Relational domains and the interpretation of reciprocals

Linguistics and Philosophy 35 (3):191-241 (2012)
Abstract
We argue that a comprehensive theory of reciprocals must rely on a general taxonomy of restrictions on the interpretation of relational expressions. Developing such a taxonomy, we propose a new principle for interpreting reciprocals that relies on the interpretation of the relation in their scope. This principle, the Maximal Interpretation Hypothesis (MIH), analyzes reciprocals as partial polyadic quantifiers. According to the MIH, the partial quantifier denoted by a reciprocal requires the relational expression REL in its scope to denote a maximal relation in REL’s interpretation domain. In this way the MIH avoids a priori assumptions on the available readings of reciprocal expressions, which are necessary in previous accounts. Relying extensively on the work of Dalrymple et al. (Ling Philos 21:159–210, 1998), we show that the MIH also exhibits some observational improvements over Dalrymple et al.’s Strongest Meaning Hypothesis (SMH). In addition to deriving some attested reciprocal interpretations that are not expected by the SMH, the MIH offers a more restrictive account of the way context affects the interpretation of reciprocals through its influence on relational domains. Further, the MIH generates a reciprocal interpretation at the predicate level, which is argued to be advantageous to Dalrymple et al.’s propositional selection of reciprocal meanings. More generally, we argue that by focusing on restrictions on relational domains, the MIH opens the way for a more systematic study of the ways in which lexical meaning, world knowledge and contextual information interact with the interpretation of quantificational expressions
Keywords Reciprocals  Relational domains  Quantifiers
Categories (categorize this paper)
Options
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history Request removal from index
 
Download options
PhilPapers Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy on self-archival     Papers currently archived: 11,808
External links
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library
References found in this work BETA
Sigrid Beck (2001). Reciprocals Are Definites. Natural Language Semantics 9 (1):69-138.
Gilad Ben-Avi & Yoad Winter (2003). Monotonicity and Collective Quantification. Journal of Logic, Language and Information 12 (2):127-151.
R. Blutner (1998). Lexical Pragmatics. Journal of Semantics 15 (2):115-162.

View all 26 references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Similar books and articles
Joop Leo (2013). Relational Complexes. Journal of Philosophical Logic 42 (2):357-390.
Yoad Winter (2005). Scope Dominance with Upward Monotone Quantifiers. Journal of Logic, Language and Information 14 (4):445-455.
Matthew J. Brown (2009). Relational Quantum Mechanics and the Determinacy Problem. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 60 (4):679-695.
Yoad Winter (2004). Scope Dominance with Monotone Quantifiers Over Finite Domains. Journal of Logic, Language and Information 13 (4):385-402.
Analytics

Monthly downloads

Added to index

2012-10-08

Total downloads

4 ( #264,049 of 1,099,821 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

4 ( #90,092 of 1,099,821 )

How can I increase my downloads?

My notes
Sign in to use this feature


Discussion
Start a new thread
Order:
There  are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.