Distributivity and Dependency

Natural Language Semantics 8 (1):27-69 (2000)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Sentences with multiple occurrences of plural definites give rise to certain effects suggesting that distributivity should be modeled by polyadic operations. Yet in this paper it is argued that the simpler treatment of distributivity using unary universal quantification should be retained. Seemingly polyadic effects are claimed to be restricted to definite NPs. This fact is accounted for by the special anaphoric (dependent) use of definites. Further evidence concerning various plurals, island constraints, and cumulative quantification is shown to support this claim. In addition, it is shown that the evidence against a simple atomic version of unary distributivity is not decisive either. In the (uncommon) cases where distributivity with definites is not strictly atomic, they can be analyzed as dependent on implicit quantifiers

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,322

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
108 (#158,955)

6 months
5 (#632,353)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

On the plurality of verbs.Angelika Kratzer - 2008 - In Johannes Dölling, Tatjana Heyde-Zybatow & Martin Schäfer (eds.), Event Structures in Linguistic Form and Interpretation. De Gruyter. pp. 269-300.
A scalar implicature-based approach to neg-raising.Jacopo Romoli - 2013 - Linguistics and Philosophy 36 (4):291-353.
How indefinites choose their scope.Adrian Brasoveanu & Donka F. Farkas - 2011 - Linguistics and Philosophy 34 (1):1-55.
Generically free choice.Bernhard Nickel - 2010 - Linguistics and Philosophy 33 (6):479-512.

View all 24 citations / Add more citations