Skip to main content
Log in

Interpreting logical form

  • Published:
Linguistics and Philosophy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

References

  • Aoun, J. and D. Sportiche: 1983, ‘On the Formal Theory of Government’,The Linguistic Review 2, 211–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barwise, J.: 1979, ‘On Branching Quantifiers in English’,Journal of Philosophical Logic 8, 47–80.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barwise, J. and R. Cooper: 1981, ‘Generalized Quantifiers and Natural Language’,Linguistics and Philosophy 4, 159–219.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benthem, J. van: 1983a, ‘Determiners and Logic’,Linguistics and Philosophy 6, 447–78.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benthem, J. van: 1983b, ‘Five Easy Pieces’, in A. G. B. ter Meulen (ed.),Studies in Modeltheoretic Semantics, Foris Publications, Dordrecht.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benthem, J. van: 1989, ‘Polyadic Quantifiers’,Linguistics and Philosophy 12, this issue, 437–464.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carlson, L.: 1980, ‘Plural Quantification’, ms., MIT, Cambridge, Mass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chomsky, N.: 1986,Barriers, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark, R. and E. Keenan: 1987, ‘The Absorption Operator and Universal Grammar’,The Linguistic Review 5, 113–136.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fauconnier, G.: 1975, ‘Do Quantifiers Branch’,Linguistic Inquiry 6, 555–78.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heim, I.: 1982,The Semantics of Definite and Indefinite Noun Phrases, Doctoral dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, Massachusetts.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heim, L, H. Lasnik and R. May: (to appear), ‘Reciprocity and Plurality’, ms., UCLA, University of Connecticut and University of California, Irvine. To appear in R. May (ed.),Grammar and Interpretation, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.

  • Higginbotham, J.: 1985, ‘On Semantics’,Linguistic Inquiry 16, 547–94.

    Google Scholar 

  • Higginbotham, J.: 1989, ‘Elucidations of Meaning’,Linguistics and Philosophy 12, this issue, 465–517.

    Google Scholar 

  • Higginbotham, J. and R. May: 1981, ‘Questions, Quantifiers and Crossing’,The Linguistic Review 1, 41–79.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hintikka, J.: 1974, ‘Quantifiers vs. Quantification Theory’,Linguistic Inquiry 5, 154–77.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keenan, E.: 1987, ‘Unreducible n-ary Quantifiers in Natural Language’, in P. Gärdenfors (ed.),Generalized Quantifiers: Linguistic and Logical Approaches, Reidel, Dordrecht, The Netherlands.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keenan, E. and J. Stavi: 1986, ‘A Semantic Characterization of Natural Language Determiners’,Linguistics and Philosophy 9, 253–326.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindström, P.: 1966, ‘First Order Predicate Logic with Generalized Quantifiers’,Theoria 30-32, 186–95.

    Google Scholar 

  • Link, G.: 1983, ‘The Logical Analysis of Plurals and Mass Terms: A Lattice-Theoretical Approach’, in R. Bauerle et al. (eds.),Meaning, Use and Interpretation of Language, de Gruyter, Berlin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Link, G.: 1987, ‘Generalized Quantifiers and Plurals’, in P. Gärdenfors (ed.),Generalized Quantifiers: Linguistic and Logical Approaches, Reidel, Dordrecht, The Netherlands.

    Google Scholar 

  • May, R.: 1977,The Grammar of Quantification, Doctoral dissertation, MIT, Cambridge, Massachusetts. (Distributed by Indiana University Linguistics Club.)

    Google Scholar 

  • May, R.: 1985,Logical Form: Its Structure and Derivation, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.

    Google Scholar 

  • May, R.: 1988, ‘Ambiguities of Quantification and WH: A Reply to Williams’,Linguistic Inquiry 19, 118–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • May, S. de: 1987, ‘Transitive Sentences and the Property of Logicality’, in I. Rusza and A. Szabolcsi (eds.),Proceedings of the '87 Debrecen Symposium on Logic and Language, Akademiai Kiado, Budapest.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mostowski, A.: 1957, ‘On a Generalization of Quantifiers’,Fundamenta Mathematica 44, 12–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reinhart, T.: 1976,The Syntactic Domain of Anaphora, Doctoral dissertation, MIT, Cambridge, Massachusetts.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reinhart, T.: 1983,Anaphora and Semantic Interpretation, Croon Helm, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rooth, M.: 1987, ‘NP Interpretation in Montague Grammar, File Change Semantics, and Situation Semantics’, in P. Gärdenfors (ed.), Generalized Quantifiers: Linguistic and Logical Approaches, Reidel, Dordrecht, The Netherlands.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schein, B.: 1986,Event Logic and the Interpretation of Plurals, Doctoral dissertation, MIT, Cambridge, Massachusetts.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sher, G.: 1989a,Generalized Logic, Doctoral dissertation, Columbia University, New York, NY.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sher, G.: 1989b, ‘Ways of Branching Quantifiers’, ms., Columbia University, New York, N.Y. To appear in Linguistics and Philosophy.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomason, R.: 1977, ‘Multiple Quantification, Questions, and Bach-Peters Sentences: Some Preliminary Notes’, ms., University of Pittsburgh.

  • Westerståhl, D.: 1987, ‘Branching Generalized Quantifiers and Natural Language’, in P. Gärdenfors (ed.),Generalized Quantifiers: Linguistic and Logical Approaches, Reidel, Dordrecht, The Netherlands.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Additional information

I would like to thank Neil Elliott, Irene Heim, Hans Kamp, Edward Keenan, William Ladusaw, Richard Larson, Howard Lasnik, Peter Ludlow, Barbara Partee, Barry Richards, Barry Schein and Gila Sher for considerable help in the thought processes that went into this paper. Thanks are also especially due to Johan van Benthem and German Chierchia for their extensive comments. Material from this paper has been presented to colloquia at MIT, Sophia University and The University of Connecticut, Storrs.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

May, R. Interpreting logical form. Linguist Philos 12, 387–435 (1989). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00632471

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00632471

Keywords

Navigation