“Diacronia” bibliometric database (BDD)

Strong Indefinites are not Quantificational: Proportional many vs most

Publication: Revue roumaine de linguistique, LVIII (4), p. 401-417
Publisher:Editura Academiei
Abstract:This paper is concerned with the analysis of strong indefinites and in particular of the proportional readings of many. Can we account for the proportional readings of many by assuming a uniform analysis, according to which many is a cardinality predicate, or do we need to postulate an ambiguity between a cardinality predicate and a quantificational determiner (Partee 1989)? I will argue in favour of the uniform analysis by comparing proportional most with proportional many: it will be shown that the former is necessarily a quantificational determiner (as in Generalized Quantifier theory, contra Hackl 2009), whereas the latter is a cardinality predicate inside a strong indefinite DP. This somewhat paradoxical result (a strong DP built with weak many) will be given a compositional semantics by assuming that constituents of the form many NP are headed by a null Determiner that has the semantics of plural some.
Language: English

Citations to this publication: 0

References in this publication: 1

15Carmen Dobrovie-Sorin, Ion GiurgeaThe Suffixation of Definite Articles in Balkan LanguagesRRL, LI (1), 73-1032006pdf

The citations/references list is based on indexed publications only, and may therefore be incomplete.
For any and all inquiries related to the database, please contact us at [Please enable javascript to view.].