No abstract

No abstract

This paper proposes a semantic analysis of comparison constructions in Japanese which is crucially different from the standard semantics of comparatives as developed for English and related languages. The interpretation of the Japanese comparison construction is determined to a larger extent by pragmatic strategies, as opposed to compositional semantics. The syntactically provided item of comparison (the constituent accompanying yori) does not, in contrast to an English than-clause, have a degree semantics; it ultimately contributes an individual. From this item the real comparison has to be inferred. We argue that Japanese does not have English-style degree operators and probably lacks abstraction over degree variables in the syntax altogether. The proposed analysis accounts for a number of empirical differences between Japanese and English. A more general outcome is that the semantics of comparison is subject to crosslinguistic variation. A parameter of language variation is suggested as the source of the differences we observe.

In this article, we explore the interaction of the verb again with double object constructions and the corresponding NP+PP constructions. The restitutive reading that again gives rise to in combination with these predicates supports an analysis of double object constructions according to which they contain a small clause with a head predicate HAVE, and an analysis of the corresponding NP+PP constructions that is not transformationally related and varies according to the verb contained in the structures

We observe that intervention effects as they have been observed for wh-constructions also exist in alternative questions. All fundamental characteristics of the effect seem to be parallel, and we propose to apply one and the same analysis to both kinds of intervention effects. To this effect we combine Romero and Han's (2003) analysis of alternative questions with the assumption that a certain kind of variable may not be bound across an intervener. A particular type of data considered by Romero and Han now also falls out as an intervention effect.Wh-intervention effects are illustrated by the data in (1)-(3) (see e.g. Beck (1996), Pesetsky (2000)). Kim (2002) offers the generalization that a quantificational or focusing element may not intervene between a wh-phrase and its licensing complementizer. The effect exists in many languages, including English, German and Korean. Example (4) has an interpretation as an alternative question (in addition to one as a Yes/No-question). On this reading, there is a focus on both disjuncts. Appopriate answers are that Sally taught Semantics I and that Sally taught Syntax I. In (5)- (7), we construct alternative questions that are analogous to the wh-questions in (1)-(3). Observe that an intervention effect arises that is parallel in all respects: The harmful intervener may not occur between the disjunction and the interrogative complementizer. The same questions without the intervener are fine. And once the disjunctive phrase has moved past the intervener, the example is fine again (see (5b)). Note, moreover, that the intervention effect with alternative questions appears crosslinguistically stable, just like the intervention effect with wh-constructions. We must assume that the source of the two types of intervention effects is the same.We adopt the analysis of Romero and Han's (2003) for alternative questions. According to them, the alternative question in (4) has the Logical Form in (8). They argue that the disjunction is larger than it appears, and that invisible material has been elided. This explains the focus pattern in alternative questions, as well as other restrictions (see Romero and Han for details). Moreover, they assume that a hidden wh-phrase ranging over choice functions is part of the structure of alternative questions. This whphrase originates next to the disjunction, and moves to the vicinity of the interrogative complementizer. A choice function variable remains in the base position and applies to the disjunction.We suggest that the relation between the base position of that wh-phrase and its licensing interrogative complementizer is just as sensitive to an intervener as is the relation between an ordinary wh-phrase and its licenser. Adopting Romero and Han's analysis allows us to treat the intervention effect in alternative questions as completely parallel to the standard wh-intervention effect. We propose that structures like (9) are excluded, and we will argue that there is a semantic reason for that in terms of variable binding.Our analysis makes some f...

No abstract

This paper presents parallel sets of data on comparison constructions from 14 languages. On the basis of the crosslinguistic differences we observe, we propose three parameters of language variation. The first parameter concerns the question of whether or not a language's grammar has incorporated scales into the meanings of gradable predicates. The second parameter differentiates between languages that allow quantification over degrees in the syntax and those that do not. Finally, we propose a syntactic parameter that concerns options for syntactically filling the degree argument position of a gradable predicate.

No abstract