On the semantics of comparison across categories

Wellwood, Alexis

doi:10.1007/s10988-015-9165-0

Cited by 63 publications

(66 citation statements)

References 43 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Solt (2015) departs from Wellwood, Hacquard & Pancheva (2012) and Wellwood (2015) in attributing this more general meaning not to much directly, but to a covert operator she terms meas. Data like the examples in (25) indicate that the analysis of kaθīr constructions as involving an underspecified degree relation is appropriate for Arabic as well, and I follow Solt in attributing the meaning in question to covert meas.…”

Section: Quantity Superlative + Definite Dependentmentioning

confidence: 90%

“…Cresti (1995) and Hackl (2009) analyse many/much as a relation between an individual and a degree that measures out the cardinality of the individual. However, Wellwood, Hacquard & Pancheva (2012), Solt (2015) and Wellwood (2015) point out that much measures out more than just cardinality. Arabic kaθīr is like much in this respect.…”

Section: Quantity Superlative + Definite Dependentmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…At this level of structure, much is deleted by virtue of directly preceding an adjective, following Bresnan (1973). Insofar as the cases in which kaθīr unexpectedly fails to materialize can all be analysed as involving surface deletion of kaθīr, the claims made here can be reformulated along the lines developed in Wellwood (2015). 10 See Wellwood (2014: 78-79) for a discussion of formal options for relating the measure function to its discourse context.…”

mentioning

confidence: 91%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Universal quantification as degree modification in Arabic

Hallman

2016

Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper demonstrates similarities between the universal quantifier kull 'every/all' and superlatives of quality and quantity in Standard Arabic. These similarities point to an analysis of kull as a kind of superlative. An analysis is developed that characterizes the meaning of kull as a minor variation on the meaning of the superlative morpheme that occurs in quality and quantity superlatives. The difference between kull's strongly distributive meaning analogous to every and its weakly distributive meaning analogous to all is argued to be the result of a type-shifting mechanism. This analysis teases apart the syntactic and semantic components of the three construction types examined here and identifies the uniformity that runs through them.

show abstract

Section: Quantity Superlative + Definite Dependentmentioning

confidence: 90%

Section: Quantity Superlative + Definite Dependentmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 91%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Universal quantification as degree modification in Arabic

Hallman

2016

Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A link between comparison and counting has been created in the literature on quantity words such as many and much and their derived comparative more (Hackl 2001;Schwarzschild 2002;Solt 2009;Wellwood et al 2012;Wellwood 2015); e.g., more boys than girls arrived directly relates to the cardinality of the arguments' sets (arriving boys and girls), but so is also John smokes more, which relates to cardinalities of events, and arguably more optimistic, which relates to dimension-set cardinalities.…”

Section: Spearman's Rho Every Most Somementioning

confidence: 99%

The role of dimensions in classification under predicates predicts their status in degree constructions

Sassoon

Fadlon

2017

Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper presents an experimental study of multidimensional gradability across categories. The study tests whether and to what extent the naturalness of multidimensional adjectives and nouns in degree constructions is predictable from their conceptual-semantic properties -the way their dimensions are typically bound to create a unified interpretation. Past research suggests that binding by counting operations is common in multidimensional adjectives, possible in certain nouns (labeled additive nouns), and rare in others (dubbed multiplicative nouns; Hampton et al. 2009). We hypothesize that the higher naturalness of adjectives in degree constructions (Kennedy 1999) stems from a preference for dimension-binding by counting operations. Accordingly, we predict that additive nouns would be judged more natural than multiplicative nouns in any construction whose interpretation involves dimension-counting, e.g., dimensional quantifiers (as in: in {some, most, every} respect}) and degree modifiers (as in more P {than y, than Q, than y is Q}). The results of a naturalness survey involving 139 English speakers confirm our predictions. Moreover, our results indicate that the naturalness of a predicate in degree constructions and dimensional-quantifier constructions are tightly correlated, suggesting that dimension accessibility for counting is indeed an important predictor of morphological gradability.

show abstract

“…More recently, evidence has mounted within degree-based frameworks that even apparently simple predications like (2a) involve quantification over states (e.g., Fults 2006;Husband 2010;Wellwood 2014Wellwood , 2015Baglini 2015). In this paper, I use evidence from temporal modification in comparatives to suggest that (2a) can translate like (3), expressing quantification over both states s and events e. On this proposal, happy introduces a measure on states which, in the positive form, must exceed some standard level of happiness; those states can then be packaged in an event 'wrapper' (cf.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

States and events for S-level gradable adjectives

Wellwood¹

2016

SALT

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The event analysis is only rarely incorporated into degree-theoretic treatments of adjectival comparatives. I propose a neodavidsonian account of predications like Ann was happy that involves quantification over both states and events. This 'double-eventuality' analysis is motivated primarily by how stage-level gradable adjectives interact with temporal for-phrases in two classes of comparatives, which I differentiate as 'low' versus 'high' attachment of the comparative morpheme. Low attachment comparatives express canonical degree readings (more available), while high attachment involve comparing numbers of occasions (available more). I resolve these patterns by positing a stative core for adjectives, and the possibility of mapping properties of states to properties of events. Low attachment interpretations, then, involve comparison of states, and high involve comparison of (pluralities of) events. I show that the analysis extends to other cases where states and events can do work for adjectives outside of comparatives.

show abstract

On the semantics of comparison across categories

Cited by 63 publications

References 43 publications

Universal quantification as degree modification in Arabic

Universal quantification as degree modification in Arabic

The role of dimensions in classification under predicates predicts their status in degree constructions

States and events for S-level gradable adjectives

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About