Pro Properties, Contra Generalized Kinds

Geenhoven, Veerle Van

doi:10.3765/salt.v10i0.3112

Cited by 12 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Since van Geenhoven assumes that nouns contain both atoms and non--atoms in their denotation, number neutrality results. Indeed, van Geenhoven (2000) and McNally (2004) extend the use of semantic incorporation to bare plurals in English and Spanish, respectively, explicitly hypothesizing that application of the rule of semantic incorporation need not be accompanied by the morpho--syntactic rule. A semantic incorporation analysis of inclusive plurals would say that plural forms undergo semantic incorporation in downward--entailing contexts (and questions); singular forms would not be subject to this rule at all (given, e.g., *I have child).…”

Section: [−Atomic] or Exhaustive Exclusive Plurals 41 Ambiguity Accomentioning

confidence: 99%

Inclusive Plurals and the Theory of Number

Martí

2020

Linguistic Inquiry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

I argue that an account of both inclusive plurals and the crosslinguistic typology of grammatical number requires postulating a [−atomic] feature (or something very much like it) in the structure of exclusive-plural DPs. When combined with the only theory we currently have that accounts for the crosslinguistic typology of number ( Harbour 2014 ), theories in which the exclusive-plural DPs of a language with inclusive plurals are [−atomic]-less under- or overgenerate with respect to that typology. These problems disappear as soon as the structure of exclusive plural DPs contains a component that generates exclusive-plural interpretations, either Harbour’s [−atomic] feature (added to a system with a second, [−atomic]-less structure, a proposal compatible with, e.g., Farkas and de Swart 2010 ) or a predicate-level exhaustivity operator (from Mayr 2015 ).

show abstract

Section: [−Atomic] or Exhaustive Exclusive Plurals 41 Ambiguity Accomentioning

confidence: 99%

Inclusive Plurals and the Theory of Number

Martí

2020

Linguistic Inquiry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Note in this respect that, unlike Carlson (1977b) and Chierchia (1998), we are not convinced that a relative clause can trigger a wide scope reading for an otherwise nonspecific nominal. See also Van Geenhoven (2000) and footnote 7 on this issue.…”

Section: Inherent Opacity Of Verbsmentioning

confidence: 94%

“…It is this implicit intention of Zimmermann's that we want to give an explicit treatment of in the present paper. In our previous work (e.g., McNally, 1992McNally, , 1995Van Geenhoven, 1995, 2000, 2002, we have argued that, alongside entity-and quantifier-type complements, verbs can also quite systematically combine with property-type complements, and that when they do so, a nonspecific reading always results (see also, e.g., Ladusaw, 1994;Dobrovie-Sorin, 1997).…”

Section: Nonspecific Complements Of Referentially Transparent Verbsmentioning

confidence: 95%

On the property analysis of opaque complements

Geenhoven

McNally

2005

Lingua

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper, we regard Zimmermann's [Natural Language Semantics 1 (1993) 149] property analysis of verbs of absence as a special case of the independent ability of verbs to take property-type complements [Ladusaw, W.A. (1994). Proceedings of SALT IV. Ithaca: CLC Publications, p. 220]. By integrating into this analysis a Quinian decomposition of verbs of absence we can tease apart the distinction between opaque and transparent, nonspecific complements, as well as the distinction between de dicto and de re readings of nonspecific complements. This prevents us from overgeneralizing transparent readings of inherently opaque complements and inherently opaque verbs and it helps us to answer some criticisms that Moltmann [Natural Language Semantics 5 (1997) 1] raises against Zimmermann's proposal. #

show abstract

“…It therefore predicts full convergence between indexical bare plurals and indefinites, but this has been challenged by Van Geenhoven (1999). One point of difference between the two positions is empirical.…”

Section: Two Types Of Indexical Bare Pluralsmentioning

confidence: 99%