Refining stratified reference

Champollion, Lucas

doi:10.1515/tl-2015-0015

Cited by 3 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 25 publications

(16 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As a result, when the first parameter is set to time, the second cannot be set to anything involving atoms, because time does not provide any atoms to distribute over. This idea is situated within a broader framework that connects it to aspect and measurement under the name of strata theory (Champollion 2010b(Champollion , 2015b(Champollion ,c, 2017.…”

Section: :2mentioning

confidence: 99%

Overt distributivity in algebraic event semantics

Champollion¹

2016

S&P

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This is the second in a pair of papers that aim to provide a comprehensive analysis of the semantic phenomenon of distributivity in natural language. This paper describes and explains observable cross-linguistic differences in overt distributive items in the framework of Neo-Davidsonian algebraic event semantics. The previous paper, Champollion 2016a, postulated two covert distributivity operators, D and Part, in the grammar, even though the semantic effects of D can be subsumed under the workings of Part. This paper motivates the split by arguing that distance-distributive items across languages are in essence overt versions of these operators. For example, English each lexicalizes D while German jeweils lexicalizes Part. For this reason, jeweils occurs in a wider range of distributive environments, including distribution over salient occasions. The proposed analysis explains why distributive items that can also be used as determiners, such as each and every, never allow distribution over occasions. It also accounts for the ability of these determiners to take part in cumulative readings and to interact with nondistributive event modifiers. The paper and its companion include an explicit proposal for the compositional process in event semantics.

show abstract

Section: :2mentioning

confidence: 99%

Overt distributivity in algebraic event semantics

Champollion¹

2016

S&P

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…To do so, I will view distributivity as the property of a predicate which, whenever it holds of a certain entity or event, also holds of its parts along a certain dimension and down to a certain granularity. I have previously developed and defended this view at length under the name of strata theory (Champollion 2010b(Champollion , 2015a(Champollion ,b, 2017. Going beyond distributivity, strata theory has applications in the domains of aspect and measurement.…”

Section: :5mentioning

confidence: 99%

Covert distributivity in algebraic event semantics

Champollion

2016

S&P

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This is the first in a pair of papers that aim to provide a comprehensive analysis of the semantic phenomenon of distributivity in natural language. This paper investigates and formalizes different sources of covert distributivity. Apart from lexical distributivity effects, which are modeled by meaning postulates, phrasal distributivity is captured via two covert operators: (i) a D operator distributing over atoms only (Link 1987), and (ii) a cover-based Part operator, which can also distribute over nonatomic pluralities under contextual licensing (Schwarzschild 1996). The resulting theory surpasses accounts in which nonatomic distributivity is freely available, or not available at all; furthermore, it correctly predicts differences between lexical and phrasal nonatomic distributivity. D and Part are reformulated in Neo-Davidsonian algebraic event semantics, so that they apply to event predicates and make the sum event available for further modification by arguments and adjuncts. This paves the way for an account of the context-dependency of distributivity phenomena under for-adverbials, which improves on theories that predict indefinites to either always or never covary with for-adverbials. The paper and its companion include an explicit proposal for the compositional process in event semantics.

show abstract

“…For example, we could let t range over all the subintervals of t if we wanted to represent atelicity via the subinterval property; but this would run into the minimal-parts problem(Dowty 1979). The definition we use is based onPiñón (2015) andChampollion (2015Champollion ( , 2017.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Rigid and Flexible Quantification in Plural Predicate Logic

Champollion

Bledin

2017

SALT

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Noun phrases with overt determiners, such as some apples or a quantity of milk, differ from bare noun phrases like apples or milk in their contribution to aspectual composition. While this has been attributed to syntactic or algebraic properties of these noun phrases, such accounts have explanatory shortcomings. We suggest instead that the relevant property that distinguishes between the two classes of noun phrases derives from two modes of existential quantification, one of which holds the values of a variable fixed throughout a quantificational context while the other allows them to vary. Inspired by Dynamic Plural Logic and Dependence Logic, we propose Plural Predicate Logic as an extension of Predicate Logic to formalize this difference. We suggest that temporal for-adverbials are sensitive to aspect because of the way they manipulate quantificational contexts, and that analogous manipulations occur with spatial for-adverbials, habituals, and the quantifier all.

show abstract

Refining stratified reference

Cited by 3 publications

References 25 publications

Overt distributivity in algebraic event semantics

Overt distributivity in algebraic event semantics

Covert distributivity in algebraic event semantics

Rigid and Flexible Quantification in Plural Predicate Logic

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About