The Meaning of More

Abstract

This book re-imagines the compositional semantics of comparative constructions with words like “more”. It argues for a revision of one of the fundamental assumptions of the degree semantics framework as applied to such constructions: that gradable adjectives do not lexicalize measure functions (i.e., mappings from individuals or events to degrees). Instead, the degree morphology itself plays the role of degree introduction. The book begins with a careful study of non-canonical comparatives targeting nouns and verbs, and applies the lessons learned there to those targeting adjectives and adverbs. A primary distinction that the book draws extends the traditional distinction between gradable and non-gradable as applied to the adjectival domain to the distinction between “measurable” and “non-measurable” predicates that crosses lexical categories. The measurable predicates, in addition to the gradable adjectives, include mass noun phrases, plural noun phrases, imperfective verb phrases, and perfective atelic verb phrases. In each of these cases, independent evidence for non-trivial ordering relations on the relevant domains of predication are discussed, and measurability is tied to the accessibility of such orderings. Applying this compositional theory to the core cases and beyond, the book establishes that the selection of measure functions for a given comparative depends entirely on what is measured and compared rather than which expression introduces the measurement

Linguistic meanings as cognitive instructions

“…[4][5][6][7][8] This stands in contrast to their understanding of more, which is more along the lines of [3], at least in that more compares measurements of two independent subsets. [9][10][11][12] If this case study is any indication, at least some natural language meanings provide surprisingly precise constraints on thought building.…”

What’s positive and negative about generics: a constrained indexical approach

“…Let's start with our observation. According to Wellwood (2019), "much" is a pronoun for measure functions (i.e., a function from entities or events to degrees). For our purposes, it is important to note that the denotation of "much" is restricted to those that are upward monotone.…”

“…Degree semanticists have tried to capture this linguistic phenomenon by using a particular semantic constraint. That is, the semantic value of "much" is restricted to upward monotone measure functions (Nakanishi, 2004(Nakanishi, , 2007Schwarzschild, 2002Schwarzschild, , 2006Wellwood, 2019). To summarize, GEN and "much" are both a kind of pronoun and they carry the upward monotonicity constraint.…”

Plurals and Mereology

“…Counting individual sums is then counting atoms in the new mereology. 28 For recent surveys of linguistic issues surrounding counting, see Rothstein [70], Ionin and Matushansky [27], and Wellwood [81]. 29 A related objection is that we are unable to provide an informative characterization of the circumstances in which won is true of a sum.…”