What do quantifier particles do?

Linguistics and Philosophy 38 (2):159-204 (2015)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In many languages, the same particles that form quantifier words also serve as connectives, additive and scalar particles, question markers, roots of existential verbs, and so on. Do these have a unified semantics, or do they merely bear a family resemblance? Are they aided by silent operators in their varied roles―if yes, what operators? I dub the particles “quantifier particles” and refer to them generically with capitalized versions of the Japanese morphemes. I argue that both MO and KA can be assigned a stable semantics across their various roles. The specific analysis I offer is motivated by the fact that MO and KA often combine with just one argument; I propose that this is their characteristic behavior. Their role is to impose semantic requirements that are satisfied when the immediately larger context is interpreted as the meet/join of their host’s semantic contribution with something else. They do not perform meet/join themselves. The obligatory vs. optional appearance of the particles depends on whether the meet/join interpretations arise by default in the given constellation. I explicate the proposal using the toolkit of basic Inquisitive Semantics.

Similar books and articles

Quantifier particles and compositionality.Anna Szabolcsi - 2013 - Proceedings of the 19th Amsterdam Colloquium.
The handbook of contemporary semantic theory.Shalom Lappin (ed.) - 1996 - Cambridge, Mass., USA: Blackwell Reference.
Probability semantics for quantifier logic.Theodore Hailperin - 2000 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 29 (2):207-239.
The syntax and semantics of split constructions: a comparative study.Alastair Butler - 2004 - New York: Palgrave-Macmillan. Edited by Eric Mathieu.
Quantifier probability logic and the confirmation paradox.Theodore Hailperin - 2007 - History and Philosophy of Logic 28 (1):83-100.
Support and Sets of Situations.Andrzej Wiśniewski - 2014 - Journal of Logic, Language and Information 23 (3):383-396.
The distribution of quantificational suffixes in Japanese.Kazuko Yatsushiro - 2009 - Natural Language Semantics 17 (2):141-173.

Analytics

Added to PP
2014-06-05

Downloads
1,637 (#6,268)

6 months
505 (#3,063)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Anna Szabolcsi
New York University

Citations of this work

Bounded Modality.Matthew Mandelkern - 2019 - Philosophical Review 128 (1):1-61.
Question Meaning= Resolution Conditions.Ivano Ciardelli - 2017 - Logic and Logical Philosophy 26 (3):383-416.
Perspectival Plurality, Relativism, and Multiple Indexing.Dan Zeman - 2018 - In Rob Truswell, Chris Cummins, Caroline Heycock, Brian Rabern & Hannah Rohde (eds.), Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung 21. Semantics Archives. pp. 1353-1370.
Ignorance Implicatures and Non-doxastic Attitude Verbs.Kyle H. Blumberg - 2017 - Proceedings of the 21st Amsterdam Colloquium.

View all 12 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

Inquisitive Semantics.Ivano Ciardelli, Jeroen Groenendijk & Floris Roelofsen - 2018 - Oxford, England: Oxford University Press. Edited by J. A. G. Groenendijk & Floris Roelofsen.
Syntax and semantics of questions.Lauri Karttunen - 1977 - Linguistics and Philosophy 1 (1):3--44.
Questions in montague english.Charles L. Hamblin - 1973 - Foundations of Language 10 (1):41-53.
A theory of focus interpretation.Mats Rooth - 1992 - Natural Language Semantics 1 (1):75-116.

View all 52 references / Add more references