Nearly all of the theories of Quantification at a Distance (QAD) that have been put forth in the past fifteen years have assumed that degree quantifiers are first merged in the derivation as a midfield (VP-) event-quantifying adverbs. This has one important consequence, pointed out in Bouchard and Burnett (2007: 8), which is that if the restriction of the quantifier in QAD is assumed to be a set of events and if the event variable is introduced in the left periphery of the VP, “the term Quantification at a Distance [...] is, in fact, a misnomer. There is nothing ‘long distance’ about the semantic composition of QAD; it simply proceeds via adjacency.” In this article, I aim to challenge this view. I first introduce novel empirical evidence, which I believe unambiguously supports a movement derivation of QAD. Specifically, I show that the degree quantifiers in QAD have the same distribution as bare quantifiers like 'tout '‘everything’ and 'rien '‘nothing’, which are arguments of the verb and are therefore first-merged VP-internally, yet are spelled out in the midfield. This leads me to re-examine the data that have led to the hypothesis that a movement analysis of QAD is undesirable and show that alternative explanations can be provided for them. Finally, I offer a new account of QAD, one that reconciles a movement derivation with the facts that have led to its demise
Is data on this page outdated, violates copyrights or anything else? Report the problem now and we will take corresponding actions after reviewing your request.