Ranges: composite measure phrases, modified numerals, and choice functions

Range expressions such asbetween 3 and 8,from 3 to 8, and3 through 8 resemble modified numerals such asat least 3and have sometimes been mentioned under that rubric. This paper shows that they are crucially different in their distribution, the readings available to them, and their behavior with respect to quantifiers, and more generally that they have an intricate grammar of their own. We distinguish three classes of readings they can receive: singleton punctual readings, on which they often give rise to ignorance inferences; set punctual readings, which arise chiefly in the scope of quantifiers; and interval readings, where the range is interpreted exhaustively. We propose an analysis on which range expressions denote choice functions over degrees, which can in the right circumstances be parameterized

Zero, Null Individuals, and Nominal Semantics in Cantonese

It has been convincingly argued that English zero provides evidence for introducing null individuals into the ontology of natural language (Bylinina & Nouwen 2018). We examine ‘zero’ in Cantonese, where it provides evidence that such null individuals are a matter of crosslinguistic variation. Cantonese zero has a more restricted distribution. It occurs widely in a number of contexts, but it is systematically ruled out with ordinary classifiers. These facts, coupled with assumptions about the nature of measurement and nominal semantics, demonstrate despite its extensive use in the language, zero is impossible in precisely the uses that require null individuals. Cantonese seems to be telling us that such null individuals are simply absent from its ontology, implying an interesting difference in natural language metaphysics between the languages—and perhaps a different perspective on what theoretical shape crosslinguistic variation can take

"Almost" and Its Kin, Across Categories

No abstract

Wholes and Their Covers

No abstract

Size Adjectives and Adnominal Degree Modification

No abstract

Percentages, Relational Degrees, and Degree Constructions

Comparatives and equatives are usually assumed to differ only in that comparatives require that one degree be greater than another, while equatives require that it be at least as great. Unexpectedly, though, the interpretation of percentage measure phrases differs fundamentally between the constructions. This curious asymmetry is, we suggest, revealing. It demonstrates that comparatives and equatives are not as similar as one might have thought. We propose an analysis of these facts in which the interpretation of percentage phrases follows straightforwardly from standard assumptions enriched with two additional ones: that percentage phrases denote "relational degrees" (type ) and that the equative morpheme is uninterpreted.

Gradable nouns as concepts without prototypes

Non-copy-edited preprint. To appear in L. McNally, E. Castroviejo-Miró, and G. Sassoon (eds). The Semantics of Gradability, Vagueness and Scale Structure. Language, Cognition and Mind series. Springer

Mediated *modification: Functional structure and the interpretation of modifier position

For all the progress that has been made in understanding the syntax-semantics interface, many long-familiar connections between the meaning and position of modifiers remain largely mysterious. Why should color adjectives, for example, occupy different positions than size adjectives and evaluative adjectives? Why should subject-oriented adverbs occupy different positions than manner adverbs? More generally, why should the lexical semantics of modifiers often seemingly determine their position in this intricate way? The analytical thread unifying the independent case studies in this thesis is an attempt to address this longstanding question by attributing part of the apparent lexical semantics of certain modifiers instead to their position itself. In Chapter 1, I discern in previous research a common analytical impulse to posit grammatical devices that mediate between a particular modifier and the expression it modifies. I then propose a generalized understanding of how such mediation might work, building broadly on McConnell-Ginet (1982) and Cinque (1999), in which certain modifiers are treated as arguments of semantically-interpreted features in the functional structure of the modified expression. This permits a kind of decomposition, in which a modifier\u27s lexical semantics is, in the spirit of Ernst (2002), reduced to a single simple core meaning that remains constant irrespective of syntactic position, and the semantic peculiarities that vary from one position to another arise instead directly form the denotations of features. After sketching how this might provide some analytical traction on some otherwise vexing puzzles, I move on in other chapters to examine some particular not-well-understood modifiers. Chapter 2 focuses on a class of evaluative adverbs such as remarkably that occur inside the adjectival projection, arguing that they are interpreted as arguments of degree morphology that imputes to them a roughly exclamative-like domain-widening interpretation. Chapter 3 develops an account of the distinguishing properties of weak DP adverbials—low scope, fixed position, and a durativity presupposition—in which they are linked to Aktionsart information in the VP and mirror the syntax of other types of measure phrase. Chapter 4 examines modifiers such as almostand virtually cross-categorially, assigning them an intensional semantics. Chapter 4 analyzes whole and entire as fundamentally non-quantificational expressions that reduce exception tolerance