Donkey Pluralities: Plural Information States vs. Non-Atomic Individuals
نویسنده
چکیده
The paper argues that two distinct and independent notions of plurality are involved in natural language anaphora and quantification: plural reference (the usual non-atomic individuals) and plural discourse reference, i.e. reference to a quantificational dependency between sets of objects (e.g. atomic / non-atomic individuals) that is established and subsequently elaborated upon in discourse. Following van den Berg (1996), plural discourse reference is modeled as plural information states (i.e. as sets of variable assignments) in a new dynamic system couched in classical type logic that extends Compositional DRT (Muskens 1996). Given the underlying type logic, compositionality at sub-clausal level follows automatically and standard techniques from Montague semantics become available. The idea that plural info states are semantically necessary (in addition to non-atomic individuals) is motivated by relative-clause donkey sentences with multiple instances of singular donkey anaphora that have mixed (weak and strong) readings. At the same time, allowing for non-atomic individuals in addition to plural info states enables us to capture the intuitive parallels between singular and plural (donkey) anaphora, while deriving the incompatibility between singular (donkey) anaphora and collective predicates. The system also accounts for empirically unrelated phenomena, e.g. the uniqueness effects associated with singular (donkey) anaphora discussed in Kadmon (1990) and Heim (1990) among others.
منابع مشابه
Structured Discourse Reference to Individuals
The paper argues that discourse reference in natural language involves two equally important components with essentially the same interpretive dynamics, namely reference to values, i.e. (non-singleton) sets of objects, and reference to structure, i.e. the correlation / dependency between such sets, which is introduced and incrementally elaborated upon in discourse. To define and investigate str...
متن کاملDynamics of Reflexivity and Reciprocity
Plural reflexives and reciprocals are anaphoric not only to antecedent pluralities but also to relations between the members of those pluralities. In this paper, I utilize Dynamic Plural Logic (van den Berg 1996) to analyze reflexives and reciprocals as anaphors that elaborate on relations introduced by the verb, which can be collective, cumulative, or distributive. This analysis generalizes to...
متن کاملVagueness and Plural Predication
This paper addresses the question of how to model the application of vague predicates like tall and bald to plural subjects like John and Mary and the men. In other words, we are interested in developing a logical analysis for natural language sentences like Mary is tall and The men are bald. In the past 30 years, much research has been devoted to finding the proper logical framework to model t...
متن کاملPlural Predication and the Strongest Meaning Hypothesis
The Strongest Meaning Hypothesis of Dalrymple et al (1994,1998), which was originally proposed as a principle for the interpretation of reciprocals, is extended in this paper into a general principle of plural predication. This principle applies to complex predicates that are composed of lexical predicates that hold of atomic entities, and determines the pluralities in the extension of the pred...
متن کاملComplement anaphora and the plurality of worlds
In a nutshell We present novel data from German revealing an striking similarity in the behavior of complement anaphora (CA) in different domains (possible worlds, times, individuals): We argue that the distribution of CA in the domain of individuals requires the antecedent quantifier to provide a plurality. We show that the correlation of quantifier types and the availability of CA with condit...
متن کامل