Comparative Quantifiers and Plural Predication

Somewhat surprisingly, there is little work addressing this question even though there are two distinguished traditions each concerned with a subset of the paradigm. On the one hand, Generalized Quantifier Theory (GQT) offers an analysis of expressions as in (1)a,b as run of the mill quantifiers, while the theory of comparative constructions, analyzes expressions as in (1)d,e as amount comparatives. The only disputed area is the status of (1)c which is claimed in Keenan(1987) to require an analysis as GQ employing a discontinuous 3-place determiner quantifier more ... than ... while Kennedy(2000) sketches a treatment in terms of comparative syntax and semantics. The main goal of this paper is to present an argument in favor of a uniform analysis of all expressions underlined in (1) as comparative constructions. The argument is based on the observation that comparative quantifiers and amount comparatives impose the same constraints on their environment. More specifically, both require that the NP and VP predicates they combine with range over pluralities. I will present the outlines of a uniform analysis that explains these observations as a consequence of the