Advertisement

The Quantifier Questionnaire

  • Edward L. Keenan
Chapter
Part of the Studies in Linguistics and Philosophy book series (SLAP, volume 97)

Abstract

The questionnaire, which constitutes this chapter, illustrates a semantically based classification of quantificational expressions cross classified according as the expressions are adverbial in character (A-quantifiers) or nominal/determiner-like (D-quantifiers). Examples are drawn mostly from English, except where other languages have structure types not readily mimicked in English, such as various types of A-quantifiers and Quantifier Float.

We take the basic semantic type of quantifiers to be a relation between properties. For example, no in No king shaves himself denotes a relation between the property of being a king and the property of shaving oneself. D-quantifiers and A-quantifiers differ with regard to what the relevant properties are properties of. D-quantifiers relate properties of entities (possibly abstract), A-quantifiers relate properties of events or “times”. It remains true (Gil 1993, Nominal and verbal quantification. Sprachtypologie und Universalienforschung, 46(4):275–317, Evans 1995), that A-quantifiers are structurally more diverse and semantically less well understood than D-quantifiers. And it happens often that syntactically non-isomorphic expressions have the same quantificational force. Even within the narrow domain of D-quantifiers a given quantificational expression may look like an English Determiner in one language and like an adjective in another. Compared to earlier typologically oriented treatments of quantifiers (Bach E, Jelinek E, Kratzer A, Partee BH (eds), Quantification in natural languages, vols 1 and 2. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, 1995; Haspelmath M, Dryer MS, Gil D, Comrie B (eds), The world atlas of language structures (WALS). Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2005; Matthewson et al. 2008) our questionnaire focuses proportionately more on ways of building syntactically complex quantificational expressions. On semantic grounds we distinguish three fundamental classes of quantifiers: intersective (existential), co-intersective (universal) and proportionality quantifiers. In addition for D-quantifiers we discuss definite quantifiers and partitive ones. It is significant that D- and A-quantifiers all exhibit members of the first three classes, with A-quantifiers being, perhaps, slightly richer in variety. And within the three basic classes interesting sub-classes are distinguished as cardinal, co-cardinal, value judgment quantifiers and interrogative quantifiers.

Keywords

A-quantifiers Quantifier float D-quantifiers Non-isomorphic Semantic Intersective (existential) Co-intersective (universal) Proportionality quantifiers Definite quantifiers Partitive quantifiers Cardinal Co-Cardinal 

References

  1. Bach, E., Jelinek, E., Kratzer, A., & Partee, B. H. (Eds.). (1995). Quantification in natural languages vols 1 and 2. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  2. Baker, M. (1995). On the absence of certain quantifiers in Mohawk. In Bach et al. (1995). Vol. 1, (pp. 13–21).Google Scholar
  3. Beghelli, F. (1994). Structured quantifiers. In M. Kanazawa & C. Piñón (Eds.), Dynamics, polarity, and quantification (pp. 119–147). Stanford: CSLI.Google Scholar
  4. Betts, G. (1986). Latin (Teach Yourself Books). Hodder Headline Plc: London.Google Scholar
  5. Bittner, M., & Trondhjem, N. (2008). Quantification as reference: Evidence from Q-verbs. In Matthewson (pp. 7–67).Google Scholar
  6. Boolos, G. (1981). For every A there is a B. Linguistic Inquiry, 12, 465–466.Google Scholar
  7. Chung, S. (1998). The design of agreement. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Chung, S. (2008). Possessors and definiteness effects in two Austronesian languages. In Matthewson (2008) (pp. 179–225).Google Scholar
  9. de Swart, H. (1996). Quantification over time. In van der Does and van Eijck (pp. 311–337).Google Scholar
  10. Gil, D. (1982). Distributive numerals. PhD dissertation. UCLA.Google Scholar
  11. Gil, D. (1988). Georgian reduplication and the domain of distributivity. Linguistics, 26, 1039–1065.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gil, D. (1993). Nominal and verbal quantification. Sprachtypologie und Universalienforschung, Berlin, 46(4), 275–317.Google Scholar
  13. Gil, D. (2005). Distributive numerals. In Haspelmath et al. (pp. 222–226).Google Scholar
  14. Haspelmath, M., Dryer, M. S., Gil, D., & Comrie, B. (Eds.). (2005). The world atlas of language structures (WALS). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Higginbotham, J. (1994). Mass and count quantifiers. Linguistics and Philosophy, 17, 447–480. Reprinted in Bach et al., vol II.Google Scholar
  16. Jackendoff, R. (1983). Semantics and cognition. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  17. Jelinek, E. (1995). Quantification in straights Salish. In Bach et al. (1995). pp. 487–541.Google Scholar
  18. Keenan, E. L. (1987). Multiply-headed NPs. Linguistic Inquiry, 18(3), 481–490.Google Scholar
  19. Keenan, E. L. (1992). Beyond the frege boundary. Linguistics and Philosophy, 15, 199–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Keenan, E. L. (1996). Further beyond the frege boundary. In J. Van der Does & J. Van Eijck (Eds.), Quantifiers, logic, and language (pp. 179–201). Stanford: CSLI.Google Scholar
  21. Keenan, E. L. (2008). Quantification in Malagasy. In Matthewson (pp. 319–353).Google Scholar
  22. Keenan, E. L., & Moss, L. S. (1984). Generalized quantifiers and the expressive power of natural language. In Generalized quantifiers in natural language (pp. 73–127). Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
  23. Lee, F. (2008). On the absence of quantificational determiners in San Lucas Quiavini Zapotec. In Matthewson (pp. 353–383).Google Scholar
  24. Lee, T. H. T., Yip, V., & Chuming, W. (1999). Inverse scope in Chinese-English interlanguage. Lingua Posnaniensis, XLI, 49–66.Google Scholar
  25. Matthewson, L. (2001). Quantification and the nature of crosslinguistic variation. Natural Language Semantics, 9, 145–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Matthewson, L. (2008). Quantification: A cross-linguistic perspective (North-Holland linguistic series, Vol. 64). Bingley: Emerald.Google Scholar
  27. Moltmann, F. (1995). Exception sentences and polyadic quantification. Linguistics and Philosophy, 18, 223–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Moltmann, F. (1996). Resumptive quantifiers in exception phrases. In H. De Swart, M. Kanazawa, & C. Piñón (Eds.), Quantifiers, deduction and context. Stanford: CSLI.Google Scholar
  29. Munro, P. (1984). Floating quantifiers in Pima. In Syntax and semantics Vol.16, The Syntax of native American languages (pp. 269–287). New York: Academic.Google Scholar
  30. Partee, B. H. (1995). Quantificational structures and compositionality. In Bach et al. 1995 (pp. 541–601).Google Scholar
  31. Peters, S., & Westerståhl, D. (2006). Quantifiers in language and logic. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  32. Pratt, I., & Francez, N. (2001). Temporal prepositions and temporal generalized quantifiers. Linguistics and Philosophy, 24(2), 187–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Safir, K., & Stowell, T. (1988). Binominal ‘each’. In Proceedings of NELS 18 (pp. 426–450). Amherst.Google Scholar
  34. Stump, G. (1981). The interpretation of frequency adjectives. Linguistics and Philosophy, 4, 221–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Szabolcsi, A. (1997). Quantifiers in pair-list readings. In A. Szabolcsi (Ed.), Ways of scope taking. Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Tyhurst, J. (1989). A semantic characterization of referentially dependent Noun Phrases. Presented at the Winter Meetings of the LSA.Google Scholar
  37. Vieira, M. D. (1995). The expression of quantificational notions in Asurini do Trocara: Evidence against the universality of determiner quantification. In E. Bach, E. Jelinek, A. Kratzer, & B. H. Partee (Eds.), Quantification in natural languages (pp. 701–720). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  38. von Fintel, K. (1993). Exceptive constructions. Natural Language Semantics, 1, 123–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. WALS (see Haspelmath et al above).Google Scholar
  40. Zimmermann, M. (2002). Boys buying two sausages each. PhD dissertation. University of Amsterdam.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of LinguisticsUniversity of California, Los AngelesLos AngelesUSA

Personalised recommendations