Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Handbook of Quantifiers in Natural Language pp 1–20Cite as

The Quantifier Questionnaire

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

Part of the book series: Studies in Linguistics and Philosophy ((SLAP,volume 90))

Abstract

The questionnaire, which constitutes Chapter 1 and is 20 pages long, 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, 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 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.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   309.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   399.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   549.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  • Bach, Emmon, Eloise Jelinek, Angelika Kratzer, and Barbara H. Partee (eds.). 1995. Quantification in natural languages, Vols. 1 and 2. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baker, Mark. 1995. On the absence of certain quantifiers in Mohawk. In Bach et al. (1995), Vol I. 13–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beghelli, Filippo. 1994. Structured quantifiers. In Dynamics, polarity, and quantification, eds. M. Kanazawa and C. Piñón, 119–147. Stanford, CA: CSLI.

    Google Scholar 

  • Betts, Gavin. 1986. Latin (Teach yourself books). London: Hodder Headline Plc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bittner, Maria, and Naja Trondhjem. 2008. Quantification as reference: Evidence from Q-verbs. In Matthewson (2008), 7–67.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boolos, George. 1981. For every A there is a B. Linguistic Inquiry 12:465–466.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bruening, Benjamin. 2008. Quantification in Passamaquoddy. In Matthewson (2008), 67–105.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chung, Sandra. 1998. The design of agreement. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chung, Sandra. 2008. Possessors and definiteness effects in two Austronesian languages. In Matthewson (2008), 179–225.

    Google Scholar 

  • Etxeberria, Urtzi. 2008. On Basque quantification and on how some languages restrict their quantificational domain overtly. In Matthewson (2008), 225–277.

    Google Scholar 

  • Evans, Nick. 1995. Q-quantifiers and scope in Mayali. In Bach et al. (1995), Vol I. 207–271.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gil, David. 1982. Distributive numerals. PhD dissertation, UCLA, Los Angeles, CA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gil, David. 1988. Georgian reduplication and the domain of distributivity. Linguistics 26:1039–1065.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gil, David. 1993. Nominal and verbal quantification. Sprachtypologie und Universalienforschung, 46.4, 275–317. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gil, David. 2005. Distributive numerals. In Haspelmath et al. (2005), 222–226.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gruber, Jeffrey. 1965. Studies in Lexical Relations. PhD dissertation, MIT. Reprinted in Lexical Structures in Syntax and Semantics. North-Holland, Amsterdam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haspelmath, Martin, Matthew S. Dryer, David Gil, and Bernard Comrie (eds.). 2005. The World Atlas of Language Structures (WALS). Oxford; New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Higginbotham, James. 1994. Mass and count quantifiers. Linguistics and Philosophy 17:447–480. Reprinted in Bach et al. Vol. II.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jackendoff, Ray. 1983. Semantics and cognition. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keenan, Edward L. 1987. Multiply-headed NPs. Linguistic Inquiry 18.3:481–490.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keenan, Edward L. 1992. Beyond the Frege boundary. Linguistics and Philosophy 15:199–221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keenan, Edward L. 1996. Further beyond the Frege boundary. In Quantifiers, logic, and language, eds. J. Van der Does and J. Van Eijck, 179–201. Stanford, CA: CSLI.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keenan, Edward L. 2008. Quantification in Malagasy. In Matthewson (2008), 319–353.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keenan, Edward L., and Larry S. Moss. 1984. Generalized quantifiers and the expressive power of natural language. In Generalized quantifiers in natural language, eds. J. van Benthem and A. ter Meulen, 73–127. Dordrecht, Holland: Foris Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, Felicia. 2008. On the absence of quantificational determiners in San Lucas Quiavini Zapotec. In Matthewson (2008), 353–383.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, Thomas Hun-Tak, Virginia Yip, and Wang Chuming. 1999. Inverse scope in Chinese-English interlanguage. Lingua Posnaniensis XLI:49–66.

    Google Scholar 

  • Matthewson, Lisa. 2001. Quantification and the nature of crosslinguistic variation. Natural Language Semantics 9:145–189.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matthewson, Lisa. 2008. Quantification: A cross-linguistic perspective. Emerald North-Holland Linguistic Series, Vol. 64. Bingley, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moltmann, Friederike. 1995. Exception sentences and polyadic quantification. Linguistics and Philosophy 18:223–280.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moltmann, Friederike. 1996. Resumptive quantifiers in exception phrases. In Quantifiers, deduction and context, eds. H. De Swart, M. Kanazawa, and C. Piñón, Stanford, CA: CSLI.

    Google Scholar 

  • Munro, Pamela. 1984. Floating quantifiers in Pima. In Eung-Do Cook and Donna Gerdts (eds.). The Syntax of Native American Languages, 269–287. New York, NY: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Partee, Barbara H. 1995. Quantificational structures and compositionality. In Bach et al. (1995), 541–601.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peters, Stanley, and Dag Westerståhl. 2006. Quantifiers in language and logic. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pratt, Ian, and Nissim Francez. 2001. Temporal prepositions and temporal generalized quantifiers. Linguistics and Philosophy 24(2):187–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Safir, K., and T. Stowell. 1988. Binominal ‘each’. In Proceedings of NELS 18, 426–450, Amherst, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stump, Gregory. 1981. The interpretation of frequency adjectives. Linguistics and Philosophy 4:221–257.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Suihkonen, Pirkko. 2007. On Quantification in Finnish. Muenchen: Lincom GmbH.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Swart, Henriëtte. 1996. Quantification over time. In van der Does and van Eijck (1996), 311–337.

    Google Scholar 

  • Szabolcsi, Anna. 1997. Quantifiers in pair-list readings. In Ways of scope taking, ed. A. Szabolcsi, 311–347. Dordrecht: Kluwer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Tyhurst, James. 1989. A semantic characterization of referentially dependent Noun Phrases. Ms. Department of Linguistics, UCLA. Presented at the Winter Meetings of the Linguistic Society of America.

    Google Scholar 

  • van der Does, Jaap, and Jan van Eijck. 1996. Quantifiers, logic, and language. Stanford, CA: CSLI.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vieira, Marcia Damaso. 1995. The expression of quantificational notions in Asurini do Trocara: Evidence against the universality of Determiner quantification. In Bach et al. (1995), Vol II. 701–721.

    Google Scholar 

  • von Fintel, Kai. 1993. Exceptive constructions. Natural Language Semantics 1:123–148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • WALS (see Haspelmath et al. (2005) above).

    Google Scholar 

  • Zimmermann, Malte. 2002. Boys buying two sausages each. PhD dissertation, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Linguistics, University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA

    Edward L. Keenan

Authors
  1. Edward L. Keenan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Edward L. Keenan .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. , Dept. of Linguistics, UCLA, Hilgard Avenue 405, Los Angeles, 90095-1543, California, USA

    Edward L. Keenan

  2. , Dept. of Linguistics, UCLA, Hilgard Avenue 405, Los Angeles, 90095-1543, California, USA

    Denis Paperno

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2012 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Keenan, E.L. (2012). The Quantifier Questionnaire. In: Keenan, E., Paperno, D. (eds) Handbook of Quantifiers in Natural Language. Studies in Linguistics and Philosophy, vol 90. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2681-9_1

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation