Skip to main content

Bare Plurals as Plural Indefinite Noun Phrases

  • Chapter

Part of the book series: Studies in Cognitive Systems ((COGS,volume 5))

Abstract

An English noun phrase whose head noun is a count noun usually occurs with a determiner. Examples of such a noun phrase are found in the subject position of each of these sentences:

  1. a.

    The desk is made of wood.

  2. b.

    A friend just arrived from Montevideo.

  3. c.

    This cup is fragile.

Such noun phrases in the singular are not permitted to appear without a determiner.

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

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight 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

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Bibliography

  • Abbott, J. Sets, Lattices, and Boolean Algebras, Allyn and Bacon, 1969.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alston, W. Philosophy of Language, Prentice—Hall, 1964.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baldwin, J.ed. Dictionary of Philosophy and Psychology, Macmillan, 1901.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bauerle, T., Schwarze, C., and A. von Stechow, eds. Meaning, Use, and Interpretation of Language, De Gruyter, 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ballmer, T., and M. Pinkal, eds. Approaching Vagueness, Elsevier, 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  • Black, M. “Vagueness,” Philosophy of Science 4, 4, pp. 427–455, 1937.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carlson, G. “A unified analysis of the English bare plural,” Linguistics and Philosophy 1, pp. 413–457, 1977.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carlson, G. References to Kinds in English, University of Massachusetts, unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, 1977.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carlson, L. Plural Quantification, MIT, unpublished manuscript, 1980.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chastain, C. “Reference and context,” Language, Mind, and Knowledge, Gunderson, K., ed., pp. 194–269, University of Minnesota Press, 1975.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chomsky, N. Lectures on Government and Binding: The Pisa Lectures, Foris, 1982.

    Google Scholar 

  • Copi, I. Introduction to Logic, Macmillan, 1982

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Fodor, J., and I. Sag. “Referential and quantificational indefinites,” Linguistics and Philosophy 5, pp. 335–398, 1982.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gillon, B. The Logical Form of Plurality and Quantification in Natural Language, MIT, unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gillon, B. “The readings of plural noun phrases in English,” Linguistics and Philosophy 10, pp. 199–200, 1987.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gunderson, K., ed. Language, Mind, and Knowledge, University of Minnesota Press, 1975.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heim, I., Lannik, H., and R. May. “Reciprocity and plurality,” Essays on Logical Form, May, R., ed., unpublished manuscript, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  • Higginbotham, J. “Reciprocal interpretation,” Linguistic Research 3, 1, pp. 97–117, 1981.

    Google Scholar 

  • Higginbotham, J. “LF, binding, and nominals,” Linguistic Inquiry 14, 3, pp. 395–420, 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoeksema, J. “Plurality and conjunction,” Studies in Model Theoretic Semantics, ter Meulen, ed., pp. 63–83, 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hornstein, N. Logic as Grammar, MIT Press, 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ioup, G. “Specificity and the interpretation of quantifiers,” Linguistics and Philosophy 1, pp. 233–245, 1977.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jesperson, O. A Modern English Grammar on Historical Principles George Allen and Unwin, 1909.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jesperson, O. The Philosophy of Grammar, George Allen and Unwin, 1924.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kempson, R. Semantic Theory Cambridge University Press 1977

    Google Scholar 

  • Kempson, R., and A. Cormack. “Ambiguity and quantification,” Linguis­tics and Philosophy 4, pp. 259–310, 1981.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keynes, J. Studies and Exercises in Formal Logic,Macmillan, 1884.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kroch, A. The Semantics of Scope, MIT, unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, 1974.

    Google Scholar 

  • Langendoen, D. “The logic of reciprocity,” Linguistic Inquiry 9,2, pp 177–197, 1978.

    Google Scholar 

  • LePore, E., ed. New Directions in Semantics, Academic Press, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  • Link, G. “The logical analysis of plurals and mass terms: a lattice-theoretic approach,” Meaning, Use, and Interpretation of Language, Bauerle, T., Schwarze, C., and A. von Stechow, eds. pp. 302–323, De Gruyter, 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  • Link, G. “Pural,” Handbook of Semantics, D. Wunderlich and C. Schwarze, eds., to appear.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lyons,J. Semantics,Cambridge University Press, 1977.

    Google Scholar 

  • Massey, G. “Tom, Dick, and Harry, and all the king’s men,” American Philosophical Quarterly 13, 2, pp. 89–108, 1976.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • May, R. The Grammar of Quantification, MIT, unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, 1977.

    Google Scholar 

  • May, R., ed. Essays on Logical Form, unpublished manuscript, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peirce, C. “Vague,” Dictionary of Philosophy and Psychology volume 2, Baldwin, J., ed., p. 748, Macmillan, 1901.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pelletier, F., and L. Schubert. Three Papers on the Logical Form of Mass Terms, Generics, Bare Plurals,and Habituais, University of Alberta, Department of Computing Science: Technical Report (TR 87–3), 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  • Quine, W. V. “Quantifiers and propositional attitudes,” The Journal of Philosophy 53, 5, pp. 177–187, 1956.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Quine, W. V. The Ways of Paradox, Random House, 1966.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, C. Modal Subordination,Anaphora, and Distributivity, Univer­sity of Massachusetts, unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schubert, L., and F. Pelletier. “Problems in the representation of the log­ical form of generics, plurals, and mass nouns,” New Directions in Semantics,LePore, E., ed. pp. 387–453, Academic Press, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  • Short, D., tr. Problems of Semantics: A Contribution to the Analysis of the Language of Science, Reidel, Translation from Czech of Tondl (1966) 2nd ed., 1981.

    Google Scholar 

  • ter Meulen, A., ed. Studies in Model Theoretic Semantics, Foris, 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tondi, L. Problemy Semantity, English translation by Short, tr., 1966.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ware, R. “Conjunction, plurality, and aggregate particulars,” University of Zimbabwe, unpublished manuscript.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, G. “On definite and indefinite descriptions,” The Philosophical Review 87, 1, pp. 48–76, 1978.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, R. Introduction to Graph Theory, Longman Group, 2nd ed. 1979, 1972.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wunderlich, D. and C. Schwarze., eds. Handbook of Semantics, to appear 1984.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1990 Kluwer Academic Publishers

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Gillon, B.S. (1990). Bare Plurals as Plural Indefinite Noun Phrases. In: Kyburg, H.E., Loui, R.P., Carlson, G.N. (eds) Knowledge Representation and Defeasible Reasoning. Studies in Cognitive Systems, vol 5. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-0553-5_6

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-0553-5_6

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht

  • Print ISBN: 978-94-010-6736-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-009-0553-5

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics