It is quite uncontroversial that a semantic theory for natural language must come to grips with the nature of intensional entities, such as properties, relations and propositions. For example, it must specify what it is to attribute a property to an individual and what information bearing structure results from such an operation. More generally, semantics must identify what types of entities are needed in a compositional account of the way phrases are interpreted, as well as how such entities are related to one another.
KeywordsNoun Phrase Thematic Role Structure Meaning Existential Quantifier Generic Sentence
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Carlson, G.: 1980, Reference to Kinds in English, Garland, New York.Google Scholar
- Carnap, R.: 1947, Meaning and Necessity, Chicago.Google Scholar
- Chierchia, G.: 1984, Topics in the Syntax and Semantics of Infinitives and Gerunds, unpublished Ph.D. Diss., University of Massachusetts at Amherst.Google Scholar
- Cresswell, M.: 1985, Structured Meanings, MIT Press.Google Scholar
- Heim, I.: 1982, The Semantics of Definite and Indefinite Noun Phrases, unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Massachusetts at Amherst.Google Scholar
- Jackendoff, R.: 1972, Semantic Interpretation in Generative Grammar, MIT Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
- Kamp, H.: 1984, ‘A Theory of Truth and Semantic Representation’, in J. Groenendijk, T. Janssen, and M. Stokhof (eds.), Truth, Interpretation and Information, Foris, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
- Partee, B.: 1986, ‘Noun Phrase Interpretation and Type-Shifting Principles’, in J. Groenendijk, D. de Jongh, and M. Stokhof (eds.), Studies in Discourse Representation Theory and the Theory of Generalized Quantifiers, Foris, Dordrecht, pp. 115–144.Google Scholar
- Partee, B. and Rooth, M.: 1983, ‘Generalized Conjunction and Type Ambiguity’, in R. Bauerle, B Schwarze, and A. von Stechow (eds.), Meaning, Use and Interpretation of Language, de Gruyter, Berlin, pp. 361–383.Google Scholar