scholarly journals Quantifier Scope in Formal Linguistics

2010 ◽  
pp. 159-225 ◽  
Author(s):  
E.G. Ruys ◽  
Yoad Winter
Keyword(s):  
2004 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kevin B. Paterson ◽  
Simon P. Liversedge ◽  
Ruth Filik
Keyword(s):  

1992 ◽  
Vol 9 (0) ◽  
pp. 223-243
Author(s):  
TOMOYUKI TANAKA
Keyword(s):  

Author(s):  
Ash Asudeh ◽  
Richard Crouch

‎The glue approach to semantic interpretation has been developed principally for Lexical Functional Grammar. Recent work has shown how glue can be used with a variety of syntactic theories and this paper outlines how it can be applied to HPSG. As well as providing an alternative form of semantics for HPSG, we believe that the benefits of HPSG glue include the following: (1) simplification of the Semantics Principle; (2) a simple and elegant treatment of modifier scope, including empirical phenomena like quantifier scope ambiguity, the interaction of scope with raising, and recursive modification; (3) an analysis of control that handles agreement between controlled subjects and their coarguments while allowing for a property denotation for the controlled clause; (4) re-use of highly efficient techniques for semantic derivation already implemented for LFG, and which target problems of ambiguity management also addressed by Minimal Recursion Semantics. 


2017 ◽  
pp. 209-238 ◽  
Author(s):  
Balázs Surányi ◽  
Gergő Turi
Keyword(s):  

1987 ◽  
Vol 4 (0) ◽  
pp. 273-293
Author(s):  
NOBUHIRO KAGA
Keyword(s):  

2018 ◽  
Vol 49 (3) ◽  
pp. 465-499 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas Grano ◽  
Howard Lasnik

A bound pronoun in the subject position of a finite embedded clause renders the clause boundary relatively transparent to relations ordinarily confined to monoclausal, control, and raising configurations. For example, too/ enough-movement structures involving a finite clause boundary are degraded in sentences like * This book is too long [for John to claim [that Bill read ___ in a day]] but improved when the finite clause has a bound pronominal subject as in ? This book is too long [for John1 to claim [that he1 read ___ in a day]]. This bound pronoun effect holds across a wide range of phenomena including too/ enough-movement, tough-movement, gapping, comparative deletion, antecedent-contained deletion, quantifier scope interaction, multiple questions, pseudogapping, reciprocal binding, and multiple sluicing; we confirm the effect via a sentence acceptability experiment targeting some of these phenomena. Our account has two crucial ingredients: (a) bound pronouns optionally enter the derivation with unvalued ϕ-features and (b) phases are defined in part by convergence, so that under certain conditions, unvalued features void the phasal status of CP and extend the locality domain for syntactic operations.


Author(s):  
Katalin É. Kiss ◽  
Jürgen Pafel

10.1075/la.84 ◽  
2006 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jürgen Pafel
Keyword(s):  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document