scholarly journals Quantity and gradability across categories

2015 ◽  
pp. 251
Author(s):  
M. Ryan Bochnak

This paper proposes a unified analysis of scalar modifiers across the adjec- tival, nominal and verbal domains, with a special focus on the proportional modifier half in English. I claim that half has a scalar meaning in all the environments in which it appears. Specifically, I show that in partitive and event-modifying uses, half targets a quantity-based scale whose scale structure crucially depends on the part structure of a nominal argument, just like many adjectival cases. To formalize the analysis, I extend the degree-based analysis of Kennedy & McNally (2005) for gradable adjectives to partitives and VPs headed by incremental theme verbs, with some discussion of compounding uses of half with both nouns and verbs.

2010 ◽  
Vol 20 ◽  
pp. 251
Author(s):  
M. Ryan Bochnak

This paper proposes a unified analysis of scalar modifiers across the adjec- tival, nominal and verbal domains, with a special focus on the proportional modifier half in English. I claim that half has a scalar meaning in all the environments in which it appears. Specifically, I show that in partitive and event-modifying uses, half targets a quantity-based scale whose scale structure crucially depends on the part structure of a nominal argument, just like many adjectival cases. To formalize the analysis, I extend the degree-based analysis of Kennedy & McNally (2005) for gradable adjectives to partitives and VPs headed by incremental theme verbs, with some discussion of compounding uses of half with both nouns and verbs.


2015 ◽  
pp. 197
Author(s):  
Daniel Lassiter

The epistemic modals possible, probable, likely, and certain require a semantics which explains their behavior both as modal operators and as gradable adjectives. An analysis of these items in terms of Kennedy & McNally's theory of gradability suggests that they are associated with a single, fully closed scale of possibility. An implementation using the standard theory of modality due to Kratzer is shown to make incorrect predictions in several domains. However, if the scale of possibility is identified with standard numerical probability, the facts about gradability are explained and the undesirable predictions of Kratzer's theory are avoided.


2015 ◽  
pp. 166
Author(s):  
Stephanie Solt ◽  
Nicole Gotzner

Semantic theories differ in the role they assume for degrees in the interpretation of gradable adjectives, and in the assumptions they make about the nature of degrees and the structure of the scales they comprise. We report on two experiments investigating speakers' use of gradable adjectives across varying contexts, with the goal of gaining insight into the nature of the degree ontology underlying their semantics. We find that the truth conditions for the positive form must be stated in terms of degrees rather than rankings of individuals, and further that the relevant scale structure is one where distances between scale points are meaningful, and not an ordinal scale derived from an ordering relation on a comparison class. We also find no evidence that scale structure depends on the presence or absence of a corresponding system of numerical measures.


2010 ◽  
Vol 20 ◽  
pp. 197 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Lassiter

The epistemic modals possible, probable, likely, and certain require a semantics which explains their behavior both as modal operators and as gradable adjectives. An analysis of these items in terms of Kennedy & McNally's theory of gradability suggests that they are associated with a single, fully closed scale of possibility. An implementation using the standard theory of modality due to Kratzer is shown to make incorrect predictions in several domains. However, if the scale of possibility is identified with standard numerical probability, the facts about gradability are explained and the undesirable predictions of Kratzer's theory are avoided.


2012 ◽  
Vol 22 ◽  
pp. 166 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephanie Solt ◽  
Nicole Gotzner

Semantic theories differ in the role they assume for degrees in the interpretation of gradable adjectives, and in the assumptions they make about the nature of degrees and the structure of the scales they comprise. We report on two experiments investigating speakers' use of gradable adjectives across varying contexts, with the goal of gaining insight into the nature of the degree ontology underlying their semantics. We find that the truth conditions for the positive form must be stated in terms of degrees rather than rankings of individuals, and further that the relevant scale structure is one where distances between scale points are meaningful, and not an ordinal scale derived from an ordering relation on a comparison class. We also find no evidence that scale structure depends on the presence or absence of a corresponding system of numerical measures.


2022 ◽  
Vol 31 ◽  
pp. 506
Author(s):  
Stavroula Alexandropoulou

This work presents results from an experiment that investigates whether at least as a modifier of gradable adjectives (e.g., at least misleading) triggers speaker ignorance inferences just as has been established for at least as a numeral modifier (e.g., at least two). I find that, while at least gives rise to ignorance inferences with both types of scalar expressions, this happens in varying degrees, contra existing accounts of at least (Geurts & Nouwen 2007; Cohen & Krifka 2014) and in line with experimental evidence on the scalar inferences of unmodified adjectives and numerals (Doran, Baker, McNabb, Larson & Ward 2009), known as scalar diversity. I also find indications that the scale structure of adjectives may affect the availability of ignorance inferences, as in the case of scalar implicature computation for unmodified adjectives (Gotzner, Solt & Benz 2018a), yet in a reverse manner.


VASA ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 41 (5) ◽  
pp. 313-318 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ernemann ◽  
Bender ◽  
Melms ◽  
Brechtel ◽  
Kobba ◽  
...  

Interventional therapies using angioplasty and stenting of symptomatic stenosis of the proximal supraaortic vessels have evolved as safe and effective treatment strategies. The aim of this paper is to summarize the current treatment concepts for stenosis in the subclavian and brachiocephalic artery with regard to clinical indication, interventional technique including selection of the appropriate vascular approach and type of stent, angiographic and clinical short-term and long-term results and follow-up. The role of hybrid interventions for tandem stenoses of the carotid bifurcation and brachiocephalic artery is analysed. A systematic review of data for angioplasty and stenting of symptomatic extracranial vertebral artery stenosis is discussed with a special focus on restenosis rate.


2016 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 30-40 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paulo S. Boggio ◽  
Gabriel G. Rêgo ◽  
Lucas M. Marques ◽  
Thiago L. Costa

Abstract. Social neuroscience and psychology have made substantial advances in the last few decades. Nonetheless, the field has relied mostly on behavioral, imaging, and other correlational research methods. Here we argue that transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is an effective and relevant technique to be used in this field of research, allowing for the establishment of more causal brain-behavior relationships than can be achieved with most of the techniques used in this field. We review relevant brain stimulation-aided research in the fields of social pain, social interaction, prejudice, and social decision-making, with a special focus on tDCS. Despite the fact that the use of tDCS in Social Neuroscience and Psychology studies is still in its early days, results are promising. As better understanding of the processes behind social cognition becomes increasingly necessary due to political, clinical, and even philosophical demands, the fact that tDCS is arguably rare in Social Neuroscience research is very noteworthy. This review aims at inspiring researchers to employ tDCS in the investigation of issues within Social Neuroscience. We present substantial evidence that tDCS is indeed an appropriate tool for this purpose.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document