“Exclusivity” and quantifier float in bakari

This paper presents a descriptive study that analyzes the semantic meaning of Toritate focus particle bakari. Previous studies reported that, although bakari expresses exclusivity, it is characterized by the fact that it permits non-applicable cases, thereby drawing the conclusion that the meaning of bakari is not exclusivity. This paper argues that bakari does indeed denote “exclusivity” as bakari is supported by the phenomenon that non-applicable cases are unacceptable when bakari co-occurs with floating quantifiers. Considering existing research on this subject, the following was observed. Even though the subjective set, as established by the speaker’s past experiences to interpret the meaning of bakari, may not be consistent with the real world, the number of events that form the said set match the number of real-world events when bakari co-occurs with floating quantifiers due to the characteristics of floating quantifiers. In such cases, bakari does not permit non-applicable cases. The interpretation that permits non-applicable cases applies to situations where the set established by the speaker is fixed at a narrower range than the real world, and the non-applicable cases exist outside the set. We thus conclude that bakari denotes “exclusivity” that does not permit non-applicable cases.

Multiple wh-quantifier float in dialectal English

This paper focuses on a dialect of English called Philadelphian Irish English (PhIrE) which allows quantifier float under wh-movement. This dialect also allows multiple quantifiers to be stranded at various stages of intermediate movement, a novel pattern not observed before. Here I focus on the patterns of multiple quantifier float and their restrictions. I propose that single and multiple quantifier float are derived through two different mechanisms: stranding and copying, respectively. Single quantifier float is derived through the standard stranding mechanisms, while wh-phrases in multiple quantifier constructions leave multiple copies which then undergo scattered deletion (See Bošković 2001; Nunes 2004).

Attributive subcomparatives in Japanese

This paper aims to explain the difference in grammaticality between Japanese attributive subcomparatives with quantity adjectives (e.g., ooku/takusan ‘many’) and those with non-quantity adjectives (e.g., omosiroi ‘interesting’). My analysis assumes that Japanese clausal comparatives involve degree abstraction (Shimoyama 2012, see also Bhatt and Takahashi 2011). Degree abstraction is generally assumed to require movement of a null degree operator. In the case of attributive clausal comparatives, the movement takes place from the left branch position. If no operation that alleviates a left branch island violation is available, we would expect that the resulting sentences would be ungrammatical. I propose that in Japanese, quantifier float can play a role in ameliorating extraction out of the left branch islands. More specifically, I argue that (i) Japanese attributive subcomparatives with quantity adjectives involve quantifier float of the quantity adjectives, and that (ii) quantifier float carries the degree operators associated with the adjectives to a position where degree operator movement can originate.

Floating quantifiers in Japanese passives and beyond

This work attempts to defend the so-called Uniform Hypothesis for passives in Japanese by re-examining the empirical phenomena involving quantifier float (Q-float). We will attempt to reinforce the following main tenets of the Uniform Hypothesis — (i) that all ni-passive sentences in Japanese involve complementation and the theta-marking of their subjects, and (ii) that they crucially lack NP movement. We will also closely examine the syntactic, semantic, pragmatic and prosodic properties of Q-float in general.

How Subjective Is the Subject?

This article re-examines the issue of grammatical relations in Mandarin Chinese in light of the results of recent large-scale typological research on grammatical relations (henceforth GRs) worldwide. Specifically, it discusses three syntactic operations and constructions that are cross-linguistically relevant to the definition of grammatical relations, namely relativisation, reflexivisation, and quantifier float. The study adopts a strictly language-internal typological approach and avails itself of natural linguistic data or sentences sanity-checked by native speakers. The aim of this paper is twofold: first, it explores the hypothesis that, in line with various other languages, GRs in Mandarin Chinese are construction-specific. Second, it proposes an alternative approach capable of explaining the conflicting evidence often pointed out in the literature on GRs and subjecthood in Mandarin Chinese.

On Movement out of Moved Elements, Labels, and Phases

The article deduces a modified version of the traditional ban on movement out of moved elements that provides a new perspective on it. Under the proposed analysis, the problem with the movement of YP out of moved XP does not arise at the point where YP moves out of XP, as in previous accounts. Instead, it arises already with the movement of XP: XP itself cannot undergo movement in this case. Any later movement out of XP is then trivially blocked. The proposed analysis leaves room for movement out of moved elements to take place in well-defined contexts. Several constructions bear this out, including German/Dutch r-pronoun constructions, Slavic left-branch extraction, and quantifier float more generally. What the proposed analysis deduces is then not the traditional ban on movement out of moved elements, but a ban on movement of phases with nonagreeing specifiers, which the article argues should replace the former ban. As a result, the analysis also extends to the immobility of verb-second clauses in German. The article also provides a new perspective on the Adjunct Condition (the ban on movement out of adjuncts). It shows that movement out of adjuncts is possible in the same configuration as movement out of moved elements. The proposed account of the latter is then extended to the Adjunct Condition. The article also proposes a labeling-based account of the Coordinate Structure Constraint, which also captures the across-the-board-movement exception.