Abstract
Quantifiers in phrasal and clausal comparatives often seem to take distributive scope in the matrix clause: for instance, the sentence John is taller than every girl is is true iff for every girl it holds that John is taller than that girl. Broadly speaking, two approaches exist that derive this reading without postulating the (problematic) wide scope of the quantifier: the negation analysis and the interval analysis of than-clauses. We propose a modification of the interval analysis in which than-clauses are not treated as degree intervals but as degree pluralities. This small change has significant consequences: it yields a straightforward account of differentials in comparatives and it correctly predicts the existence of hitherto unnoticed readings, viz. cumulative readings of clausal comparatives. Finally, this paper also makes the case that using degree pluralities is conceptually appealing: it allows us to restrict the analysis of comparatives by mechanisms that are postulated independently in the semantics of pluralities.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Aloni M., Roelofsen F. (2014) Indefinites in comparatives. Natural Language Semantics 22(2): 145–167
Alrenga P., Kennedy C. (2014) No more shall we part: Quantifiers in English comparatives. Natural Language Semantics 22(1): 1–53
Artstein, R., and N. Francez. 2003. Plural times and temporal modification. In Proceedings of the 14th Amsterdam Colloquium, ed. P. Dekker, and R. van Rooy, 63–68. Amsterdam: ILLC.
Beck S. (2010) Quantifiers in than-clauses. Semantics & Pragmatics 3: 1–72
Beck S. (2012) Lucinda driving too fast again: the scalar properties of ambiguous than-clauses. Journal of Semantics 29: 1–63
Beck, S. 2014. Plural predication and quantifier ‘than’-clauses. In The art and craft of semantics: A Festschrift for Irene Heim, ed. L. Crnic, and U. Sauerland. MITWPL 70, 91–115. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT.
Beck S., Sauerland U. (2000) Cumulation is needed: A reply to Winter (2000). Natural Language Semantics 8(4): 349–371
Beck S., Sharvit Y. (2002) Pluralities of questions. Journal of Semantics 19(2): 105–157
Bhatt R., Pancheva R. (2004) Late merge of degree clauses. Linguistic Inquiry 35: 1–45
Brasoveanu A. (2008) Donkey pluralities: Plural information states versus non-atomic individuals. Linguistics and Philosophy 31(2): 129–209
Bresnan J. (1973) Syntax of the comparative clause construction in English. Linguistic Inquiry 4(3): 275–343
Carlson G. (1977) Amount relatives. Language 53: 520–542
Champollion, L. 2010a. Cumulative readings of every do not provide evidence for events and thematic roles. In Proceedings of the 17th Amsterdam Colloquium 2009, ed. M. Aloni, and K. Schulz. Amsterdam: Springer.
Champollion, L. 2010b. Parts of a whole: Distributivity as a bridge between aspect andmeasurement. Ph. D. thesis, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
Chomsky, N. 1977. On wh-movement. In Formal syntax, ed. P. Culicover, T. Wasow, and A. Akmajian, 71–132. New York: Academic Press.
Dalrymple M., Kanazawa M., Mchombo S., Peters S. (1998) Reciprocal expressions and the concept of reciprocity. Linguistics and Philosophy 21: 159–210
Davies, M. 2008. The corpus of contemporary american english (coca): 385 million words, 1990–present. http://www.americancorpus.org.
Dotlačil, J. 2010. Anaphora and distributivity: A study of same, different, reciprocals and others. Ph. D. thesis, LOT.
Dowty, D.R., and B. Brodie. 1984. The semantics of “floated” quantifiers in a transformational grammar. In Proceedings of WCCFL 3, ed. M. Cobler, S. MacKaye, and M.T. Wescoat, 75–90. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.
Fintel, K. von, and S. Iatridou. 2005. What to do if you want to go to Harlem: Anankastic conditionals and related matters. Manuscript, MIT. http://web.mit.edu/fintel/www/harlem-rutgers.pdf.
Fitzgibbons, N., Y. Sharvit, and J. Gajewski. 2008. Plural superlatives and distributivity. In Proceedings of SALT 18, ed. T. Friedman and S. Ito, 302–318. Ithaca, N.Y.: CLC Publications.
Fleisher, N. (To appear). Comparing theories of quantifiers in than clauses: lessons from downward-entailing differentials. Semantics and Pragmatics.
Gajewski, J. 2008. More on quantifiers in comparative clauses. In Proceedings of SALT 18, ed. T. Friedman and S. Ito, 340–357. Ithaca, N.Y.: CLC Publications.
Gillon B. (1987) The readings of plural noun phrases in English. Linguistics and Philosophy 10: 199–219
Heim, I. 2000. Degree operators and scope. In Proceedings of SALT 10, ed. B. Jackson and T. Matthews, 40–64. Ithaca, N.Y.: CLC Publications.
Heim, I. 2006. Remarks on comparative clauses as generalized quantifiers. Manuscript, MIT. Online at http://semanticsarchive.net/Archive/mJiMDBlN/comparatives%20as%20GQs.
Heim I., Kratzer A. (1998) Semantics in generative grammar. Blackwell Publishing, Oxford
Hoeksema, J. 1983. Plurality and conjunction. In Studies in modeltheoretic semantics, ed. A. ter Meulen, 63–83. Dordrecht: Foris.
Hoeksema, J. 1996. Floating quantifiers, partitives and distributivity. In Partitives: Studies on the syntax and semantics of partitive and related constructions, ed. J. Hoeksema, 57–106. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Kennedy, C. 1997. Projecting the adjective: The syntax and semantics of gradability and comparison. PhD. Thesis, UC San Diego.
Kennedy C. (2002) Comparative deletion and optimality in syntax. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 20(3): 553–621
Krasikova, S. 2008. Quantifiers in comparatives. In Proceedings of SuB12, ed. A. Grønn, 337–352. Oslo: ILOS.
Kratzer, A. 2003. The event argument and the semantics of verbs. Manuscript, University of Massachusetts at Amherst; 4 chapters. http://semanticsarchive.net.
Krifka,M. 1989. Nominal reference, temporal constitution, and quantification in event semantics. In Semantics and contextual expressions, ed. R. Bartsch, J. van Benthem, and P. van Emde Boas, 75–115. Dordrecht: Foris.
Krifka M. (1996) Parametrized sum individuals for plural reference and partitive quantification. Linguistics and Philosophy 19: 555–598
Landman F. (1989) Groups. Part I, II. Linguistics and Philosophy 12(559–605): 723–744
Landman, F. 1996. Plurality. In The handbook of contemporary semantic theory, ed. S. Lappin, 425–457. Dordrecht: Blackwell.
Landman F. (2000) Events and plurality. Kluwer, Dordrecht
Larson R. (1988) Scope and comparison. Linguistics and Philosophy 11: 1–26
Lasersohn P. (1998) Generalized distributivity operators. Linguistics and Philosophy 21(1): 83–93
Link, G. 1983. The logical analysis of plurals and mass terms: a lattice- theoretical approach. In Meaning, use and interpretation of language, ed. R. Bäuerle, C. Schwarze, and A. von Stechow, 302–323. Berlin: de Gruyter.
Link, G. 1987. Generalised quantifiers and plurals. In Generalised quantifiers: Linguistic and logical approaches (Studies in linguistics and philosophy 31), ed. P. Gårdenfors, 151–180. Dordrecht: Reidel.
Matushansky, O., and E.G. Ruys. 2006. Meilleurs voeux: Quelques notes sur la comparaison plurielle. In Empirical issues in formal syntax and semantics 6, ed. O. Bonami and P.C. Hofherr, 309–330. Paris: Presses de l’Université de Paris-Sorbonne.
May R. (1985) Logical form: Its structure and derivation. Mass.: MIT Press, Cambridge
Nouwen R. (2003) Complement anaphora and interpretation. Journal of Semantics 20(1): 73–113
Nouwen R. (2007) On dependent pronouns and dynamic semantics. Journal of Philosophical Logic 36(2): 123–154
Nouwen, R. 2015. Plurality. In Cambridge handbook of semantics, ed. M. Aloni and P. Dekker. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Reinhart T. (1997) Quantifier scope: how labor is divided between QR and choice functions. Linguistics and Philosophy 20: 335–397
Roberts, C. 1987. Modal Subordination, anaphora and distributivity. Ph. D. thesis, University of Massachussets, Amherst.
Scha, R., and D. Stallard 1988. Multi-level plurals and distributivity. In Proceedings of the 26th annual meeting of the ACL. 17–24. Morristown, N.J.: ACL.
Schein, B. 1993. Plurals and events (Current studies in linguistics 23). Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
Schwarzschild, R. 1996. Pluralities. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Schwarzschild R. (2008) The semantics of comparatives and other degree constructions. Language and Linguistics Compass 2(2): 308–331
Schwarzschild R., Wilkinson K. (2002) Quantifiers in comparatives: A semantics of degree based on intervals. Natural Language Semantics 10: 1–41
van den Berg, M. 1996. Some aspects of the internal structure of discourse: The dynamics of nominal anaphora. Ph. D. thesis, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam.
van Rooij, R. 2008. Comparatives and quantifiers. In Empirical issues in syntax and semantics 7, ed. O. Bonami and P. Hofherr, 423–444. Paris: Presses de l’Université de Paris-Sorbonne.
von Stechow A. (1984) Comparing semantic theories of comparison. Journal of Semantics 3: 1–77
Winter Y. (1997) Choice functions and the scopal semantics of indefinites. Linguistics and Philosophy 20: 399–467
Winter Y. (2000) Distributivity and dependency. Natural Language Semantics 8: 27–69
Winter Y. (2002) Atoms and sets: a characterization of semantic number. Linguistic Inquiry 33: 493–505
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
About this article
Cite this article
Dotlačil, J., Nouwen, R. The comparative and degree pluralities. Nat Lang Semantics 24, 45–78 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11050-015-9119-7
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11050-015-9119-7