Linguistics and Philosophy

, Volume 17, Issue 4, pp 391–428 | Cite as

E-type pronouns, i-sums, and donkey anaphora

  • Shalom Lappin
  • Nissim Francez

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Barwise, J. and R. Cooper: 1981, ‘Generalized Quantifiers in Natural Language’,Linguistics and Philosophy 4, 159–219.Google Scholar
  2. Chierchia, G.: 1992, ‘Anaphora and Dynamic Binding’,Linguistics and Philosophy 15, 111–183.Google Scholar
  3. Cooper, R.: 1979, ‘The Interpretation of Pronouns’, in F. Heny and H. Schnelle (eds.),Syntax and Semantics 10, Academic Press, New York, pp. 61–92.Google Scholar
  4. Cooper, R.: 1983,Quantification and Syntactic Theory, Reidel, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  5. Evans, G.: 1980, ‘Pronouns’,Linguistic Inquiry 11, 337–362.Google Scholar
  6. Groenendijk, J. and M. Stokhof: 1990, ‘Dynamic Montague Grammar’, in L. Kalman and L. Polos (eds.),Papers from the Second Symposium on Logic and Language, Akademiai Kiado, Budapest, pp. 3–48.Google Scholar
  7. Groenendijk, J. and M. Stokhof: 1991, ‘Dynamic Predicate Logic’,Linguistics and Philosophy 14, 39–100.Google Scholar
  8. Heim, I.: 1982,The Semantics of Definite and Indefinite Noun Phrases, unpublished Ph.D dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA.Google Scholar
  9. Heim, I.: 1990, ‘E-type Pronouns and Donkey Anaphora’,Linguistics and Philosophy 13, 137–177.Google Scholar
  10. Kadmon, N.: 1990, ‘Uniqueness’,Linguistics and Philosophy 13, 273–324.Google Scholar
  11. Kamp, H.: 1981, ‘A Theory of Truth and Semantic Interpretation’ in J. Groenendijk, T. Janssen, and M. Stokhof (eds.),Formal Methods in the Study of Language, Mathematical Center, Amsterdam, pp. 277–322.Google Scholar
  12. Kanazawa, M.: 1994, ‘Weak vs. Strong Readings of Donkey Sentences and Monotonicity Inference in a Dynamic Setting’,Linguistics and Philosophy,17.Google Scholar
  13. Landman, F.: 1989a, ‘Groups, I’,Linguistics and Philosophy 12, 559–605.Google Scholar
  14. Landman, F.: 1989b, ‘Groups, II’,Linguistics and Philosophy 12, 723–744.Google Scholar
  15. Lappin, S.: 1989, ‘Donkey Pronouns Unbound’,Theoretical Linguistics 15, 263–286.Google Scholar
  16. Lewis, D.: 1975, ‘Adverbs of Quantification’, in E. Keenan (ed.),Formal Semantics of Natural Language, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 3–15.Google Scholar
  17. Link, G.: 1983, ‘The Logical Analysis of Plurals and Mass Terms: A Lattice-Theoretical Approach’, in R. Baeuerle et al. (eds.),Meaning, Use, and Interpretation, de Gruyter, Berlin, pp. 302–323.Google Scholar
  18. Link, G.: 1987, ‘Generalized Quantifiers and Plurals’, in Peter Gärdenfors (ed.),Generalized Quantifiers, Reidel, Dordrecht, pp. 151–180.Google Scholar
  19. Loebner, S.: 1987, ‘Natural Language and Generalized Quantifier Theory’, in Peter Gärdenfors (ed.),Gerneralized Quantifiers, Reidel, Dordrecht, pp. 181–201.Google Scholar
  20. Neale, S.: 1990,Descriptions, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  21. Pelletier, J. and L. Schubert: 1989, ‘Generically Speaking’, in G. Chierchia, B. H. Partee, and R. Turner (eds.),Properties, Types, and Meaning, Vol. 2, Kluwer, Dordrecht.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1994

Authors and Affiliations

  • Shalom Lappin
    • 1
  • Nissim Francez
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Linguistics School of Oriental and African StudiesUniversity of LondonLondonUK
  2. 2.Department of Computer Science Technion-IIIHaifaIsrael

Personalised recommendations