Linguistics and Philosophy

, Volume 29, Issue 3, pp 251–276 | Cite as

Plurality and Temporal Modification

Article
  • 91 Downloads

Abstract

A semantics with plural entitles and plural times accounts for cumulative relations between plural arguments and temporal expressions. The semantics equips nominal, verbal and sentential meanings with temporal context variables and treats temporal modifiers as temporal generalized quantifiers; cumulative conjunction, however, takes place at types lower than generalized quantifiers. The mediation of temporal context variables allows cumulative relations to percolate between an argument in a main clause and one in a temporal clause, in apparent violation of locality restrictions. Plural times form a semilattice structure imposed on the set of intervals; no interaction is observed between this and the internal temporal structure of intervals.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Artstein, R. 2001

    ‘Conjunction Weakening and Morphological Plurality’

    Megerdoomian, K.Bar-e1, L. A. eds. WCCFL 20 Proceedings.Cascadilla PressSomerville, MA2942
    Google Scholar
  2. Artstein, R. 2005‘Quantificational Arguments in Temporal Adjunct Clauses’Linguistics and Philosophy28541597CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Artstein, R., Francez, N. 2003

    ‘Plural Times and Temporal Modification’

    Dekker, P.Rooy, R. eds. Proceedings of the 14th Amsterdam Colloquium.ILLC, University of AmsterdamThe Netherlands6368
    Google Scholar
  4. Beck, S. 2000

    ‘Star Operators. Episode1:DefenseoftheDoubleStar’

    Kusumoto, K.Villalta, E. eds. Issues in SemanticsUniversity of Massachusetts Occasional Papers 23GLSA, Amherst, MA123
    Google Scholar
  5. Beck, S., Sauerland, U. 2000‘Cumulation Is Needed: A Reply to Winter (2000)’Natural Language Semantics.8349371CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Francez, N. M. Steedman: To appear, ‘Categorial Grammar and the Semantics of Indexical Preposition Phrases’, Linguistics and Philosophy.Google Scholar
  7. Groenendijk, J., T. M. V. Janssen and M. Stokhof (eds.): 1984, Truth, Interpretation and Information: Selected Papers from the Third Amsterdam Colloquium(Groningen-Amsterdam Studies in Semantics 2), Foris, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  8. Kamp, H., Reyle, U. 1993From Discourse to Logic: Introduction to Model-theoretic Semantics of Natural Language, Formal Logic and Discourse Representation Theory (Studies in Linguistics and Philosophy 42)KluwerDordrechtGoogle Scholar
  9. Krifka, M: 1990a, ‘Boolean and Non-Boolean And’, in L. Kálmán and L. Pólos (eds.), Papers from the Second Symposium on Logic and Language, Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, pp. 161–188.Google Scholar
  10. Krifka, M. 1990b‘Four Thousand Ships Passed Through the Lock: Object-Induced Measure Functions on Events’Linguistics and Philosophy13487520CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Landman, F. 1989‘Groups, I’Linguistics and Philosophy12559605CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Landman, F. 1996

    ‘Plurality’

    Lappin, S. eds. The Handbook of Contemporary Semantic Theory, chap. 16.BlackwellOxford425457
    Google Scholar
  13. Landman, F.: 2000, Events and Plurality: The Jerusalem Lectures (Studies in Linguistics and Philosophy 76), Kluwer, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  14. Link G. (1983). ‘The Logical Analysis of Plurals and Mass Terms: A Lattice-Theoretical Approach’. In: Bäuerle R., Schwarze C., von Stechow A. (eds)., Meaning, Use and Interpretation of Language. de Gruyter, Berlin, pp. 302–323Google Scholar
  15. Partee, B. H. and M. Rooth: 1983, ‘Generalized Conjunction and Type Ambiguity’, in R. Bäuerle, C. Schwarze and A. von Stechow (eds.), Meaning, Use and Interpretation of Language, de Gruyter, Berlin, pp. 361–383.Google Scholar
  16. Pratt, I. and N. Francez: 1997, ‘On the Semantics of Temporal Prepositions and Preposition Phrases’, Tech. Rep. UMCS-97-4-2, Department of Computer Science, University of Manchester, ftp://ftp.cs.man.ac.uk/pub/TR/UMCS-97-4-2.ps.ZGoogle Scholar
  17. Pratt, I., Francez, N. 2001‘Temporal Prepositions and Temporal Generalized Quantifiers’Linguistics and Philosophy24187222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Sauerland, U.: 1998, ‘Plurals, Derived Predicates, and Reciprocals’, in U. Sauerland and O. Percus (eds.), The Interpretive Tract (MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 25), MIT Department of Linguistics and Philosophy, Cambridge, MA, pp. 177–204.Google Scholar
  19. Scha, R. J. H.: 1981, ‘Distributive, Collective and Cumulative Quantification’, in J. Groenendijk, T. M. V. Janssen and M. Stokhof (eds.), Formal Methods in the Study of Language, Part 2 (Mathematical Centre Tracts 136), Mathematisch Centrum, Amsterdam, pp. 483–512, reprinted in Groenendijk et al. (1984), pp. 131–158.Google Scholar
  20. Schwarzschild, R. 1994‘Plurals, Presuppositions and the Sources of Distributivity’Natural Language Semantics2201248CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Stechow, A. 2002‘Temporal Prepositional Phrases with Quantifiers: Some Additions to Pratt and Francez (2001)’Linguistics and Philosophy25755800CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Sternefeld, W. 1998‘Reciprocity and Cumulative Predication’Natural Language Semantics6303337CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Winter, Y. 2000‘Distributivity and Dependency’Natural Language Semantics82769CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Winter, Y.: to appear, ‘Type Shifting with Semantic Features: A Unified Perspective’, in C. Barker and P. Jacobson (eds.), Direct Compositionality, Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of EssexColchesterUK
  2. 2.Department of Computer ScienceTechnion-Israel Institute of TechnologyHaifaIsrael

Personalised recommendations