Logic, Language and Meaning pp 355-363
Two Sources of Again-Ambiguities: Evidence from Degree-Achievement Predicates
This paper provides evidence that again-ambiguities derive from two distinct sources, with the precise nature of a particular ambiguity being dependent on the particular type of predicate (Result-State or Degree-Achievement) present in the sentence. Previous research has focused primarily on sentences containing Result-State predicates (e.g. to open) rather than Degree Achievements (e.g. to widen), and has located the source of the ambiguity in the scope that again takes with respect to become in a syntactically decomposed predicate. I argue that entailment facts preclude such an analysis from applying to sentences containing Degree Achievements and again. Instead, I propose that Degree Achievement predicates should be decomposed into comparative structures, and that the ambiguity in such sentences arises from the scope again takes with respect to a comparative Degree Phrase, rather than a become operator.
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 2.Bennett, M., Partee, B.: Toward the Logic of Tense and Aspect in English. Technical report, Indiana University Linguistics Club, Bloomington, Indiana (1978)Google Scholar
- 3.Dowty, D.: Word Meaning and Montague Grammar. Reidel, Dordecht (1979)Google Scholar
- 4.Heim, I., Kratzer, A.: Semantics in Generative Grammar. Blackwell, Malden (1998)Google Scholar
- 5.Heim, I.: Degree Operators and Scope. Semantics and Linguistic Theory 10, 40–64 (2000)Google Scholar
- 7.Kennedy, C., Levin, B.: Measure of Change: The Adjectival Core of Degree Achievements. In: McNally, L., Kennedy, C. (eds.) Adjectives and Adverbs: Syntax, Semantics and Discourse, pp. 156–182. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2008)Google Scholar
- 8.McCawley, J.D.: Syntactic and Logical Arguments for Semantic Structures. In: Fujimura, O. (ed.) Three Dimensions in Linguistic Theory, pp. 259–376. TEC Corp., Tokyo (1973)Google Scholar