Advertisement

(The) Most in Flemish Dutch: Definiteness and Specificity

  • Koen Roelandt
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 8607)

Abstract

This paper is concerned with de meeste ‘(the) most’ and het meeste ‘the most’ in Flemish Dutch. I first give an overview of their distribution and the different readings they produce. I then submit them to definiteness and specificity tests. The ensuing analysis of de/het meeste builds on the theory set out in Hackl [2009], but proposes a more complex syntactic structure to account for the Flemish data.

Keywords

proportional quantification specificity definiteness 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Ariel, M.: Does most mean ‘more than half’? In: Proceedings of the Annual Meeting, pp. 17–30. Berkeley Linguistics Society (2003)Google Scholar
  2. Ariel, M.: Most. Language 80(4), 658–706 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Broekhuis, H., Keizer, E., Den Dikken, M.: Syntax of Dutch: Nouns and Noun Phrases. Comprehensive Grammar Resources. Amsterdam University Press (2012) ISBN 9789089644602Google Scholar
  4. de Hoop, H.: Case Configuration and Noun Phrase Interpretation, Garland. Linguistics Series (1996) ISBN 9780815325604Google Scholar
  5. Farkas, D.F., Kiss, K.É.: On the comparative and absolute readings of superlatives. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 18, 417–455 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Hackl, M.: On the grammar and processing of proportional quantifiers: Most versus more than half. Natural Language Semantics 17(1), 63–98 (2009)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  7. Heim, I.: Notes on superlatives. MIT lecture notes (1999), http://semanticsarchive.net/Archive/TI1MTlhZ/Superlative.pdf
  8. Horn, L.R.: The border wars: A neo-Gricean perspective. In: Where Semantics Meets Pragmatics. Current research in the semantics/pragmatics interface, pp. 21–48. Elsevier (2006)Google Scholar
  9. Link, G.: The logical analysis of plurals and mass terms: a lattice-theoretical approach. In: Meaning, Use and Interpretation of Language, pp. 302–323. de Gruyter (1983)Google Scholar
  10. Matushansky, O.: On the attributive nature of superlatives. Syntax 11(1), 26–90 (2008) ISSN 13680005Google Scholar
  11. Milsark, G.: Existential Sentences in English. PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts (1974)Google Scholar
  12. Pancheva, R., Tomaszewicz, B.: Cross-linguistic differences in superlative movement out of nominal phrases. In: Arnett, N., Bennett, R. (eds.) Proceedings of the 30th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics, Cascadilla Proceedings Project (2012)Google Scholar
  13. Postma, G.: The indefinite reading of wh. In: Bok-Bennema, R., Cremers, C. (eds.) Linguistics in the Netherlands 1994, pp. 187–198. John Benjamins (1994)Google Scholar
  14. Szabolcsi, A.: Comparative superlatives. In: Sagey, E., Rapoport, T.R., Fukui, N. (eds.) Papers in Theoretical Linguistics. MIT WPL 8. MIT (1986)Google Scholar
  15. von Heusinger, K.: Specificity. In: Semantics: An International Handbook of Natural Language Meaning, vol. 2, pp. 1024–1057. de Gruyter (2011)Google Scholar
  16. Wexler, K., Culicover, P.: Formal principles of language acquisition. MIT Press, Cambridge (1981)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Koen Roelandt
    • 1
  1. 1.KU Leuven HUBrussel / CRISSPBrusselBelgium

Personalised recommendations