Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Exceptive constructions

  • Published:
Natural Language Semantics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

For the first time a uniform compositional derivation is given for quantified sentences containing exceptive constructions. The semantics of exceptives is primarily one of subtraction from the domain of a quantifier. The crucial semantic difference between the highly grammaticized but-phrases and free exceptives is that the former have the Uniqueness Condition as part of their lexical meaning whereas the latter are mere set subtractors. Several empirical differences between the two types of exceptives are shown to follow from this basic lexical difference.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abney, Steven: 1987, The English Noun Phrase in Its Sentential Aspect, Ph.D. dissertation, MIT.

  • Bach, Emmon: 1979, ‘Control in Montague Grammar’, Linguistic Inquiry 10, 515–531.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bach, Emmon: 1981, ‘Discontinuous Constituents in Generalized Categorical Grammars’, Proceedings of NELS 11, GLSA, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.

  • Bach, Emmon and Robin Cooper: 1978, ‘The NP-S Analysis of Relative Clauses and Compositional Semantics’, Linguistics and Philosophy 2, 145–150.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baltin, Mark: 1985, Toward a Theory of Movement Rules, Garland, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barwise, John and Robin Cooper: 1981, ‘Generalized Quantifiers and Natural Language’, Linguistics and Philosophy 2, 159–219.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Benthem, Johan: 1984, ‘Questions about Quantifiers’, Journal of Symbolic Logic 49, 443–466.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berman, Steve: 1990, ‘Towards the Semantics of Open Sentences: Wh-Phrases and Indefinites’, in Martin Stokhof and Leen Torenvliet (eds.), Proceedings of the Seventh Amsterdam Colloquium, ITLI, University of Amsterdam, pp. 53–78.

  • Blevins, James: 1990, Syntactic Complexity: Evidence for Discontinuity and Multidomination, Ph.D. dissertation, GLSA, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.

  • Chierchia, Gennaro: 1984, Topics in the Syntax and Semantics of Infinitives and Gerunds, Ph.D. dissertation, GLSA, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.

  • Cooper, Robin: 1975, Montague's Semantic Theory and Transformational Syntax, Ph.D. dissertation, GLSA, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.

  • Emonds, Joseph: 1985, A Unified Theory of Syntactic Categories, Foris, Dordrecht.

    Google Scholar 

  • von Fintel, Kai: 1989, ‘Exception Phrases’, in Emmon Bach, Angelika Kratzer, and Barbara Partee (eds.), Papers on Quantification: NSF Grant BNS 87-19999, Department of Linguistics, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.

    Google Scholar 

  • von Fintel, Kai: 1991a, ‘A Semantics for Exception Phrases’, in Dawn Bates (ed.), Proceedings of WCCFL 10, Stanford Linguistics Association, Stanford, California, pp. 493–504.

  • von Fintel, Kai: 1991b, ‘Exceptive Conditionals: The Meaning of unless’, Proceedings of NELS 22, GLSA, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.

  • Geis, Michael: 1973, ‘If and Unless’, in Braj B. Kachru, Robert B. Lees, Yakov Malkiel, Angelina Petrangeli, and Sol Saporta (eds.), Issues in Linguistics: Papers in Honor of Henry and Renée Kahane, University of Illinois Press, Urbana, pp. 231–253.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hausser, Roland: 1974, Quantification in an Extended Montague Grammar, Ph.D. dissertation, University of Texas, Austin.

  • Hoeksema, Jack: 1986, ‘An Account of Relative Clauses with Split Antecedents’, Proceedings of WCCFL 5, Stanford Linguistics Association, Stanford, California, pp. 68–86.

  • Hoeksema, Jack: 1987, ‘The Logic of Exception’, Proceedings of ESCOL 4, 100–113.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoeksema, Jack: 1990, ‘Exploring Exception Phrases’, in Martin Stokhof and Leen Torenvliet (eds.), Proceedings of the Seventh Amsterdam Colloquium, ITLI, University of Amsterdam, pp. 165–190.

  • Hoeksema, Jack: 1991, ‘Complex Predicates and Liberation in Dutch and English’, Linguistics and Philosophy 14, 661–710.

    Google Scholar 

  • Horn, Laurence: 1989, A Natural History of Negation, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

    Google Scholar 

  • Horn, Laurence and S. Bayer: 1984, ‘Short-Circuited Implicature: A Negative Contribution’, Linguistics and Philosophy 7, 397–414.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huck, Geoffrey and Almerindo Ojeda (eds.): 1987, Discontinuous Constituency (Syntax and Semantics, vol. 20), Academic Press, Orlando.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacobson, Pauline: 1983, On the Syntax and Semantics of Multiple Relatives in English, Indiana University Linguistics Club, Bloomington.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacobson, Pauline: 1984, ‘On the Syntax and Semantics of Multiple Relatives in English’, revised version, ms., Brown University.

  • Janssen, Theo: 1983, Foundations and Applications of Montague Grammar, Mathematisch Centrum, Amsterdam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jespersen, Otto: 1924, The Philosophy of Grammar, Allen and Unwin, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnsen, Lars: 1987, ‘There-Sentences and Generalized Quantifiers’, in Peter Gärdenfors (ed.), Generalized Quantifiers: Linguistic and Logical Approaches, Reidel, Dordrecht, pp. 93–107.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kadmon, Nirit and Fred Landman: 1990, ‘Polarity Sensitive any and Free Choice any’, in Martin Stokhof and Leen Torenvliet (eds.), Proceedings of the Seventh Amsterdam Colloquium, ITLI, University of Amsterdam, pp. 227–252.

  • Karttunen, Lauri and Stanley Peters: 1979, ‘Conventional Implicature’, Syntax and Semantics, vol. 11: Presupposition, pp. 1–56.

  • Keenan, Edward: 1987, ‘A Semantic Definition of “Indefinite NP”’, in Eric Reuland and Alice ter Meulen (eds.), The Representation of (In)definiteness, MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, pp. 286–317.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keenan, Edward and J. Stavi: 1986, ‘A Semantic Characterization of Natural Language Determiners’, Linguistics and Philosophy 9, 253–326.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kempson, Ruth: 1991, ‘Wh-gap Binding and Ellipsis: A Grammar for an Input System’, Nordic Journal of Linguistics 14, 41–64.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kretzmann, Norman: 1982, ‘Syncategoremata, Exponibilia, Sophismata’, in Norman Kretzmann, Anthony Kenny, and Jan Pinborg (eds.), The Cambridge History of Late Medieval Philosophy: From the Rediscovery of Aristotle to the Disintegration of Scholasticism 1100–1600, Cambridge University Press, pp. 211–245.

  • Landman, Fred and Ieke Moerdijk: 1979, ‘Behalve als voorzetsel’, Spektator: Tijdschrift voor Neerlandistiek 9, 335–347.

    Google Scholar 

  • Link, Godehard: 1984, ‘Hydras: On the Logic of Relative Clauses’, in Fred Landman and Frank Veltman (eds.), Varieties of Formal Semantics, Foris, Dordrecht, 245–257.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCawley, James: 1989, ‘Individuation in and of Syntactic Structures’, in Mark Baltin and Anthony Kroch (eds.), Alternative Conceptions of Phrase Structure, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp. 117–138.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCloskey, James: 1978, Questions and Relative Clauses in Modern Irish, Ph.D. dissertation, University of Texas, Austin.

  • Partee, Barbara: 1984, ‘Compositionality’, in Fred Landman and Frank Veltman (eds.), Varieties of Formal Semantics, Foris, Dordrecht, pp. 283–311.

    Google Scholar 

  • Partee, Barbara: 1987, ‘Noun Phrase Interpretation and Type-Shifting Principles’, in J. Groenendijk, D. de Jongh, and Martin Stokhof (eds.), Studies in Discourse Representation Theory and the Theory of Generalized Quantifiers, GRASS 8, Foris, Dordrecht, pp. 115–144.

    Google Scholar 

  • Partee, Barbara: 1988, ‘Many Quantifiers’, Proceedings of ESCOL 5.

  • Partee, Barbara: 1989, ‘Binding Implicit Variables in Quantified Contexts’, Chicago Linguistics Society 25.

  • Partee, Barbara and Mats Rooth: 1983, ‘Generalized Conjunction and Type Ambiguity’, in Rainer Bäuerle, Christoph Schwarze, and Arnim von Stechow (eds.), Meaning, Use, and Interpretation of Language, de Gruyter, Berlin, pp. 361–383.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reinhart, Tanya: 1989, ‘Non-quantificational LF’, in Asa Kasher (ed.), The Chomskyan Turn, Basil Blackwell, Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rooth, Mats: 1985: Association with Focus, Ph.D. dissertation, GLSA, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.

  • Sadock, Jerry: 1971, ‘Queclaratives’, Chicago Linguistics Society, 7, 223–231.

    Google Scholar 

  • Srivastav, Veneeta: 1991, ‘The Syntax and Semantics of Correlatives’, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 9, 637–686.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stump, Gregory: 1981, The Formal Semantics and Pragmatics of Free Adjuncts and Absolutes in English, Ph.D. dissertation, Ohio State University.

  • Stump, Gregory: 1985, The Semantic Variability of Absolute Constructions, Reidel, Dordrecht.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vendler, Zeno: 1967, Linguistics in Philosophy, Cornell University Press, Ithaca, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Westerståhl, Dag: 1985, ‘Determiners and Context Sets’, in Johan van Benthem and Alice ter Meulen (eds.), Generalized Quantifiers in Natural Language, Foris, Dordrecht, pp. 45–71.

    Google Scholar 

  • Westerståhl, Dag: 1989, ‘Quantifiers in Formal and Natural Languages’, in D. Gabbay and F. Guenthner (eds.), Handbook of Philosophical Logic IV, pp. 1–131.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Linguistics, South College, University of Massachusetts, 01003, Amherst, MA, U.S.A.

    Kai Von Fintel

Authors
  1. Kai Von Fintel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Von Fintel, K. Exceptive constructions. Nat Lang Seman 1, 123–148 (1993). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00372560

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00372560

Keywords

Search

Navigation