Bare arguments Semantic Structures ‘09. Carlson (1977) Semantic Structures ‘09.

Bare arguments

Semantic Structures ‘09

Carlson (1977)


Overview

•BP is not the plural counterpart of a•is not an indefinite

•the generic and the existential reading of BPs are two sides of the same coin

•how to connect the sides of the coin?

The BP: a weird thing

Minnie wishes to talk to a young psychiatrist.

Minnie’s wish is to talk to a psychiatrist.

There is a young psychiatrist such that it is Minnie’s wish to talk to him.

ok

ok

OPACITY PHENOMENA


Minnie wishes to talk to psychiatrists.

Minnie’s wish is to talk to a psychiatrists.

There are psychiatrists such that it is Minnie’s wish to talk to them.

ok

#

OPACITY PHENOMENA


Minnie wishes to talk to a few psychiatrists.

Minnie’s wish is to talk to a few psychiatrists.

There are a few psychiatrists such that it is Minnie’s wish to talk to them.

ok

#

OPACITY PHENOMENA


opacity phenomena = scope with respect to intensional verbs (such as believe verbs)

whereas bare plurals can only take scope below the intensional verb, regular indefinites can take scope below and above it

OPACITY PHENOMENA


Everyone read a book on caterpillars.

For everyone there is a book on caterpillars that is such that he/she read it.

There is a book on caterpillars such that everyone read it.

ok

ok

NARROW SCOPE


Everyone read books on caterpillars.

For everyone there are books on caterpillars that are such that he/she read them.

There are books on caterpillars such that everyone read them.

ok

#

NARROW SCOPE


Everyone read two books on caterpillars.

For everyone there are two books on caterpillars that is such that he/she read them.

There are two books on caterpillars such that everyone read them.

ok

ok

NARROW SCOPE


whereas bare plurals can only take scope below other operators, regular indefinites can take scope below and above them

NARROW SCOPE


A dog was everywhere.

The indefinite cannot scope below everywhere.

Only reading: There is a dog such that it was in all places (at the same time).

Not: In all places there was a dog (at the same time)

DIFFERENTIATED SCOPE


Dogs were everywhere.

The BP can scope below everywhere.

Only reading: In all places there were dogs.

Not: There are dogs such that they were in all places (at the same time)



A flag was hanging in front of every building.

There was a flag such that is was hanging in front of every building.

In front of every building there was a flag hanging.


ok

ok


According to Carlson BPs can sometimes take scope below operators indefinites cannot take scope under.

This might however be due to his choice of examples.

What does seem to hold is that bare plurals can only take narrow scope.



Harriet caught a rabbit yesterday, and Ozzie caught it today.

a rabbit and it have a different referent

a rabbit and it have the same referent

ANAPHORA

#

ok


Harriet caught rabbits yesterday, and Ozzie caught them today.

rabbits and them have a different referent

rabbits and them have the same referent

ANAPHORA

ok

ok


Max killed very few rabbits, but Hiram killed them in great abundance.

Ozzie bought a potato because they contain vitamin C.

ANAPHORA


According to Carlson BPs sometimes allow for anaphora indefinites don’t allow for.

This might however be due to his choice of pronoun.

(plurals can pick up both kinds and normal individuals whereas singulars cannot)


Overview




hold

don’t clearly hold

Overview




Bare plurals and kinds

“A unified analysis is not only desirable, but necessary, if we are to have a complete account of this construction.”


Two sides of the same coin...

Argument #1: they are in complementary distribution

Children are playing in the garden.

Children are intelligent.

Why is this not a very strong argument?


Two sides of the same coin...

Argument #2: unambiguously kind-referring DPs behave in the same way:

This kind of human being is playing in the garden.

This kind of human being is intelligent.

Why is this still not very strong?


Strongest point:

Unambiguously kind-referring DPs behave scopally in the same way!

->If we assume that BPs are kind-referring we get the funny scope behaviour for free!


Max believes this kind of animal to have eaten his pet sponge.

No specific instantiation of this kind of animal can be intended.


Everyone saw this kind of animal.

A reading according to which there is a particular instantiation of this kind of animal that everyone saw is not available.

Overview




case depends on scope-facts

Overview




Kinds and their instantiations

Carlson doesn’t give an explicit semantics for the generic readings.

For the existential readings he proposes that there are predicates that select kinds and existentially quantify over their instantiations.

yx[R(x,y)&P(x)]

Kinds and their instantiations

yx[R(x,y)&P(x)]

To be hereyx[R(x,y)&Here(x)]Not to be hereyx[R(x,y)&Here(x)]Cats_kindyx[R(x,y)&Here(x)](Cats_kind)x[R(x,Cats_kind)&Here(x)]

Dayal (2009)


Longobardi

Il mio Gianni ha finalmente telefonato.

the my John has finally calledMy Johnny finally called.

*Mio Gianni ha finalmente telefonato.

my John has finally calledMy Johnny has finally called.

ITALIAN PROPER NAMES

Longobardi

Il mio Gianni ha finalmente telefonato.

the my John has finally calledMy Johnny finally called.

*Mio Gianni ha finalmente telefonato.

my John has finally calledMy Johnny has finally called.

def + poss + name

poss + name

Proposal:

il occupies a position that...

... has to be filled

... cannot be filled by mio

... but can be filled by

moving Gianni to it


Longobardi

Il mio Gianni ha finalmente telefonato.the my John has finally calledMy Johnny finally called.

*Mio Gianni ha finalmente telefonato.my John has finally calledMy Johnny has finally called.

Gianni mio ha finalmente telefonato.

Proposal:





moving Gianni to it


Longobardi

*The my Johnny ha finalmente telefonato. has finally calledMy Johnny finally called.

My Johnny ha finalmente telefonato. has finally calledMy Johnny has finally called.

*Johnny my ha finalmente telefonato.

Proposal:

the occupies a position that...

... hasn’t got to be filled

... and therefore shouldn’t be

filled

... consequently the moving of

Johnny to it is not allowed

ENGLISH PROPER NAMES

Longobardi

Proposal:





moving Gianni to it

ITALIAN VS. ENGLISH PNs

Proposal:




filled


Johnny to it is not allowed

ITALIAN ENGLISH

parameter distinguishing between Italian and English type languages

Longobardi

*The big dogs bark.the big dogs barkBig dogs bark.

Big dogs bark.big dogs barkBig dogs bark.

Dogs big bark.dogs big barkBig dogs bark.

ENGLISH COMMON NOUNS

Proposal:




filled


dogs to it is not allowed

Longobardi

I grandi cani abbaianothe big dogs barkBig dogs bark.

*Grandi cani abbaianobig dogs barkBig dogs bark.

*Cani grandi abbaianodogs big barkBig dogs bark.

Proposal:

i occupies a position that...


... cannot be filled by grandi

... cannot be filled by cani

ITALIAN COMMON NOUNS

Longobardi

Proposal:

i occupies a position that...


... cannot be filled by grandi

... cannot be filled by cani


Proposal:





moving Gianni to it

Only proper names can raise to D.

Longobardi

In order to refer (in argument position) NPs have to be associated with a D.

The association with D can be made in syntax or at LF.

This association can be made by adding an (overt or covert) D or by moving the noun to D. The latter option is only available for nouns that intrinsically refer to an individual (i.e. proper names).

In Italian the association is made in syntax.

In English the association is made at LF.

UNIVERSAL

PARAMETER

SETTING

SETTING

Longobardi

!Ho mangiato biscotti.

I_have eaten biscuits

I ate biscuits.


Proposal:

In ‘properly governed positions’ a null determiner can be inserted into D.

= everywhere except in preverbal subject position

Type-shifting ?

Types ?

Types...

two basic types:

- individuals (type e)- truth values (type t)

Hu Jintao

type e

president(s)

type <e,t>

Hu Jintao is president.

e + <e,t> = t

TRUE!

Type-shifting ?

Types ?

Types...

two basic types:


Hu Jintao

type e

smile

type <e,t>

Hu Jintao [smile].

e + <e,t> = t

TRUE!

Type-shifting ?

Types ?

Types...

two basic types:


president(s)

type <e,t>

smile

type <e,t>

Presidents [smile].

<e,t> + <e,t> = ?

OOPS...

Type-shifting ?

Types ?

Type-shifting...

president(s)

type <e,t>

xPresident(x) Qx[President(x)&Q(x)]

type <<e,t>,t>

xPresident(x) x[President(x)]

type e

xPresident(x) KINDx[President(x)]

type e

Type-shifting ?

Types ?

Type-shifting...

smile

type <e,t>

Presidents [smile].

<<e,t>,t> + <e,t> = t

Qx[President(x)&Q(x)]

type <<e,t>,t>

x[President(x)]

type e

KINDx[President(x)]

type e

e + <e,t> = t

Type-shifting ?

Types ?

Type-shifting...

Can we do whatever we want?

NO!Two constraints:

THOU SHALT NOT shift unless needed.

THOU SHALT NOT shift covertly if you have a determiner that makes the same shift overtly.

Type-shifting ?

Types ?

Type-shifting...

smile

type <e,t>

Presidents [smile].

<<e,t>,t> + <e,t> = t

Qx[President(x)&Q(x)]

type <<e,t>,t>

x[President(x)]

type e

KINDx[President(x)]

type e

e + <e,t> = t

Type-shifting ?

Types ?

Type-shifting...

Hu Jintao

type e

the president

type e

Hu Jintao

type e

(is) the president

type e+ =?

xPresident(x) y[y=xPresident(x)]

type <e,t>

Hu Jintao

type e

(is) the president

type <e,t> + = t

Type-shifting ?

Types ?

Type-shifting...

e

<e,t>

<<e,t>,t>

KINDID

EN

T

Realization

BE

Chierchia

Longobardi:

Italian common nouns need a D to be able to appear in argument position.

English common nouns don’t need a D to be able to appear in argument position.

Chierchia:

Italian common nouns are of type <e,t> and cannot be type-shifted (at least not without a covert D). [-arg; +pred]

English common nouns are of type <e,t> and can be type-shifted to type e or type <<e,t>,t>. [+arg; +pred]

Chierchia & Longobardi

Chierchia

Chierchia:

Italian common nouns are of type <e,t> and cannot be type-shifted (at least not without a covert D). [-arg; +pred]

English common nouns are of type <e,t> and can be type-shifted to type e or type <<e,t>,t>. [+arg; +pred]

Why aren’t there bare singular arguments in Italian?Why aren’t there bare singular arguments in English?

Chierchia Quiz

Chierchia

How does he derive the narrow-scope behaviour of the English bare plural?

e

<e,t>

<<e,t>,t>

KIND

Realization

English bare plural

Chierchia

How does he derive the narrow-scope behaviour of the Italian bare plural?

Italian bare plural

e

<e,t>

<<e,t>,t>

KIND

Realization

Chierchia

Does he have anything to say about other languages?

[-arg; +pred]

[+arg; +pred]

[-arg; -pred]

[+arg; -pred]

Italian

English

No language

Chinese

Typology

Chierchia

Extra assumption about Chinese:

all nouns start life as kind-referring expressions

-> predicts narrow-scope behaviour

Extra trivia about Chinese:

- language that doesn’t have number marking on nouns

- language that doesn’t have articles

Chinese

Chierchia

What are the possible English translations of xueshing (‘student’)?

a student

the student

students (existential)

students (kind)

the students

Can xueshing appear in a sentence like Hu shi xueshing (‘Hu is student’)?

Chierchia Quiz

Chierchia

What Chierchia adds to type-shifting:

- typology (extra constraint on type-shifting)

- all argumental uses of bare nominals across all languages pass through kinds (and therefore only take narrow scope)

=> NEO-CARLSONIAN ANALYSIS

Dayal

There’s a small problem in Hindi:

#caaro taraf bacca khel rahaa thaafour ways child play PROG PAST‘A (same) child was playing everywhere.’

If bare nominals are always kind-referring and always take narrow-scope the above sentence should be fine...but it’s not...

Does this endanger the generalization that bare nominals always refer to kinds and that they always take narrow scope?

Dayal & Chierchia

Dayal

NO!

Hindi distinguishes between singular and plural kinds.

Singular kinds do not allow access to their instantiations.two of these whales -> two of this type of whaletwo of this whale -> two of this type of whale

The only way to derive a reading for bacca is through the type-shift.

The apparent indefinite reading arises because the covert type-shift doesn’t carry any familiarity requirement.

Dayal & Chierchia

Overview

Longobardi -> syntax Italian, English

Chierchia -> semanticsItalian, English, Chineselanguages vary along the pred and

arg parametersall bare noun arguments refer to

kinds and take narrow scope Dayal -> semantics

Hindiall bare noun arguments refer to kinds but

only plural kinds allow access to their instantiations

What about your language?

a. Otokonoko-ga asonde-iruboy-Nom play-Prog‘A boy is / boys are playing.’

b. Itariazin-wa yooki-daItalian-Top cheerful-Cop‘Italians are cheerful.’

c. Zyosei-tantei-wa mezurasiifemale-detective-Top rare‘Female private detectives are rare.’

d. Sono byooin-wa kangohu-o sagasi-teiruthat hospital-Top nurse-ACC look for-Prog‘That hospital is looking for a nurse / nurses.’


a. Jeg vet at det fins elger her.I know that there exist elk PL,INDEF here.'I know there are elks here.'

b. Elger har fire bein.Elks have four legs

c. #Elger er ikke utrydningstruet. Elks are not threatened by extinction.

d. Jon leser ikke bøker.'John doesn't read books.

e. Jon ønsker å møte filmstjerner.'John wants to meet movie stars.'


a. *Ballenas son mamíferos.whales are mammals

b. Las ballenas son mamíferos.the whales are mammals‘Whales are mammals.’

c. A la reunión no asistieron profesores.at the meeting not attended professors‘No professors attended the meeting.’

d. Esta empresa busca secretarias.this company looks_for secretaries‘This company is looking for secretaries.’


a. Walvissen zijn zoogdieren.whales are mammals‘Whales are mammals.’

b. Zij werkt niet samen met collega’s.she works not together with colleagues‘She doesn’t collaborate with colleagues.’

c. Ik ben op zoek naar secretaresses.I am in search at secretaries‘I’m looking for secretaries.’

Bare arguments Semantic Structures ‘09. Carlson (1977) Semantic Structures ‘09.

Documents

Transcript of Bare arguments Semantic Structures ‘09. Carlson (1977) Semantic Structures ‘09.