The Existential and the Quasi-universal Readings of Bare Plurals
0
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Condoravdi (1992, 1994) proposes that bare plurals have the so-called quasi-universal reading, in addition to the generic and the existential readings. She argues that bare plurals may presuppose their descriptive content, but not their index, which satisfies the so-called weak novelty felicity condition. Meanwhile, this so-called quasi-universal reading of bare plurals is proposed as the generic reading by Dobrovie-Sorin (1998). She accounts for the lack of lawlikeness in this generic reading with the episodic context of the sentence in question. Given this, Cohen (2005) argues that although Dobrovie-Sorin proposes the quasi-universal reading as the generic reading, we are still left with three kinds of readings for bare plurals unless she provides a unified semantics for generics. On the other hand, Cohen proposes that there is no need to stipulate the quasi-universal reading of bare plurals if the suitability implicature is employed. Given these, this paper reviews Condoravdi's (1992, 1994), Dobrovie-Sorin's (1998), and Cohen's (2005) theories, and concludes that we still need the third reading of bare plurals, i.e., the quasi-universal reading, pointing out some problems of Cohen's theory, which is based on the suitability implicature.
Abstract
Condoravdi (1992, 1994) proposes that bare plurals have the so-called quasi-universal reading, in addition to the generic and the existential readings. She argues that bare plurals may presuppose their descriptive content, but not their index, which satisfies the so-called weak novelty felicity condition. Meanwhile, this so-called quasi-universal reading of bare plurals is proposed as the generic reading by Dobrovie-Sorin (1998). She accounts for the lack of lawlikeness in this generic reading with the episodic context of the sentence in question. Given this, Cohen (2005) argues that although Dobrovie-Sorin proposes the quasi-universal reading as the generic reading, we are still left with three kinds of readings for bare plurals unless she provides a unified semantics for generics. On the other hand, Cohen proposes that there is no need to stipulate the quasi-universal reading of bare plurals if the suitability implicature is employed. Given these, this paper reviews Condoravdi's (1992, 1994), Dobrovie-Sorin's (1998), and Cohen's (2005) theories, and concludes that we still need the third reading of bare plurals, i.e., the quasi-universal reading, pointing out some problems of Cohen's theory, which is based on the suitability implicature.
참고문헌 (9)
- Carlson, Gregory N., "Reference to kinds in English", 박사, pp.1977
- Cohen, Ariel, "More than bare existence: an implicature of existential bare plurals", Journal of Semantics, 22(4), pp.389~400 (2005)
- Condoravdi, Cleo, "Strong and Weak Novelty and Familiarity", Proceedings of the Second Conference on Semantics and Linguistic Theory, pp.17~37 (1992), Ohio State University
- Condoravdi, Cleo, "Descriptions in Context", 박사, pp.1994
- Dobrovie-Sorin, Carmen, "Types of Predicates and the Representation of Existential Readings", Proceedings of the Seventh Conference on Semantics and Linguistic Theory, pp.117~134 (1998), Cornell University Press
- Grice, H. Paul, "Logic and conversation in: Syntax and Semantics 3: Speech Acts", pp.41~58 (1975), Academic Press
- Heim, Irene, "The Semantics of Definite and Indefinite Noun Phrases", 박사, pp.1982
- Horn, Lawrence R., "Toward a new taxonomy for pragmatic inference: Q-based and R-based implicature in: Meaning, Form, and Use in Context: Linguistic Applications", pp.11~42 (1984), Georgetown University Press
- Lahiri, Utpal, "Embedded Interrogatives and Predicates that Embed Them", 박사, pp.1991
