Uniformity between Dependent Plurals and Anti-quantifiers

Abstract

This paper presents a unified compositional analysis for dependent plurals and anti-quantifiers. Choe (1987) has previously put forth a theory of distributivity, acknowledging the parallelism between dependent plurals and anti-quantifiers. Yet, his theory faces some shortcomings. Developing the limitations, I address a number of unanswered questions, arguing that both dependent plurals and anti-quantifiers are pluralization operators. Although dependent plurals and anti-quantifiers are essentially uniform, their functions are not entirely overlapped. Therefore, in capturing their uniformity, I also articulate the slight distinction between them which is the very reason why the two different forms exist in the grammar. My account that spells out not only the essential similarity but also the marginal difference between dependent plurals and anti-quantifiers has not a few advantages compared to Choe (1987). My analysis doesn’t need an i-part operation that is stipulative. I don’t face apparent counter-examples. My account relieves the grammar to high extent by not postulating an independent module of distributivity. Even more, in my account, the fact that dependent plurals produce distributivity is not coincidental but reflects a fundamental linguistic principle. Fifth, my account correctly captures that dependent plurals are more basic than anti-quantifiers in their function. Lastly, my analysis is compositional and thus is fully formalized.