Abstract
AbstractIn this chapter, we further explore the landscape of PPIs. First, the account for the strong–weak NPI distinction, developed in Chapter 10, straightforwardly extends to the distinction between strong and weak PPIs, and even accounts for some hitherto unattested facts concerning their distribution. Second, elements of which the monotonicity of their domain of quantification is not lexically fixed but depends on the grammatical contexts it appears in can indeed be both NPI- and PPI-like. This explains, for instance, the behaviour of adverbials headed by until. Finally, superweak NPIs find their counterparts in weak existential PPIs. This account has some strong consequences for the distribution of existential modal PPIs. For one, it explains why existential modal PPIs can be attested among epistemic but not deontic (or other circumstantial) modals.
Publisher
Oxford University PressOxford
Reference636 articles.
1. A unified approach to split scope.;Natural Language Semantics,2010
2. Linear Asymmetries and the LCA.;Syntax,2012
3. Abusch, D. 1988. ‘Sequence of tense, intensionality and scope.’ In: H. Borer (ed.), Proceedings of the 7th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics. Stanford, CA: CSLI. 1–14.
4. Sequence of tense and temporal de re.;Linguistics and Philosophy,1997
5. Abusch, D. 2002. ‘Lexical alternatives as a source of pragmatic presupposition.’ In: B. Jackson (ed.), Proceedings of Semantics and Linguistic Theory (SALT) Conference, Washington, DC: LSA, 12. 1–19.