Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T19:57:58.548Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

DECOMPOSING GENERALIZED QUANTIFIERS

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 October 2008

DAG WESTERSTÅHL
DAG WESTERSTÅHL*
Affiliation:
Department of Philosophy, University of Gothenburg
*
*DEPARTMENT OF PHILOSOPHY UNIVERSITY OF GOTHENBURG GOTHENBURG 405 30, SWEDEN E-mail:[email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This note explains the circumstances under which a type 〈1〉 quantifier can be decomposed into a type 〈1, 1〉 quantifier and a set, by fixing the first argument of the former to the latter. The motivation comes from the semantics of Noun Phrases (also called Determiner Phrases) in natural languages, but in this article, I focus on the logical facts. However, my examples are taken among quantifiers appearing in natural languages, and at the end, I sketch two more principled linguistic applications.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Review of Symbolic Logic , Volume 1 , Issue 3 , October 2008 , pp. 355 - 371
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Symbolic Logic 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Barker, C. (1995). Possessive Descriptions. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Barwise, J., & Cooper, R. (1981). Generalized quantifiers and natural language. Linguistics and Philosophy, 4, 159–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dalrymple, M., Kanazawa, M., Kim, Y., Mchombo, S., & Peters, S. (1998). Reciprocal expressions and the concept of reciprocity. Linguistics & Philosophy, 21, 159–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peters, S., & Westerståhl, D. (2006). Quantifiers in Language and Logic. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Peters, S., & Westerståhl, D. (in preparation). The semantics of possessive constructions.Google Scholar