Latest documents http://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/index/index/ Tue, 05 May 2009 11:41:27 +0200 Tue, 05 May 2009 11:41:27 +0200 http://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/11852 Uli Sauerland workingpaper http://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/11852 Tue, 05 May 2009 11:41:27 +0200 http://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/11851 This paper concerns the semantics of determiners. I point out that the currently dominant generalized quantifiers analysis of determiners has certain deficiencies. I then provide an alternative which seems offer some hope not suffer from the same deficiencies. Uli Sauerland article http://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/11851 Tue, 05 May 2009 11:37:23 +0200 http://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/11848 Alexopoulou (2008) argues that Greek provides new evidence for the concept of binding illusions that was hypothesized by Fox and Sauerland (1996). Of special interest from my perspective is Alexopoulou’s argument that binding illusions arise not only with existential and universal quantifiers, but also with negative and interrogative quantifiers. The purpose of this note is to speculate on how to account for these kinds of binding illusions semantically building on Alexopoulou’s argument. In the following I refer to Alexopoulou’s (2008) paper as BIRG (Binding Illusions and Resumption in Greek) and to Clitic Left-Dislocation as CLLD. BIRG’s argument is based on the generalization concerning CLLD in Greek. Generally, a left-dislocated noun phrase cannot bind a pronoun in its clause in Greek. Uli Sauerland article http://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/11848 Tue, 05 May 2009 11:26:20 +0200 http://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/11847 The Gricean approach explains implicatures by assumptions about the pragmatics of entire utterances. The phenomenon of embedded implicatures remains a challenge for this approach since in such cases apparently implicatures contribute to the truth-conditional content of constituents smaller than utterances. In this paper, I investigate three areas where embedded implicatures seem to differ from implicatures at the utterance level: optionality, epistemic status, and implicated presuppositions. I conclude that the differences between the two kinds of implicatures justify an approach that maintains Gricean assumptions at the utterance level, and assumes a special operator for embedded implicatures. Uli Sauerland preprint http://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/11847 Tue, 05 May 2009 11:22:46 +0200 http://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/11846 Uli Sauerland other http://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/11846 Tue, 05 May 2009 11:18:57 +0200 http://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/11845 In this snippet, I will describe a new case where overt wh-movement leads to additional scope possibilities. Uli Sauerland article http://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/11845 Tue, 05 May 2009 11:16:03 +0200 http://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/11844 Uli Sauerland article http://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/11844 Tue, 05 May 2009 11:12:41 +0200 http://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/11843 Uli Sauerland article http://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/11843 Tue, 05 May 2009 10:55:33 +0200 http://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/11842 It is widely believed that existential quantifiers can bring about the semantic effects of a scope which is wider than their actual syntactic scope (See Fodor & Sag (1982), Cresti (1995), Kratzer (1995), Reinhart (1995) and Winter (1995), among many others.) On the other hand, it is assumed that the syntactic scope of universal quantifiers can be determined unequivocally by the semantics. This paper shows that this second assumption is wrong; universal quantifiers can also bring about scope illusions, though in a very specific environment. In particular, we argue that in the environment of generic tense, universal quantifiers can show the semantic effects of a scope which is wider than the one that is actually realized at LF. Our argument has four steps. First, we show that in generic contexts, universal quantifiers escape standard “scope-islands” (Section 1). Second, we show how the effects of wide scope in generic contexts can be achieved without syntactic wide scope (Section 2.1). Third, we show that this result is actually forced on us, once we take seriously certain independent issues concerning the interpretation of generic tense (Sections 2.2 - 2.4). Finally, the semantics of generic tense and, in particular, its interaction with focus, will yield some intricate new predictions, which, as we show, are borne out (Sections 3 - 5). Uli Sauerland; Danny Fox article http://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/11842 Tue, 05 May 2009 10:51:38 +0200 http://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/11841 Uli Sauerland article http://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/11841 Mon, 04 May 2009 16:51:41 +0200 http://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/11840 The paper presents an additional argument for a specific account of semantic binding: the flat-binding analysis. The argument is based on observations concerning sloppy interpretations in verb phrase ellipsis when the binder is not the subject of the elided VP. In one such case, it is important that one of the binders belong to the domain of the other. This case can be derived from the flat-binding analysis as is shown in the paper, while it is unclear how to account for it within other analyses of semantic binding. Uli Sauerland article http://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/11840 Mon, 04 May 2009 16:48:24 +0200 http://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/11839 Uli Sauerland article http://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/11839 Mon, 04 May 2009 16:44:41 +0200 http://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/11836 This paper advances a purely presuppositional analysis of intonation. I first show that a inspiring recent article by Geurts and van der Sandt (Theoretical Linguistics, 2004) that pursues the same goal cannot account for multiple foci. Then, I show that if it is assumed that destressed rather than focussed material is semantically marked, multiple foci are accounted for correctly. Uli Sauerland article http://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/11836 Mon, 04 May 2009 16:32:28 +0200 http://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/11835 Uli Sauerland article http://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/11835 Mon, 04 May 2009 16:28:17 +0200 http://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/11834 Uli Sauerland workingpaper http://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/11834 Mon, 04 May 2009 16:23:58 +0200 http://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/11832 Uli Sauerland article http://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/11832 Mon, 04 May 2009 16:17:06 +0200 http://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/11830 Uli Sauerland article http://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/11830 Mon, 04 May 2009 16:08:39 +0200 http://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/11828 Uli Sauerland article http://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/11828 Mon, 04 May 2009 16:01:17 +0200 http://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/11827 Uli Sauerland workingpaper http://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/11827 Mon, 04 May 2009 15:56:34 +0200