A Semantics for Degree Questions Based on Intervals: Negative Islands and Their Obviation
A Semantics for Degree Questions Based on Intervals: Negative Islands and Their Obviation
复制标题
基于区间的程度问题语义：负岛及其消除
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2011
影响因子：
0.9
通讯作者：
Benjamin Spector
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Márta Abrusán;Benjamin Spector
根据对程度问题的标准分析（参见Rullmann 1995; Beck & Rullmann 1996），程度问题的逻辑形式包含一个变量，该变量在各个程度上变化，并受程度问题操作符how的约束。与此相反，我们主张程度问题操作符how约束的变量范围不是在单个程度上，而是在程度间隔上，与Schwarzschild和威尔金森（2002）关于比较分句语义的提议类似。基于区间的语义学不仅预测了某些在标准观点下没有预测到的读数的存在，它还能够与其他自然假设一起解释程度问题对负岛的敏感性，以及Fox和Hackl（2007）发现的事实，即负岛可以通过一些适当放置的情态动词来消除。像福克斯和哈克一样，我们将负岛屿效应描述为：相关问题，由于其意义本身，永远不会有最大信息量的答案。然而，与福克斯和哈克相反，我们不需要假设尺度是普遍密集的，也不需要假设负岛的最大信息量的概念对上下文参数是盲目的。
According to the standard analysis of degree questions (see, among others, Rullmann 1995; Beck & Rullmann 1996), the logical form of a degree question contains a variable that ranges over individual degrees and is bound by the degree question operator how. In contrast with this, we claim that the variable bound by the degree question operator how does not range over individual degrees but over intervals of degrees, by analogy with Schwarzschild and Wilkinson's (2002) proposal regarding the semantics of comparative clauses. Not only does the interval-based semantics predict the existence of certain readings that are not predicted under the standard view, it is also able, together with other natural assumptions, to account for the sensitivity of degree questions to negative islands, as well as for the fact, uncovered by Fox and Hackl (2007), that negative islands can be obviated by some properly placed modals. Like Fox and Hackl, we characterize negative island effects as arising from the fact that the relevant question, due to its meaning alone, can never have a maximally informative answer. Contrary to Fox and Hackl, however, we do not need to assume that scales are universally dense, nor that the notion of maximal informativity responsible for negative islands is blind to contextual parameters.