Quantification and ACD: What is the Evidence from Real-Time Processing Evidence for? A Response to Hackl et al

Journal of Semantics 31 (1):135-145 (2014)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Abstract
Hackl and colleagues (2012) argue that processing evidence specifically supports a theory of An-tecedent Contained Deletion (ACD) that involves the threat of type mismatch and infinite re-gress, with Quantifier Raising (QR) coming to the rescue. This squib argues that the processing evidence does not specifically support that theory. Very similar predictions can be made by the variable-free, or combinatory, theory that Hackl and colleagues dismiss, if we add the assumption that ACD is resolved by binding, not by simple anaphora.
Categories
(categorize this paper)
PhilPapers/Archive ID
SZAQAA-2
Upload history
Archival date: 2019-12-25
View other versions
Added to PP index
2017-06-22

Total views
26 ( #48,642 of 51,646 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
9 ( #41,764 of 51,646 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.