Weak islands and an algebraic semantics for scope taking

In Ways of Scope Taking. Dordrecht: Kluwer (1997)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Abstract
Modifying the descriptive and theoretical generalizations of Relativized Minimality, we argue that a significant subset of weak island violations arise when an extracted phrase should scope over some intervener but is unable to. Harmless interveners seem harmless because they can support an alternative reading. This paper focuses on why certain wh-phrases are poor wide scope takers, and offers an algebraic perspective on scope interaction. Each scopal element SE is associated with certain operations (e.g., not with complements). When a wh-phrase scopes over some SE, the operations associated with that SE are performed in its denotation domain. The requisite operations may or may not be available in a domain, however. We present an empirical analysis of a variety of wh-phrases. It is argued that the wh-phrases that escape all weak islands (i.e., can scope over any intervener) are those that range over individuals, the reason being that all Boolean operations are defined for their domain. Collectives, manners, amounts, numbers, etc. all denote in domains with fewer operations and are thus selectively sensitive to scopal interveners—a “semantic relativized minimality effect”
Keywords
No keywords specified (fix it)
PhilPapers/Archive ID
SZAWIA
Revision history
Archival date: 2019-12-25
View upload history
References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA
The Universal Density of Measurement.Fox, Danny & Hackl, Martin

View all 20 citations / Add more citations

Added to PP index
2013-12-01

Total views
92 ( #34,526 of 50,310 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
35 ( #17,579 of 50,310 )

How can I increase my downloads?

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