There is no number effect in the licensing of negative polarity items: A reply to Guerzoni and Sharvit [Book Review]

Linguistics and Philosophy 31 (4):397-407 (2008)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Guerzoni and Sharvit (Linguistics and Philosophy 30:361–391, 2007) provide an argument that plural, but not singular, wh-phrases may contain a negative polarity item in their restriction, and connect this with the semantic property of exhaustivity. I will show that this claim is factually incorrect, and that the theory of negative polarity licensing does not need to be complicated by taking number distinctions into account. In addition, I will argue that number distinctions do not appear to be relevant for polarity items in the restriction of definite noun phrases either.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,349

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
111 (#156,045)

6 months
5 (#629,136)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Any.Nirit Kadmon & Fred Landman - 1993 - Linguistics and Philosophy 16 (4):353 - 422.
Focus and Negative Polarity in Hindi.Utpal Lahiri - 1998 - Natural Language Semantics 6 (1):57-123.
Polarity sensitivity as lexical semantics.M. Israel - 1996 - Linguistics and Philosophy 19 (6):619 - 666.

View all 11 references / Add more references