Linguistics and Philosophy 30 (4):445 - 485 (2007)

This paper investigates relative constructions as in The gifted mathematician that you claim to be should be able to solve this equation, in which the head noun is semantically dependent on an intensional operator in the relative clause, even though it is not c-commanded by it. This is the kind of situation that has led, within models of linguistic description that assume a syntactic level of Logical Form, to analyses in which the head noun is interpreted within the CP-internal gap by reconstruction or interpretation of a lower element of a chain. We offer a solution that views surface representation as the input to semantics. The apparent inverted scope effects are traced back to the interpretation of the head nominal gifted mathematician as applying to individual concepts, and of the relative clause that you claim to be as including an equational statement. According to this view, the complex DP in question refers to the individual concept that exists just in the worlds that are compatible with what is generally supposed to be the case, is a gifted mathematician in those worlds, and is identical to you in those worlds. Our solution is related to the non-reconstructionist analysis of binding of pronouns that do not stand in a c-command relationship to their binder, as in The woman that every man hugged was his mother in Jacobson Proceedings of Semantics and Linguistic Theory IV:161-178, 1994) and Sharvit Proceedings of Semantics and Linguistic Theory VI:227-244, 1996), and allows us to capture both similarities with and differences from the latter type of construction. We point out and offer explanations for a number of properties of such relative clauses—in particular their need for an internal intensional operator, their incompatibility with any determiner other than the definite article, and the fact that some of their properties are shared by demonstrably distinct kinds of relative clauses.
Keywords Relative clauses  Head-raising analysis of relative clauses  Syntax/Semantics interface  Individual concepts  Definiteness
Categories (categorize this paper)
Reprint years 2008
DOI 10.1007/s10988-008-9022-5
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 70,214
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Reductionism About Understanding Why.Insa Lawler - 2016 - Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 116 (2):229-236.
Intensional Relative Clauses and the Semantics of Variable Objects.Friederike Moltmann - 2018 - In Manfred Krifka & Schenner Mathias (eds.), Reconstruction Effects in Relative Clauses. Berlin: De Gruyter. pp. 427-453..

View all 7 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Tropes, Intensional Relative Clauses, and the Notion of a Variable Object.Friederike Moltmann - 2012 - In Aloni Maria, Kimmelman Vadim, Weidman Sassoon Galit, Roloefson Floris, Schulz Katrin & Westera Matthjis (eds.), Proceedings of the 18th Amsterdam Colloquium 2011. Springer.
Syntax and Semantics: An Overview.Arnim von Stechow - 2012 - In Klaus von Heusinger, Claudia Maienborn & Paul Portner (eds.), Semantics: An International Handbook of Natural Language Meaning. De Gruyter Mouton.
Interactions of Scope and Ellipsis.Stuart M. Shieber, Fernando C. N. Pereira & Mary Dalrymple - 1996 - Linguistics and Philosophy 19 (5):527 - 552.


Added to PP index

Total views
108 ( #108,517 of 2,507,563 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
2 ( #277,263 of 2,507,563 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes