Linguistics and Philosophy 35 (3):191-241 (2012)

Abstract
We argue that a comprehensive theory of reciprocals must rely on a general taxonomy of restrictions on the interpretation of relational expressions. Developing such a taxonomy, we propose a new principle for interpreting reciprocals that relies on the interpretation of the relation in their scope. This principle, the Maximal Interpretation Hypothesis (MIH), analyzes reciprocals as partial polyadic quantifiers. According to the MIH, the partial quantifier denoted by a reciprocal requires the relational expression REL in its scope to denote a maximal relation in REL’s interpretation domain. In this way the MIH avoids a priori assumptions on the available readings of reciprocal expressions, which are necessary in previous accounts. Relying extensively on the work of Dalrymple et al. (Ling Philos 21:159–210, 1998), we show that the MIH also exhibits some observational improvements over Dalrymple et al.’s Strongest Meaning Hypothesis (SMH). In addition to deriving some attested reciprocal interpretations that are not expected by the SMH, the MIH offers a more restrictive account of the way context affects the interpretation of reciprocals through its influence on relational domains. Further, the MIH generates a reciprocal interpretation at the predicate level, which is argued to be advantageous to Dalrymple et al.’s propositional selection of reciprocal meanings. More generally, we argue that by focusing on restrictions on relational domains, the MIH opens the way for a more systematic study of the ways in which lexical meaning, world knowledge and contextual information interact with the interpretation of quantificational expressions
Keywords Reciprocals  Relational domains  Quantifiers
Categories (categorize this paper)
ISBN(s)
DOI 10.1007/s10988-012-9117-x
Options
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: 71,436
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Quantifiers in Language and Logic.Stanley Peters & Dag Westerståhl - 2006 - Oxford, England: Clarendon Press.
Quantifiers in Language and Logic.Stanley Peters & Dag Westerståhl - 2006 - Oxford, England: Oxford University Press UK.
A Semantics for Positive and Comparative Adjectives.Ewan Klein - 1980 - Linguistics and Philosophy 4 (1):1--45.
Prototype Theory and Compositionality.H. Kamp - 1995 - Cognition 57 (2):129-191.

View all 29 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Plural Predication and the Strongest Meaning Hypothesis.Yoad Winter - 2001 - Journal of Semantics 18 (4):333-365.
Relational Complexes.Joop Leo - 2013 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 42 (2):357-390.
Scope Dominance with Upward Monotone Quantifiers.Alon Altman, Ya'Acov Peterzil & Yoad Winter - 2005 - Journal of Logic, Language and Information 14 (4):445-455.
Relational Quantum Mechanics and the Determinacy Problem.Matthew J. Brown - 2009 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 60 (4):679-695.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2012-10-08

Total views
40 ( #285,771 of 2,519,857 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
2 ( #270,671 of 2,519,857 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes