Sherlock Holmes Was In No Danger

An important ingredient in understanding such sentences is resolving the question of: level in/of what? protection from what? what sort of documents? danger from what? Each of these is an example coming from novels, television commercials, and news reports. In the first instance, it is from a commercial for a brand of computers. In the commercial, which is pushing the most recent version of that computer, the voice-over announces (1a) just as a teenager exults after having apparently accomplished something worthy of jubilation in a computer game. The message is intentionally interpretable in multiple ways: You are taken to a new level in the game, you are taken to a new level in computing power/speed, and, being a commercial, one also reads that it takes you to a new level in life. The second example is a story caption in a local newspaper. The article is about the shortage of flu shot vaccine in the U.S., and the people are going to Canada for flu shots, seeking protection from contracting the flu. The third example, also from a newspaper report, requires not just that the FBI agent sold some documents or other, but rather that they were sensitive confidential documents, likely purloined from the FBI itself. The final instance is from a novel. In the novel the protagonist, in seeking to solve a crime, has overlooked something which in retrospect appears terribly obvious. The character’s self-deprecation thus reads: Sherlock Holmes’ reputation as a master sleuth was in no danger of being diminished. Each example, in context, reads seamlessly and poses little challenge to attentive or even inattentive readers and listeners.

[1]  David L. Davidson,et al.  The Logical Form of Action Sentences , 2001 .

[2]  Kai-Uwe Von Fintel,et al.  Restrictions on quantifier domains , 1994 .

[3]  Barbara H. Partee,et al.  Genitives, relational nouns, and argument-modifier ambiguity , 2002 .

[4]  Jason Stanley,et al.  On Quantifier Domain Restriction , 2000 .

[5]  James Pustejovsky,et al.  The Generative Lexicon , 1995, CL.

[6]  Angelika Kratzer,et al.  Stage-Level and Individual-Level Predicates , 1995 .

[7]  Scott Soames,et al.  Incomplete definite descriptions , 1986, Notre Dame J. Formal Log..

[8]  Barbara H. Partee,et al.  Binding Implicit Variables in Quantified Contexts , 2004 .

[9]  E. Lepore,et al.  Indexicality, binding, anaphora and a priori truth , 2002 .

[10]  Dag Westerståhl,et al.  Determiners and Context Sets , 1985 .

[11]  Per Anker Jensen,et al.  A Semantic Analysis of the English Genitive.: Interaction of Lexical and Formal Semantics , 2002 .

[12]  L. Martí Contextual Variables as Pronouns , 2003 .

[13]  K. Fintel The Semantics and Pragmatics of Quantifier Domains , 1998 .

[14]  J. Stanley Context and Logical Form , 2000 .

[15]  A. Kratzer An investigation of the lumps of thought , 1989 .

[16]  A. Kratzer Scope or Pseudoscope? Are there Wide-Scope Indefinites? , 1998 .

[17]  Francis Jeffry Pelletier,et al.  Context Dependence and Compositionality , 2003 .

[18]  Richard Breheny A Lexical Account of Implicit (Bound) Contextual Dependence , 2003 .

[19]  Geoffrey Nunberg,et al.  Systematic polysemy in lexicology and lexicography , 1992 .

[20]  T. Stowell Weakest Crossover , 2008 .

[21]  R. Hursthouse THE LOGIC OF DECISION AND ACTION , 1969 .

[22]  Jorge Hankamer,et al.  Deep and surface anaphora , 1993 .

[23]  Nat Hansen,et al.  Literal Meaning: Introduction , 2003 .

[24]  N. Cocchiarella,et al.  Situations and Attitudes. , 1986 .

[25]  Jonathan Edward Mitchell,et al.  THE FORMAL SEMANTICS OF POINT OF VIEW , 1986 .