The semantics of Spanish plural existential determiners and the dynamics of judgment types

Abstract In this paper, a semantic analysis of several contrasting properties between the Spanish plural existential determiners unos ‘a-pl.’ and algunos ‘some-pl.’ is presented within the framework of Discourse Representation Theory (DRT). Some of these properties can be directly related to the distinction between the thetic and the categorical judgment, as understood by Kuroda and Ladusaw. Others, related to plurality and the interaction of quantifiers, provide evidence for an extension of the scope of the distinction and its implementation as a procedural semantic difference. It will be argued that the determiner unos contributes a group discourse referent to a Discourse Representation Structure (DRS). This discourse referent is subject to a no linking constraint, and does not trigger box-splitting of the DRS. This forms the basis for the claim that this plural determiner participates only in thetic judgments. On the other hand, the determiner algunos is not subject to a no linking constraint and may contribute a duplex condition to the DRS. Thus, it can participate in categorical judgments. This type of judgment corresponds to a set of construction rules which yields an updated DRS in which a new discourse referent has been introduced and, in contrast to the thetic judgment, a linking condition and a duplex condition are introduced. The analysis is extended to account for the effects of contrastive focus and scopal interactions with other operators in the semantics of Spanish existential determiners.

[1]  Howard Lasnik,et al.  Reciprocity and plurality , 1991 .

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

[3]  Dag Westerståhl,et al.  Generalized Quantifiers in Linguistics and Logic , 1997, Handbook of Logic and Language.

[4]  Javier Gutiérrez Rexach,et al.  Questions and Generalized Quantifiers , 1997 .

[5]  Alice ter Meulen,et al.  Genericity: An Introduction , 1995 .

[6]  Gregory Norman Carlson,et al.  Reference to kinds in English , 1977 .

[7]  Jeroen Groenendijk,et al.  Dynamic predicate logic , 1991 .

[8]  S.-Y. Kuroda,et al.  The categorical and the thetic judgment , 1979 .

[9]  Veerle van Geenhoven Semantic Incorporation and Indefinite Descriptions: Semantic and Syntactic Aspects of Noun Incorporation in West Greenlandic , 1998 .

[10]  F. D. Jong,et al.  Generalized Quantifiers: the Properness of their Strength , 1984 .

[11]  ROBERT MAY,et al.  Questions, quantifiers and crossing , 1981 .

[12]  Javier Gutiérrez-Rexach,et al.  Spanish Indefinites and Type-Driven Interpretation , 1999 .

[13]  Alessandro Zucchi The ingredients of definiteness and the definiteness effect , 1995 .

[14]  Irene Heim,et al.  The semantics of definite and indefinite noun phrases : a dissertation , 1982 .

[15]  Jacob Hoeksema,et al.  TOPICS IN THE SYNTAX AND SEMANTICS OF INFINITIVES AND GERUNDS - CHIERCHIA,G , 1991 .

[16]  S. Kennison Reference and proper names : A theory of N-movement in syntax and Logical Form , 2001 .

[17]  Heles Contreras,et al.  Small clauses in Spanish and English , 1987 .

[18]  INGER ROSENGREN,et al.  The thetic/categorical distinction revisited once more , 1997 .