Indeterminate Phrase Quantification in Japanese

This paper examines the question of how so-called indeterminate phrases in Japanese (Kuroda 1965) associate with relevant particles higher in the structure. In the universal construction in Japanese, the restrictor (provided by an indeterminate phrase) sometimes appears to be separate from the universal particle mo. It is proposed that quantification at a distance is only apparent, and that the restriction is in fact provided locally by the sister constituent of mo as a whole. The proposal leads us to a straightforward uniform picture of the syntax-semantics mapping of the universal construction and wh-questions, building upon Hamblin’s (1973) semantics for wh-phrases as sets of alternatives. It allows for a switch of perspective on a long-standing puzzle regarding locality effects in the indeterminate–particle association by deriving the locality pattern from the way indeterminate phrases are interpreted and associated with particles, without any stipulations.

[1]  Mats Rooth.  Association with focus , 1985 .

[2]  Norvin Richards,et al.  An Island Effect in Japanese , 2000 .

[3]  Jo-Wang Lin,et al.  Polarity licensing and wh-phrase quantification in Chinese , 1996 .

[4]  T. Reinhart.  Quantifier Scope: How labor is Divided Between QR and Choice Functions , 1997 .

[5]  C. L. Hamblin.  QUESTIONS IN MONTAGUE ENGLISH , 1976 .

[6]  Lisa Matthewson,et al.  On The Interpretation of Wide-scope Indefinites , 1998 .

[7]  Howard Lasnik,et al.  Move α: Conditions on Its Application and Output , 1992 .

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

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

[10]  A. Watanabe.  Subjacency and S-structure movement of wh-in-situ , 1992 .

[11]  Daiko Takahashi,et al.  Determiner Raising and Scope Shift , 2002, Linguistic Inquiry.

[12]  Kazuhiko Fukushima,et al.  Phrase structure grammar, montague semantics, and floating quantifiers in Japanese , 1991 .

[13]  Karlos Arregi,et al.  Clausal Pied-Piping , 2003 .

[14]  T. Reinhart.  Wh-in-situ in the Framework of the Minimalist Program , 1998 .

[15]  G. Chierchia,et al.  Reference to Kinds across Language , 1998 .

[16]  Angelika Kratzer,et al.  Indefinites and the Operators they Depend on: From Japanese to Salish , 2005 .

[17]  S. Ishihara.  Intonation and interface conditions , 2003 .

[18]  Kazuhiko Fukushima,et al.  Model theoretic semantics for Japanese floating quantifiers and their scope properties , 1993 .

[19]  Jeroen Groenendijk,et al.  Semantic analysis of wh-complements , 1982 .

[20]  Arnim von Stechow,et al.  Against LF Pied-Piping , 1996 .

[21]  Hajime Hoji,et al.  Logical form constraints and configurational structures in Japanese , 1985 .

[22]  L. Karttunen.  Syntax and Semantics of Questions , 1977 .

[23]  Hidekazu Tanaka,et al.  LF WH-Islands and the Minimal Scope Principle , 1999 .

[24]  Joseph E. Aoun.  'Wh'- elements in situ: syntax or lF? , 1993 .

[25]  R. May.  Logical Form: Its Structure and Derivation , 1985 .

[26]  Jae-Woong Choe.  LF movement and pied-piping , 1987 .

[27]  Edward L. Keenan,et al.  A semantic characterization of natural language determiners , 1986 .

[28]  H. Rullmann,et al.  A Flexible Approach to Exhaustivity in Questions , 1999 .

[29]  Masao Ochi,et al.  Constraints on feature checking , 1999 .

[30]  Wei-Tien Dylan Tsai,et al.  On economizing the theory of A-bar dependencies , 1999 .

[31]  Cheng-Teh James Huang,et al.  Logical Relations in Chinese and the Theory of Grammar , 1998 .

[32]  Edward L. Keenan,et al.  In The Handbook of Contemporary Semantic Theory. 1996. Shalom Lappin (ed). Blackwell The Semantics of Determiners , 1996 .

[33]  Noam Chomsky,et al.  On Wh-Movement , 1977 .

[34]  渡邊 明.  Wh-in-situ, subjacency, and chain formation , 1992 .

[35]  Yen-hui Audrey Li,et al.  Indefinite Wh in Mandarin Chinese , 1992 .

[36]  Y. Winter,et al.  Choice Functions and the Scopal Semantics of Indefinites , 1997 .

[37]  Martin Haspelmath,et al.  Diachronic Sources of ‘All’ and ‘Every’ , 1995 .

[38]  H. Kamp.  A Theory of Truth and Semantic Representation , 2008 .

[39]  Dag E. Wold.  Long Distance Selective Binding: The Case of Focus , 1996 .

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

[41]  Wide Scope Universal NPIs in Japanese , 2003 .

[42]  Nigel G. J. Richards,et al.  What Moves Where In Which Language , 1991 .

[43]  Jeroen Groenendijk,et al.  Formal methods in the study of language , 1983 .

[44]  Angelika Kratzer,et al.  Prosodic Effects on the Interpretation of Japanese Wh-questions , 2003 .

[45]  Akira Watanabe,et al.  Wh‐in‐situ Languages , 2008 .

[46]  Junko Shimoyama,et al.  Wh -constructions in Japanese , 2001 .

[47]  Ji-yung Kim.  Specific Nominals in Chinese and Korean , 2004 .

[48]  Stephen Robert Berman,et al.  On the semantics and logical form of {\it wh\/} -clauses , 1991 .

[49]  Friederike Moltmann,et al.  Exception sentences and polyadic quantification , 1995 .

[50]  A. Watanabe,et al.  The Genesis of Negative Concord: Syntax and Morphology of Negative Doubling , 2004, Linguistic Inquiry.

[51]  Taisuke Nishigauchi,et al.  Quantification in the theory of grammar , 1990 .