Number-neutral bare plurals and the multiplicity implicature

Bare plurals (dogs) behave in ways that quantified plurals (some dogs) do not. For instance, while the sentence John owns dogs implies that John owns more than one dog, its negation John does not own dogs does not mean “John does not own more than one dog”, but rather “John does not own a dog”. A second puzzling behavior is known as the dependent plural reading; when in the scope of another plural, the ‘more than one’ meaning of the plural is not distributed over, but the existential force of the plural is. For example, My friends attend good schools requires that each of my friends attend one good school, not more, while at the same time being inappropriate if all my friends attend the same school. This paper shows that both these phenomena, and others, arise from the same cause. Namely, the plural noun itself does not assert ‘more than one’, but rather the plural denotes a predicate that is number neutral (unspecified for cardinality). The ‘more than one’ meaning arises as an scalar implicature, relying on the scalar relationship between the bare plural and its singular alternative, and calculated in a sub-sentential domain; namely, before existential closure of the event variable. Finally, implications of this analysis will be discussed for the analysis of the quantified noun phrases that interact with bare plurals, such as indefinite numeral DPs (three boys), and singular universals (every boy).

[1]  Petra Sleeman,et al.  Romance languages and linguistic theory 2001: selected papers from 'Going Romance', Amsterdam, 6-8 december 2001 , 2003 .

[2]  Cleo Condoravdi Strong and Weak Novelty and Familiarity , 1992 .

[3]  Benjamin Russell,et al.  Against Grammatical Computation of Scalar Implicatures , 2006, J. Semant..

[4]  U. Sauerland,et al.  The Plural Is Semantically Unmarked , 2005 .

[5]  Eytan Zweig,et al.  Dependent plurals and plural meaning , 2008 .

[6]  Jack Hoeksema,et al.  The Semantics of Non-Boolean "And" , 1988, J. Semant..

[7]  Roger Schwarzschild,et al.  Types of plural individuals , 1992 .

[8]  Benjamin Spector,et al.  Plural Indefinite DPs as Plural-Polarity Items , 2003 .

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

[10]  A. Papafragou,et al.  Scalar implicatures: experiments at the semantics–pragmatics interface , 2003, Cognition.

[11]  Siobhan Chapman Logic and Conversation , 2005 .

[12]  J. Roodenburg Pour une approche scalaire de la deficience nominale: la position du francais dans une theorie des "noms nus" , 2004 .

[13]  Samuel Louis Bayer Confessions of a Lapsed Neo-Davidsonian: Events and Arguments in Compositional Semantics , 1997 .

[14]  Bart Geurts,et al.  Scalar implicature and local pragmatics. , 2009 .

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

[16]  Donka F. Farkas The unmarked determiner , 2006 .

[17]  C. Brisson Plurals, All, and the Nonuniformity of Collective Predication , 2003 .

[18]  Benjamin Spector Aspects of the Pragmatics of Plural Morphology: On Higher-Order Implicatures , 2007 .

[19]  G. Chierchia,et al.  Broaden Your Views: Implicatures of Domain Widening and the Logicality of Language , 2006, Linguistic Inquiry.

[20]  J. Sadock On Testing for Conversational Implicature , 1978 .

[21]  Craige Roberts,et al.  Modal subordination, anaphora, and distributivity , 1990 .

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

[23]  Gerald Gazdar,et al.  Pragmatics: Implicature, Presupposition, and Logical Form , 1978 .

[24]  Ana Lúcia de Paula Muller,et al.  Genericity and the denotation of common nouns in Brazilian Portuguese , 2002 .

[25]  S. Crain,et al.  At the Semantics / Pragmatics Interface in Child Language , 2001 .

[26]  Justin Halberda,et al.  Acquisition of English Number Marking: The Singular-Plural Distinction , 2006 .

[27]  Laurence R. Horn,et al.  The handbook of pragmatics , 2004 .

[28]  Agustín Rayo Plural Predication , 2008 .

[29]  Uwe Reyle,et al.  From Discourse to Logic - Introduction to Modeltheoretic Semantics of Natural Language, Formal Logic and Discourse Representation Theory , 1993, Studies in linguistics and philosophy.

[30]  K. Turner,et al.  The Border Wars: A Neo-Gricean Perspective , 2006, Where Semantics meets Pragmatics.

[31]  Manfred Krifka,et al.  Bare NPs: Kind-referring, Indefinites, Both, or Neither? , 2003 .

[32]  Brendan S. Gillon,et al.  The readings of plural noun phrases in English , 1987 .

[33]  Fred Landman,et al.  Events and Plurality: The Jerusalem Lectures , 2001 .

[34]  Adriana Belletti,et al.  Structures and beyond , 2004 .

[35]  Arnim von Stechow,et al.  Semantik: Ein Internationales Handbuch Der Zeitgenössischen Forschung , 1991 .

[36]  Laurence R. Horn,et al.  On the semantic properties of logical operators in english' reproduced by the indiana university lin , 1972 .

[37]  I. Noveck When children are more logical than adults: experimental investigations of scalar implicature , 2001, Cognition.

[38]  U. Sauerland,et al.  Presupposition and Implicature in Compositional Semantics , 2007 .

[39]  Noam Chomsky,et al.  Questions of Form and Interpretation , 1975 .

[40]  Henriëtte de Swart Aspectual implications of the semantics of plural indefinites , 2006 .

[41]  B. Schein Plurals and Events , 1994 .

[42]  L. M. Bosveld-de Smet,et al.  On mass and plural quantification: the case of French des/du NPs , 2001 .

[43]  K. Turner,et al.  Where semantics meets pragmatics , 2006 .

[44]  Barbara H. Partee,et al.  Comments on C. J. Fillmore's and N. Chomsky's Papers , 1975 .

[45]  Ways of Branching Quantifiers , 2022 .

[46]  Liliane Tasmowski,et al.  Non-definiteness and plurality , 2006 .

[47]  Godehard Link Algebraic semantics in language and philosophy , 1997 .

[48]  Godehard Link,et al.  Generalized Quantifiers and Plurals , 1987 .