Free Relatives and Ever: Identity and Free Choice Readings

This paper explores  three questions about the semantics of free relatives (FRs).  One, do FRs have a uniform meaning? Two, related to one, what is the contribution of ever?  And  three, perhaps less discussed than the other two, what is the relation between identity and free choice (FC) readings of FRs with ever?  It claims that FRs are always definite. Ever introduces a type of modality that is independent of the verbal system by enforcing universal quantification over epistemic alternatives to the world of evaluation.  In so doing, it endows the FR with properties typically associated with universal quantifiers.  There is no formal distinction between identity and FC readings of FRs.  The crucial distinctions have to do with the interaction of uniqueness requirements typical of definites, NP-internal modality and episodic vs. non-episodic interpretations determined by tense and aspect.


 
ANY as Inherently Modal

 The primary theoretical focus of this paper is on Free Choice uses of 'any', in particular, on two phenomena that have remained largely unstudied.  One involves the ability of 'any' phrases to occur in
 affirmative episodic statements when aided by suitable noun modifiers.  The other involves the difference between modals of necessity and possibility with respect to licensing of 'any'.  The central thesis advanced here is that FC 'any' is a universal determiner whose domain of quantification is not a set of particular individuals but the set of possible individuals of the relevant kind.  In a theory of genericity utilizing situations, an 'any' phrase can be seen as having a universal quantifier binding the situation variable of the common noun.  This inherent genericity is argued to be at the heart of the intuition that 'any' statements support counterfactual inferences and do not involve existential commitments.  A conflict in presuppositions is shown to account for the incompatibility of unmodified 'any' phrases in affirmative episodic statements and the crucial role played by modificaiton in ameliorating this clash is explicated.  In the case of modals of necessity, the interaction between the universal force of 'any' and the particular modal base is shown to be crucial.  In view of these facts it is argued that FC 'any' is not directly licensed by modal or generic operators as generally assumed but that its felicitous use is sensitive to the pragmatics of epistemic modality.  Turning to its Polarity Sensitive uses, language internal as well as crosslinguistic evidence is presented to distinguish it from FC 'any' in having the existential quantificational force typical of indefinites.  The paper concludes by suggesting that the common tie between them is that they both occur in statements that apply to a class of entities, rather than to particular members of the class.


 

Locality in WH Quantification: Questions and Relative Clauses in Hindi

This book argues that Logical Form, the level that mediates between syntax and semantics, is derived from S-structure by local movement. The primary data for the claim of loclaity at LF is drawn from Hindi but English data is used in discussing the semantics of questions and relative clauses. The book takes a cross-linguistic perspective showing how the Hindi and English facts can be brought to bear on the theory of universal grammar.

 Phenomena generally thought to involve long-distance dependencies at LF, such as scope marking, long-distance lists and correlatives, are handled by explicating novel types of local relationships that interrogative and relative clauses can enter into. A more articulated semantics is shown to lead to a simpler syntax. 

Among other issues addressed is the switch from uniqueness/maximality effects in single wh constructions to list readings in multiple wh constructions. These effects are captured by adapting the treatment of wh expressions as quantifying over functions to the cases of multiple wh questions and correlatives. The modification of the functional approach also accounts for subject-object asymmetries in exhaustivity, a fact that has been observed but not explained. List readings due to functional dependencies are systematically distinguished from those that are based on plurality. 
 

 
 

Scope Marking: In Defense of Indirect Dependency

This paper departs from earlier formulations of the indirect dependency approach to scope marking in allowing cross-linguistic variation in the syntax though not in the semantics. It maintains that the matrix wh in a scope marking structure, in any language, sets the quantification in the question to be over propositional variables, with the restriction on this variable being provided by the complement CP. Adapting a proposal of Reis (same volume) relating scope marking structures to parenthetical constructions, it argues for a range of options that languages may exercise with respect to syntactic realization of this relation. Empirical evidence from English, Hindi and German is presented to argue for a three-way distinction in the type of subordination involved. Unlike earlier discussions of the phenomenon, the perspective adopted here suggests that scope marking may be universally instantiated in natural language. 


 

Licensing ANY In Non-Negative/Non-Modal Contexts

Kadmon and Landman (1993) propose that any is univocally an indefinite. It has free choice (FC) readings in modal contexts where indefinites get universal force and negative polarity (NPI) readings in negative contexts. It is barred from non-negative/non- modal contexts by a licensing principle that requires statements with "any" to strengthen statements with ordinary indefinites. In this paper FC readings of "any" are shown to be available in non- modal (and non-negative) contexts if there is a relative clause inside the NP, arguing that "any" must be recognized as a universal. A consequence of this is that strengthening can no longer be used to explain the distribution of "any". The alternative proposed here is that "any" is an inherently modal particle and signals lack of commitment with respect to the existence of individuals in its domain. It cannot occur in non-negative/non-modal contexts because the existence of such individuals is entailed. A relative clause over-rides this constraint by carving out a possibly empty subset of the individuals denoted by the head noun. The interaction of semantic and pragmatic factors is shown to account for hitherto unexplained facts about the distribution and behavior of "any" in a variety of contexts.