Semantics with Dependent Types for Indefinites

Open access


The paper proposes a new semantics with dependent types for indefinites, encompassing both the data related to their exceptional scopal behavior and the data related to their anaphoric (dynamic) properties. The proposal builds on the formal system combining generalized quantifiers ([Mostowski 1957], [Lindström 1966]) with dependent types ([Martin-Löf 1972], [Makkai 1995]) in [Grudzińska & Zawadowski 2014] and [Grudzińska & Zawadowski 2016].

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • Abusch Dorit (1994) The Scope of Indefinites. Natural Language Semantics 2. 83–135.

  • Barwise Jon & Robin Cooper (1981) Generalized Quantifiers and Natural Language. Linguistics & Philosophy 4. 159-219.

  • Bekki Daisuke (2014). Representing anaphora with dependent types. In Asher N. Soloviev S. (eds.) Logical Aspects of Computational Linguistics Lecture Notes in Computer Science vol. 8535 Springer. 14–29.

  • Brasoveanu Adrian (2008) Donkey Pluralities: Plural Information States Versus Non-Atomic Individuals. Linguistics & Philosophy 31(2). 129–209.

  • Brasoveanu Adrian & Donka F. Farkas (2011) How indefinites choose their scope. Linguistics & Philosophy 34. 1–55

  • Chierchia Gennaro (1992) Anaphora and dynamic binding. Linguistics & Philosophy 15(2). 111–83.

  • Chierchia Gennaro (2001) a Puzzle about Indefinites. In Carlo Cecchetto Gennaro Chierchia and Maria Teresa Guasti (eds.) Semantic Interfaces: Reference Anaphora and Aspect. CSLI Stanford. 51–89.

  • Church Alonzo (1940) a formulation of the simple theory of types. Journal of Symbolic Logic 5(1). 56–68.

  • Cooper Robin (1979) The interpretation of pronouns. In Heny F. Schnelle H. (eds.) Syntax and Semantics 10 New York Academic Press. 61–92.

  • Cooper Robin (2004) Dynamic generalised quantifiers and hypothetical contexts. In Ursus Philosophicus a festschrift for Björn Haglund Department of Philosophy Göteborg University.

  • Dekker Paul (1994) Predicate logic with anaphora. In Lynn Santelmann and Mandy Harvey (eds.) Proceedings SALT IX. Ithaca NY: DMLL Publications Cornell University. 79–95.

  • Dekker Paul (2008) A multi-dimensional treatment of quantification in extraordinary English. Linguistics & Philosophy (1). 101–127.

  • Dobrovie-Sorin C. & C. Beyssade 2012 Redefining Indefinites. Berlin Springer.

  • Endriss Cornelia (2009) Quantificational Topics a Scopal Treatment of Exceptional Wide Scope Phenomena. Studies in Linguistics & Philosophy Berlin Springer.

  • Farkas Donka (1981) Quantifier Scope and Syntactic Islands. CLS 17. 59–66.

  • Fernando Tim (2001). Conservative generalized quantifiers and presupposition. Proceedings SALT XI. Ithaca NY: DMLL Publications Cornell University. 172–191.

  • Fodor Janet & Ivan Sag (1982) Referential and Quantificational Indefinites. Linguistics & Philosophy 5. 355–398.

  • Geurts Bart & Rob van der Sandt (1999) Domain Restriction. In P. Bosch & R. A. van der Sandt (eds.) Focus: Linguistic Cognitive and Computational Perspectives Cambridge UP Cambridge. 268–292.

  • Groenendijk Jeroen & Martin Stokhof (1984) Studies on the Semantics of Questions and the Pragmatics of Answers PhD thesis Amsterdam University of Amsterdam.

  • Groenendijk Jeroen & Martin Stokhof (1991) Dynamic Predicate Logic. Linguistics & Philosophy 14. 39-100.

  • Grudzińska Justyna (2015) Deskrypcje nieokreślone Wydawnictwo Naukowe Semper Warszawa.

  • Grudzińska Justyna & Marek Zawadowski (2014) System with Generalized Quantifiers on Dependent Types for Anaphora. In R. Cooper S. Dobnik S. Lappin S. Larsson (eds.) Proceedings of the EACL 2014 Workshop on Type Theory and Natural Language Semantics. 10-18.

  • Grudzińska Justyna & Marek Zawadowski (2016) Generalized Quantifiers on Dependent Types: a System for Anaphora to appear. In S. Chatzikyriakidis and Z. Luo (eds.) Type-Theoretical Semantics: Current Perspectives Studies in Linguistics and Philosophy Springer.

  • Hintikka Jaakko (1986) The Semantics of a certain. Linguistic Inquiry 17 (2). 331–336.

  • Ionin Tania (2010) The scope of indefinites: an experimental investigation. Nat Lang Semantics 18. 295–350.

  • Kadmon Nirit (1987) On unique and Non-unique reference and Asymmetric Quantification. Ph.D. diss University of Massachusetts Amherst.

  • Kamp Hans (1981) a theory of truth and semantic representation. In J. Groenendijk T. Janssen & M. Stokhof (eds.) Truth Interpretation and Information Foris Dordrecht. 1-41.

  • Kamp Hans & Uwe Reyle (1993) From Discourse to Logic. Kluwer Academic Publishers Dordrecht.

  • Kratzer Angelika (1998) Scope or Pseudoscope? Are there Wide-Scope Indefinites? In S. Rothstein (ed) Events and Grammar. Kluwer Academic Publishers Dordrecht. 163–196.

  • Lindström Per (1966) First-order predicate logic with generalized quantifiers Theoria 32. 186-95.

  • Makkai Michael (1995) First Order Logic with Dependent Sorts with Applications to Category Theory preprtint McGill University.

  • Lappin Shalom & Francez Nissim (1994) E-type pronouns I-sums and Donkey anaphora. Linguistics & Philosophy 17. 391–428.

  • Luo Zhaohui (2012) Formal Semantics in Modern Type Theories with Coercive Subtyping. Linguistics & Philosophy 35. 491–513.

  • Luo Zhaohui (2012) Common nouns as types. LACL’12 LNCS 7351. 173–185.

  • Martin-Löf Per (1972) An intuitionstic theory of types Technical Report University of Stockholm.

  • Martin-Löf Per (1984) Intuitionistic Type Theory Bibliopolis.

  • Matthewson Lisa (1999) On the Interpretation of Wide-scope Indefinites Natural Language Semantics 7. 79-134.

  • Montague Richard (1974) Formal Philosophy. Yale University Press.

  • Mostowski Andrzej (1957) On a generalization of quantifiers Fundamenta Mathematicae 44. 12-36.

  • Ranta Aarne (1994) Type-Theoretical Grammar Oxford University Press Oxford.

  • Reinhart Tanya (1997) Quantifier Scope: How Labour is divided between QR and Choice Functions. Linguistics & Philosophy 20. 335-397.

  • Ruys Eddy (1992) The Scope of Indefinites PhD thesis Utrecht University.

  • Schwarzschild Roger (2002) Singleton Indefinites. Journal of Semantics 19. 289–314.

  • Steedman Mark (2012) Taking Scope. The Natural Semantics of Quantifiers The MIT Press Cambridge.

  • Szabolcsi Anna (1997) Background notions in lattice theory and generalized quantifiers. In Anna Szabolcsi (ed.) Ways of scope taking. Kluwer Academic Publishers Dordrecht. 1–27.

  • Szabolcsi Anna (2010) Quantification. Cambridge University Press Cambridge.

  • Van den Berg Martin H. (1996) The Internal Structure of Discourse Ph.D. thesis Universiteit van Amsterdam Amsterdam.

  • Wang Linton Eric McCready & Nicholas Asher (2006) Information dependency in quantificational subordination. In K. von Heusinger & K. Turner (eds.) Where semantics meets pragmatics. Elsevier Amsterdam. 268–304.

  • Winter Yoad (1997) Choice Functions and the Scopal Semantics of Indefinites. Linguistics & Philosophy 20. 399-467.

  • Zawadowski Marek (1989) Formalization of the feature system in terms of preorders. In I. Bellert Feature System for Quantification Structures in Natural Language. Dordrecht Foris. 155-175.

Journal information
Impact Factor

Cite Score 2018: 0.29

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2018: 0.138
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2018: 0.358

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 172 81 11
PDF Downloads 90 55 1