Cover not available

In:Weak Referentiality
Edited by Ana Aguilar-Guevara, Bert Le Bruyn and Joost Zwarts
[Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 219] 2014
► pp. 45–72

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload Book PDF
authorization required

Epistemic and scopal properties of some indefinites

Published online: 3 December 2014
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/la.219.03ion
This paper experimentally examines the behavior of English some indefinites, addressing the following research questions. (i) How do singular some indefinites behave with respect to scopal (non-)specificity? (ii) How do singular some indefinites pattern with respect to epistemic (non-)specificity? And (iii) Does stress (or lack thereof) on some influence the behavior of some indefinites with respect to epistemic and/or scopal (non-)specificity, and if so, how? The findings of two experimental studies with adult native English speakers indicate that some indefinites take long-distance scope more readily than a indefinites, and carry a condition of epistemic non-specificity; stress on some is related to both properties. These findings are discussed in light of different theories of indefinite interpretation.
References (32)
References
Anderson, C. 2004. The Structure and Real-time Comprehension of Quantifier Scope Ambiguity. PhD dissertation, Northwestern University.
Becker, M. 1999. The some indefinites. In UCLA Working Papers in Linguistics, Vol. 3: Syntax at Sunset 2, G. Storto (ed.), 1–13.Los Angeles CA: UCLA Working Papers in Linguistics.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cowart, W. 1997. Experimental Syntax. Thousand Oaks CA: Sage.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dahl, O. 1970. Some notes on indefinites. Language 46(1): 33–41. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Diesing, M. 1992. Indefinites. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Endriss, C. 2009. Quantificational Topics. A Scopal Treatment of Exceptional Wide Scope Phenomena. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Enç, M. 1991. The semantics of specificity. Linguistic Inquiry 22(1): 1–25.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Farkas, D. 1981. Quantifier scope and syntactic islands. In Proceedings of CLS 7, R. Hendrik, et al. (eds), 59–66. Ithaca NY: CLC Publications.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1994. Specificity and scope. In Langues et Grammaires 1, L. Nash & G. Tsoulas (eds), 119–137. Paris: University of Paris VIII.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2002a. Specificity distinctions. Journal of Semantics 19(3): 213–243. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2002b. Varieties of indefinites. In Proceedings of SALT 12, B. Jackson (ed.). Ithaca NY: CLC Publications.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fodor, J. & Sag, I. 1982. Referential and quantificational indefinites. Linguistics and Philosophy 5(3): 355–398. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Giannakidou, A. 2011. Negative and positive polarity items: Licensing, compositionality and variation. In Semantics: An International Handbook of Natural Language Meaning, C. Maienborn, K. von Heusinger & P. Portner (eds). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Groenendijk, J. & Stokhof, M. 1981. A pragmatic analysis of specificity. In Ambiguity in Intensional Contexts, F. Heny (ed.), 98–123. Dordrecht: Reidel.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Haspelmath, M. 1997. Indefinite Pronouns. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
von Heusinger, K. 2002. Specificity and definiteness in sentence and discourse structure. Journal of Semantics 19(3): 245–274. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hintikka, J. 1986. The semantics of a certain . Linguistic Inquiry 17(2): 331–336.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ionin, T. 2009. Specificity. In The Routledge Pragmatics Encyclopedia, L. Cummings (ed.). New York NY: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2010. The scope of indefinites: An experimental investigation. Natural Language Semantics 18(3): 295–350. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ionin, T., Ebert, C. & Stolterfoht, B. 2011. One indefinite scopes out of islands: An experimental study of long-distance scope in English and German. Poster presented at 50 Years of MIT Linguistics, Cambridge, MA, December.
Ioup. G. 1977. Specificity and the interpretation of quantifiers. Linguistics and Philosophy 1(2): 233–245,Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jayez, J. & Tovena, L. 2006. Epistemic determiners. Journal of Semantics 23(3): 217–250. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Karttunen, L. 1976. Discourse referents. In Syntax and Semantics 7, J. McCawley (ed.), 363–385. New York NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kratzer, A. 1998. Scope or pseudoscope? Are there wide-scope indefinites? In Events and Grammar, S. Rothstein (ed.), 163–196. Amsterdam: Kluwer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ladusaw, W. 1980. Polarity Sensitivity as Inherent Scope Relations. New York NY: Garland.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lyons, C. 1999. Definiteness. Cambridge: CUP. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Milsark, G. 1977. Toward an explanation of certain peculiarities of the existential construction in English. Linguistic Analysis 3(1): 1–29.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Reinhart, T. 1997. Quantifier scope: How labour is divided between QR and choice functions. Linguistics and Philosophy 20(4): 335–397. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schwarz, B. 2001. Two kinds of long-distance indefinites. In Proceedings of the Thirteenth Amsterdam Colloquium, R. van Rooy & M. Stokhof (eds), 192–197. Amsterdam: Institute for Logic, Language and Computation.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schwarzschild, R. 2002. Singleton indefinites. Journal of Semantics 19(3): 289–314. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tunstall, S.L. 1998. The Interpretation of Quantifiers: Semantics & Processing. PhD dissertation, University of Massachusetts.
Winter, Y. 1997. Choice functions and the scopal semantics of indefinites. Linguistics and Philosophy 20(4): 399–467. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (2)

Cited by two other publications

Philipp, Mareike & Malte Zimmermann
2025. An Experimental Comparison of the Availability of Inverse Scope in English and German. Linguistic Inquiry 56:2 ► pp. 209 ff. DOI logo
Ebert, Cornelia
2020. Wide Scope Indefinites. In The Wiley Blackwell Companion to Semantics, ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 22 november 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue