Cover not available

In:Weak Referentiality
Edited by Ana Aguilar-Guevara, Bert Le Bruyn and Joost Zwarts
[Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 219] 2014
► pp. 213–235

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

How weak and how definite are Weak Definites?

ORCiD logo with link
Published online: 3 December 2014
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/la.219.09sch
This paper explores the potential for a unified analysis of Weak Definites and regular definites. I first consider and argue against assimilating Weak Definites to co-varying interpretations of regular definites via general mechanisms. Next, I present a new proposal for analyzing Weak Definites, which sees them as regular definites occurring in verb phrases that denote kinds of events. This has the promise of allowing us to maintain a unified analysis of definites in terms of uniqueness while at the same time capturing the special properties of Weak Definites.
References (41)
References
Aguilar-Guevara, A. & Zwarts, J. 2011. Weak definites and reference to kinds. In Proceedings of SALT 20, N. Li & D. Lutz (eds),179–196. Vancouver BC.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Asic, T. & Corblin, F. 2012. Telic definites and their preposition (s): French vs. Serbian. Talk presented at the Workshop on ‘Languages with and without articles’, Paris, France.
Axelrod, M. 1990. Incorporation in Koyukon Athapaskan. International Journal of American Linguistics 56(2): 179–195. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Barker, C. 2005. Possessive weak definites. In Possessives and Beyond: Semantics and Syntax, J. Kim, Y. Lander & B.H. Partee (eds), 89–113. Amherst MA: GLSA.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Borthen, K. 2003. Norwegian Bare Singulars. PhD dissertation, NTNU, Trondheim.
Bosch, P. 2010. Weak definites and German preposition-determiner contraction. Talk presented at the Workshop on ‘Specificity from theoretical and empirical points of view’, University of Stuttgart.
Bosch, P. & Cieschinger, M. 2010. Weak definites. Linguistic evidence for cognitive constraints. Talk presented at the Cognitive Science Research Training School, Universität Osnabrück.
Carlson, G. 2006. The meaningful bounds of incorporation. In Nondefiniteness and Plurality [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 95], S. Vogeleer & L. Tasmowski (eds), 35–50. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1977. Reference to Kinds in English. PhD dissertation, University of Massachusetts Amherst.
Carlson, G., Sussman, R., Klein, N. & Tanenhaus, M. 2006. Weak definite noun phrases. In Proceedings of NELS 36, C. Davis, A.-R. Deal & Youri Zabbal (eds), 179–196. Amherst, MA: GLSA.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chierchia, G. 1984. Topics in the Syntax and Semantics of Infinitives and Gerunds. PhD dissertation, University of Massachusetts Amherst.
. 1995. Dynamics of Meaning. Anaphora, Presupposition and the Theory of Grammar. Chicago IL: University of Chicago Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1998. Reference to kinds across languages. Natural Language Semantics 6(4): 339–405. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Clark, H.H. 1975. Bridging. In Theoretical Issues in Natural Language Processing, R.C. Schank & B.L. Nash-Webber (eds), 169–174.New York NY: Association for Computing Machinery.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dayal, V. 2004. Number marking and (in)definiteness in kind terms. Linguistics and Philosophy 27(4): 393–450. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2011. Hindi pseudo-incorporation. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 29(1):123–167. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Elbourne, P. 2005. Situations and Individuals. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
von Fintel, K. 1994. Restrictions on Quantifier Domains. PhD dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
Hawkins, J.A. 1978. Definiteness and Indefiniteness. London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Heim, I. 1991. Artikel und Definitheit. In Semantik: Ein internationales Handbuch der zeitgenössischen Forschung, A. von Stechow & D. Wunderlich (eds), 487–535. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kadmon, N. 1987. On Unique and Non-unique Reference and Asymmetric Quantification. PhD thesis, University of Massachusetts Amherst.
Kratzer, A. 1989. An investigation of the lumps of thought. Linguistics and Philosophy 12(5): 607–653. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1996. Severing the external argument from its verb. In Phrase Structure and the Lexicon, J. Rooryck & L. Zaring (eds), 109–137. Dordrecht: Kluwer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2007a. On the plurality of verbs. In Event Structures in Linguistic Form and Interpretation, J. Dölling, T. Heyde-Zybatow & M. Schäfer (eds), 269–300. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2007b. Situations in natural language semantics. In Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, E.N. Zalta (ed.), Stanford CA: CSLI.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Krifka, M., Pelletier, F.J., Carlson, G.N., ter Meulen, A., Chierchia, G. & Link, G. 1995. Introduction to genericity. In The Generic Book, G.N. Carlson & F.J. Pelletier (eds), 1–124. Chicago IL: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Landman, F. 1996. Plurality. In The Handbook of Contemporary Semantic Theory, S. Lappin (ed.), 425–457. Cambridge: Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2000. Events and Plurality. The Jerusalem Lectures. Dordrecht: Kluwer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mithun, M. 1984. The evolution of noun incorporation. Language 60(4): 847–894. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Partee, B.H. 1986. Noun phrase interpretation and type-shifting principles. In Studies in Discourse Representation Theory and the Theory of Generalized Quantifiers, J. Groenendijk, D.H.J. Jongh & M. Stokhof, 115–144. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Poesio, M. 1994. Weak definites. In Proceedings of SALT IV, M. Harvey & L. Santelmann (eds), Vol. 4, 282–299. Ithaca CA: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Postal, P.M. 1969. On so-called ‘pronouns’ in English. In Modern Studies in English, D. Reibel & S. Schane (eds), 201–224. Englewood Cliffs NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Prince, E.F. 1981. Toward a taxonomy of given/new information. In Radical Pragmatics, P. Cole (ed), 223–255. New York NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pustejovsky, J. 1995. The Generative Lexicon. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
de Reuse,. J. 1994. Noun incorporation in Lakota (Siouan). International Journal of American Linguistics 60(3):199–260. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Roberts, C. 2003. Uniqueness in definite noun phrases. Linguistics and Philosophy 6(3): 287–350. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rothstein, S. 1995. Adverbial quantification over events. Natural Language Semantics 3(1):1–32. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Scholten, J. & Aguilar-Guevara, A. 2010. Assessing the discourse referential properties of weak definite NP’s. In Linguistics in the Netherlands, Vol. 27, J. van Kampen & R. Nouwen (eds),115–128. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schwarz, F. 2009. Two Types of Definites in Natural Language. PhD dissertation, University of Massachusetts Amherst.
. 2012a. Different types of definites crosslinguistically. Ms, University of Pennsylvania.
. 2012b. Situation pronouns in determiner phrases. Natural Language Semantics 20(4): 431–475. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (25)

Cited by 25 other publications

Dvořák, Jan
2025. La télicité de la prédication française : le poids de la sémantique linguistique et de la pragmatique. Une étude comparative avec le tchèque. Travaux de linguistique n° 90:1 ► pp. 115 ff. DOI logo
Morosi, Paolo & M. Teresa Espinal
2025. Indefinite definites in Italian. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 43:3 ► pp. 2101 ff. DOI logo
Yang, Liu
2025. A feature-based approach to nominal predicates. Linguistic Variation DOI logo
Aguilar‐Guevara, Ana & Carolina Oggiani
2023. Weak definite nominals. Language and Linguistics Compass 17:6 DOI logo
Driemel, Imke
2023. Pseudo-Noun Incorporation and Differential Object Marking, DOI logo
Krifka, Manfred & Fereshteh Modarresi
2023. Anaphoric potential of bare nominals, incorporated objects and weak definites in German. In Reference [Studies in Language Companion Series, 228], ► pp. 27 ff. DOI logo
Modarresi, Fereshteh & Manfred Krifka
2023. Anaphoric potential of pseudo-incorporated bare objects in Persian. In Advances in Iranian Linguistics II [Current Issues in Linguistic Theory, 361], ► pp. 12 ff. DOI logo
Tollet, Andrew
2023. The case for weak null in English. Kalbotyra 76 ► pp. 131 ff. DOI logo
Luo, Qiongpeng
2022. Bare nouns, incorporation, and event kinds in Mandarin Chinese. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 31:2 ► pp. 221 ff. DOI logo
McKenzie, Andrew
2022. Mediating functions and the semantics of noun incorporation. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 40:2 ► pp. 505 ff. DOI logo
Pinzin, Francesco & Cecilia Poletto
2022. Indefinite Objects in Micro‐variation. A Cross‐linguistic Analysis of the Distribution of Partitives Articles, Bare Nominals and Definite Determiners in Northern Italy*. Studia Linguistica 76:1 ► pp. 13 ff. DOI logo
Sağ, Yağmur
2022. Bare singulars and singularity in Turkish. Linguistics and Philosophy 45:4 ► pp. 741 ff. DOI logo
Tsiakmakis, Evripidis, Joan Borràs-Comes & M.Teresa Espinal
2021. The interpretation of plural mass nouns in Greek. Journal of Pragmatics 181 ► pp. 209 ff. DOI logo
Wittenberg, Eva & Andreas Trotzke
2021. Semantic incorporation and discourse prominence: Experimental evidence from English pronoun resolution. Journal of Pragmatics 186 ► pp. 87 ff. DOI logo
Dayal, Veneeta & Yağmur Sağ
2020. Determiners and Bare Nouns. Annual Review of Linguistics 6:1 ► pp. 173 ff. DOI logo
Demske, Ulrike
2020. The grammaticalization of the definite article in German. In Walking on the grammaticalization path of the definite article [Studies in Language Variation, 23], ► pp. 43 ff. DOI logo
Koring, Loes
2020.  Producing figurative meanings. In Producing Figurative Expression [Figurative Thought and Language, 10], ► pp. 237 ff. DOI logo
Gehrke, Berit & Louise McNally
2019. Idioms and the syntax/semantics interface of descriptive content vs. reference. Linguistics 57:4 ► pp. 769 ff. DOI logo
Zhang, Niina Ning
2018. Non-canonical objects as event kind-classifying elements. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 36:4 ► pp. 1395 ff. DOI logo
Bumford, Dylan
2017. Split-scope definites: Relative superlatives and Haddock descriptions. Linguistics and Philosophy 40:6 ► pp. 549 ff. DOI logo
Gehrke, Berit
2015. Adjectival participles, event kind modification and pseudo-incorporation. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 33:3 ► pp. 897 ff. DOI logo
Aguilar-Guevara, Ana & Maartje Schulpen
2014. Modified weak definites. In Weak Referentiality [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today, 219], ► pp. 237 ff. DOI logo
Gehrke, Berit & Cristina Marco
2014. Different by-phrases with adjectival and verbal passives: Evidence from Spanish corpus data. Lingua 149 ► pp. 188 ff. DOI logo
Schumacher, Petra B. & Hanna Weiland-Breckle
2014. Referential properties of definites and salience spreading. In Weak Referentiality [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today, 219], ► pp. 365 ff. DOI logo
Klein, Natalie M., Whitney M. Gegg-Harrison, Greg N. Carlson & Michael K. Tanenhaus
2013. Experimental investigations of weak definite and weak indefinite noun phrases. Cognition 128:2 ► pp. 187 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