Cover not available

In:Weak Referentiality
Edited by Ana Aguilar-Guevara, Bert Le Bruyn and Joost Zwarts
[Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 219] 2014
► pp. 237–264

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

Modified weak definites

Published online: 3 December 2014
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/la.219.10agu
Weak definites display restrictions on the kind of modifiers they accept. This paper aims to determine what kind of adjectives can maintain weak readings and why. Following a kind-referring analysis of weak definites, this paper predicts, tests, and corroborates that only adjectives denoting properties of kinds can occur in weak definite configurations.
References (31)
References
Aguilar-Guevara, A. 2014. Weak Definites: Semantics, Lexicon and Pragmatics. Utrecht: Landelijke Onderzoekschool Taalkunde Dissertation Series.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Aguilar-Guevara, A. & Zwarts, J. 2010. Weak definites and reference to kinds. In Proceedings of Semantics and Linguistic Theory 20, N. Li & D. Lutz (eds), 179–196. Ithaca NY: CLC Publications.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Arsenijević, B., Boleda Torrent, G., Gehrke, B. & McNally, L. 2010. Ethnic adjectives are proper adjectives. In Proceedings of Chicago Linguistic Society 46, T. Grinsell, A. Baker, J. Thomas, R. Baglini & J. Keane (eds),1–15. Chicago IL: CLS.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Baayen, R.H. 2011. languageR: Data sets and functions with “Analyzing Linguistic Data: A practical introduction to statistics”. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bally, C. 1944. Linguistique générale et linguistique française. Bern: A. Francke.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bates, D., Maechler, M. & Bolker, B. 2012. lme4: Linear mixed-effects models using S4 classes. [URL]
Bolinger, D. 1967. Adjectives in English: Attribution and predication. Lingua 18: 1–34. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Borik, O. & Espinal, M. 2012. On definite kinds. Recherches Linguistiques de Vincennes 41: 123–146. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Carlson, G. 1977. Reference to Kinds in English. PhD thesis, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
Carlson, G. & Sussman, R. 2005. Seemingly indefinite definites. In Linguistic Evidence: Empirical, Theoretical, and Computational Perspectives, S. Kepsar & M. Reis (eds), 71–85. Berlin: De Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cinque, G. 2010. The Syntax of Adjectives. A Comparative Study. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press. 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
de Swart, H. & Zwarts, J. 2009. Less form-more meaning: Why bare singular nouns are special. Lingua 119(2): 280–295. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fábregas, A. 2007. The internal syntactic structure of relational adjectives. Probus 19(1): 1–36. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Farkas, D. & de Swart, H. 2007. Stability and variation in article choice: Generic and episodic contexts. Lingua 117(9): 1657–1676. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fradin, B. & Kerleroux, F. 2003. Troubles with lexemes. In Proceedings of the Third Mediterranean Morphology Meeting, G. Booij, J. de Cesaris, S. Scalie & A. Rallis (eds), 177–196, Barcelona: Institut Universitari de Lingüística Aplicada, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Horn, L. 1984. Toward a new taxonomy for pragmatic inference: Q-based and R-based implicature. Meaning, Form, and Use in Context 42: 11–42.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kamp, H. 1975. Two theories about adjectives. In Formal Semantics of Natural Language, E. Keenan (ed.), 123–155. Cambridge: CUP. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kamp, H. & Partee, B. 1995. Prototype theory and compositionality. Cognition 57(2): 129–191. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Krifka, M. 2004. Bare NPs: Kind–referring, indefinites, both, or neither? In Empirical Issues in Syntax and Semantics, Olivier Bonami & Patricia Cabredo Hofherr (eds), 111–132. Paris: CNRS.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Krifka, M., Pelletier, F.J., Carlson, G., ter Meulen, A., Chierchia, G. & Link, G. 1995. Genericity: An introduction. In The Generic Book, G. Carlson & F.J. Pelletier (eds), 1–124. Chicago IL: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Larson, R. 1998. Events and modification in nominals. In Proceedings of Semantics and Linguistic Theory 8: 145–168.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Levi, J. 1978. The Syntax and Semantics of Complex Nominals. New York NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
McNally, L. & Boleda, G. 2004. Relational adjectives as properties of kinds. Empirical Issues in Formal Syntax and Semantics 5: 179–196.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Partee, B. 1986. Noun phrase interpretation and type-shifting principles. In Studies in Discourse Representation Theory and the Theory of Generalized Quantifiers [Groningen–Amsterdam Studies in Semantics 8], J. Groenendijk, D. de Jongh & M. Stokhof (eds.), 115–143. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2003. Are there privative adjectives? Ms, University of Massachusetts, Amherst. Conference on the philosophy of Terry Parsons.
. 2010. Privative adjectives: Subsective plus coercion. In Presuppositions and Discourse: Essays Offered to Hans Kamp, R. Bäuerle, U. Reyle & T.E. Zimmermann (eds.), 273–285. Bingley: Emerald. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
R Development Core Team 2008. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schulpen, M. 2011. Weak Definites: Modification, Non-unique Reference and Enriched Meanings. MA thesis, Utrecht University.
Schwarz, F. 2014. Functional frames in the interpretation of weak nominals. In Weak Referentiality, A. Aguilar-Guevara, B. Le Bruyn & J. Zwarts (eds), 213–235. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zwarts, J. 2014. Functional frames in the interpretation of weak nominals. In Weak Referentiality, A. Aguilar-Guevara, B. Le Bruyn & J. Zwarts (eds), 265–286. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (5)

Cited by five other publications

Aguilar‐Guevara, Ana & Carolina Oggiani
2023. Weak definite nominals. Language and Linguistics Compass 17:6 DOI logo
Tollet, Andrew
2023. The case for weak null in English. Kalbotyra 76 ► pp. 131 ff. DOI logo
Lee, Meng-Chen
2020. Strong and weak nominal reference in thetic and categorical sentences. In Thetics and Categoricals [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today, 262], ► pp. 155 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