distributive numerals, dependent indefinites and event...

Distributive numerals, dependent indefinites andevent plurality

Patricia Cabredo Hofherr1 Lucia Tovena2

1UMR 7023CNRS & Université Paris 8

2Université Sorbonne Paris Cité - Paris 7

ESSLLI 2015 Barcelona

Outline

1 Marking the distributive share

2 D-indefinites vs. d-numerals: Hungarian (Farkas 1997)

3 Cross-linguistic variationTelugu (Balusu 2006)Pereltsvaig 2012Tlingit (Cable 2014)D-numerals cross-linguistically: temporal/locative keyD-numerals cross-linguistically: subjectsD-numerals cross-linguistically: adverbials

Cabredo Hofherr/Tovena (CNRS/Paris 7) Event pluralities: d-numerals & d-indefinites ESSLLI 2015 2 / 64

Marking the distributive share


We have seen the general schema of distribution (day 2):

(1) Every childDist.key

ate a peachDist.share

The distributive key is marked by a quantifier everyThe distributed share can also be marked: binominal each

(2) The childrenDist.key

ate a peach each

Dist.share

IKey: the children

IKey unit: 1 child

IShare sum: as many peaches as will be handed to the children

IShare unit: 1 peach




In distributive configurations each unit of the key is attributed aunit of the share:

(3) The childrenDist.key

ate a peach each

Dist.share1 child �!1 peach

Distributive configurations look like the pairs resulting from auniversal quantifier taking scope over an existential quantifier.8 x child(x) 9 y peach (y): eats(x,y)However, these pairs need not be the result of quantificationThese pairs do not need to be asserted.




Day 4: pluractional adverbials:I pairing is the result of the existence of the cover with certain

properties, imposed by [[Pl]]I the pluractional adverbial imposes a felicity condition that a cover

yielding pair-wise association has to be possible (plus otherrestrictions, e.g. temporal sequence)

(4) a. John ate the peach (*one by one).b. The children ate a peach (one by one).

Cover: child 1 eats peach 1, child 2 eats peach 2,...




Choe (1987) calls markers of the distributive shareanti-quantifiers.Quantifiers provide multiplication of the events.

Markers of the distributive share / anti-quantifiers

I require multiple events for licensingI do not provide the event plurality themselves

(5) a. *The child ate a lolly each.b. Every child ate a lolly each.



Marking the distributive share: dependent indefinites

D-indefinitesI need to be part of a distributive shareI need to be distributed over a plurality (depend on a plurality)

Following Farkas (2015) call dependent indefinites d-indefinites

D-indefinites include distributive numerals (Gil, 1982, 1988)



Marking the distributive share: dependent indefinites

Distinguish two types of d-indefinites (Farkas, 2015)d-existentials: d-indefinites whose D is a specially markedindefinite article

d-numerals: d-indefinites whose D is a specially marked cardinal

numeral



D-indefinites and narrow scope

D-definites cannot be reduced to narrow scope indefinites.There are contexts that license d-existentials but in whichunmarked indefinites can only have ‘wide’ scope, i.e., fixedreference readings. (Henderson 2014 for Kaqchikel)This also holds for Hungarian Farkas (2015)



D-indefinites and narrow scope

Caveat: Scope here is understood semantically

An NP1 is in the semantic scope of NP2 ifthe reference of NP1 co-varies with the reference of NP2Being in the syntactic scope of a quantifier is one way to co-vary,but not the only one.Fixed reference of an NP can be the result of (at least)

I wide syntactic scope of the NP with respect to another quantifierI lack of distributive dependencies with another plurality



D-indefinites and narrow scope: Kaqchikel

With pluractional suffix -Vla’ on the verb in Kaqchikel Henderson(2012)

I reduplicated numerals are licensedI narrow scope of simple numerals impossible

Caveat: Narrow scope is understood as co-varying reading wrt toanother expressionSee discussion of scope wrt to habitual iteration (Day 1& 3):

I narrow syntactic scopeI no co-variation of the sg indefinite with different events

(no multiplication of the sg indef)



D-indefinites and narrow scope: Kaqchikel

With pluractional suffix -Vla’ on the verb in KaqchikelI reduplicated numerals are licensedI multiplication of simple numeral indefinites impossible

(6) X-e’-in-chap-ala’

COM-A3p-E1s-handle-Vla’ox-ox

three-REDwäy.tortilla

‘I touched tortillas in threes.’ FALSE if there are three tortillas in total(or only one touching event)�!co-varying three tortillas

(7) X-e’-in-chap-ala’COM-A3p-E1s-handle-Vla’

oxi’

threewäy.tortilla

‘I touched three tortillas individually (many times).’FALSE if there are more than three tortillas involved�!no multiplication of three tortillasHenderson (2012, exs 403/404)



D-indefinites

Question 1: what are the licensing environments for d-indefinitesQuestion 2: what are the parameters of variation


D-indefinites vs. d-numerals: Hungarian (Farkas 1997)


Common contexts for d-existential egy-egy and d-numeralsFarkas (2015): both can be licensed by

I Quantified argumentI Distributive predication (plural subject and distributive predicate)I Quantificational adjuncts




(8) Quantified argument

Minden‘Every

gyerekchild

hozottbrought

egy-egy/a-a

két-két/two-two

könyvet.book.’ (Farkas, 2015, ex1-2)

(9) Distributive predication

A‘The

gyerekekchildren

hoztakbrought

egy-egy/két-kéta-a/two-two

könyvet.book.’

The children brought a book each. (Farkas, 2015, ex6)(10) Quantificational adjuncts

Minden‘Every

utcasarokracorner


rendörtpoliceman

állitottak.placed.III.Pl’

Only interpretation: policemen co-vary with corners (Farkas, 2015,ex14)




Common contexts for d-existential egy-egy and d-numeralsFarkas (2015): both cannot be licensed by

I out of the blueI modalsI generic contexts



D-indefinites: Hungarian (Farkas 1997)

(11) no licensor

*Egy-egy/két-két‘A-a/two-two

gyerekchild

(épp)right.now

szalad.runs.’

(Hungarian)

(12) Modals

*Mari‘Mari

kellmust

találkozzonmeet.with


párizsi tanárral.professor from Paris.’

(13) Gen operator

*Egya

sirályseagull

szeretlikes


halat.fish

Attempted reading: A seagull likes a/two fish(d-nominal under the scope of Gen binding the Su)(Farkas, 2015, exs 3,8,9)



D-existentials vs. d-numerals in Hungarian

HomophonyI indefinite article egyI numeral egy "one"

egy-egy : d-indefinite or d-numeral?Farkas: the d-indefinite egy-egy differs from other d-numerals



D-existentials vs. d-numerals in Hungarian

Licensor sensitivityI d-existentials in Hungarian can co-vary with a

situation/event/temporal variable;I d-numerals cannot (Farkas, 1997)

Situation/event/temporal variables:I implicit multiple event licensingI licensing by pluractionalsI licensing by overt adverbs of quantification



D-existentials vs. d-numerals: implicit multiple events

Implicit multiple event licensing: contexts that make clear thatseveral events are involved

I egy-egy possibleI d-numeral impossible

(14) Context: We are discussing how things are in the departmentgenerally:A diákok általában jól haladnak.‘The students usually well advance.’

Egy-egy/*két-két‘A-a/*two-two

diákstudent

megbukikfails

debut

ezthis

ritkánrarely

fordulcomes

elö.up.’

Only interpretation: The students usually do well. From time to time,a student fails but this happens rarely – students co-vary with timesFarkas (2015, ex16)



D-existentials vs. d-numerals: pluractional morphology

Licensing by pluractional morphology on the verbI egy-egy possibleI d-numeral impossible

(15) Context:Nurses are talking about how the night went in a children’sward:

Egy-egy/*két-két‘A-A/*two-two

gyerekchild

fel-felébredt

up-up wokedebut

másother

bajtrouble

nemwas

volt.not.’

Only interpretation: From time to time a child woke up but otherthan that there was no trouble – child co-varies with times(Farkas, 2015, ex19)



D-indefinites/d-numerals: adverbs of quantification 1

Licensing by overt adverb of quantification

I egy-egy possibleI distributive numeral impossible

(16) Frequency adverbial

A‘The

politikuspolitician

néha/sometimes/

mindig

always

megtapsoltapplauded

egy-egy/*két-kéta-a/*two-two

ellenzékiopposition

hozzászólást.comment.’

(17) Adverbial distributive suffixe -enként

Helyenként‘In several places


rendörpolicemen

leállított.stopped me.’

In several places a policeman stopped me – policemen co-vary withplaces. Farkas (2015, exs 12-13)



D-indefinites/d-numerals: adverbs of quantification 2

Licensing by overt adverb of quantificationI egy-egy possibleI distributive numeral impossible

(18) Generic whenever

Ahányszor‘Whenever


híresfamous

személyperson

meglátogattavisited

athe

várost,town

elvittékthey took him

a kastélyba.to the castle.’

(Farkas, 2015, exs 11)



D-indefinites and intensiontal / extensional worldvariables in Hungarian

Modals/ generic operator range over intensional world variables.D-indefinites possible with extensional world variables.

(19) Factual conditionals (extensional world variable)Ha egy-egy tanár megbetegedik helyettesiti egy szülöIf a-a teacher gets-sick replaces-him a parent.If a teacher gets sick a parent replaces him. (ex 44 Farkas1997)

D-numerals not possible with world variables.



D-indefinites and scope in Hungarian

D-indefinites cannot be reduced to obligatory narrow scope.With pluractional morphology on the verb and implicit multiple

events in Hungarian (Farkas 2015)I egy-egy possibleI narrow scope of egy impossible

Caveat: Narrow scope is understood as co-varying reading wrt toanother expression



D-indefinites and scope in Hungarian

No multiplication of sg indefinitesI with implicit events (26)I with pluractional morphology (21)

(20) Egy

‘Adiák

studentpananszkodikcomplains

debut

ezthis

ritkánhappens

fordulrarely.’

elö.

Only interpretation: From time to time, a student (the same)complains but this happens rarely. 6= (14)

(21) Egy

‘Agyerek

childfel-felébredtup-up

dewoke

másbut

bajother

nemtrouble

volt.was not.’

Only interpretation: From time to time a child (the same every

time) woke up but other than that there was no trouble. 6= (15)(Farkas, 2015, ex23-24)



D-indefinites in Hungarian: Analysis

D-indefinites are subject to a co-variation condition: the variablethey introduce must receive multiple values (variation) and mustbe referentially dependent on another varying variable(co-variation) Farkas (2015, 13)Dependent Variable Condition (See Farkas (1997), ex. (39))D-indefinites must introduce dependent variables.A variable y is dependent on a variable x iff values for y co-varywith values assigned to x. (See Farkas (1997), ex. (27))




The dependent variable y is co-varies with a variable x, itsdomain variable Farkas (2015, 13)The domain variable is evaluated by a set of functions G x thatrange exhaustively over x’s non-singleton domain (Domain x).

I for the functions in G x the value at x is in the domain of x8 g 2 G x, g(x) 2 Domain x

I each element in the domain of x is assigned a value by some g 2G x

8 z 2 Domain x 9 g: g(z) = xI the functions in G x differ with respect to their value for x8 g, g’ 2 G x, g(x) 6= g’(x)




The dependent variable y is evaluated by a set of functions H thatdepends on the set G x chosen to evaluate x (Farkas, 2015, 14)

I for each h 2 H, there is a g 2 G x such that h differs from g at mostwith respect to the value assigned to y.

I For each g 2 G x, there is an h 2 H such that h differs from g atmost with respect to the value assigned to y.

I Variation condition:there are at least two functions h, h’ 2 H such thath(y) 6= h’(y)




Variation condition:there are at least two functions h, h’ 2 H such thath(y) 6= h’(y)The functions in H differ wrt to the value they assign to x

I the functions in G x differ wrt to their values on x,I the functions in H are identical to the functions in G x except

possibly on yThe variation condition imposes co-variation of y wrt to x:

I h and h’ differ on their value for x by inheritance from G xI h and h’ differ on their value for y by the Variation condition




The variation condition for the dependent indefinite is a constrainton the output context: post-supposition (following Henderson2014)Post-suppositions are checked after calculation of thetruth-conditions.




Arguments for a domain variableFarkas: having a domain variable allows a restriction on the typeof variable that can act as a licensorNeed this as possible licensors vary across types of d-indefinites

domain variable d-indefinites d-numeralsintensional w-variable no noextensional w-variable yes noindividual variable yes yes


Cross-linguistic variation


Look at other descriptions of d-indefinites.Examine variation with respect to

I licensors for the d-indefinitesI distribution possibilities (participants/ space/ time)




Caveat: The descriptions are often in terms of possible scenariosIt is not clear that scenarios correspond to different readings.

(22) Two men carried suitcases in threes.Verifying scenarios

a. Man 1 carries three suitcases & Man 2 carries three suitcases�!⇡ Two men carrying three suitcases each.

b. Man 1 carries three suitcases at t 1 & t 2

Man 2 carries three suitcases at t 2& t 3 ...�!⇡ Two men carrying three suitcases at a time.

c. Man 1 carries three suitcases at t 1

Man 2 carries three suitcases at t 2& t 3 ...�!⇡ Two men carrying three suitcases at a time.


Cross-linguistic variation Telugu (Balusu 2006)

D-numerals in Telugu (Balusu 2006)

In Telugu reduplicated numerals give rise to distributive readings(Balusu, 2006)Have three possible readings (23a-c)

(23) pilla-lukid-Pl

renDu2

renDu2

kootu-lu-nimonkey-Pl-Acc

cuus-ee-rusee-Past-3PPl

a. The kids each saw 2 monkeys. Participant keyb. The kids saw 2 monkeys in each time interval. Temp. keyc. The kids saw 2 monkeys in each location. Spatial key



D-numerals in Telugu (Balusu 2006)

In Telugu a distributive and a collective reading is possible with asimple numeral and a plural DP (24)

(24) iithese

pilla-lukid-Pl

renDu2

kootu-lu-nimonkey-Pl-Acc

cuus-ee-rusee-Past-3PPl

a. These kids saw 2 monkeys. collectiveb. These kids saw 2 monkeys each. distributive

) distributivity does not require special marking.



D-numerals in Telugu

D-numerals require distribution wrt to a plural dimension(participants, space, time)Weak licensing restrictions: Licensing of d-numerals does notrequire an overt licensorWithout an overt licensor distribution in time or space fulfillsdistribution requirement.

(25) renDu2

renDu2

kootu-lumonkey-Pl

egir-i-niyyijump-Past-3PPl

a. 2 monkeys jumped in each time interval. Temp. keyb. 2 monkeys jumped in each location. Spatial key



D-numerals in Telugu:

Balusu distinguishes two meaning componentsI An assertion including a distribution requirementI A plurality requirement (variation across the distributed share)

For the example (25) this corresponds toI There was an event e such that for every relevant part e’ of e, two

monkeys jumped in e’.I the cardinality of monkey pairs jumping in e is greater than one

(26) a. Assertion:9e9⇡(e)[8e’2 ⇡(e)9X[two-monkeys(X) ^ jumped(X,e’)]]

b. Plurality requirement (felicity condition)|{X: two-monkeys(X) ^ jumped(X,e)}|>1



D-numerals in Telugu: temporal and spatial key

⇡(e) is a partition of e: division of e into a set of non-overlappingsubsets or partsPlural events can be partitioned by having different

I participantsI locationsI times

Events cannot be partitioned by other criteria:a scenario with monkeys’ foreheads of different colours, with 2monkeys for each colour does not allow a distributed reading.Balusu (2006, 8)




The plurality requirement in (26) is not a conjunct in the

assertion.If the same two monkeys jumped in every cell of the partition, asentence (25) is not false, but infelicitous.The plurality requirement is either a presupposition or animplicature. (Balusu, 2006, 8)




The superevent e is the key.A partition ⇡ on the event, based on temporal or spatialinformation provides the units of key.⇡ = { e 1 ... e n }For each cell of the partition (subevent e’) have the participant Xdescribed by D-num+NP provides the share.The plurality condition postulates that the share-sum containsmore than a single share.



D-numerals in Telugu: participant key

Balusu: Participant-key readings arise through event-keydistribution with a trivial partition ⇡(e) = e.With a trivial partition key = units of key

�!the D-numeral does not distribute in these cases.In these cases distribution comes from

I the quantifier for quantified subjects

I distributive predication for plural subjects



D-numerals in Telugu: participant key

Balusu: Participant-key reading with a quantified subject

(27) a. 9E[8y[kid(y)!9e2E 9⇡(e) [8e’2⇡(e) [9X[two-monkeys(X) ^saw(y,X,e’)]]]]]

b. |{X: two-monkeys(X) ^9y[kid(y) ^ saw(y,X,E)]}|>1(28) 9E[8y[kid(y)!9e2E [8e’2{e}[9X[two-monkeys(X) ^

saw(y,X,e’)]]]]](29) 9E[8y[kid(y)!9e2E [[9X[two-monkeys(X) ^ saw(y,X,e)]]]]]


Cross-linguistic variation Pereltsvaig 2012

Participant key vs. event key: Pereltsvaig 2012

Pereltsvaig (2012) argues that distributivity over individuals cannotgenerally be reduced to distributivity over events.Argument 1: There are languages that have two distinct markersfor distributivity over individuals and distributivity over events.Argument 2: The marker for event distributivity tends to bemorphologically more complex than the marker for distributivityover individuals. German: jeweils vs. jeArgument 3: There are distributive markers (like binominal each)that only distribute over individuals.These observations are unexpected if event distributivity is takento be the basic case.


Cross-linguistic variation Tlingit (Cable 2014)

Distributive numerals in Tlingit

Can have implicit licensing by temporal iteration and spatialdistribution (6= Albanian, Hungarian d-numerals, Kaqchikel)Like in Telugu, other dimensions of event-identification are out:cannot group girls by colour of their dress in (30b)

(30) a. AxMy

yéetson

nás’gigáathree.DIST

xáatfish

aawashaatcaught

My son caught three fish each time / each place (ex 21bhandout Cable)

b. Dáxgáatwo.dist

shaax’wsáanigirls

keihas

kwdik’énjumped

The girls jumped in twos. (Pairs of girls jumping at thesame time). 27 handout Cable




With plural arguments have a participant-distributive interpretationand an event-distributive interpretation (31)

(31) AxMy

kaamale

yátx’ichildren

nás’gigáathree.DIST

xáatfish

has aawashaatthey.caught

(i) My sons caught three fish each(ii) My sons caught fishes in threes. / My sons caught threefishes each time.




In Tlingit adverbial d-numerals and adnominal d-numerals thathave to be distinguished on syntactic grounds. (Cable, 2014)Participant-distributive interpretation and event-distributiveinterpretation are possible for both adverbial and adnominald-numerals.The Tlingit adverbial and adnominal d-numerals are notambiguous.Participant-distributive interpretation and event-distributiveinterpretation are possible scenarios for a single meaning.



D-numerals in Tlingit

AssumptionsCUMULATIVITY CONDITION on arguments of predicates

(32) For any entities x1, ... , xn, y1, ... , yn,if [[P]](x1)...(xn) = T,and [[P]](y1)...(yn) = T,

then [[P]](x1 + y1)...(xn + yn) = T.

Verbs are (Cumulative) Relations Between Events and Themes(Kratzer 2008)

(33) P<e,✏t>: predicates from individuals (e) and events (✏)to truthvalues.




Specific assumptions

The predicate Participant

(34) Participant(e,x) iff x bears a ‘theta relation’ to eiff x is Agent of e, or x is Theme of e, or x is Goal of e,...

the binary maximality operator

(35) a. Pair addition: hx1, x2i + hy1, y2i =df hx1+x2 , y1+y2ib. �<x ,y>. Q(x)(y) =df the pair h↵,�i such that h↵,�i 2 *{hx,yi :Q(x)(y)}, and if h�, �i 2 *{hx,yi : Q(x)(y)}, then � ↵ and � �.

numerals have distinct type n




Cable’s semantics for adnominal d-numerals:

(36) Tlingit adnominal d-numerals[[ -gáa ADN ]] = �n n : [ �Q <e,t>: [ �P <e,✏t> : [ �e ✏:9x. Q(x) ^ P(x)(e) ^he,xi = � <e’,y>. y<x ^ |y|=n ^ e’<e ^Participant (e’, y)]...]

n n is the numeral -gáa

ADN

attaches toQ <e,t> is the noun combining with the adnominal numeralP <e,✏t> is the eventive verb of the sentencethe d-numeral+N is the theme of P (as P(x)(e) and P is a predicatebetween events and their themes)e is a sum of subevents e’




Require a partition of e with distributive properties

(37) [[ -gáa ADN ]] = �n n : [ �Q <e,t>: [ �P <e,✏t> : [ �e ✏:9x. Q(x) ^ P(x)(e) ^he,xi = � <e’,y>. y<x ^ |y|=n ^ e’<e ^Participant (e’, y)]...]

the pair <e,x> is the sum of pairs <e’,y>the e’ are proper parts of e (no trivial partition: variation)y is a participant in e’ for the pairs <e’,y> partitioning ey is a proper part of x (need more than one y in the partition pairsto sum up to x �!covariation)y is a plurality of cardinality n




This formula applies to -gáa ADN in theme position.In Tlingit the d-numeral can modify a subject.

(38) [[ -gáa ADN ]] = �n n : [ �Q <e,t>: [ �P <e,✏t> : [ �e ✏:9x. Q(x) ^ P(x)(e) ^he,xi = � <e’,y>. y<x ^ |y|=n ^ e’<e ^Participant (e’, y)]...]

the pair <e,x> is the sum of pairs <e’,y>the e’ are proper parts of e (no trivial partition: variation)y is a participant in e’ for the pairs <e’,y> partitioning ey is a proper part of x (need more than one y in the partition pairsto sum up to x �!covariation)y is a plurality of cardinality n




Cable proposes the following semantics for adverbial d-numerals:

(39) Tlingit adverbial d-numerals[[-gáa ADV]] = �nn : [ �P<e,✏t> : [ �xe : [ �e✏:P(x)(e) ^he,xi = �<e0,y>. y<x ^ |y|=n ^ e’<e ^Participant (e’, y)]...]




Cable’s proposal above is the version for themesTlingit also allows d-numerals in subject position

(40) Context: We have three dogs. Six girls came over to bathethem. Each dog was bathed by a team of two (different) girls.

Dáxgaanáxtwo.DIST.HUM

shaax’wsáanigirls

nás’kthree

keitldog

has aawashúch.3plS.3O.bathed

‘Three dogs were each bathed by two girls.’ Judgment: True inthis scenario Cable (2014, ex 33b)



Cable’s analysis of d-numerals in Tlingit

Cable’s proposal works for Telugu and TlingitI the distributive morpheme on the numeral introduces a variation

across events and themesI the d-numeral does not need a licensor (locative or temporal key

readings possible)

This analysis will not carry over to languages where locative ortemporal key readings are not freely available.


Cross-linguistic variation D-numerals cross-linguistically: temporal/locative key

D-numerals cross-linguistically: temporal/locative key

Languages where locative or temporal key readings are not freelyavailable:

(41) ?? BeniBen

zuricaught

nga

DISTtrethree

peshqfish

(Albanian)

Not: Ben caught three fish each time / each place (Rushiti,2015)

(42) *MartinekMartin-ERG

bi-natwo-DISTR

egunkari(-ak)newpaper(-s).ABS

erostenbuying.IMPF

dizkitdoes.3PL-DO.1SG.IO

(Basque)

intended: ‘Martin buys me two newspapers (on eachoccasion).’ (Pereltsvaig, 2012, ex7b)


Cross-linguistic variation D-numerals cross-linguistically: temporal/locative key

D-numerals cross-linguistically: subjects

Cross-linguistic variationI In Tlingit the d-numeral can be in subject position.I In Basque the d-numeral cannot be in subject position.I In Albanian the d-numeral in subject position has much stricter

licensing conditions (quantificational PP)


Cross-linguistic variation D-numerals cross-linguistically: subjects

D-numerals cross-linguistically: subjects

In Basque the d-numeral cannot be in subject position.Albanian: d-numeral in subject position requires Q-PP

(43) *Hirunathree.na

emakumeekwomen.erg

ogibread

erosibuy

zuten.aux

(Basque)

Not: each loaf was bought by three women. Trask (2003, 128,ex 89b)

(44) a. ??NgaDIST

dytwo

vajzagirls

lanëbathed

trethree

qenëdogs

(Albanian)

b. NëIn

çdoevery

zyrëoffice

punoninwork-imp

ngaDIST

trethree

punëtorë.workers

’Three workers were working in every office’ (Rushiti, 2015,ex 24a/ 20a)


Cross-linguistic variation D-numerals cross-linguistically: adverbials

D-numerals cross-linguistically: adverbials

In Basque adverbial expressions do not license -na d-numerals.

(45) *igandero,sunday-each

ManuelekM-erg

binatwo-na

egunkarinewspaper

erosten ditu.buy-hab aux(3plA.3sE)

Every Sunday M. buys two newspapers.(46) *Manuelek

Manuel-ergbeti

alwaysbinatwo-na

pizzapizza

jateneat-hab

dituaux(3plA-3sE)

Manuel always eats two pizzas. (ex Ricardo Etxepare, pc)(47) *Ni

me-absikusterasee-nmz-allative

etortzencome-hab

deneanis-rel-loc

ManuelekManuel-erg

binatwo-na

oparipresent

ekartzenbring-hab

dizkitaux(3plA-1sD-3sE)

When he comes to see me M brings two presents (each time).(Cabredo Hofherr, 2015)



D-indefinites cross-linguistically

Other studiesI Gil (1982, 1988): Georgian reduplicated numeralsI Farkas (1997); Brasoveanu and Farkas (2011): Romanian cîte +

indefI Zimmermann (2002): German je/jeweilsI Choe (1987); Oh (2001, 2005): Korean -ssikI binominal eachI Rushiti (2015): Albanian -nga+numeralI Basque -na: Trask (2003); Pereltsvaig (2012)



Conclusion

A compléterD-indefinites cannot be reduced to narrow scope (Henderson,2012)Cross-linguistic variation in licensing of d-numerals

I Temporal/ locative key freely available (yes/no)I World variables license (yes/no)I Extensional world variables license (yes/no)I Pluractional marking license (yes/no)I Subject position possible (yes/no)



References I

Balusu, R. (2006). Distributive reduplication in Telugu. In Proceedings ofNELS 36, pp. 39–53.

Brasoveanu, A. and D. Farkas (2011). How indefinites choose their scope.Linguistics and Philosophy 34, 1–55.

Cable, S. (2014). Distributive numerals and distance distributivity in Tlingit(and beyond). Language 90(4), 562–606.

Cabredo Hofherr, P. (2015). The basque distributive suffix -na. in progress.Choe, J.-W. (1987). Anti-quantifiers and a theory of distributivity. Ph. D.

thesis, UMass at Amherst.Farkas, D. (1997). Dependent indefinites. In F. Corblin, D. Godard, and J.-M.

Marandin (Eds.), Empirical Issues in Syntax and Semantics 1, pp.243–268. Peter Lang.

Farkas, D. (2015, February). Dependent indefinites revisited. Talk atJournées (Co-)Distributivité 2015, CNRS Pouchet, Paris.

Gil, D. (1982). Distributive Numerals. Ph. D. thesis, UCLA.



References II

Gil, D. (1988). Georgian reduplication and the domain of distributivity.Linguistics 26, 1039–1065.

Henderson, R. (2012). Ways of pluralizing events. Ph. D. thesis, UC SantaCruz.

Henderson, R. (2014). Pluractionality in Mayan. In under review.Oh, S.-R. (2001). Distributivity in an event semantics. In Proceedings of

Semantics and Linguistic Theory XI (SALT 11), pp. 326–346.Oh, S.-R. (2005). Plurality markers across languages. Ph. D. thesis,

University of Connecticut.Pereltsvaig, A. (2012). Distributivity is not uniformly over events. In

P. Cabredo Hofherr and B. Laca (Eds.), Verbal plurality and distributivity,pp. 211–221. Berlin: de Gruyter.

Rushiti, B. (2015, 26 Feb). Distance distributivity in Albanian: the case of-nga. Talk at Journées (Co-)Distributivité 2015, CNRS Pouchet, Paris.



References III

Trask, L. (2003). The noun phrase: nouns, determiners and modifiers;pronouns and names. In J. I. Hualde and J. Ortiz de Urbina (Eds.), AGrammar of Basque, pp. 113–170. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Zimmermann, M. (2002). Buy buying two sausages each. On The SyntaxAnd Semantics Of Distance-Distributivity. Ph. D. thesis, U. Amsterdam.


distributive numerals, dependent indefinites and event...

Documents