Predication: why we (sometimes) need a

1. Predication: why we (sometimes) need a Bert Le Bruyn SiN 2008

2. I am linguist. a

3. Outline

4. Outline DUTCH & ENGLISH ●Facts ● Analysis of de Swart, Winter & Zwarts ● A problem ● A solution ● An extension

5. Facts

6. Standard observations one set of nouns usually doesn’t take the indefinite article = capacity nouns Professions Religions Nationalities lawyer dictator … jew christian … Belgian American … ex. Hitler was dictator. H was dictator another set of nouns usually takes the indefinite article = non-capacity nouns The rest ex. White Fang is een wolf. WF is a wolf

7. Advanced observations MARKED USES capacity nouns can occur with the indefinite article Marie is een dictator. M is a dictator “non-capacity use” “Mary has characteristics that we associate with dictators” non-capacity nouns can occur without the indefinite article Ik ben wolf. I am wolve “capacity use” “I play the part of wolve”

8. CAPACITY NOUNS NON-CAPACITY NOUNS NO INDEFINITE ART Ik ben wolf. I am wolf Hitler was dictator. Hitler was dictator INDEFINITE ART White Fang is een wolf. WF is a wolf Marie is een dictator. Marie is a dictator

9. de Swart et al. (2007)

10. I. In the lexicon there are two kinds of nouns non-capacity nouns -> kind nouns type e, subtype ‘kinds’ capacity nouns

11. I. In the lexicon there are two kinds of nouns kind nouns type e, subtype ‘kinds’ capacity nouns type e, subtype ‘capacities’

12. e Capacities Kinds capacity nouns kind nouns

13. II. When occurring in predicate position nouns have to shift to type <e,t> To do this both have a special type-shift: non-capacity nouns REL (cf. Carlson 1980) set of instantiations of the kind kind capacity nouns CAP set of people performing the profession profession set of followers religion set of citizens nationality Sometimes this shift is made explicit: Hij is advocaat van beroep. He is lawyer of profession

14. e Capacities Kinds capacity nouns kind nouns CAP REL <e,t>

15. III. NumP selects kinds Assumption: The indefinite article in predicate position sits in NumP. -> The combination of the indefinite article and a capacity noun leads to a sortal clash. -> To solve this clash the capacity gets coerced into a kind. -> The operator used to do this is called kind.

16. e [presence of NumP] Capacities Kinds capacity nouns REL <e,t>

17. III. NumP selects kinds Assumption: The indefinite article in predicate position sits in NumP. -> The combination of the indefinite article and a capacity noun leads to a sortal clash. -> To solve this clash the capacity gets coerced into a kind. -> The operator used to do this is called kind. This coercion has a semantic effect: KINDS kinds are different from capacities in that they not only group the individuals that perform a certain profession but also those that have the characteristics associated with the profession

18. e [presence of NumP] Capacities Kinds capacity nouns REL CAP <e,t>

19. e [presence of NumP] Capacities Kinds capacity nouns CAP REL <e,t>

20. Facts central in de Swart et al. (2007) ●Special status of capacity nouns. ● Unmarked reading of capacity nouns. Hitler was dictator. Hitler was dictator (Application of CAP that maps professions to the people that perform it) ● Marked reading of capacity nouns. Marie is een dictator. Mary is a dictator (Coercion into kind + application of REL)

21. The problem

22. Observation De Swart et al. (2007) treat the “kind” reading of capacity nouns but don’t treat the “capacity” reading of kind nouns.

23. Question Can it be incorporated into their account ? NO ! ??? clash clash indefinite article + capacity absence of article + kind ??? kind cap indefinite article + kind absence of article + capacity REL CAP indefinite article + instantiations of the kind absence of article + individuals having a capacity The problem There is nothing for the capacity to clash with... and therefore no reason for coercion of any kind.

24. The solution: Part I

25. The problem There is nothing for the capacity to clash with... and therefore no reason for coercion of any kind. strategy get a meaning for the indefinite article -> exploit presence -> exploit absence

26. A meaning for the indefinite article (1) Marking argumenthood In languages that have articles they are obligatory in argument position (in as far as they render the same semantics as the bare form) *I have dog. *Woman came to see me. Marking uniqueness In languages that distinguish between a definite and an indefinite article the definite article (in the singular) is marked for uniqueness whereas the indefinite article is unmarked. # I saw the priest. I saw a priest.

27. A meaning for the indefinite article (2) Indefinite article vs. bare form both constructions are unmarked for uniqueness wherever both are possible (i.e. in predicate position) the construction with the indefinite article marks non-uniqueness (marked form linked to marked meaning)

28. A meaning for the indefinite article (3) What does non-uniqueness really mean ? men Marc Lucas John Matthew [[John is man.]] -> John belongs to the set of men. TRUE [[John is a man.]] -> John belongs to the set of men and there is at least one other man. TRUE

29. A meaning for the indefinite article (3) What does non-uniqueness really mean ? men John [[John is man.]] -> John belongs to the set of men. TRUE [[John is a man.]] -> John belongs to the set of men and there is at least one other man. FALSE

30. Interludium

31. p a s t Supervisor: What does it mean to be unique ? What does it mean to be non-unique ? Me (to myself): What does she mean ? I already gave an explicit semantics... men To decide whether John is a man... it is completely irrelevant to know there are other men... Marc Lucas John Matthew Marking non-uniqueness is therefore completely irrelevant and should be proscribed. unless...

32. -> Mary saw the tallest cats. Mary saw cats. Mary saw tall cats. Mary saw taller cats. Mary saw tallest cats. * even though the superlative guarantees uniqueness / maximality by itself the definite article has to be used

33. -> Mary saw the tallest cats. Mary saw cats. Mary saw tall cats. Mary saw taller cats. Mary saw tallest cats. * despite the fact that marking definiteness is irrelevant we cannot but mark it What is it that distinguishes DPs containing superlatives from all other DPs ? they guarantee uniqueness / maximality independently of the model

34. Suggestion If uniqueness / maximality is guaranteed model-independently it has to be marked. -> this constraint overwrites the relevance criterion Extension If non-uniqueness is guaranteed model-independently it has to be marked. -> this constraint overwrites the relevance criterion

35. The solution: Part II

38. Background on kinds (1) Kinds are regularities that occur in nature. (Chierchia 1998) One important corollary for me: -> they should – in potential – have more than one member

39. Background on kinds (2) What does it mean to have “– in potential – more than one member” ? + KIND > # 1 A kind can only be a kind if it has at least two instantiations.

40. Background on kinds (2) What does it mean to have “– in potential – more than one member” ? + KIND > # 1 It is model-independently guaranteed that kinds have at least two members.

41. e If we assume REL takes a kind and returns a set containing all members of the kind (including those of other worlds)... ... it is model-independently guaranteed that the obtained set contains at least two members. Capacities Kinds capacity nouns kind nouns CAP REL <e,t> # members > 1

42. Pulling things together (1) Whenever REL applies non-uniqueness has to be marked. This has to be marked (for the singular) with the indefinite article.

43. Pulling things together (2) Whenever REL applies non-uniqueness has to be marked. In as far as CAP doesn’t necessarily give rise to sets with at least 2 members... ...the relevance criterion tells us that non-uniqueness should never be used with capacity nouns. This has to be marked (for the singular) with the indefinite article. The indefinite article ends up being unambiguously connected to REL and its absence to CAP.

44. e Capacities Kinds capacity nouns kind nouns Ø IND. ARTICLE CAP REL <e,t>

45. An extension

46. Nitty-gritty facts about Dutch Paul was journalist toen Parijs werd aangevallen. Paul was journalist when Paris was being attacked “Paul was a journalist when Paris was under attack.” Paul was een journalist toen Parijs werd aangevallen. Paul was a journalist when Paris was being attacked “Paul was a journalist when Paris was under attack” Marie is een meisje in de eerste jaren van haar leven. Marie is a girl in the first years of her life “Marie is a girl during the first years of her life.” Paul was meisje in het spel dat we gisteren speelden. Paul was girl in the game that we yesterday played “Paul played the role of girl in our game yesterday.” capacity noun / bare ?? capacity noun / non-bare ?? non-capacity noun / non-bare non-capacity noun / bare Feeling of “what?! / why?! / how?!” when adding adverbial modification to predication with the ind. art.

47. e Capacities Kinds capacity nouns kind nouns contextual restriction no contextual restriction CAP REL <e,t>

48. Nitty-gritty facts about English Henry is treasurer. Mary is deputy leader of the party. Ann is head of the department. They refer to ‘unique professions’.

49. Two assumptions 1. English has a general ban on bare singulars. I take this to be a syntactic ban. 2. The indefinite article in English is the default way of avoiding bare singulars.

50. An account The indefinite singular can only be used as a way to avoid bare nominals... ... insofar as its use does not clash with its semantics. Given that sets originating in capacities always come with a contextual restriction... we expect a possible clash between the indefinite singular as the default way to avoid bare nominals... and its semantics. In those cases we expect bare nominals to be possible in English. -> predicts the behaviour of “unique professions” in English ! -> strong confirmation of the fact that the indefinite article marks non-uniqueness !