Abstract
In this article we make remarks on overt and covert movement inlogical grammar. With respect to the latter (e.g. quantification) weobserve how a treatment in terms of displacement calculus interactswith normal modalities for intensionality to allow a coding in logicalgrammar of the distinction between weak and strong quantifiers(i.e. those that may or may not not scope nonlocally such as'a' and 'every' respectively). With respect to overt movement (e.g.relativisation) we observe how displacement calculus supportsa coding of a filler-gap dependency similar to that employed in lambdagrammars, but we argue that this general approach does not extend toparasitic gaps, for which we propose exponentials.
Highlights
In this article, we make some brief remarks on overt and covert movement in logical grammar
We offer two reasons to question any use of a discontinuous linear operator for relativisation
The resulting picture, is one in which displacement calculus is used to characterise the covert movement of quantification, including employment of semantic modalities for the distinction between strong and weak quantifiers, but in which an exponential modality rather than a discontinuous linear operator is used for the overt movement of relativisation, for the reasons given above
Summary
We make some brief remarks on overt and covert movement in logical grammar. In the logical rules of the calculus of Lambek (1958) ∆(Γ ) signifies context configuration ∆ with a distinguished subconfiguration Γ : Γ ⇒ B ∆(C) ⇒ D /L
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
