Abstract
AbstractDistinct senses of universal quantification are expressed not only byvocabularyinventory variation, but also throughfeaturesandcategorieswhich build the various quantifier types. It can be shown that the most productive Arabic universalkull(and arguably its kins in Semitic and other languages) conveysthreeuniversal quantifier senses, roughly equivalent to Englishall,every, andeach(and not only justtwo, as commonly assumed). Similar trilogies are observed in Greek, French, or Hebrew (with two Q words, or just one). Thanks to their feature and category specifications, universal subtypes are more appropriately characterized in terms of Merge and Move syntactic operations, as in Chomsky (1995), Beghelli and Stowell (1997), and they conform to internal composition of variational quantifier meaning (as in e.g. Szabolcsi 2010, Mathewson 2013), and appealing results about distributivity (Tunstall 1998 & Champollion 2017, among others).
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 callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
