Indefiniteness

Abstract

The philosophical work on definite and indefinite descriptions of the form “the N” and “a N” focuses on the logic of natural language. Definites and indefinites are sometimes treated as devices of reference and at other times associated with quantificational expressions. Along with quantificational noun phrases such as “every N” they receive a unified analysis as generalized quantifiers. Insights into the semantic properties of generalized quantifiers have led to productive lines of research on indefinites in existential contexts and indefinites under negation, including negative polarity items and negative concord items. Clearly, indefinites have referential features as well. Unlike true quantificational expressions, they serve as anchors for anaphoric pronouns in subsequent discourse, which motivates Discourse Representation theory as a dynamic extension of first-order logic. Their variable quantificational force is accounted for by the treatment of indefinites as variables, which depend on other quantifiers in the sentence. The observation that indefinites can scope out of scope islands such as embedded clauses gave rise to analyses in terms of choice functions. Finally, indefinites are frequently found in predicative contexts, which have led to analyses in terms of property denotations. Many analyses focus on one particular aspect of indefinites, or posit ambiguities between different types of denotations. However, the quantificational, referential, and predicative roles of indefinites can be reconciled in a type-shifting framework, which allows indefinites to live in different types. Besides singular indefinite articles, languages may also have plural indefinite articles. Interestingly, many languages do not grammaticalize indefinite articles and instead use bare plurals or bare singulars. In English, bare plurals are ontologically different from full indefinites in that they may refer to kinds, besides regular individuals. They also display a different scopal behavior, in that they take obligatory narrow scope with respect to other scope-bearing operators. In languages where we find them, bare singulars share these features. Typological variation raises a special interest in grammaticalization patterns over time. Indefinites have also drawn attention in the psycholinguistic literature in which their cognitive status and the relation of indefinites with bare nominals and definites in acquisition and processing has been investigated. All in all, the study of indefiniteness is relevant for philosophy of language, semantic theory, the syntax-semantics interface, language typology, historical linguistics, and psycholinguistics. Additional relevant references to indefinite descriptions and indefiniteness appear in the Oxford Bibliographies articles Definiteness, Anaphora, Negation, and Polarity.