Abstract
One of the central questions in linguistics is whether or not the Japanese floating numeral quantifier (FNQ) is always a distributive operator, as Gunji and Hasida (1998), Nakanishi (2004, 2007, 2008), and Kobuchi (2003, 2007) contend. This paper argues against their view and that the interpretive ambiguity is resolved if the semantic ambiguity arises due to the existence of the two different types of FNQs. It is argued that, discourse-semantically, what is crucial to the distinction between the two types of FNQs is whether an FNQ is interpreted via quantificational adverbs or quantificational determiners. This distinction is required when variance in FNQ interpretation is considered. In particular, it is shown that NP-related FNQs have much in common with referential (-like) nouns, functioning as discourse anaphoric items.
Highlights
There are many cases in Japanese where floating numeral quantifiers (FNQs) that appear to be VP-related can receive the NP-related interpretation when the appropriate context is provided
To gain a handle on the semantic variance observed in the FNQ construction, we suggest that the two distinct meanings of FNQs can be compared to restrictive and non-restrictive modifiers
A major portion of the argument in this paper has been devoted to validating the presence and motivation of the presence of NP-related FNQs in order to fully explain FNQ placement and interpretation
Summary
There are many cases in Japanese where floating numeral quantifiers (FNQs) that appear to be VP-related can receive the NP-related interpretation when the appropriate context is provided. The above data tell us that it is possible for the FNQ to have a non-distributive interpretation since the entities denoted by the FNQ are considered as an established group, though a distributive reading is available for (1). In accounting for these interpretive effects, there seems not much to be obtained by viewing FNQs as VP-adverbs. A simple (but plausible) explanation for this is that FNQs (especially NP-related FNQs) have almost the same status—as nominals From this perspective, the FNQ phrase (i.e., the subject noun and its associated FNQ) is coreferential. It comes as no surprise that we may encounter the NP-related FNQ reading
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
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
