3

To express "some students" in the sense of "more than one", you could say that there exist at least two distinct individuals both of which are students and met by John (and yes, the duplication is necessary): ∃x ∃y (x ≠ y ⋀ student(x) ⋀ student(y) ⋀ met(j,x) ⋀ met(j,y)) "at least one but not all" would be "There is at ...


2

I don't see any floating of a preposition in your examples. McCawley has some interesting remarks about reciprocal "each other". In the reference, click "next" until you get to occurrences 6-9, and especially 8, which mentions an analysis by Dougherty attempting to relate this "each" to the one that floats.


2

The sentence formed by combining an element with others is the scope of that element. (Sometimes the element which is said to have a scope is itself excluded from that scope, but including it comes closer to the original account given in Hans Reichenbach's Elements of Symbolic Logic. It doesn't generally matter which policy one follows,) For instance, in ...


2

Correct; "neither" does essentially assert "0" and "both" asserts "2". What makes them more complicated is that "neither" and "both" bear an additional presupposition, namely that |A| = 2. This presupposition can be expressed as ∂(|A| = 2). If the presupposition is not met, the sentence will have no ...


1

"I am calling a verb in a serial verb construction that is not the "head" one a coverb." I would prefer that you didnt do that, coverbs in Mandarin are words that function similarly to prepositions in English. If by "not the head verb" you are refering to verbs such as 会, 可以, 得, etc. then those should be refered ro as auxiliary ...


1

'The men all have a {noun}' is fine, but 'the men all have {verb}ed' is not. The rule is probably the same one as the one that has us say 'they/we have all {verbed}' rather than 'they/we all have {verbed}'. Also, the other way around for a noun, 'they/we all have a {noun}' rather than e.g. 'they/we have all a hat'.


1

The indefinite article surely is a quantifier -- as you say, it quantifies an NP to indicate existence and, more arguably, uniqueness. The reason you haven't found it explicitly listed as such might be because in traditional formal semantics, "a" is often treated as synonymous to "some".


1

The question concerns the observation that the floating quantifier prefers to immediately follow rather than immediately precede an auxiliary verb. Interestingly, however, the quantifier can readily immediately precede a content verb. Observe the following triplets: (1a) ?The girls all have been trying hard. (1b) The girls have all been trying hard. (1c)...


1

As a little intellectual exercise, I looked around a little and found an online PDF using your notation - "Elements of Formal Semantics" (http://www.phil.uu.nl/~yoad/efs/EFS-ch3-online.pdf). According to page 89, "drank" is of type e(et), not et, as it's transitive. The "and" would be t(tt), not e(ee) according to that page, but that may be an omission. My ...


1

The boys hit each other. Each is not a 'floating quantifier' here (whatever that means), and each does not modify boys. The reciprocal meaning is expressed by each in combination with other, and although each other is written as two orthographic words it is actually a single grammatical word. The two components are inseparable and thus form a compound ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible