Pub Date : 2019-01-16DOI: 10.1146/ANNUREV-LINGUISTICS-011718-012419
D. Shankweiler, C. Fowler
All writing systems represent speech, providing a means for recording each word of a message. This is achieved by symbolizing the phonological forms of spoken words as well as information conveying grammar and meaning. Alphabetic systems represent the segmental phonology by providing symbols for individual consonants and vowels; some also convey morphological units. Other systems represent syllables (typically CVs) or morphosyllables. In all cases, learning to read requires a learner to discover the forms of language that writing encodes, drawing on metalinguistic abilities that are not needed for the acquisition of speech. Therefore, learning to read is harder and rarer than acquiring speech. Research reveals that skilled readers of every studied orthography access phonological language forms automatically and early in word reading. Although reading processes differ according to the cognitive demands of specific orthographic forms, the differences are subservient to the universal phonologic principle that all readers access phonological language forms.
{"title":"Relations Between Reading and Speech Manifest Universal Phonological Principle","authors":"D. Shankweiler, C. Fowler","doi":"10.1146/ANNUREV-LINGUISTICS-011718-012419","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1146/ANNUREV-LINGUISTICS-011718-012419","url":null,"abstract":"All writing systems represent speech, providing a means for recording each word of a message. This is achieved by symbolizing the phonological forms of spoken words as well as information conveying grammar and meaning. Alphabetic systems represent the segmental phonology by providing symbols for individual consonants and vowels; some also convey morphological units. Other systems represent syllables (typically CVs) or morphosyllables. In all cases, learning to read requires a learner to discover the forms of language that writing encodes, drawing on metalinguistic abilities that are not needed for the acquisition of speech. Therefore, learning to read is harder and rarer than acquiring speech. Research reveals that skilled readers of every studied orthography access phonological language forms automatically and early in word reading. Although reading processes differ according to the cognitive demands of specific orthographic forms, the differences are subservient to the universal phonologic principle that all readers access phonological language forms.","PeriodicalId":45803,"journal":{"name":"Annual Review of Linguistics","volume":"16 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2,"publicationDate":"2019-01-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"91306117","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-01-16DOI: 10.1146/ANNUREV-LINGUISTICS-011415-040658
E. Stabler
Three different foundational ideas can be identified in recent syntactic theory: structure from substitution classes, structure from dependencies among heads, and structure as the result of optimizing preferences. As formulated in this review, it is easy to see that these three ideas are completely independent. Each has a different mathematical foundation, each suggests a different natural connection to meaning, and each implies something different about how language acquisition could work. Since they are all well supported by the evidence, these three ideas are found in various mixtures in the prominent syntactic traditions. From this perspective, if syntax springs fundamentally from a single basic human ability, it is an ability that exploits a coincidence of a number of very different things.
{"title":"Three Mathematical Foundations for Syntax","authors":"E. Stabler","doi":"10.1146/ANNUREV-LINGUISTICS-011415-040658","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1146/ANNUREV-LINGUISTICS-011415-040658","url":null,"abstract":"Three different foundational ideas can be identified in recent syntactic theory: structure from substitution classes, structure from dependencies among heads, and structure as the result of optimizing preferences. As formulated in this review, it is easy to see that these three ideas are completely independent. Each has a different mathematical foundation, each suggests a different natural connection to meaning, and each implies something different about how language acquisition could work. Since they are all well supported by the evidence, these three ideas are found in various mixtures in the prominent syntactic traditions. From this perspective, if syntax springs fundamentally from a single basic human ability, it is an ability that exploits a coincidence of a number of very different things.","PeriodicalId":45803,"journal":{"name":"Annual Review of Linguistics","volume":"184 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2,"publicationDate":"2019-01-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"77115554","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-01-16DOI: 10.1146/ANNUREV-LINGUISTICS-011718-012613
M. Espinal, Susagna Tubau
This article critically reviews the main research issues raised in the study of response systems in natural languages by addressing the syntax and semantics of fragment answers and yes/no response particles. Fragment answers include replies that do not have a sentential form, whereas response particles consist solely of an affirmative or a negative adverb. While the main research question in the syntax of fragments and response particles has been whether these contain more syntactic structure than what is actually pronounced, the key issues in the study of their semantics are question–answer congruence, the anaphoric potential of response particles, and the meaning of fragments in relation to positive and negative questions. In connection to these issues, this review suggests some interesting avenues for further research: ( a) providing an analysis of particles other than yes/no, ( b) choosing between echoic versus nonechoic forms as answers to polar questions, and ( c) deciding whether some non-lexically-based or nonverbal responses are systematically used in combination with polar particles to express (dis)agreement.
{"title":"Response Systems: The Syntax and Semantics of Fragment Answers and Response Particles","authors":"M. Espinal, Susagna Tubau","doi":"10.1146/ANNUREV-LINGUISTICS-011718-012613","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1146/ANNUREV-LINGUISTICS-011718-012613","url":null,"abstract":"This article critically reviews the main research issues raised in the study of response systems in natural languages by addressing the syntax and semantics of fragment answers and yes/no response particles. Fragment answers include replies that do not have a sentential form, whereas response particles consist solely of an affirmative or a negative adverb. While the main research question in the syntax of fragments and response particles has been whether these contain more syntactic structure than what is actually pronounced, the key issues in the study of their semantics are question–answer congruence, the anaphoric potential of response particles, and the meaning of fragments in relation to positive and negative questions. In connection to these issues, this review suggests some interesting avenues for further research: ( a) providing an analysis of particles other than yes/no, ( b) choosing between echoic versus nonechoic forms as answers to polar questions, and ( c) deciding whether some non-lexically-based or nonverbal responses are systematically used in combination with polar particles to express (dis)agreement.","PeriodicalId":45803,"journal":{"name":"Annual Review of Linguistics","volume":"14 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2,"publicationDate":"2019-01-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"81527965","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-01-16DOI: 10.1146/ANNUREV-LINGUISTICS-011718-011832
G. Jarosz
Recent advances in computational modeling have led to significant discoveries about the representation and acquisition of phonological knowledge and the limits on language learning and variation. These discoveries are the result of applying computational learning models to increasingly rich and complex natural language data while making increasingly realistic assumptions about the learning task. This article reviews the recent developments in computational modeling that have made connections between fully explicit theories of learning, naturally occurring corpus data, and the richness of psycholinguistic and typological data possible. These advances fall into two broad research areas: ( a) the development of models capable of learning the quantitative, noisy, and inconsistent patterns that are characteristic of naturalistic data and ( b) the development of models with the capacity to learn hidden phonological structure from unlabeled data. After reviewing these advances, the article summarizes some of the most significant consequent discoveries.
{"title":"Computational Modeling of Phonological Learning","authors":"G. Jarosz","doi":"10.1146/ANNUREV-LINGUISTICS-011718-011832","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1146/ANNUREV-LINGUISTICS-011718-011832","url":null,"abstract":"Recent advances in computational modeling have led to significant discoveries about the representation and acquisition of phonological knowledge and the limits on language learning and variation. These discoveries are the result of applying computational learning models to increasingly rich and complex natural language data while making increasingly realistic assumptions about the learning task. This article reviews the recent developments in computational modeling that have made connections between fully explicit theories of learning, naturally occurring corpus data, and the richness of psycholinguistic and typological data possible. These advances fall into two broad research areas: ( a) the development of models capable of learning the quantitative, noisy, and inconsistent patterns that are characteristic of naturalistic data and ( b) the development of models with the capacity to learn hidden phonological structure from unlabeled data. After reviewing these advances, the article summarizes some of the most significant consequent discoveries.","PeriodicalId":45803,"journal":{"name":"Annual Review of Linguistics","volume":"154 5 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2,"publicationDate":"2019-01-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"83184846","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-01-16DOI: 10.1146/ANNUREV-LINGUISTICS-011718-011820
M. Antoniou
Bilingualism was once thought to result in cognitive disadvantages, but research in recent decades has demonstrated that experience with two (or more) languages confers a bilingual advantage in executive functions and may delay the incidence of Alzheimer's disease. However, conflicting evidence has emerged leading to questions concerning the robustness of the bilingual advantage for both executive functions and dementia incidence. Some investigators have failed to find evidence of a bilingual advantage; others have suggested that bilingual advantages may be entirely spurious, while proponents of the advantage case have continued to defend it. A heated debate has ensued, and the field has now reached an impasse. This review critically examines evidence for and against the bilingual advantage in executive functions, cognitive aging, and brain plasticity, before outlining how future research could shed light on this debate and advance knowledge of how experience with multiple languages affects cognition and the brain.
{"title":"The Advantages of Bilingualism Debate","authors":"M. Antoniou","doi":"10.1146/ANNUREV-LINGUISTICS-011718-011820","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1146/ANNUREV-LINGUISTICS-011718-011820","url":null,"abstract":"Bilingualism was once thought to result in cognitive disadvantages, but research in recent decades has demonstrated that experience with two (or more) languages confers a bilingual advantage in executive functions and may delay the incidence of Alzheimer's disease. However, conflicting evidence has emerged leading to questions concerning the robustness of the bilingual advantage for both executive functions and dementia incidence. Some investigators have failed to find evidence of a bilingual advantage; others have suggested that bilingual advantages may be entirely spurious, while proponents of the advantage case have continued to defend it. A heated debate has ensued, and the field has now reached an impasse. This review critically examines evidence for and against the bilingual advantage in executive functions, cognitive aging, and brain plasticity, before outlining how future research could shed light on this debate and advance knowledge of how experience with multiple languages affects cognition and the brain.","PeriodicalId":45803,"journal":{"name":"Annual Review of Linguistics","volume":"16 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2,"publicationDate":"2019-01-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"79396119","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-01-16DOI: 10.1146/ANNUREV-LINGUISTICS-011718-012708
A. Nevins, P. Weisser
Closest conjunct agreement is of great theoretical interest in terms of what it reveals about the structure of coordination; the locality of agreement relations; and the interaction between syntax, semantics, and morphology in the expression of agreement. We highlight recent approaches to the phenomenon, including typologically diverse case studies and experimentally elicited results, and point out crystallized generalizations as well as directions for future research, including the absence of last conjunct agreement, the absence of closest conjunct case, differences between conjunction and disjunction, and the role of linear adjacency in morphological realization.
{"title":"Closest Conjunct Agreement","authors":"A. Nevins, P. Weisser","doi":"10.1146/ANNUREV-LINGUISTICS-011718-012708","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1146/ANNUREV-LINGUISTICS-011718-012708","url":null,"abstract":"Closest conjunct agreement is of great theoretical interest in terms of what it reveals about the structure of coordination; the locality of agreement relations; and the interaction between syntax, semantics, and morphology in the expression of agreement. We highlight recent approaches to the phenomenon, including typologically diverse case studies and experimentally elicited results, and point out crystallized generalizations as well as directions for future research, including the absence of last conjunct agreement, the absence of closest conjunct case, differences between conjunction and disjunction, and the role of linear adjacency in morphological realization.","PeriodicalId":45803,"journal":{"name":"Annual Review of Linguistics","volume":"23 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2,"publicationDate":"2019-01-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"78544053","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-01-16DOI: 10.1146/ANNUREV-LINGUISTICS-011718-011731
Victoria Chen, Bradley McDonnell
Over the past four decades, the nature of western Austronesian voice—typically subcategorized as Philippine-type and Indonesian-type—has triggered considerable debate in the typological and syntactic literature. Central questions in these debates have been concerned with how voice alternations in western Austronesian languages interact with grammatical relations, transitivity, and syntactic alignment. In this review, we reassess the syntactic properties of voice alternations in western Austronesian languages, in some cases focusing on more controversial alternations, including the putative antipassive and applicative constructions in Philippine-type languages and the passive constructions in Indonesian-type languages. We discuss reasons that favor a valency-neutral approach to western Austronesian voice and evidence against a valency-changing and/or ergative approach to the analysis of these languages.
{"title":"Western Austronesian Voice","authors":"Victoria Chen, Bradley McDonnell","doi":"10.1146/ANNUREV-LINGUISTICS-011718-011731","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1146/ANNUREV-LINGUISTICS-011718-011731","url":null,"abstract":"Over the past four decades, the nature of western Austronesian voice—typically subcategorized as Philippine-type and Indonesian-type—has triggered considerable debate in the typological and syntactic literature. Central questions in these debates have been concerned with how voice alternations in western Austronesian languages interact with grammatical relations, transitivity, and syntactic alignment. In this review, we reassess the syntactic properties of voice alternations in western Austronesian languages, in some cases focusing on more controversial alternations, including the putative antipassive and applicative constructions in Philippine-type languages and the passive constructions in Indonesian-type languages. We discuss reasons that favor a valency-neutral approach to western Austronesian voice and evidence against a valency-changing and/or ergative approach to the analysis of these languages.","PeriodicalId":45803,"journal":{"name":"Annual Review of Linguistics","volume":"47 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2,"publicationDate":"2019-01-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"90820557","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-01-16DOI: 10.1146/ANNUREV-LINGUISTICS-011718-012545
J. Lowe
The syntactic and semantic properties of nonfinite verb categories can best be understood in relation to and distinction from the corresponding properties of finite verb categories. In order to explore these issues, it is necessary to provide a crosslinguistically valid characterization of finiteness. Finiteness is a prototypical notion, understood in relation to a language-specific finite verb prototype; nonfiniteness is therefore understood in terms of degrees of deviation from this prototype. The syntactic properties of nonfinite verb categories, so defined, can be considered from two perspectives: the functions of nonfinite clauses within superordinate clauses (e.g., argument and adjunct functions) and the internal structure of nonfinite verb phrases. Typical of the second aspect is that nonfinite phrases tend to be defective in one or another respect, relative to finite phrases, which may be understood in terms of lacking functional projections or features which are an obligatory part of finite phrases. This defectiveness relative to the finite prototype plays out also in the semantics; typically, certain aspects of the meaning of nonfinite phrases are not independently specified, but must be derived from semantic properties of a superordinate finite clause.
{"title":"The Syntax and Semantics of Nonfinite Forms","authors":"J. Lowe","doi":"10.1146/ANNUREV-LINGUISTICS-011718-012545","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1146/ANNUREV-LINGUISTICS-011718-012545","url":null,"abstract":"The syntactic and semantic properties of nonfinite verb categories can best be understood in relation to and distinction from the corresponding properties of finite verb categories. In order to explore these issues, it is necessary to provide a crosslinguistically valid characterization of finiteness. Finiteness is a prototypical notion, understood in relation to a language-specific finite verb prototype; nonfiniteness is therefore understood in terms of degrees of deviation from this prototype. The syntactic properties of nonfinite verb categories, so defined, can be considered from two perspectives: the functions of nonfinite clauses within superordinate clauses (e.g., argument and adjunct functions) and the internal structure of nonfinite verb phrases. Typical of the second aspect is that nonfinite phrases tend to be defective in one or another respect, relative to finite phrases, which may be understood in terms of lacking functional projections or features which are an obligatory part of finite phrases. This defectiveness relative to the finite prototype plays out also in the semantics; typically, certain aspects of the meaning of nonfinite phrases are not independently specified, but must be derived from semantic properties of a superordinate finite clause.","PeriodicalId":45803,"journal":{"name":"Annual Review of Linguistics","volume":"12 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2,"publicationDate":"2019-01-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"89750326","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-01-16DOI: 10.1146/ANNUREV-LINGUISTICS-011718-012329
J. Culbertson, Kathryn D. Schuler
Artificial language learning methods—in which learners are taught miniature constructed languages in a controlled laboratory setting—have become a valuable experimental tool for research on language development. These methods offer a complement to natural language acquisition data, allowing researchers to control both the input to learning and the learning environment. A large proportion of artificial language learning studies has aimed to understand the mechanisms of learning in infants. This review focuses instead on investigations into the nature of early linguistic representations and how they are influenced by both the structure of the input and the cognitive features of the learner. Looking not only at young infants but also at children beyond infancy, we discuss evidence for early abstraction, conditions on generalization, the acquisition of grammatical categories and dependencies, and recent work connecting the cognitive biases of learners to language typology. We end by outlining important areas for future research.
{"title":"Artificial Language Learning in Children","authors":"J. Culbertson, Kathryn D. Schuler","doi":"10.1146/ANNUREV-LINGUISTICS-011718-012329","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1146/ANNUREV-LINGUISTICS-011718-012329","url":null,"abstract":"Artificial language learning methods—in which learners are taught miniature constructed languages in a controlled laboratory setting—have become a valuable experimental tool for research on language development. These methods offer a complement to natural language acquisition data, allowing researchers to control both the input to learning and the learning environment. A large proportion of artificial language learning studies has aimed to understand the mechanisms of learning in infants. This review focuses instead on investigations into the nature of early linguistic representations and how they are influenced by both the structure of the input and the cognitive features of the learner. Looking not only at young infants but also at children beyond infancy, we discuss evidence for early abstraction, conditions on generalization, the acquisition of grammatical categories and dependencies, and recent work connecting the cognitive biases of learners to language typology. We end by outlining important areas for future research.","PeriodicalId":45803,"journal":{"name":"Annual Review of Linguistics","volume":"31 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2,"publicationDate":"2019-01-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"89348132","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-01-16DOI: 10.1146/ANNUREV-LINGUISTICS-011718-012528
Lucas Champollion
Distributivity in natural language occurs in sentences such as John and Mary (each) took a deep breath, when a predicate that is combined with a plurality-denoting expression is understood as holding of each of the members of that plurality. Language provides ways to express distributivity overtly, with words such as English each, but also covertly, when no one word can be regarded as contributing it. Both overt and covert distributivity occur in a wide variety of constructions. This article reviews and synthesizes influential approaches to distributivity in formal semantics and includes pointers to some more recent approaches. Theories of distributivity can be distinguished on the basis of how they answer a number of interrelated questions: To what extent can distributivity be attributed to what we know about the world, as opposed to the meanings of words or silent operators? What is the relationship between distributivity and plurality? Does distributivity always reach down to the singular individuals in a plurality? If not, under what circumstances is distributivity over subgroups possible, and what is its relation to distributivity over individuals?
自然语言中的分配性出现在诸如John and Mary (each)深吸一口气这样的句子中，当一个谓词与一个表示复数的表达式结合在一起时，它被理解为持有该复数的每个成员。语言提供了公开表达分配性的方式，比如英语，但也提供了隐蔽的方式，当没有一个词可以被视为贡献分配性时。显性和隐性分布性都出现在各种各样的结构中。本文回顾和综合了形式语义中对分布性有影响的方法，并指出了一些最新的方法。分配性理论可以根据它们如何回答一些相互关联的问题来区分:分配性在多大程度上可以归因于我们对世界的了解，而不是单词或无声运算符的含义?分配性和多元性之间的关系是什么?分配性是否总是在复数中触及单个个体?如果不是，在什么情况下，子群体之间的分配是可能的，它与个体之间的分配是什么关系?
{"title":"Distributivity in Formal Semantics","authors":"Lucas Champollion","doi":"10.1146/ANNUREV-LINGUISTICS-011718-012528","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1146/ANNUREV-LINGUISTICS-011718-012528","url":null,"abstract":"Distributivity in natural language occurs in sentences such as John and Mary (each) took a deep breath, when a predicate that is combined with a plurality-denoting expression is understood as holding of each of the members of that plurality. Language provides ways to express distributivity overtly, with words such as English each, but also covertly, when no one word can be regarded as contributing it. Both overt and covert distributivity occur in a wide variety of constructions. This article reviews and synthesizes influential approaches to distributivity in formal semantics and includes pointers to some more recent approaches. Theories of distributivity can be distinguished on the basis of how they answer a number of interrelated questions: To what extent can distributivity be attributed to what we know about the world, as opposed to the meanings of words or silent operators? What is the relationship between distributivity and plurality? Does distributivity always reach down to the singular individuals in a plurality? If not, under what circumstances is distributivity over subgroups possible, and what is its relation to distributivity over individuals?","PeriodicalId":45803,"journal":{"name":"Annual Review of Linguistics","volume":"68 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2,"publicationDate":"2019-01-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"77629435","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：