Part of
Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory 10: Selected papers from 'Going Romance' 28, Lisbon
Edited by Ernestina Carrilho, Alexandra Fiéis, Maria Lobo and Sandra Pereira
[Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory 10] 2016
► pp. 83102
References
Baayen, R.H.
2011"Analyzing Linguistic Data: A practical introduction to statistics". R package version 1.4. [URL].
Beck, Sigrid
2001“Reciprocals and Definites”. Natural Language Semantics 9: 69–138. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bott, Oliver and Janina Radó
2009 “How to provide exactly one interpretation for every sentence, or what eye movements reveal about quantifier scope”. In The fruits of empirical linguistics, vol. 1: Process, ed. by S. Featherston and S. Winkler, 25–46. Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin/New York. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brooks, Patricia J. and Martin D.S. Braine
1996 “What do children know about the universal quantifiers all and each?Cognition 60 (3): 235–268. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dobrovie-Sorin, Carmen
2014 "Collective quantification and the homogeneity constraint". In Proceedings of SALT 24, 453–472. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2015 "Two Types of Most". In Proceedings of SALT 25, 394–412. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dobrovie-Sorin, Carmen and Ion Giurgea
2015 “Weak Reference and Property Denotation. Two Types of Pseudo-incorporated Bare Nominals”. Syntax and Semantics 40 ( The Syntax and Semantics of Pseudo-Incorporation ), ed. by Olga Borik et Berit Gehrke), 88–125.Google Scholar
Dobrovie-Sorin, Carmen, Tonia Bleam and M. Teresa Espinal
2006 “Bare nouns, number and types of incorporation”. In Non-definiteness and plurality, ed. by Svetlana Vogeleer and Liliane Tasmowski, 51–79. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Van Der Does, Jaap
1993 “Sums and quantifiers”. Linguistics and Philosophy 16 (5): 509–550. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dotlačil, Jakub
2010Anaphora and distributivity. A study of same, different, reciprocals and others. PhD diss. Utrecht University.Google Scholar
2015.”Why is distributivity so hard? New evidence from distributive markers and licensors in Czech”. To appear in Proceedings of FDSL 10.5, [URL]
Espinal, M. Teresa and Louise McNally
2011 “Bare nominals and incorporating verbs in Spanish and Catalan”. Journal of Linguistics 47: 87–128. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Frazier, Lyn, Patch, Jeremy M. and Rayner, Keith
1999 “Taking on semantic commitments, II: colllective versus distributive readings”, Cognition 70(2): 87–104. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
De la Fuente, Israel and Barbara Hemforth
2013 “Effects of Clefting and Left-Dislocation on Subject and Object Pronoun Resolution in Spanish.” In Proceedings of the 16th Hispanic Linguistics Symposium, ed. by Jennifer Cabrelli Amaro, Gillian Lord, Ana de Prada Pérez, and Jessi Elana Aaron, 27–45. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.Google Scholar
Higginbotham, Jim
1994 “Mass and count quantifiers”. Language and Philosophy 17 (5): 447–480. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Landman, Fred
2000Events and plurality: the Jerusalem lectures. Dordrecht: Kluwer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Link, Godehard
1983 “The logical analysis of plurals and mass terms: a lattice-theoretical approach”. In Meaning, use and interpretation of language, ed. by Rainer Bauerle, Christoph Schwarze, and Arnim von Stechow, 302–323. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lønning, Jan Tore
1987 “Mass terms and quantification”. Linguistics and Philosophy 10 (1):1–52. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Magri, Georgi
2012 “Collective nouns without groups”. In IATL 27: Proceedings of the 27th annual meeting of the Israeli Association for Theoretical Linguistics , 183–202.
Pagliarini, Elena, Gaetano Fiorin and Jakub Dotlačil
2012 “The acquisition of distributivity in pluralities”. In Proceedings of the 36th annual Boston University Conference on Language Development , ed. by A.K. Biller and E.Y. Chung and A.E. Kimball, 387–399. Cascadilla Press.
Sharvy, Richard
1980 “A more general theory of definite descriptions.” Philosophical Review 89 (4):607–624. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sternefeld, Wolfgang
1998 “Reciprocity and Cumulative Predication.” Natural Language Semantics 6 (3): 303–337. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 4 other publications

Arsenijević, Boban, Jana Willer‐Gold, Nadira Aljović, Nermina Čordalija, Marijana Kresić Vukosav, Nedžad Leko, Frane Malenica, Franc Lanko Marušič, Tanja Milićev, Nataša Milićević, Petra Mišmaš, Ivana Mitić, Anita Peti‐Stantić, Branimir Stanković, Jelena Tušek & Andrew Nevins
2020. Elided Clausal Conjunction Is Not the Only Source of Closest‐Conjunct Agreement: A Picture‐Matching Study. Syntax 23:1  pp. 78 ff. DOI logo
Corr, Alice
2022. Numeral Reduplication and Clausal Syntax: Grammaticalized Distributivity in Medieval Iberia. Probus 34:2  pp. 317 ff. DOI logo
Konrad, Ingrid, Massimo Burattin, Carlo Cecchetto, Francesca Foppolo, Adrian Staub & Caterina Donati
2021. Avoiding Gaps in Romance: Evidence from Italian and French for a Structural Parsing Principle. Syntax 24:2  pp. 191 ff. DOI logo
Pozniak, Céline, Barbara Hemforth, Yair Haendler, Andrea Santi & Nino Grillo
2019. Seeing events vs. entities: The processing advantage of Pseudo Relatives over Relative Clauses. Journal of Memory and Language 107  pp. 128 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 19 february 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.