Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Bare Singular NPs in Argument Positions: Restrictions on Indefiniteness

Bare Singular NPs in Argument Positions: Restrictions on Indefiniteness <jats:sec><jats:title>Abstract</jats:title><jats:p>It has been assumed that in articleless languages such as Russian, bare singular NPs in argument positions can receive a definite or an indefinite interpretation. While the definite interpretation depends on the broader discourse and may freely arise if the referent is familiar, the option of an indefinite interpretation for bare NPs introducing new discourse referents is more restricted. This paper investigates conditions on the indefinite interpretation of bare singular NPs in Russian. It shows that this interpretation is restricted by the topic-comment structure: the indefinite interpretation may arise only if the NP belongs to the comment part of the sentence and is excluded for NPs which are aboutness topics. This restriction can be explained by the requirement that indefinite aboutness topics must be specific. Bare indefinite NPs however can only receive a non-specific existential interpretation, and hence do not qualify as topics. The paper contributes to the elucidation of the interaction between the semantic and pragmatic components of an overall theory of NP interpretation and argues that weak existential NPs should be distinguished from cases of noun incorporation.</jats:p> </jats:sec> http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png International Review of Pragmatics Brill

Bare Singular NPs in Argument Positions: Restrictions on Indefiniteness

International Review of Pragmatics , Volume 2 (2): 191 – Jan 1, 2010

Loading next page...
 
/lp/brill/bare-singular-nps-in-argument-positions-restrictions-on-indefiniteness-p0fxAZUjB8

References

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
Brill
Copyright
© 2010 Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands
ISSN
1877-3095
eISSN
1877-3109
DOI
10.1163/187731010X528340
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

<jats:sec><jats:title>Abstract</jats:title><jats:p>It has been assumed that in articleless languages such as Russian, bare singular NPs in argument positions can receive a definite or an indefinite interpretation. While the definite interpretation depends on the broader discourse and may freely arise if the referent is familiar, the option of an indefinite interpretation for bare NPs introducing new discourse referents is more restricted. This paper investigates conditions on the indefinite interpretation of bare singular NPs in Russian. It shows that this interpretation is restricted by the topic-comment structure: the indefinite interpretation may arise only if the NP belongs to the comment part of the sentence and is excluded for NPs which are aboutness topics. This restriction can be explained by the requirement that indefinite aboutness topics must be specific. Bare indefinite NPs however can only receive a non-specific existential interpretation, and hence do not qualify as topics. The paper contributes to the elucidation of the interaction between the semantic and pragmatic components of an overall theory of NP interpretation and argues that weak existential NPs should be distinguished from cases of noun incorporation.</jats:p> </jats:sec>

Journal

International Review of PragmaticsBrill

Published: Jan 1, 2010

Keywords: WEAK INDEFI NITES; INDEFI NITE ARTICLE; BARE NPS; INDEFI NITENESS; TOPIC

There are no references for this article.