Cover not available
Part of
Weak Referentiality
Edited by Ana Aguilar-Guevara, Bert Le Bruyn and Joost Zwarts
[Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 219] 2014
► pp. 17–44

Modal inferences in marked indefinites

the case of German irgend-indefinites

In this paper, we first present the results of a synchronic corpus study of the determiner irgendein and the pronoun irgend jemand in German and identify four main uses: ignorance effect in specific uses (spU), ignorance effect under epistemic modals (epiU), narrow-scope existential meaning in �negative� contexts (NPu), free choice effect under deontic modals (deoFC). Then we sketch a formal account in the framework of a Dynamic Semantics with Conceptual Covers along the lines of Aloni and Port (2011) and Aloni (2012). This enables us (i) to derive the obligatory ignorance effect irgend-indefinites induce in specific uses and under epistemic modals, (ii) to account for the NPu and deoFC uses, and (iii) to explain the different behavior of the indefinite under different modals.

Published online: 3 December 2014
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/la.219.02alo
References
Aguilar-Guevara, A., Aloni, M., Port, A., Šimík, R., de Vos, M. & Zeijlstra, H
2011. Semantics and pragmatics of indefinites: Methodology for a synchronic and diachronic corpus study. In Proceedings of the DGfS Workshop ‘Beyond Semantics: corpus-based investigations of pragmatic and discourse phenomena’ [Bochumer Linguistische Arbeitsberichte 3], Stefanie Dipper & Heinke Zinsmeister (eds). Bochum: Ruhr Universität Bochum.Google Scholar
Aguilar-Guevara, A., Aloni, M., de Jager, T., Port, A., Šimík, R., Solt, S. & de Vos, M
2012 A corpus of indefinite uses annotated with semantic functions: Documentation. Technical report, University of Amsterdam.
Aloni, M
2001 Quantification under Conceptual Covers. PhD dissertation, University of Amsterdam.
2007a Expressing ignorance or indifference. Modal implicatures in BiOT. In Proceedings of the Sixth International Tbilisi Symposium on Language, Logic and Computation, B. ten Cate & H. Zeevat (eds), 1–20. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2007b Free choice, modals and imperatives. Natural Language Semantics 15: 65–94. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2012 On epistemic indefinites: A note on emphatic free choice uses. In Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung 16. Utrecht: Utrecht University.Google Scholar
Aloni, M. & Franke, M
2013 On the free choice potential of epistemic and deontic modals. In From Grammar to Meaning: The Spontaneous Logicality of Language, I. Caponigro & C. Cecchetto (eds). Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Aloni, M. & Port, A
2011 Epistemic indefinites crosslinguistically. In Proceedings of NELS 41, Y. Fainleib, N. LaCara & Y. Park (eds). Amherst MA: GLSA.Google Scholar
Aloni, M. & van Rooij, R
2007 Free choice items and alternatives. In Proceeding of the KNAW Academy Colloquium: Cognitive Foundations of Interpretation, G. Bouma, I. Kraemer & J. Zwarts (eds), 5–26. Amsterdam: Edita KNAW.Google Scholar
Aloni, M., van Cranenburgh, A., Fernandez, R. & Sznajder, M
2012 Building a corpus of indefinite uses annotated with fine-grained semantic functions. In Proceedings of LREC 12, Istanbul, Turkey.
Alonso-Ovalle, L. & Menéndez-Benito, P
2010 Modal indefinites. Natural Language Semantics 18: 1–31. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Beck, S
2010 Quantifiers in than-clauses. Semantics and Pragmatics 3: 1–72. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chierchia, G
2013 Logic in Grammar.Oxford University Press. DOI logo
Dayal, V
1998  Any as inherently modal. Linguistics and Philosophy 21: 433–476. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fălăuş, A
2009 Polarity Items and Dependent Indefinites in Romanian. PhD dissertation, University of Nantes.
Gajewski, J
2008 More on quantifiers in comparative clauses. In Proceedings of Semantics and Linguistic Theory XVIII, T. Friedman & S. Ito (eds), 340–357. Ithaca NY: Cornell University.Google Scholar
Giannakidou, A
2001 The meaning of free choice. Linguistics and Philosophy 24: 659–735. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Giannakidou, A. & Quer, J
2013 Exhaustive and non-exhaustine variation with anti-specific indefinites. Lingua 26: 120–149. DOI logo
Haspelmath, M
1997 Indefinite Pronouns. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Heim, I
2006 Remarks on comparative clauses as generalized quantifiers. Ms.
Horn, L.R
2005 Airport ’68 revisited: Toward a unified indefinite any . In The Partee Effect, G.N. Carlson & F.J. Pelletier (eds), 179–205. Stanford CA: CSLI.Google Scholar
Jayez, J. & Tovena, L
2006 Epistemic determiners. Journal of Semantics 23: 217–250. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kadmon, N. & Landman, F
1993 Any. Linguistics and Philosophy 16: 353 – 422. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kratzer, A. & Shimoyama, J
2002 Indeterminate pronouns: The view from Japanese. In The Proceedings of the Third Tokyo Conference on Psycholinguistics, Y. Otsu (ed.), 1–25, Tokyo: Hituzi Syobo.Google Scholar
Lauer, S
2010 Some news on irgendein and algún . Talk given at the workshop ‘Epistemic Indefinites’, University of Goettingen.
Menéndez-Benito, P
2005 The Grammar of Choice. PhD dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
Seuren, P
1978 The structure and selection of positive and negative gradable adjectives. In Papers from the Parasession on the Lexicon, Chicago Linguistic Society, April 14-15, D. Farkas, W.M. Jacobsen & K.W. Todrys (eds) Chicago IL: CLS.Google Scholar
Veltman, F
1996 Defaults in update semantics. Journal of Philosophical Logic 25: 221–261. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Von Fintel, K
1999 NPI-Licensing, Strawson-Entailment, and Context-Dependency. Journal of Semantics 16: 97–148. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zamparelli, R
2007 On singular existential quantifiers in Italian. In Existence: Semantics and Syntax, ed.I. Comorovski and K. von Heusinger, 293–328. Springer.Google Scholar
Zwarts, F
1998 Three types of polarity. In Plurality and quantification, F. Hamm & E. Hinrichs (eds), 177–238. Kluwer: Dordrecht. DOI logoGoogle Scholar