|
Acknowledgements |
7 |
|
|
Contents |
8 |
|
|
1 Introduction |
10 |
|
|
1.1 Overview |
11 |
|
|
1.2 Three Illustrations of Empirical Claim |
14 |
|
|
1.2.1 First Illustration: Betting Scenarios |
14 |
|
|
1.2.2 Second Illustration: In Fact, and Downward Entailing Contexts |
16 |
|
|
1.2.3 Third Illustration: Only as a Weakener |
18 |
|
|
1.3 Consequences |
18 |
|
|
1.4 Theoretical Implications |
20 |
|
|
1.5 Book Overview |
24 |
|
|
2 Only and Its Inferences |
32 |
|
|
2.1 Chapter Preview |
32 |
|
|
2.2 The Semantics of Only |
33 |
|
|
2.2.1 The Exclusive Inference of Only |
37 |
|
|
2.2.1.1 Scalar Only |
39 |
|
|
2.2.1.2 Scalarity and Only's Disjunctive Presupposition |
43 |
|
|
2.2.2 Interim Summary |
46 |
|
|
2.2.3 Only and Its Scalar Presupposition |
47 |
|
|
2.2.4 Only and the Ban Against Its Vacuous Use |
53 |
|
|
2.2.5 The Scalar Presupposition as the Ban Against VacuousUse |
57 |
|
|
2.3 Chapter Summary |
60 |
|
|
3 The Positive Morpheme and Its Interaction with Only |
62 |
|
|
3.1 Chapter Preview |
62 |
|
|
3.2 Background: Many and Few as Gradable Adjectives |
63 |
|
|
3.3 pos and the Evaluativity of Many and Few |
66 |
|
|
3.3.1 N as a Modal in the Semantics of pos |
71 |
|
|
3.4 Interim Summary |
74 |
|
|
3.5 The Interaction of pos and Only: Answering the Missing Readings Question |
75 |
|
|
3.6 Theory 1 of the Only-pos Interaction |
77 |
|
|
3.6.1 Prediction: Negation |
80 |
|
|
3.6.2 Prediction: Modals and Their Monotonicity |
82 |
|
|
3.6.3 Section Summary |
87 |
|
|
3.7 Theory 2 of the Only-pos Interaction |
88 |
|
|
3.8 Chapter Summary |
93 |
|
|
3.9 The Antonym-Pair Generalization |
94 |
|
|
4 The Proposal |
98 |
|
|
4.1 Chapter Preview |
98 |
|
|
4.2 The Scoping Account: Decomposing Modified Numerals |
99 |
|
|
4.3 The Closure Account |
107 |
|
|
4.3.1 Van Benthem's Problem |
109 |
|
|
4.3.2 Bypassing van Benthem's Problem by Constraining Alternatives |
111 |
|
|
4.3.3 Bypassing van Benthem's Problem by Blind Exclusion |
119 |
|
|
4.4 Summary |
124 |
|
|
4.4.1 The Existence Inference and the Status of Only'sPrejacent |
126 |
|
|
4.4.2 A Remark on the Distribution of Existentially-ClosedParses |
127 |
|
|
4.5 Comparison with Other Accounts |
128 |
|
|
4.5.1 POS as Comparative: Density? |
128 |
|
|
4.5.2 BonomiCasalegno1993 |
129 |
|
|
4.5.3 Beck2012 |
134 |
|
|
4.6 Extension to Rarely |
138 |
|
|
4.7 Chapter Summary |
141 |
|
|
Appendix: Constraint on Formal Alternatives |
142 |
|
|
5 Only if, Its Interaction with pos, and Its Scalar Presupposition |
145 |
|
|
5.1 Chapter Preview |
145 |
|
|
5.2 Only if as Only and a Conditional Prejacent |
147 |
|
|
5.3 Only if and pos |
154 |
|
|
5.4 Only if and Only's Scalar Presupposition |
156 |
|
|
5.5 Chapter Summary |
158 |
|
|
6 Conclusions and Extensions |
160 |
|
|
6.1 Book Summary |
160 |
|
|
6.2 Comparatives |
163 |
|
|
6.2.1 Antonymy and the -er Morpheme |
164 |
|
|
6.2.2 Subsethood in Measure-Phrase Comparatives |
165 |
|
|
6.2.3 Innocent Exclusion and Density |
169 |
|
|
6.2.4 LessP |
173 |
|
|
6.2.5 Summary |
174 |
|
|
6.3 At Least and At Most? |
175 |
|
|
6.3.1 Alternativehood of Disjuncts and Association with Only |
175 |
|
|
6.4 Another Case: Recently |
182 |
|
|
Appendix |
184 |
|
|
References |
186 |
|
|
Index |
192 |
|