Academic literature on the topic 'Indefinite adjective'

Abstract In Gothic and, more generally, early Germanic, adjectives can be declined for gender, number, case and determination. The latter category refers to a morphologically realised distinction (opposition) of indefiniteness and definiteness, traditionally presented in terms of the strong (indefinite) and weak (definite) types of inflection: cf. strong ubils‘evil’ vs. weak sa ubila‘the evil (one)’. The definite (weak) form of the adjective is conventionally said to be triggered by the definite determiner (pronoun) that precedes it. By examining the evidence of variation between determined and undetermined weak forms of adjectives in the Gothic Bible, I argue that the weak inflection performs a broader range of functions than conventionally assumed. In particular, I show that the weak form of the adjective is indefinite in the presence of a classifying or identifying feature. However, it accompanies a D-word projected from a noun (which may be null) bearing a definite feature. In other words, the weak inflection is not an autonomous carrier of definiteness and is definite only by association with the determiner. The evidence of variation between Lithuanian short (indefinite) and long (definite) forms of adjectives provides compelling support for this presentation of the Gothic facts.

A number of authors have claimed that indefinite pronoun constructions like everything red are formed by raising a noun (thing) over a higher prenominal adjective (red). We examine phenomena in English and other languages which appear to show that adjectives participating in the indefinite pronoun construction do not correspond to prenominal forms, but to postnominal ones. We evaluate the challenges these results present for the N-raising account, showing that while some can be met, others apparently cannot. This outcome calls for a reexamination of postnominal position with indefinite pronouns.

In this article I discuss article usage in NPs with subjective and objective adjectival premodifiers. The main topic of the article is the tendency of semantically subjective adjectives to be used in indefinite NPs. This correlation is independent of the frequency of the adjective, and the uneven article distribution becomes even more skewed when an overt indicator of subjectivity, such as very or much, is introduced to the NP. I explain this tendency in terms of accessibility: subjective modifiers provide the speaker with a way of expressing a personal evaluation of the referent, and this evaluation is typically new information in discourse. Consequently, subjective premodifiers strongly favour indefinite NPs. By contrast, objective modifiers often encode information that is typical of the referent or else accessible from context or through world knowledge. Because the information expressed by the modifier is accessible, the accessibility of the discourse referent itself determines article choice, and the distribution of articles is more even. I also show that the connection between subjectivity and indefiniteness may provide the linguist with a useful tool in semantic disambiguation and diachronic research. Case studies of two polysemous -ing participles, moving and glowing, show that when used as a nominal premodifier, the subjective sense of the word (e.g. moving, ‘emotionally touching’) strongly favours indefinite NPs over definite NPs. We will also see that when a participle (outstanding) or a noun (key) develops a subjective sense and undergoes category change to adjective, the new sense is particularly often used in indefinite constructions, and the semantic change and gradual adjectivisation of the word is mirrored in the gradual increase in the use of indefinite NPs.

The paper deals with semantic developments in the Lithuanian and Latvian definite adjectival forms. The basic function of definite adjectival forms in Baltic is to mark the definiteness of the noun phrase. However, the adjectival marking of definiteness creates an interesting situation in which the noun phrase has several slots for the marking of (in)definiteness. In certain cases, different values for definiteness may appear in different slots: the adjective may be in the definite form whereas the noun phrase as a whole may be viewed as indefinite and can occur with formal markers of indefiniteness such as indefinite pronouns. These cases afford certain insights into the periphery of definiteness and the mechanisms of extension of definiteness markers into the domain of indefiniteness. The factors involved in this spill-over of definiteness markers are (i) genericity, realised in the form of so-called definite generics, whose definite markers are often retained when descending from the level of kind-reference to that of individual reference (this is referred to here as rigid or fossilised generic definiteness), and (ii) nominalisation of the adjective, which enables the retention of definite marking when a noun phrase shifts from definite plural description to singular or plural indefinite description. An important factor in the spread of definite adjectives beyond the domain of definiteness of the noun phrase seems to be their ability to evoke ad hoc taxonomies. The instances of extended definiteness marking discussed in this paper have parallels in article languages that have only one slot for (in)definiteness marking. The presence of two slots for definiteness marking in Baltic brings to light the layered nature of the definiteness of many noun phrases,which leads to what is here called ‘definiteness conflicts’ and indeterminacy between the semantic zones of definiteness and indefiniteness.

In the present article the problem of the position of the adjectives in the noun phrase in Modern Greek is addressed. Rather than starting from their alleged ‘asymmetrical’ distribution, according to which postnominal adjectives are only allowed in indefinite DPs, I concentrate on the possible interpretations that the adjective can have relative to the noun. The differences between prenominal and apparently postnominal adjectives in indefinite DPs suggest a predicative reading of the latter. This semantic account motivates a corresponding syntactic one, according to which the noun moving upwards to a head DEF, formally distinct from D, enters a predicative relationship with the AP generated uniquely prenominally. Such a movement is precluded in definite DPs, because the DEF position is occupied by the definite article. In this way, a number of differences observed between definite and indefinite NPs, as far as ‘postnominal’ adjectives are concerned, are seen as consequences of their predicative nature and the way this interacts with the definiteness/indefiniteness of what serves as their subject.

Abstract In line with the traditional pronouncement that the weak (definite) forms of adjectives in Germanic follow the definite determiner, the Gothic weak-only adjective sama ‘the same’ (no indefinite form *sams, with the strong inflection -s, occurs) is determined (sa sama ‘the same’) in the majority of its attestations. However, contrary to the traditional description, occasionally it also occurs on its own, without a determiner. An examination of the syntactic distribution of the adjective and a comparison of the Gothic translation of the Bible with the Greek and Latin texts uncover a double semantic nature of sama. Specifically, when determined, sama conveys a definite/particularising force of ‘the same’. In the absence of the determiner, however, it conveys the semantic value of ‘one; of one kind’. The results of this investigation contribute to our understanding of the conditions that govern the distribution of strong vs. weak adjective inflections in early Germanic. In particular, they confirm the contention that the occurrence of the weak form of the adjective is not simply a matter of whether or not a definite determiner precedes it. Instead, the definite value of the adjective inflection is realised cumulatively (periphrastically), via the co-occurrence of the definite determiner and the weak adjective inflection.

Indefinite articles are generally used to introduce new or unfamiliar entities to the discourse. However, in noun phrases such as een opgeluchte Obama ‘a relieved Obama’, the proper noun denotes a familiar individual who does not even have to be new in the discourse. Yet, an indefinite article is used in this construction. We have conducted a corpus study in written Dutch and a production experiment in order to find out the characteristics of this construction as well as its definite counterpart. We will show that the denotation of the adjective plays a crucial role in the semantic composition of the construction, and that preferences for either a definite or an indefinite article correlate with differences in the duration of the state denoted by the adjective. We will use semantic type-theory to account for these findings.

English articles are thought to be complex, ambiguous and not salient in spoken language, which is why second language (L2) learners of English exhibit usage variability. Much of the L2 acquisition literature seems to agree that L2 learners are affected, one way or another, by their first language (L1). However, the debatable and controversial issue is whether there are other factors that affect article use, independent of potential L1 effects. The present study examines whether the presence or absence of adjectives in noun phrases influences article choice among Saudi Arabic learners of English. Both Arabic and English have articles, but Arabic adjectives are different from English adjectives to the extent that they agree with nouns in definiteness, case and gender. The study was conducted with 24 L1 Saudi Arabic speakers and 6 native English speakers. A 42-item fill-in-the-blanks task was administered. The results showed that a) native speakers of English outperformed L2 Arabic speakers in all contexts except indefinite plural contexts not modified by adjectives; and b) L2 Arabic speakers were more accurate in indefinite contexts that were not modified by adjectives than those that were. These findings show that L1 Arabic speakers are sensitive to the presence or absence of adjectives in noun phrases.

Abstract This paper discusses a specific subclass of English it-clefts posited in the theoretical literature, so-called predicational clefts. The main point of the paper is to show that there is no need to postulate such a separate class. Predicational clefts look special because of the narrow focus on the adjective within an indefinite pivot, but their special properties can all be derived from this narrow focus in a focus analysis in which it-clefts express contrasting focus. Contrasting focus means that besides the assertion of the proposition expressed in the cleft, there is one contrasting proposition which is excluded. The focus on the adjective in apparent predicational clefts gives rise to a narrow set of relevant alternatives, all of which differ only in the adjectival property within the pivot. The analysis developed here can account for many of the observations for apparent predicational clefts. Other properties are shown to be not conclusive. Thus, predicational clefts need not be considered a special subclass beyond their special focus characteristics.

Cette thèse analyse les propriétés sémantiques et discursives des prédicats d'état ('laid, généreux') ainsi que des prédicats causatifs et résultatifs, et plus particulièrement des verbes psychologiques à Expérienceur objet ('stimuler, encourager'). Le cadre adopté est celui de la sémantique néo-davidsonienne (Parsons, 1990) et de la sémantique du discours (Kamp & Reyle 1993, Asher 1993). La première partie (chap 1-7) est consacrée aux prédicats d'état, et la seconde aux prédicats causatifs et résultatifs (chap. 8-9). Dans le chapitre 1, on expose les arguments en faveur de l'idée que les verbes d'état ont un argument implicite davidsonien comme les verbes d'action. Abordant ensuite les constructions en 'by/in' ('by/in smoking, he broke his promise'), l'auteur propose de considérer, avec Goldman et contre Davidson, que celles-ci décrivent deux événements distincts, liés par une relation de génération. L'analyse goldmanienne de ces constructions est ensuite étendue aux prédicats d'état ('in doing this, he was clever'), ce qui permet de distinguer les prédicats qui dénotent un état dépendant d'une action, comme 'clever' en usage occurrentiel, des prédicats qui dénotent un état indépendant d'une action, comme beautiful (cf. '??in doing this, he was beautiful'). Le chapitre 2 fait le point sur les spécificités des prédicats d'état par rapport aux prédicats d'activité. Y est notamment montré que certains prédicats d'état acceptent le "progressif interprétatif" ('tu es en train de croire au Père Noël!'). Ce type de progressif est distingué du progressif standard et du progressif actif anglais ('he was being clever'); sont définis également les "prédicats interprétatifs" qui n'acceptent que ce progressif. Le chapitre 3 élabore une typologie aspectuelle des prédicats d'état. Sont d'abord distingués quatre types d'états en fonction de l'intervalle pendant lequel l'état en cause est vérifié. On montre que cette quadri-partition rend mieux compte des données linguistiques que la dichotomie classique en 'stage level predicates' et 'individual level predicates'. Ensuite sont définis les "prédicats d'état pur" comme beau, qui dénotent un état indépendant de toute action, et les "prédicats d'état endo-actionnel" comme 'généreux/bruyant' en usage occurrentiel, qui dénote un état généré par une action. On présente des arguments contre l'assimilation de ces derniers prédicats à des prédicats d'action. Est alors analysée l'ambiguïté des prédicats comme "généreux" dans l'emploi occurrentiel: 'Pierre m'a donné des bonbons. Il a été généreux' peut vouloir dire soit que Pierre a été généreux de (décider de) me donner des bonbons (lecture-d), soit qu'il a été généreux dans la manière de me les donner (lecture-m). Dans la foulée, on examine la relation temporelle qui prend place entre un état s et l'action e dont il dépend. Enfin, on montre que l'analyse proposée peut rendre compte de la concurrence entre passé composé et imparfait dans les phrases dénotant un état occurrentiel. A partir de la typologie aspectuelle élaborée au chapitre 3, le chapitre 4 revisite le problème que soulèvent certains prédicats d'état dans les constructions à prédicat second descriptif ('Pierre a donné des bonbons saoul/??généreux') et propose une nouvelle solution. On montre ensuite que cette solution peut être adaptée pour résoudre un problème moins étudié, à savoir celui que posent certains prédicats d'état dans les subordonnées temporelles en 'quand '(cf. 'Il était généreux, quand il a distribué les bonbons' versus '??Il a distribué des bonbons quand il était généreux'). Enfin, on fait le point sur la difficulté qu'éprouvent les prédicats évaluatifs à entrer dans les constructions présuppositionnelles, parmi lesquelles les subordonnées temporelles, mais les GN définis ('La femme rousse/??généreuse commanda une bière'). Le chapitre 5 est consacré aux relations rhétoriques qui s'établissent entre la description d'un état et la description d'un événement, aux combinaisons possibles entre ces relations rhétoriques, et à la manière dont tel ou tel prédicat d'état, vu ses propriétés sémantiques, contribue à établir telle ou telle relation rhétorique avec la description d'événement. Le chapitre 6 revient sur le problème que soulève l'indéfini des en lecture non générique avec certains prédicats d'état, notamment les prédicats évaluatifs ('Des livres étaient sales' versus '??Des livres étaient merveilleux'). En se fondant sur les outils de la 'Decision Theoretic Semantic's (Merin 1999), l'auteur fait l'hypothèse qu'un prédicat P n'accepte des que si la quantité des éléments satisfaisant P dans le contexte est non pertinente pour les fins du discours, et s'il est clair, par ailleurs, que les qualités implicites que peuvent instancier les dits éléments ne contribuent en aucune façon à expliquer qu'ils satisfont P. On montre que ces deux conditions sont respectées (resp. violées) avec les prédicats d'état compatibles (resp. incompatibles) avec des dans sa lecture non générique. Le chapitre 7 est consacré à la sémantique qu'il faut assigner aux prédicats d'état évaluatifs. On expose tout d'abord les arguments en faveur d'une sémantique "réaliste", qui analyse les prédicats évaluatifs comme des prédicats unaires dénotant de vraies propriétés. On distingue ensuite, dans le contenu informationnel des énoncés évaluatifs, un composant assertif et deux implicatures associées. On termine par l'analyse des prédicats évaluatifs superlatifs ('merveilleux'); est argumentée l'idée que ces prédicats ont un composant expressif, en ce sens que le locuteur, en les utilisant, implicite qu'une entité satisfaisant le prédicat a déclenché en lui une émotion, vécue ou rejouée lors de l'énonciation. On montre en quoi ce composant expressif contribue à expliquer pourquoi de tels prédicats sont difficilement utilisables à l'impératif ou dans certains types de questions. Le chapitre 8 répertorie trois classes parmi les verbes, dits "résultatifs", qui présupposent l'occurrence d'un événement e causant ou générant l'événement asserté e'. On présente d'abord le problème que pose la définition de cette présupposition, puis une nouvelle solution est exposée. On montre alors que la présupposition des verbes résultatifs -- achèvements droits et accomplissements strictement forts --- est de nature scalaire et peut s'expliquer par la Loi d'exhaustivité de Ducrot. Le chapitre 9 est consacré aux verbes psychologiques à Expérienceur objet (VPEO). Après avoir classé ces verbes en fonction de leur structure événementielle, on fait le point sur les différentes lectures qu'ils peuvent accepter. On montre ensuite qu'à la différence des VPEO acceptables dans les constructions agentives, les VPEO qui y sont peu acceptables exhibent deux propriétés cruciales. D'abord, ils présupposent toujours, à l'instar des verbes étudiés dans le chapitre 8, l'occurrence de l'événement impliquant le sujet; ensuite, certains d'entre eux sont "interprétatifs", en ce sens que l'assertion du changement d'état psychologique ne s'avère pertinente pour les fins du discours que si l'interprétant connaît, par ailleurs, l'événement qui cause ce changement. Cela permet d'expliquer pourquoi les verbes en question ne peuvent faire avancer la narration comme le ferait un prédicat d'action normal, et pourquoi ils sont peu compatibles avec les adverbes de manière orientés sur l'agent, les pseudo-clivées ou les compléments de lieu. On termine par l'analyse aspectuelle de la classe des VPEO, en montrant qu'on y trouve des membres des cinq classes aspectuelles distinguées dans le chapitre précédent.

This volume offers an overview of current research on grammatical number in language. The chapters Part i of the handbook present foundational notions in the study of grammatical number covering the semantic analyses of plurality, the mass–count distinction, the relationship between number and quantity expressions and the mental representation of number and individuation. The core instance of grammatical number is marking for number distinctions in nominal expressions as in English the book/the books and the chapters in Part ii, Number in the nominal domain, explore morphological, semantic, and syntactic aspects of number marking within noun phrases. The contributions examine morphological marking of number the relationship between syntax and nominal number marking, and the interactions between numeral classifiers with semantic number and number marking. They also address cases of mismatches in form and meaning with respect to number displayed by lexical plurals and collective nouns. The final chapter reviews nominal number processing from the perspective of language pathologies. While number marking on nouns has been the focus of most research on number, number distinctions can also be found in the event domain. Part iii, Number in the event domain, presents an overview of different linguistic means of expressing plurality in the event domain, covering verbal plurality marking, pluractional modifiers of the form Noun preposition Noun, frequency adjectives and dependent indefinites. Part iv provides fifteen case studies examining different aspects of grammatical number marking in a range of typologically diverse languages.

Nouns are inflected for gender (masculine, feminine, neuter), number (singular and plural), and case: nominative, accusative, genitive, dative. Except in -u- stems, the vocative has the form of the accusative and/or is syncretized with the nominative. Demonstratives and pronominals have a residual instrumental, e.g. þe (by this), and ablative, e.g. jáinþro (from there). Adjectives are similarly inflected but also have strong and weak forms. Comparatives and nonpast participles are weak. The precise syntactic status of D-words (demonstratives, determiners, and articles) is impossible to test. Personal pronouns of the first and second person are inflected for singular, plural, and dual, and have no gender distinction. The third person pronoun has all three genders but only singular and plural number. Interrogative and indefinite pronouns are morphologically identical. Gothic has a rich negative polarity system. Numerals are partly inflected and partly indeclinable. Deictic adverbs belong to an old local case system.