• Korean Journal of English Language and Linguistics
• /
• v.2 no.3
• /
• pp.403-430
• /
• 2002

With a view to providing a unitary interpretation of a lexical item, even, this paper proposes that even be understood as a quantifier. To countenance this idea, the quantifier theories will be evaluated against the implicature accounts on the basis of conceptual and empirical evidence. With the help of Bach (1999), the quantifier theories of even are regarded as most viable and plausible. On the other hand, from among different quantifier approaches even will be viewed as a quasi-universal quantifier, which means that even is similar to the universal quantifier but still it is different from it. That is, even introduces a comparison set that is context-dependent and only the salient members of this comparison set will be taken into account when an even-sentence is to be uttered. This observation is based on the formal representation for a universal quantifier in general on the one hand and the truth-conditional contribution of even to the sentence containing it.

• Korean Journal of Cognitive Science
• /
• v.19 no.2
• /
• pp.205-222
• /
• 2008

This study investigated scope relations between quantifier and focus which are represented in quantified sentences. In the sentence which has both strong quantifier and weak quantifier, one of them has a wide scope and a presuppositional reading, and the other which has a narrow one is interpreted non-presuppositionally. In Korean, when a weak quantifier is separated from VP in surface representation, whether it is a subject or an object, it has only a presuppositional reading. Therefore, there is no scope ambiguity in that sentence. However, when weak quantifier which is an object of transitive verb or a subject of transitive verb is sensitive to focus, it is available to non-presuppositional reading, so that the sentence seems to be ambiguous. Once even weak quantifier out of VP in the Surface structure is focused, it becomes to be in the scope of focus (focal phrase) which is formed in Logical form by a focus projection. And this scope of focus corresponds to a nuclear scope. That is to say, focus operates on the weak quantifier to be interpreted non-presuppositionally in a nuclear scope.

• Language and Information
• /
• v.7 no.1
• /
• pp.1-22
• /
• 2003

Quantifier floating is one of the much studied phenomena in natural languages where quantifying expressions may appear in places other than their original prenominal one. Its presence is especially prominent in languages such as Korean that allow more or less free word order. We find that, in addition to what is described in the literature, there are other remarkable regularities in the way the language allows quantifiers to “float” with respect to various constructions including coordination, relative clauses, and embedded clauses. These regularities are captured syntactically in a combinatory categorial grammar (CCG) framework for Korean. We also show how to derive semantic representations for Korean quantifier floating in the same CCG framework.

• Journal of Digital Convergence
• /
• v.12 no.12
• /
• pp.529-535
• /
• 2014

This study is to establish the consistency of Subject-Verb agreement in quantifier phrase. Absence of consistency in English grammar is critical to the grammaticality. We focused on the grammar part, specifically, S-V agreement rule in quantifier phrase. We believe the existence of exceptional rules in quantifier S-V structure is not necessary as the basic grammar rule on S-V agreement is sufficient enough and adding exceptional rules just make it more difficult and confusing. We argue specific features indwelt in each quantifier are linked when quantifiers are used pronominally and the ${\pm}$feature plays an important role in quantifier S-V agreement structure. This study shows the solution to eliminate the ungrammaticality in typical English text books by simplifying quantifier S-V agreement to make it solid and systematic.

• Language and Information
• /
• v.5 no.2
• /
• pp.39-55
• /
• 2001

This paper investigates the idiosyncratic understanding of universal quantifiers such as every, each or all by young children at the ages of 4 to 7, and argues that the phenomenon is explicable in terms of the maturation of both the cognitive system and the linguistic system. Evidence for this dual explanation comes from the fact that the visual input, a picture, plays a key role in determining the children's conceptual representation, suggesting the need for the central integration of visual and linguistic elements; and from the fact that a quantifier in the linguistic input has an intrinsic property, i.e. a <+focus> feature. I have tried to explain the nature of the cognitive factors in terms of the function of the central system, suggesting a modified form of Smith & Tsimpli's (1995) yersion of Fodor's (1983) modularity hypothesis. The categorial status of the quantifier in the children's interpretation is considered, focusing on the movement of that quantifier out of its own extended projection to FP. It is claimed that children initially treat quantifiers as modifiers, rather than functional heads, and that the phenomenon of quantifier spreading by children can be attributed to delay in the development of the relevant functional category, i.e., DP (or QP), in language acquisition.

• Journal of Intelligence and Information Systems
• /
• v.12 no.3
• /
• pp.15-32
• /
• 2006

The increasing complexity of the socio-economic environments makes it less and less possible for single decision-maker to consider all relevant aspects of problem. Therefore, many organizations employ groups in decision making. In this paper, we present a multiperson decision making method using fuzzy logic with linguistic quantifier when each of group members specifies imprecise judgments possibly both on performance evaluations of alternatives with respect to the multiple criteria and on the criteria. Inexact or vague preferences have appeared in the decision making literatures with a view to relaxing the burdens of preference specifications imposed to the decision-makers and thus taking into account the vagueness of human judgments. Allowing for the types of imprecise judgments in the model, however, makes more difficult a clear selection of alternative(s) that a group wants to make. So, further interactions with the decision-makers may proceed to the extent to compensate for the initial comforts of preference specifications. These interactions may not however guarantee the selection of the best alternative to implement. To circumvent this deadlock situation, we present a procedure for obtaining a satisfying solution by the use of linguistic quantifier guided aggregation which implies fuzzy majority. This is an approach to combine a prescriptive decision method via a mathematical programming and a well-established approximate solution method to aggregate multiple objects.

• Language and Information
• /
• v.13 no.1
• /
• pp.57-75
• /
• 2009

English floating quantifiers (FQ) are both limited and complex in the sense that they are introduced by a limited set of words, all, both, and each, and display free distributional possibilities. This paper provides a non-movement approach to the syntax of English floating quantifier constructions. The non-movement analysis we develop here is different from stranding movement analyses in that all the FQs are base-generated while the linkage with their antecedent refers to grammatical features such as SUBJ and PRD. The analysis avoids the postulation of abstract levels as well as empty elements in capturing the flexibility of English FQ constructions, making the grammar of English simpler.

• Language and Information
• /
• v.5 no.2
• /
• pp.9-20
• /
• 2001

Barker (1997) has argued that all the three approaches to anaphora, namely, E-type theories, Discourse Representation Theory, and Dynamic Semantics, are faced with the so-called 'double-bind' problem in the quantifier/variable-binding model of anaphora. Recently, in the same journal, Slater (2000) has claimed that the so-called epsilon account (Slater 1991, 1993, 1994, 1997) handles the problem without any difficulty. However, it will be proposed in this paper that the epsilon account has its own problems in handling the quantifier/variable-binding, and that as argued in Yoon (1998), the so-called‘conjunctive paraphrase’account is the correct solution to the problem, which is intuitively supported as well.

• Language and Information
• /
• v.6 no.2
• /
• pp.153-169
• /
• 2002

In this paper I develop a mechanism of interpreting Korean “wh-phrases”. The phrases have various readings depending on where they occur and they could be ambiguous even in the same structure. Yet their readings are subject to certain restrictions. I assume that the “wh-phrases” behave like variables and that there are three quantifiers to bind the phrases; $COMP_{wh},\;COMP_{conc}$ and derivational $\exists$-quantifier. Based on the assumptions I suggest derivational quantification, which consists of three conditions. 1) A quantifier can bind only when it merges into the derivation; 2) $\exists$-quantifier accompanies 〔-OP〕 complementizer but its activation is optional; 3) an instance of quantification makes the clause opaque to other instances of quantification. Scrambling data support derivational approach and across-the-board interpretation motivates the opacity condition. The opacity condition accounts for ATB- interpretations of reflexive pronouns. It can also explain the island effect of wh-islands without adopting covert wh-movement in Korean.

• Proceedings of the Korean Society for Language and Information Conference
• /
• 2002.02a
• /
• pp.370-382
• /
• 2002

This paper puts forward an analysis of scope interactions between Japanese adverbial quantifiers like mainichi 'everyday'and tokidoki 'sometimes'and a negative morpheme nai 'not'on the basis of f(ocus)-structures. In this analysis, three f-structures are assigned to a sentence with an adverbial quantifier and a negative morpheme. One of them represents a negation-wide reading, and the other two represent quantifier-wide readings. Some f-structures, however, are unacceptable due to semantic or pragmatic factors. Different scope behaviors of the two quantifiers mentioned above can then be ascribed to acceptability of f-structures.