Author： Oosterhof Albert M.
Publisher： John Benjamins Publishing Company
E-ISSN： 1569-9676|19|1|59-91
ISSN： 0774-5141
Source： Belgian Journal of Linguistics, Vol.19, Iss.1, 2006-01, pp. : 59-91
Disclaimer: Any content in publications that violate the sovereignty, the constitution or regulations of the PRC is not accepted or approved by CNPIEC.
Abstract
In this paper I focus on the semantics and distribution of Dutch bare plurals and faded partitives. It has been claimed in the literature that both types of noun phrases are indefinite, because they can occur in existential sentences. I discuss the semantic differences between faded partitives and bare plurals. It will be argued that bare plurals are ambiguous: they can take kind-referring or non-kind-referring (indefinite) interpretations, while faded partitives always take kind-referring readings. Our analysis makes it possible to handle subject-object asymmetries in the distribution of both types of noun phrases.
Related content
Access to resources
Recommend
Subject–Object ambiguities in spoken and written Dutch
By Jansen Frank
Linguistics in the Netherlands, Vol. 22, Iss. 1, 2005-01 ,pp. :
Subject–Object ambiguities in spoken and written Dutch
By Jansen Frank
Linguistics in the Netherlands, Vol. 22, Iss. 1, 2005-01 ,pp. :