Quantifying over Individual Concepts

Abstract

Since Montague (1973), it has been assumed that quantificational DPs must, at least sometimes, be analyzed as quantifiers over individual concepts (i.e., functions from indices of evaluation to individuals). Because the domain of individual concepts is significantly greater than that of individuals, the challenge has always been how to properly constrain quantification over these objects. This dissertation proposes a solution to this problem by developing a novel theory as to how NPs are shifted from predicates of individual into predicates of individual concepts. The idea is that, since NPs are interpreted as restrictors, the nature of this shifting mechanism will constrain quantification. The proposal bears a strong resemblance to the analysis of interrogative clauses of Karttunen (1977): suitable predicates of individual concepts are built from the interaction of a type-shifting operation and existential quantifiers. In three cases studies, I show how this theory can solve old and new puzzles: (i) the different interpretations of sentences of the form ‘[Det NP] changed’ (Nathan 2006); (ii) two ambiguities in the interpretation of concealed questions (Heim 1979); and (iii) question intruders, a novel puzzle concerning the interpretation of both embedded interrogative clauses and concealed questions.