View More View Less
  • 1 Pázmány Péter Catholic University
Full access

The topic of my paper is the syntax and the quantificational force of free-choice items (FCIs) in Hungarian. FCIs such as any have been at the forefront of research interest in the past decades (e.g., Ladusaw 1979; Kadmon & Landman 1993; Giannakidou 2001). The close interdependence of syntactic, semantic and even pragmatic considerations makes the study of FCIs one of the most interesting research programmes. Earlier investigations of the syntax and semantics of FCIs in Hungarian include Hunyadi (1991; 2002), Abrusán (2007) and Szabó (2012). In my paper, I show that FCIs in Hungarian occupy the syntactic position associated with distributive quantifiers (É. Kiss 2010). Furthermore, I examine the quantificational force of FCIs by the well-known battery of quantification tests (for a previous application for Hungarian, cf. Surányi 2006): almost-modification, modification by exceptive phrase, donkey anaphora, predicative use, is-modification, incorporation and split reading with modals. My findings of mixed quantificational behaviour provide further corroboration for the analysis of FCIs as quantificationally underspecified intensional dependent indefinites.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • Abrusán, Márta. 2007. Even and free-choice any in Hungarian. In E. Puig-Waldmüller (ed.) Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung 11. Barcelona: Universitat Pompeu Fabra. 115.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Aloni, Maria. 2002. Free choice in modal contexts. In M. Weisgerber (ed.) Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung 7. Konstanz: Universität Konstanz. 2537.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Baker, C. Lee. 1970. Double negatives. Linguistic Inquiry 1. 169186.

  • Bende-Farkas, Ágnes. 2015. The landscape of universal quantification in Old Hungarian. Acta Linguistica Hungarica 62. 223261.

  • Bernardi, Raffaela and Anna Szabolcsi. 2008. Optionality, scope and licensing: An application of partially ordered categories. Journal of Logic, Language and Information 17. 237283.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Carlson, Gregory. 1981. Distribution of free-choice any. In R. A. Hendrick, C. S. Masek and M. F. Miller (eds.) Papers from the Seventeenth Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society. 823.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Dahl, Östen. 1970. Some notes on indefinites. Language 46. 3341.

  • Dayal, Veneeta. 1997. Free relatives and “ever”: Identity and free choice readings. In A. Lawson (ed.) Proceedings of the 7th Semantics and Linguistic Theory Conference (SALT 7). Ithaca NY: Cornell University. 99116.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • É. Kiss, Katalin . 2002. The syntax of Hungarian. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  • É. Kiss, Katalin . 2006. The function and the syntax of the verbal particle. In K. É. Kiss (ed.) Event structure and the left periphery. Studies on Hungarian. Dordrecht: Springer. 1655.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • É. Kiss, Katalin . 2009. Negative quantifiers in Hungarian. In M. den Dikken and R. M. Vago (eds.) Approaches to Hungarian 11: Papers from the New York conference. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 6594.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • É. Kiss, Katalin . 2010. An adjunction analysis of quantifiers and adverbials in the Hungarian sentence. Lingua 120. 506526.

  • Fauconnier, Gilles. 1975. Pragmatic scales and logical structure. Linguistic Inquiry 6. 353376.

  • Giannakidou, Anastasia. 1997. The landscape of polarity items. Doctoral dissertation. University of Groningen.

  • Giannakidou, Anastasia. 2001. The meaning of free choice. Linguistics and Philosophy 24. 659735.

  • Giannakidou, Anastasia and Josep Quer. 2013. Exhaustive and non-exhaustive variation with anti-specific indefinites: Free choice versus referential vagueness. Lingua 126. 120149.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Halm, Tamás. 2013. Free choice and Focus: FCIs in Hungarian. In B. Surányi (ed.) Proceedings of the Second Central European Conference in Linguistics for Postgraduate Students. Budapest: Pázmány Péter Catholic University. 109121.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Halm, Tamás. 2016. The grammar of free-choice items in Hungarian. Doctoral dissertation. Pázmány Péter Catholic University.

  • Heim, Irene. 1982. The semantics of definite and indefinite noun phrases. Doctoral dissertation. University of Massachusetts at Amherst.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Hoeksema, Jack and Hotze Rullmann. 2000. Scalarity and polarity. In J. Hoeksema, H. Rullmann and V. Sánchez-Valencia (eds.) Perspectives on negation and polarity items. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 129171.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Horn, Larry. 1972. On the semantic properties of logical operators in English. Doctoral dissertation. UCLA.

  • Hunyadi, László. 1991. On the syntax of ANY and EVERY. In B. Korponay and P. Pelyvás (eds.) Studies in linguistics: A supplement to Hungarian Studies in English. Debrecen: Kossuth Lajos University. 8388.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Hunyadi, László. 2002. Hungarian sentence prosody and Universal Grammar: On the prosody–syntax interface. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Kadmon, Nirit and Fred Landman. 1993. Any. Linguistics and Philosophy 16. 353422.

  • Kenesei, István. 1994. Subordinate clauses. In F. Kiefer and K. É. Kiss (eds.) The syntactic structure of Hungarian (Syntax and semantics 27). San Diego/New York: Academic Press. 275354.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Kratzer, Angelika and Junko Shimoyama. 2002. Indeterminate pronouns: The view from Japanese. In Y. Otsu (ed.) Proceedings of Third Tokyo Psycholinguistics Conference. Tokyo: Hituzi Syobo. 125.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Krifka, Manfred. 1995. The semantics and pragmatics of polarity items. Linguistic Analysis 25. 149.

  • Kroch, Anthony. 1975. The semantics of scope in English. Doctoral dissertation. MIT.

  • Ladusaw, William. 1979. Polarity sensitivity as inherent scope relations. Doctoral dissertation. University of Texas at Austin.

  • Lahiri, Utpal. 1998. Focus and negative polarity in Hindi. Natural Language Semantics 6. 57123.

  • Lasnik, Howard. 1972. Analyses of negation in English. Doctoral dissertation. MIT.

  • Lee, Young-Suk and Laurence Horn. 1995. Any as indefinite plus even. Ms. Yale University.

  • Linebarger, Marcia. 1981. Polarity any as existential quantifier. In J. Kreiman and A. Ojeda (eds.) Proceedings of the Sixteenth Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society. 211219.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Menéndez-Benito, Paula. 2010. On universal free choice items. Natural Language Semantics 18. 3364.

  • Partee, Barbara H. 2004. Compositionality in formal semantics: Selected papers by Barbara H. Partee (Explorations in Semantics). Malden, MA & Oxford: Blackwell.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Quer, Josep. 1999. The quantificational force of free choice items. Ms. University of Amsterdam.

  • Quine, Willard Van Orman. 1960. Word and object. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

  • Reichenbach, Hans. 1947. Elements of symbolic logic. London: Collier-Macmillan.

  • Rooth, Mats. 1985. Association with focus. Doctoral dissertation. University of Massachusetts, Amherst.

  • Strawson, Peter F. 1952. Introduction to logical theory. London: Methuen.

  • Surányi, Balázs. 2002. Negation and the negativity of n-words in Hungarian. In I. Kenesei and P. Siptár (eds.) Approaches to Hungarian 8: Papers from the Budapest conference. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó. 107132.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Surányi, Balázs. 2006. Quantification and focus in negative concord. Lingua 116. 272313.

  • Swart, Henriette de. 1996. Scope ambiguities with negative quantifiers. In K. von Heusinger and U. Egli (eds.) Proceedings of the Workshop on Reference and Anaphoric Relations 1. Konstanz: Universität Konstanz. 145164.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Szabó, Martina. 2012. A bárki nem akárki, avagy a bár- és akár- elemek eltéro nyelvi sajátságai [bárki and akárki are not the same: Grammatical differences of bár- and akár-words]. Paper presented at the Conference of Doctoral Students, University of Szeged, 31 May. 2012.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Szabolcsi, Anna. 2015. What do quantifier particles do? Linguistics and Philosophy 38. 159204.

  • Tóth, Ildikó. 1999. Negative polarity item licensing in Hungarian. Acta Linguistica Hungarica 46. 119142.

  • Vendler, Zeno. 1967. Linguistics in philosophy. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

  • Wouden, Ton van der and Frans Zwarts. 1993. A semantic analysis of negative concord. In U. Lahiri and A. Z. Wyner (eds.) Proceedings of the 3rd semantics and linguistics conference. Ithaca, NY: CLC Publications, Cornell University. 202219.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Zanuttini, Raffaella. 1991. Syntactic properties of sentential negation: A comparative study of Romance languages. Doctoral dissertation. University of Pennsylvania.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation