Publication details

Against class A treatment of no more



Year of publication 2020
Type Appeared in Conference without Proceedings
MU Faculty or unit

Faculty of Arts

Description Previous research on modified numerals established some widely accepted contrasts between comparative modifiers (CM) and superlative modifiers (SM) (see \citealt{buring_least_2008,geurts_at_2007,nouwen_modified_2015,mayr_implicatures_2013,schwarz_consistency_2016} a.o.), such as: (i) CM don't but SM do give raise to obligatory ignorance implicatures; (ii) CM can scope over or under existential modals (EM) but SM have to outscope them. A \textit{no more than Num} construction (NMC), where negation and comparison are combined in a way exemplified by an English sentence \Next from \cite{nouwen_upper-bounded_2008}, to this day the most developed formal treatment of NMC, is then claimed to allow both scopes w.r.t. EM (\citealt{nouwen_upper-bounded_2008}) and to have scalar bounding inference, signalling speaker's well-informedness (ibid), since English \textit{no more} construction (unlike class B modifiers) give raise to equality readings like (=50) for \Next. Such claims seem to be supported by the comparative morphology of NMC. I bring new experimental and corpus evidence against both claims, showing that (cross-linguistically) (i) NMC can be interpreted only with wider scope then EM; (ii) NMC is compatible (mostly) only with speaker's insecurity (or so-called variation) readings as SM. The experimental and corpus evidence comes from Czech as it was observed before that Slavic languages (unlike English) generally don't support speaker's well-informedness NMC interpretation.
Related projects:

You are running an old browser version. We recommend updating your browser to its latest version.

More info