Publishing Partner: Cambridge University Press CUP Extra Wiley-Blackwell Publisher Login
amazon logo
More Info


New from Oxford University Press!

ad

Language Planning as a Sociolinguistic Experiment

By: Ernst Jahr

Provides richly detailed insight into the uniqueness of the Norwegian language development. Marks the 200th anniversary of the birth of the Norwegian nation following centuries of Danish rule


New from Cambridge University Press!

ad

Acquiring Phonology: A Cross-Generational Case-Study

By Neil Smith

The study also highlights the constructs of current linguistic theory, arguing for distinctive features and the notion 'onset' and against some of the claims of Optimality Theory and Usage-based accounts.


New from Brill!

ad

Language Production and Interpretation: Linguistics meets Cognition

By Henk Zeevat

The importance of Henk Zeevat's new monograph cannot be overstated. [...] I recommend it to anyone who combines interests in language, logic, and computation [...]. David Beaver, University of Texas at Austin


Summary Details


Query:   Scope Ambiguities
Author:  Eung-Cheon Hah
Submitter Email:  click here to access email
Linguistic LingField(s):   Semantics
Syntax

Summary:   Dear linguists,

A couple of weeks ago, I posted a questionnaire on scope ambiguities.
Eight people, some of them with valuable comments, responded to the
questionnaire. A short summary is given below with the result in the
parenthesis of each sentence. I'd like to express my heartful thanks to
the following linguists.


Deborah Milam Berkley <dberkley@babel.ling.nwu.edu>
Barbara Lazenby Simpson <bsimpson@tcd.ie>
stephen p spackman <stephen@acm.org>
Chris Johns <csrj100@hermes.cam.ac.uk>
Roland Stuckardt <stuckardt@compuserve.com>
George Huttar 709 2400 <George_Huttar@SIL.ORG>
spencer@rainbow.net.au
"H Stephen Straight (Binghamton University/SUNY)"
<sstraigh@binghamton.edu>


*************************<Questionnaire>****************************

Please mark with +A if the following sentences are ambiguous, with +mA
if they are marginally ambiguous, and with -A if they are not ambiguous
at all.

...................
I. Between "do = expect/hope/intend to visit" and "do =visit"

(1) Which student expects/hopes/intends to visit which city that you do?
(+A: 37.5%) (+mA: 37.5%) (-A: 25%)

...................
II. Between 'cardinals'/'some'/'what' and 'every'/'most'

(2) a. Some congressional aide asked to see every report.
(+A: 12.5%) (+mA: 25%) (-A: 62.5%)
b. Some congressional aide asked John to see every report.
(+A: 12.5%) (+mA: 37.5%) (-A: 50%)
c. Some congressional aide saw every report.
(+A: 37.5%) (+mA: 0%) (-A: 62.5%)

(3) a. At least two American tour groups expect to visit every European
country this year.
(+A: 37.5%) (+mA: 12.5%) (-A: 50%)
b. At least two American tour groups expect to visit every European
country next year.
(+A: 37.5%) (+mA: 0%) (-A: 62.5%)
c. At least two American tour groups visited every European country
last year.
(+A: 37.5%) (+mA: 12.5%) (-A: 50%)

(4) At least one tourist wants to visit every city.
(+A: 25%) (+mA: 25%) (-A: 50%)

(5) a. Some agency intends to send aid to every Bosnian city this year.
(+A: 37.5%) (+mA: 0%) (-A: 62.5%)
b. Some agency intends to send aid to every Bosnian city next year.
(+A: 50%) (+mA: 0%) (-A: 50%)
c. Some agency sent aid to every Bosnian city last year.
(+A: 50%) (+mA: 0%) (-A: 50%)

(6) a. At least four recreational vehicles tried to stop at most AAA
approved campsites last year.
(+A: 75%) (+mA: 0%) (-A: 25%)
b. At least four recreational vehicles stopped at most AAA approved
campsites last year.
(+A: 37.5%) (+mA: 12.5%) (-A: 50%)

(7) At least two American tour groups are expected to visit every
European country this year.
(+A: 62.5%) (+mA: 0%) (-A: 37.5%)

(8) Some agency is expected to send aide to every Bosnian city this
year.
(+A: 25%) (+mA: 37.5%) (-A: 37.5%)

(9) At least four recreational vehicles are expected to stop at most
AAA
approved campsites this year.
(+A: 50%) (+mA: 25%) (-A: 25%)

(10) Some congressional aide is expected to see every report.
(+A: 25%) (+mA: 12.5%) (-A: 62.5%)

(11) a. Someone expects to dance with every woman.
(+A: 50%) (+mA: 12.5%) (-A: 37.5%)
b. Someone wants to dance with every woman.
(+A: 62.5%) (+mA: 12.5%) (-A: 25%)

(12) a. Someone promised her to invite everyone.
(+A: 25%) (+mA: 0%) (-A: 62.5%)
b. Someone persuaded her to invite everyone.
(+A: 25%) (+mA: 12.5%) (-A: 50%)
c. Someone persuaded her that she should invite everyone.
(+A: 12.5%) (+mA: 0%) (-A: 75%)
d. John promised someone to invite everyone.
(+A: 25%) (+mA: 0%) (-A: 75%)
e. John persuaded someone to invite everyone.
(+A: 37.5%) (+mA: 0%) (-A: 62.5%)
=====>One person was mute on (12a,b,c)

(13) a. What did everyone make a plan to say?
(+A: 25%) (+mA: 12.5%) (-A: 62.5%)
b. What did everyone plan to say?
(+A: 25%) (+mA: 25%) (-A: 50%)

(14) a. What did you make the claim that everyone said?
(+A: 25%) (+mA: 0%) (-A: 37.5%)
====>Three people judged (14a) to be ungrammatical or unacceptable.
b. What did you claim that everyone said?
(+A: 12.5%) (+mA: 12.5%) (-A: 75%)

...................
III. Between 'who' and 'everyone'

(15) a. Who does everyone think you saw?
(+A: 12.5%) (+mA: 12.5%) (-A: 75%)
b. Who does everyone think saw you?
(+A: 25%) (+mA: 0%) (-A: 75%)

******************************************************************************

Best wishes,
Eung-Cheon Hah

LL Issue: 8.539
Date Posted: 18-Apr-1997
Original Query: Read original query


Back

Sums main page