1 What Are Bare Pps?

1 What Are Bare Pps?

Bare PPs

Semantic Structures 2011-2012

Weak Referentiality Project

1 What are bare PPs?

(1) Descriptive definition

A bare PP is an adposition with a determinerless singular count common noun.

(2) Bare PPs

at school, by car, on TV, at hand, at eye level, per recruited student

(3) Non-bare PPs

about wine (not count), about dogs (not singular), about midnight (not common)

(4) Non-decidable

a priori, ex cathedra, ad nauseam; in zwang ‘in fashion’, van lieverlee ‘gradually’

(5) A first search in the British National Corpus (http://corpus.byu.edu/bnc/)

a. about [nn1*], at [nn1*]

b. about [aj*] [nn1*], at [aj*] [nn1*]

2 What kind of bare PPs are there?

(6) Fixed and variable parts

a. PN of course

b. PN by car/train/carpet/telephone (P-based)

c. PN in/to/out of jail (N-based)

d. PAN at long last

e. PAN at great/considerable/tedious/epic length

(7) PN type

a. no variability in P or N

b. no modification

c. non-compositional semantics

d. no PDN counterpart

(8) PN examples

at large, before hand, by heart, from scratch, in fact, of course, on track, to date

(9) PAN type with fixed/variable A

a. like PN type, but with fixed A

b. like PN type, but with variable A

(10) PAN examples

a. at long last, at full tilt, in due course

b. at [aj*] [nn1*], with [aj*] reason

(11) P-based type

a. variability in noun

b. modification of noun sometimes possible?

c. compositional semantics

d. sometimes PDN counterpart, sometimes not

(12) P-based examples

a. English: by + means, per + unit, on + medium, as + role

b. Dutch: zonder ‘without’, in + clothing, op + time

c. German: unter ‘under’ (in certain non-spatial contexts)

(13) More English examples

a. on tape, on video, on film, on cd, on cassette, on celluloid, on disk, on usb stick, on digital audio tape

b. per year, per person, per square metre, per productive hour, per terabyte, per recruited student that finishes the project

c. as secretary, as witness, as general manager, as federal minister, as avatar, as sole surviving brother of the king

d. by train, by telephone, by road, by radio, by pogo stick, by open-topped bus

(14) Percentages of PN for Dutch prepositions (Eindhovencorpus, 720.000 words)

(15) Percentages of PN for French prepositions (Frantext, 1.4M words)

(16) N-based type

a. variability in preposition

b. no modification

c. compositional semantics, but with enrichment

d. contrast with PDN counterpart

(17) N-based examples

a. at school, from school, to school

b. in prison, out of prison, from prison

c. in bed, to bed, out of bed

d. to town, in town, out of town

3 What are N-based bare PPs like?

Narrow scope

(18) a. Each mobster went to prison.

b. Each mobster went to a prison.

Discourse opacity

(19) a. Pat is in prison. ?It is a 3-story concrete building.

b. Pat is in a prison. It is a 3-story concrete building.

Number neutrality

(20) a. Bob was in prison for 10 years, first in Alcatraz, then in Sing Sing.

b. ?Bob was in a prison for 10 years, first in Alcatraz, then in Sing Sing.

Limited productivity

(21) a. *Bob is in penitentiary.

b. Bob is in a penitentiary.

Nouns from Stvan (1998)

(22) base, bed, camp, campus, cellar, chapel, church, class, clinic, college, country, court, daycare, deck, dock, district, hall, harbor, hill, home, hospital, island, jail, kindergarten, kitchen, line, market, meeting, office, pasture, planet, port, prison, property, river, school, sea, shore, site, seminary, slope, stage, state, stream, studio, synagogue, table, temple, theater, town, university, work, world, yeshiva

Specific governors

(23) a. *Bob is near prison. – Bob is in prison

b. Bob is near a prison. – Bob is in a prison.

Restricted modification

(24) a. *Bob is in crowded prison.

b. Bob is in a crowded prison.

Stereotypical enrichment (activity implicature)

(25) a. ?Bob is in prison to do some plumbing.

b. Bob is in a prison to do some plumbing.

Other examples of stereotypical enrichment (possessor + familiarity)

(26) a. Three days later Mrs Holt arrivedintown.

b. Sue expected the doctor to come to school. (Jackendoff et al. 1993)

Also as object and subject

(27) a. I left college/court/hospital/jail/port/school/town/university.

b. Court/hospital/jail/school/university is boring.

Defectivity Hypothesis (for English)

N-based bareness is the result of a more general phenomenon of defectiveness in the determiner system of certain nouns. (Baldwin et al. 2006, Stvan 2009, Himmelmann 1998)

4 What do N-based bare PPs have to do with weak definites?

Weak definites

are definites that do not satisfy the usual uniqueness and familiarity requirements. (Carlson & Sussman 2005, Lucas 2011, Aguilar Guevara & Zwarts 2011)

Ellipsis test of Carlson & Sussman (2005)

(28) a. Bob went to the store/office/pub and so did Eve.

(could be different > no uniqueness)

b. Eve went to the hotel/restaurant/house and so did Bob.

(can only be the same > uniqueness)

Other properties of weak definites (cf. bare nominals)

(29) a. Each mobster went to the pub.

b. #Let’s go to the pub and smash it up.

c. Bob was in the pub the whole evening, first in pub A then in pub B.

d. #Bob is in the bar/café/restaurant.

d’. #Bob is near the pub.

e. #Bob is in the crowded pub.

f. #Bob is in the pub to do some plumbing.

Kind-based hypothesis for weak definites

Weak definites satisfy the usual restrictions for definite articles, because they refer to kinds (types) and not to individuals (tokens). (Aguilar-Guevara & Zwarts 2011)

Additional assumptions

- D picks out the maximal element in a denotation.

- $x … R(x)(k) relates an object x as a realization to a kind k.

- Certain prepositions (P+) and verbs (V+) can select a kind and introduce an existential quantifier over the realizations of that kind.

Regular definite vs. weak definite

(30) Dad is in the pub.

a. Regular reading: in(D(pub))(dad)

b. Weak reading: in+(D(pub+))(dad)

Þ $x [ R(D(pub+))(x) Ù in(x)(dad) ]

Sloppy identity

(31) a. Dad is in the pub and so is Mum.

in+(D(pub+))(dad) Ù in+ (D(pub+))(mum) Þ

$x [ R(D(pub+))(x) Ù in(x)(dad) ] Ù $x [ R(D(pub+))(x) Ù in(x)(mum) ]

b Dad is in the hotel and so is Mum.

in(D(hotel))(dad) Ù in(D(hotel))(mum)

Generic statements

(32) Pub is a place for men, not women.

place-for-men(pub+) Ù Ø place-for-women(pub+)

(33) a. Narrow scope: $ is introduced locally

"x [ mobster(x) ® go-to+(D(pub+))(x) ] Þ

"x [ mobster(x) ® $y [ R(D(pub+))(y) Ù go-to(y)(x) ]

b. Discourse opacity: $ is only inferred, not strong enough to bind

go-to+(D(pub+))(w) Ù smash(?)(w)

$y [ R(D(pub+))(y) Ù go-to(y)(w) Ù smash(y)(w) ]

c. Number neutrality: realizations can be plural sums

in+(D(pub+))(bob) Þ $x [ R(D(pub+))(x) Ù in(x)(bob) ]

d. Lexical restrictions: not every noun has the right taxonomic structure

in+(D(bar?))(bob)

d’ Specific governors: not every prep or verb can take a kind

near?(D(pub+))(bob)

e. Restricted modification: modifiers apply to tokens, not to types

* in+(D(crowded(pub+)))(bob)

f. Stereotypical enrichment: part of inference from type to token

in+(D(pub+))(bob) Þ $x [ R(D(pub+))(x) Ù in(x)(bob) Ù drink(bob) ]

Complementary distribution of bare and weak

(34) a. in church – #in the church (Church is not a place for men.)

b. *in pub – in the pub (The pub is not a place for women.)

c. in hospital (Br) – in the hospital (Am)

d. at university (Br) – at the university (Am)

The bare nominals as defective weak definites hypothesis

Bare nominals (of the N-based type) are in complementary distribution with weak definites. In other words, they are weak definites with a defective article system.

5 What is the situation with N-based bare PPs in Dutch?

N-based bare PPs in Dutch (Van der Beek 2005, Paenen 2009, Van der Klis 2010)

(35) school ‘school’ op school ‘at school’, naar school ‘to school’, van, uit school ‘from school’

huis ‘house’ thuis, in huis ‘(at) home’, naar huis ‘home’, van, uit huis ‘from home’

honk ‘honk’ op honk, bij honk ‘at home’, van honk ‘from home’

bed ‘bed’ in bed ‘in bed’, naar bed ‘to bed’, uit bed ‘out of bed’

bad ‘bath’ in bad ‘in the bathtub’, uit bad ‘out of the bathtub’

zee ‘sea’ op zee ‘at sea’, aan zee ‘by the sea’, naar zee ‘to sea’, in zee ‘into the sea’, uit zee ‘out of the sea’

tafel ‘table’ aan tafel ‘at/to the table’, op tafel ‘on the table’, van tafel ‘from the table’

straat ‘street’ op straat ‘on the street’, van straat ‘from the street’, over straat ‘across the street’

kantoor ‘office’ op kantoor ‘at the office’, naar kantoor ‘to the office’, van kantoor ‘from the office’

zolder ‘attic’ op zolder ‘in the attic’, naar zolder ‘to the attic’, van zolder ‘from the attic’

college ‘class’ op college ‘in class’, naar college ‘to class’

stal ‘stable’ op stal ‘in the shed’, van stal ‘from the shed’

wal ‘shore’ aan wal ‘ashore’, van wal ‘from the shore’

dek ‘deck’ aan dek, op dek ‘on deck’, van dek ‘from the deck’

boord ‘board’ aan boord ‘aboard, on board’, van boord ‘ashore’

dok ‘dock’ in dok ‘in dock’, uit dok ‘out of dock’

Complementarity of bareness and definiteness

(36) a. English bare > Dutch definite

in prison > in de gevangenis, in church > in de kerk, to town > naar de stad, from hospital > uit het ziekenhuis, at university > op de universiteit

b. Dutch bare > English definite

op straat > on the street, op kantoor > in the office, op tafel > on the table

Complementarity also on subject and object position

(37) a. Hospitalwasthe best bit of this accident.

a’. Het ziekenhuis was het beste deel van zijn ongeluk.

b. Anthony had justleftuniversity.

b’. Anthony had net de universiteit verlaten.

Stereotypical interpretations

(38) a. Ada heeft Bob op kantoor ontmoet.

Ada has Bob on office met

‘Ada met Bob in the office.’

b. De soep staat op tafel.

The soup stands on table

‘The soup is standing on the table.’

Defectivity in Dutch: Apart from school, the relevant bare nouns do not appear bare outside of PPs. This means that the bareness of N-based PPs does not reside exclusively in the noun, but must be a property of the whole PP.

One implementation:

(39) a. á[N school ], schoolñ vs. á[DP school ], D(school+)ñ

b. á[N bed ], bedñ vs. á[PP in bed ], in+(D(bed+))ñ

6 What does this mean for P-based bare PPs

P-based cases

(40) a. on tape, on video, on film, on cd, on cassette, on celluloid, on disk, on usb stick, on digital audio tape

b. per year, per person, per square metre, per productive hour, per terabyte, per recruited student that finishes the project

c. as secretary, as witness, as general manager, as federal minister, as avatar, as sole surviving brother of the king

d. by train, by telephone, by road, by radio, by pogo stick, by open-topped bus

Property type Some P-based cases can be treated as selecting a semantic property, a set of tokens (type et).

Quantificational per

(41) a. per » ‘for every’

b. for ( every ( person))

|--per--|

c. per: selection of et restriction of quantifier

Free modification (because of token-level semantics)

(42) a. per recruited student that finishes the project

per(that-finishes-the-project(recruited(student)))

b. as sole surviving brother of the king

as(sole-surviving(brother(the-king)))

Kind type Some P-based cases involve reference to a kind.

Media on

(43) a. on tape

b. op (de) band (Dutch)

c. onmedia ( D ( tape+ ))

|---on---|

Restricted modification (sub-types)

(44) on digital audio tape

onmedia ( D ( digital+ ( audio+ ( tape+ ))))

A grammatical distinction

(45) N-based: bareness tied to the noun or preposition + noun combination

P-based: bareness tied to the preposition

A semantic distinction

(46) kind-based: bareness alternates with (weak) definite

property-based: bareness alternates with indefinite

1