Universal #1604

Legacy number: 1604

 Number  1600
 Original  If a language has DPs at all, it has DPs of type e. If it has no DPs distinct from NPs, it has some way to use NPs referentially, as type e.
 Standardized  IF there are DPs of types other than e, THEN there are DPs of type e.
When there are no DPs distinct from NPs, NPs can be used as type e.
 Keywords  quantification, NP, DP, semantic type
 Domain  syntax, semantics
 Type  implication
 Status  achronic
 Quality  absolute
 Basis  unspecified
 Source  Partee 2000: 5

← Back to Universals Archive

Discussion
Notes
1. Partee (2000) claims the need to distinguish N and NP (common noun phrase) on the one hand, and DP (determiner phrase) on the other hand, and to find out.2. Default type assignments for NP, DP are: (a) NP: <e,t> (common noun phrase); (b) DP: e (referential DPs) and <<e,t>,t> (DPs as generalized quantifiers, à la Montague).3. See also ##1603, 1203.
Comment
Frans Plank · 3 Aug 2006
1. Partee 2000 claims the need to distinguish N and NP (common noun phrase) on the one hand, and DP (determiner phrase) on the other hand, and to find out.

2. Default type assignments for NP, DP are: (a) NP: <e,t> (common noun phrase); (b) DP: e (referential DPs) and <<e,t>,t> (DPs as generalized quantifiers, à la Montague).

3. See also <a class="innerLink" href="browse.php?entry_id=1603"><img src="../img/entry.gif" border="0">, <a class="innerLink" href="browse.php?entry_id=1203"><img src="../img/entry.gif" border="0">.