Condition A and Scope Reconstruction

Abstract

It is well known that in certain environments the scope of a moved quantifier phrase can be determined at either its pre-movement position (“scope reconstruction”) or its post-movement position (“surface scope”). Thus the familiar ambiguity of (1) results from two choices for the scope of the moved QP. Under scope reconstruction, the scope of the moved existential QP is the sister of the pre-movement position (i.e. the sister of t, [to win the lottery]), while under surface scope it is the sister of the post-movement position (i.e. [is likely t to win the lottery]). The two scope possibilities yield different semantic interpretations, corresponding to the paraphrases in (2). (1) Someone from New York is likely t to win the lottery (2) a. It is likely that there will be someone from New York who wins the lottery b. There is someone from New York who is likely to win the lottery The ambiguity of (3) is commonly analyzed in similar terms, once it is realized that the moved wh-phrase involves pied-piping of an existential quantifier. This existential quantifier (n-many books, with n a degree variable bound by the wh-operator) has two possible scopes ([John is likely to hire t], [to hire t]), leading to two interpretations,

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 35 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.