Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-qlrfm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-11T04:08:14.035Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Towards a unified analysis of French floating quantifiers

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 March 2000

Cécile De Cat
Affiliation:
University of York

Abstract

In French, a quantifier can appear in various positions outside of the NP it quantifies over, whether this NP is the subject or the (direct or indirect) object of the sentence. This phenomenon, often referred to as ‘floating’, has been investigated since the early stages of the generative framework, and several analyses have been proposed to account for both the quantifier subject and the quantifier object in a unified way. However, to my knowledge, none of them has succeeded in providing such a unified account without recourse to non-explanatory restrictions. The main aim of this paper is to propose an analysis that does not require any such restrictions. The focus will be on anaphoric quantifiers (i.e. quantifiers that have to be linked to some other argument position in order to be interpretable), the analysis of which will be shown to extend straightforwardly to pronominal and adverbial quantifiers, according to the principles of Government and Binding theory.

The study of floating quantifiers raises the broader question of how to account for locality requirements in a satisfactory way. Basically, there are two possible ways to account for the restrictions on the distribution of floating quantifiers: either they flow from derivational restrictions, or they are subject to representational restrictions. I will argue in favour of the latter.

The analysis proposed here is essentially syntactic. However, reference will be made to the semantic interpretation of various structures: the position occupied by the floating quantifier at S-structure will be shown to constrain its interpretation. The semantics of floating quantifiers will however not be investigated beyond this.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
© 2000 Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)