Robert Chapman's article on the to-Poss in English (Chapman, 1975) brings out some interesting points about constructions with the preposition to. Chapman concludes by suggesting the need for more data. As I shall try to demonstrate, more data reveal that the uses of to-Poss are more pervasive in English than his article implies.

Chapman restricts to-Poss to three categories: (a) kinship and other personal relations; (b) parts or qualities — both (a) and (b) are elements of what has long been singled out as ‘inalienable possession’ — and (c) serving adjuncts (64).

These categories seem to be simultaneously too limited and too general; all instances of the so-called to-Poss can apparently be included under one category, but a category with very special properties.

This paper studies prenominal reduplicative classifier in Cantonese, which has been argued to be a distributive quantifier on a par with English every/each and Mandarin mei ‘every’, and a plural classifier giving the ‘many’ reading. The analysis I propose draws heavily on ideas introduced in the cover theory proposed by Schwarzschild (1996) and Brisson (1998, 2003), and ideas introduced by Partee (2004) and others on quantifying determiner many. I argue that prenominal reduplicative classifier is a quantifying determiner which is ambiguous between a quantifier type and a modifier type. When it occurs with the distributive quantifier dou1 ‘all’, it serves as a modifier, regulating the domain of dou1-quantification by imposing a maximizing effect on the nominal it modifies (see e.g. Link 1983; Gillon 1987; Schwarzschild 1996; Brisson 1998, 2003). Without the presence of a distributive quantifier, prenominal reduplicative classifier serves either as a modifier or as a quantifier, giving its NP a weak cardinal reading or a strong proportional reading, respectively. The proposed analysis implies that domain restriction in Chinese is overtly realized in grammatical form by means of the reduplicative classifier (when combined with a distributive quantifier) and that Chinese may have determiners, which is at least true in Cantonese.

This article reflects on a double interpretation of English constructions containing the combined expression will have to. As I will show, illocutions involving sentences of the type ‘NP will have to VP’ can be interpreted as either (i) predicting future enforcing circumstances that trigger a future obligation or (ii) reporting such circumstances as currently in force at speech time. Once I sketch the different semantic elements at play in a Kratzerian framework, I cast doubt on some current views on the so-called modal–tense interaction. As I will show, one way to fully account for the availability of both readings is by assuming a semantic temporal underspecification as to when the triggering circumstances in the conversational background are initially in force. This raises important theoretical caveats for semantic analyses in the field, particularly for those that equate the semantics of the future with prediction. As the article shows, such a widespread assumption can be contended by a dynamic account of obligational ascriptions, according to which their different illocutionary forces can be derived from the contextual change potential of its primitive (and admittedly underspecified) future semantics. Ultimately, the paper voices support for the view that future semantics must not be equated with prediction.

This paper investigates aspectual meanings that resultative morphemes in Mandarin Chinese contribute to interpretations of the entire predicates, and in particular the culmination readings they bring out of the originally non-culminating accomplishments. Two resultative morphemes are studied: -wán and -diào. I argue that while both morphemes give rise to culmination readings, the culmination readings are derived in different ways. I propose that -wán expresses termination, which comments on the progress of an event. The culmination readings of the telicized accomplishments by -wán are obtained indirectly. By contrast, -diào expresses culmination, commenting directly on the resulting culmination state. The proposed analysis for the two morphemes is couched in the framework defined by Krifka (1989, 1992, 1998), which models the relations between events, individuals, and times as a series of homomorphic relations between mereological part structures. Following Zucchi & White (2001), I analyze -diào in terms of a maximalization over patient, which transfers mereological properties from the individual structure to the event structure, explaining the culmination reading, and -wán a maximalization over time, which transfers mereological properties from the time structure to the event structure, explaining termination, and then transfers the mereological properties to the individual structure, explaining the culmination reading.

Gilles Fauconnier & Eve Sweetser (eds.),Space, worlds, and grammar. Chicago & London: University of Chicago Press, 1996. 355 Pp.

Masayoshi Shibatani & Sandra Thompson (eds.),Grammatical constructions: their form and meaning. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1996. Pp. xvii+345.

Several years ago a volume of articles appeared called The view from Building 20 (Hale & Keyser 1993). As suggested by the title, the contributions reflected trends guiding the theoretical paradigm pre-eminently associated with MIT. After reading this collection, a colleague quipped that she wondered how well the view from Building 20 accorded with the broad research world beyond it. In this connection, the two books under review represent perspectives on language analysis which encourage one to pause and consider the present theoretical landscape in linguistics, and, less directly, the role of linguistics within modern cognitive science. Among their other merits, both books provide a rich and useful illustration of some of the perspectives on language analysis outside of Building 20. In doing so, they also help to define a more interesting research landscape than that usually characterized as an opposition between ‘formalists’ versus ‘cognitive/functionalists’.

I. SOUNDS IN MODERN HEBREW Hebrew shorashim – the triliteral roots – have already been analysed from many points of view, for example in Morgenbrod & Serifi (1976, 1977, 1978). The aim of this article is an examination of the sound structure of shorashim.

In general we can divide the consonants which form the shorashim into two different types; concerning (a) the manner of articulation (e.g. plosives, nasals, etc.); and (b) the place of articulation (e.g. bilabials, labiodentals, etc.).

In this study we have concentrated on position of articulation and ignore manner of articulation.

In Figure I the consonants forming the shorashim are related to the different kinds of sounds according to Wendt (1961).

In order to investigate the relationship between the sounds it is convenient to establish so-called compound matrices with a computer. All computation was done by a program in COBOL running on the SIEMENS System 4004. As material for our analysis we took 2443 shorashim from the sources Barkaly (1972) and Even-Shoshan (1972).

I. In recent years, considerable attention has been paid to stylistic variation in linguistic description. Variation which used to be described as ‘free’ has lately been described as fitting within identifiable linguistic and/or social parameters. I discern three trends. In the first, variation that was previously ignored is incorporated into description in a fairly systematic way. An example of this is Harris' (1969: 7) claim that variation among the Spanish forms [esbjuðo], [ezbjuðo] and [ezβuðo] es viudo ‘he is a widower’‘not only CAN but MUST be described in terms of stylistic levels… it will be shown that careful examination of the kinds of alternation under discussion leads to some interesting questions about the form and organization of phonological rules’ (emphasis original).