Vše

Co hledáte?

Vše
Projekty
Výsledky výzkumu
Subjekty

Rychlé hledání

  • Projekty podpořené TA ČR
  • Významné projekty
  • Projekty s nejvyšší státní podporou
  • Aktuálně běžící projekty

Chytré vyhledávání

  • Takto najdu konkrétní +slovo
  • Takto z výsledků -slovo zcela vynechám
  • “Takto můžu najít celou frázi”

Annihilating atoms with entity partitives

Identifikátory výsledku

  • Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI

    <a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F00216224%3A14210%2F22%3A00129314" target="_blank" >RIV/00216224:14210/22:00129314 - isvavai.cz</a>

  • Výsledek na webu

  • DOI - Digital Object Identifier

Alternativní jazyky

  • Jazyk výsledku

    angličtina

  • Název v původním jazyce

    Annihilating atoms with entity partitives

  • Popis výsledku v původním jazyce

    In standard theories of pluralities and countability, the mass/count distinction is often formulated in terms of atomicity (e.g., Link 1983, Landman 1991, 2000, Chierchia 1998, 2010, Champollion 2017). Despite significant differences in particular theories, the contrast between count and mass nouns usually boils down to the (non-)existence of minimal building blocks in their denotations or, alternativley, to a distinct nature of those building blocks. The approach developed in this talk rejects the view that what counts as `one' is best represented as an atomic entity. Instead, building on a mereotopological approach to nominal semantics (Grimm 2012, see also Casati &amp; Varzi 1999) I propose that countability is a feature of individuals that constitute non-overlapping and integrated wholes (as opposed to, e.g., scattered entities and arbitrary sums). The evidence comes from entity partitives involving numerical quantification over material parts of referents of concrete count singular NPs, e.g., *three parts of the teddy bear*. First, I will present the problem such constructions pose for atomicity-based approaches to the mass/count distinction. Next, I will discuss two attempts to account for that problem, i.e., the theories of Chierchia (2010) and Landman (2016), and point what I believe to be their shortcomings. Then, I will argue for two claims, specifically (i) having a notion of atomicity is not enough for a full analysis of entity partitives and (ii) atomicity is actually not needed for that purpose since it can be replaced by mereotopological notions which are required independently. Finally, I will discuss independent cognitive evidence which seems to support my approach.

  • Název v anglickém jazyce

    Annihilating atoms with entity partitives

  • Popis výsledku anglicky

    In standard theories of pluralities and countability, the mass/count distinction is often formulated in terms of atomicity (e.g., Link 1983, Landman 1991, 2000, Chierchia 1998, 2010, Champollion 2017). Despite significant differences in particular theories, the contrast between count and mass nouns usually boils down to the (non-)existence of minimal building blocks in their denotations or, alternativley, to a distinct nature of those building blocks. The approach developed in this talk rejects the view that what counts as `one' is best represented as an atomic entity. Instead, building on a mereotopological approach to nominal semantics (Grimm 2012, see also Casati &amp; Varzi 1999) I propose that countability is a feature of individuals that constitute non-overlapping and integrated wholes (as opposed to, e.g., scattered entities and arbitrary sums). The evidence comes from entity partitives involving numerical quantification over material parts of referents of concrete count singular NPs, e.g., *three parts of the teddy bear*. First, I will present the problem such constructions pose for atomicity-based approaches to the mass/count distinction. Next, I will discuss two attempts to account for that problem, i.e., the theories of Chierchia (2010) and Landman (2016), and point what I believe to be their shortcomings. Then, I will argue for two claims, specifically (i) having a notion of atomicity is not enough for a full analysis of entity partitives and (ii) atomicity is actually not needed for that purpose since it can be replaced by mereotopological notions which are required independently. Finally, I will discuss independent cognitive evidence which seems to support my approach.

Klasifikace

  • Druh

    O - Ostatní výsledky

  • CEP obor

  • OECD FORD obor

    60203 - Linguistics

Návaznosti výsledku

  • Projekt

    <a href="/cs/project/GA20-16107S" target="_blank" >GA20-16107S: Struktury část-celek napříč jazyky</a><br>

  • Návaznosti

    P - Projekt vyzkumu a vyvoje financovany z verejnych zdroju (s odkazem do CEP)

Ostatní

  • Rok uplatnění

    2022

  • Kód důvěrnosti údajů

    S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů