English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

One of the central questions in linguistics is whether or not the Japanese floating numeral quantifier (FNQ) is always a distributive operator, as Gunji and Hasida (1998), Nakanishi (2004, 2007, 2008), and Kobuchi (2003, 2007) contend. This paper argues against their view and that the interpretive ambiguity is resolved if the semantic ambiguity arises due to the existence of the two different types of FNQs. It is argued that, discourse-semantically, what is crucial to the distinction between the two types of FNQs is whether an FNQ is interpreted via quantificational adverbs or quantificational determiners. This distinction is required when variance in FNQ interpretation is considered. In particular, it is shown that NP-related FNQs have much in common with referential (-like) nouns, functioning as discourse anaphoric items.

Towards a Proper Treatment of “NP-Related” Floating Numeral Quantifiers in Japanese