Hostname: page-component-68c7f8b79f-lvtpz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-01-01T08:52:31.537Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Comparisons of Nominal Degrees

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2026

Galit Weidman Sassoon
Galit Weidman Sassoon*
Affiliation:
Bar Ilan University
*
Haruzim 6/11, Ramat Gan 5252520, Israel [galitadar@gmail.com]
Get access

Abstract

There are two fundamentally different kinds of comparison: DIFFERENCE comparisons and CONTRAST comparisons. Unlike adjective phrases, noun phrases can occur in contrast comparisons (such as This bird is more a duck than a goose), but not in difference comparisons (#This bird is more a duck than that one is), where the mediation of a partitive particle is necessary (as in more of a duck). The problem is that postulating either semantic gradability or even just ad-hoc, metalinguistic, gradable interpretations for nouns in order to capture the meaning of contrast comparisons results in wrong predictions for difference comparisons and for most other gradable constructions (#very duck, #too duck, #duck enough, #the most duck). This article presents an account that exploits the psychological notion of a CONTRAST SET to explain these data and to correctly predict the truth conditions and characteristic inference patterns of contrast comparisons. Two main conclusions are, first, that if adjectives are degree expressions, so are nouns, and second, that nouns form a different type of degree expression.

Keywords

comparisondegreecontrastcategorizationnounadjectivedimension

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Language , Volume 93 , Issue 1 , March 2017 , pp. 153 - 188
Copyright
Copyright © 2017 Linguistic Society of America

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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Aloni, Maria, and Roelofsen, Floris. 2011. Interpreting concealed questions. Linguistics and Philosophy 34 (5). 443–78. DOI: 10.1007/s10988-011-9102-9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baker, Mark C. 2003. Lexical categories: Verbs, nouns, and adjectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511615047CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bale, Alan Clinton. 2011. Scales and comparison classes. Natural Language Semantics 19 (2). 169–90. DOI: 10.1007/s11050-010-9068-0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barsalou, Lawrence W. 1983. Ad hoc categories. Memory & Cognition 11. 211–27. DOI: 10.3758/BF03196968.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Beck, Sigrid. 2011. Comparison constructions. Semantics: An international handbook of natural language meaning, vol. 2, ed. by Maienborn, Claudia, Heusinger, Klaus von, and Portner, Paul, 1341–89. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
Bhatt, Rajesh, and Pancheva, Roumyana. 2004. Late merger of degree clauses. Linguistic Inquiry 35 (1). 1–45. DOI: 10.1162/002438904322793338.10.1162/002438904322793338CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bobaljik, Jonathan David. 2012. Universals in comparative morphology: Suppletion, superlatives, and the structure of words. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bochnak, Μ. Ryan. 2010. Quantity and gradability across categories. Proceedings of Semantics and Linguistic Theory (SALT) 20. 251–68. DOI: 10.3765/salt.v20i0.2570.Google Scholar
Breakstone, Micha y., Cremers, Alexandre, Fox, Danny; and Hackl, Martin. 2011. On the analysis of scope ambiguities in comparative constructions: Converging evidence from real-time sentence processing and offline data. Proceedings of Semantics and Linguistic Theory (SALT) 21. 712–31. DOI: 10.3765/salt.v21i0.2609.Google Scholar
Bresnan, Joan. 1973. Syntax of the comparative clause construction in English. Linguistic Inquiry 4. 275–343. Online: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4177775.Google Scholar
BÜring, Daniel. 2007. Cross-polar nomalies. Proceedings of Semantics and Linguistic Theory (SALT) 17. 37–52. DOI: 10.3765/salt.vl7i0.2957.10.3765/salt.v17i0.2957CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Constantinescu, Camelia. 2011. Gradability in the nominal domain. Leiden: Leiden University dissertation.Google Scholar
Davies, Mark. 2010. Corpus of Contemporary American English. Provo, UT: Brigham Young University. Online: http://corpus.byu.edu/coca.Google Scholar
Davis, Tyler, and Love, Bradley C.. 2010. Memory for category information is idealized through contrast with competing options. Psychological Science 21. 234–42. DOI: 10.1177/0956797609357712.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
de Saussure, Ferdinand. 1972 [1916]. Cours de linguistique général. Paris: Edition Payot.Google Scholar
Doetjes, Jenny. 2010. Incommensurability. Logic, language and meaning: 17th Amsterdam Colloquium, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, December 16-18, 2009, ed. by Aloni, Maria, Bastiaanse, Harald, Jager, Tikitu de, and Schulz, Katrin, 254–63. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
Doherty, Paul c., and Schwartz, Arthur. 1967. The syntax of the compared adjective in English. Language 43 (4). 903–36. DOI: 10.2307/411973.10.2307/411973CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fox, Danny, and Katzir, Roni. 2011. On the characterization of alternatives. Natural Language Semantics 19. 87–107. DOI: 10.1007/s11050-010-9065-3..10.1007/s11050-010-9065-3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gärdenfors, Peter. 2000. Conceptual spaces: The geometry of thought. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.10.7551/mitpress/2076.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gärdenfors, Peter. 2004. Conceptual spaces as a framework for knowledge representation. Mind and Matter 2 (2). 9–27.Google Scholar
Gärdenfors, Peter. 2014. The geometry of meaning: Semantics based on conceptual spaces. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.10.7551/mitpress/9629.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Giannakidou, Anastasia, and Yoon, Suwon. 2011. The subjective mode of comparison: Metalinguistic comparatives in Greek and Korean. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 29 (3). 621–55. DOI: 10.1007/s11049-011-9133-5.10.1007/s11049-011-9133-5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldstone, Robert L., Steyvers, Mark; and Rogosky, Brian J.. 2003. Conceptual interrelatedness and caricatures. Memory & Cognition 31 (2). 169–80. DOI: 10.3758/BF03194377.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hackl, Martin. 2001. Comparative quantifiers and plural predication. West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics (WCCFL) 20. 234–47.Google Scholar
Hampton, James A. 1995. Testing the prototype theory of concepts. Journal of Memory and Language 34. 686–708. DOI: 10.1006/jmla.1995.1031.10.1006/jmla.1995.1031CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hampton, James A. 1998. Similarity-based categorization and fuzziness of natural categories. Cognition 65. 137–65. DOI: 10.1016/S0010-0277(97)00042-5.10.1016/S0010-0277(97)00042-5CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hampton, James a., Storms, Gert, Simmons, Claire L.; and Heussen, Daniel. 2009. Feature integration in natural language concepts. Memory & Cognition 37 (8). 1150–63. DOI: 10.3758/MC.37.8.1150.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Heim, Irene. 2000. Degree operators and scope. Proceedings of Semantics and Linguistic Theory (SALT) 10. 40–64. DOI: 10.3765/salt.v10i0.3102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heim, Irene. 2008. Decomposing antonyms? Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung 12.21225.Google Scholar
Heim, Irene, and Kratzer, Angelika. 1998. Semantics in generative grammar. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Kamp, Hans. 1975. Two theories about adjectives. Formal semantics for natural language, ed. by Keenan, Edward Louis, 123–55. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kamp, Hans, and Partee, Barbara. 1995. Prototype theory and compositionality. Cognition 57. 129–91. DOI: 10.1016/0010-0277(94)00659-9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kennedy, Christopher. 1999. Projecting the adjective: The syntax and semantics of gradability and comparison. New York: Garland.Google Scholar
Kennedy, Christopher. 2007. Vagueness and grammar: The semantics of relative and absolute gradable adjectives. Linguistics and Philosophy 30 (1). 1–45. DOI: 10.1007/s10988-006-9008-0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kennedy, Christopher, and Levin, Beth. 2008. Measure of change: The adjectival core of degree achievements. Adjectives and adverbs: Syntax, semantics, and discourse, ed. by McNally, Louise and Kennedy, Christopher, 156–82. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kennedy, Christopher, and McNally, Louise. 2005. Scale structure, degree modification, and the semantics of gradable predicates. Language 81 (2). 345–81. DOI: 10.1353/lan.2005.0071.10.1353/lan.2005.0071CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klein, Ewan. 1980. A semantics for positive and comparative adjectives. Linguistics and Philosophy 4 (1). 1–45. DOI: 10.1007/BF00351812.10.1007/BF00351812CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klein, Ewan. 1991. Comparatives. Semantics: An international handbook of contemporary research, ed. by Stechow, Arnim von and Wunderlich, Dieter, 673–91. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Krantz, David h., Luce, R. Duncan, Suppes, Patrick; and Tversky, Amos. 1971. Foundations of measurement, vol. 1: Additive and polynomial representations. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Krifka, Manfred. 2007. Approximate interpretation of number words: A case for strategic communication. Cognitive foundations of interpretation, ed. by Bouma, Gerlof, Krämer, Irene, and Zwarts, Joost, 111–26. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Lakoff, George. 1987. Women, fire and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago: Chicago University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lasersohn, Peter. 1999. Pragmatic halos. Language 75 (3). 522–51. DOI: 10.2307/417059.10.2307/417059CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCawley, James D. 1998. The syntactic phenomena of English. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
McConnell-Ginet, Sally. 1973. Comparative constructions in English: A syntactic and semantic analysis. Rochester, NY: University of Rochester dissertation.Google Scholar
Mervis, Carolyn b., and Rosch, Eleanor. 1981. Categorization of natural objects. Annual Review of Psychology 32. 89–115. DOI: 10.1146/annurev.ps.32.020181.000513.10.1146/annurev.ps.32.020181.000513CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, George a., and Johnson-Laird, Philip Nicholas. 1976. Language and perception. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morzycki, Marcin. 2011. Metalinguistic comparison in an alternative semantics for imprecision. Natural Language Semantics 19 (1). 39–86. DOI: 10.1007/s11050-010-9063-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murphy, Gregory. 2002. The big book of concepts. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.10.7551/mitpress/1602.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pancheva, Roumyana. 2006. Phrasal and clausal comparatives in Slavic. Formal Approaches to Slavic Linguistics 14: The Princeton meeting, ed. by Lavine, James, Franks, Steven, Filip, Hana, and Tasseva-Kurktchieva, Mila, 236–57. Ann Arbor: Michigan Slavic Publications.Google Scholar
Pothos, Emmanuel m., and Wills, Andy J.. 2011. Formal approaches in categorization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rooth, Mats. 1992. A theory of focus interpretation. Natural Language Semantics 1 (1). 75–116. DOI: 10.1007/BF02342617.10.1007/BF02342617CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosch, Eleanor H. 1973. Natural categories. Cognitive Psychology 4 (3). 328–50. DOI: 10.1016/0010-0285(73)90017-0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosch, Eleanor H. 1975. Cognitive representations of semantic categories. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 104. 192–232. DOI: 10.1037/0096-3445.104.3.192.10.1037/0096-3445.104.3.192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosch, Eleanor h., and Mervis, Caroline B.. 1975. Family resemblances: Studies in the internal structure of categories. Cognitive Psychology 7 (4). 573–605. DOI: 10.1016/0010-0285(75)90024-9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sassoon, Galit W. 2013. Vagueness, gradability, and typicality: The interpretation of adjectives and nouns. Leiden: Brill.10.1163/9789004248588CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sassoon, Galit W. 2015. Between-noun comparisons. Logic, language, and computation: Selected papers from the 10th TbiLLC conference, ed. by Aher, Martin, Hole, Daniel, Jeřábek, Emil, and Kupke, Clemens, 276–89. Berlin: Springer. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-662-46906-4_16.Google Scholar
Sassoon, Galit W. 2017. Dimension accessibility as a predictor of morphological gradability. Compositionality and concepts in linguistics and psychology, ed. by James A. Hampton and Yoad Winter. Berlin: Springer, to appear.Google Scholar
Schwarzschild, Roger. 2005. Measure phrases as modifiers of adjectives. Recherches Linguistiques de Vincennes 34. 207–28. DOI: 10.4000/rlv.1401.Google Scholar
Schwarzschild, Roger, and Wilkinson, Karina. 2002. Quantifiers in comparatives: A semantics of degree based on intervals. Natural Language Semantics 10 (1). 1–41. DOI: 10.1023/A:1015545424775.10.1023/A:1015545424775CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shepard, Roger N. 1987. Toward a universal law of generalization for psychological science. Science 237. 1317–23. DOI: 10.1126/science.3629243.10.1126/science.3629243CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, David J., and Minda, John Paul. 2002. Distinguishing prototype-based and exemplar-based processes in dot-pattern category learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 28. 800–811. DOI: 10.1037/0278-7393.28.4.800.Google ScholarPubMed
Solt, Stephanie. 2009. The semantics of adjectives of quantity. New York: City University of New York dissertation.Google Scholar
Stalnaker, Robert. 1978. Assertion. Syntax and semantics, vol. 9: Pragmatics, ed. by Cole, Peter, 315–32. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Stewart, Neil, and Brown, Gordon D. A.. 2005. Similarity and dissimilarity as evidence in perceptual categorization. Journal of Mathematical Psychology 49. 403–9. DOI: 10.1016/j.jmp.2005.06.001.10.1016/j.jmp.2005.06.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tversky, Amos. 1977. Features of similarity. Psychological Review 84. 327–52. DOI: 10.1037/0033-295X.84.4.327.10.1037/0033-295X.84.4.327CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Rooij, Robert. 2011. Measurement and interadjective comparisons. Journal of Semantics 28. 335–58. DOI: 10.1093/jos/ffq018.10.1093/jos/ffq018CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Verheyen, Steven, Deyne, Simon De, Dry, Mathew J.; and Storms, Gert. 2011. Uncovering contrast categories in categorization with a probabilistic threshold model. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 37. 1515–31. DOI: 10.1037/a0024431.Google ScholarPubMed
von Stechow, Arnim. 1984. Comparing semantic theories of comparison. Journal of Semantics 3. 1–77. DOI: 10.1093/jos/3.1-2.1.10.1093/jos/3.1-2.1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
von Stechow, Arnim. 2009. The temporal degree adjectives früh (er)/spät (er) ‘early (er)’/‘late (r)’ and the semantics of the positive. Quantification, definiteness, and nominalization, ed. by Giannakidou, Anastasia and Rathert, Monika, 214–33. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Voorspoels, Wouter, Storms, Gert; and Vanpaemel, Wolf. 2012. Contrast effects in typicality judgements: A hierarchical Bayesian approach. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 65 (9). 1721–39. DOI: 10.1080/17470218.2012.662237.10.1080/17470218.2012.662237CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wattenmaker, William David. 1995. Knowledge structures and linear separability: Integrating information in object and social categorization. Cognitive Psychology 28.274328. DOI: 10.1006/cogp.1995.1007.10.1006/cogp.1995.1007CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wellwood, Alexis. 2014. Measuring predicates. College Park: University of Maryland dissertation.Google Scholar
Zamparelli, Roberto. 2002. Definite and bare kind-denoting noun phrases. Romance languages and linguistic theory 2000: Selected papers from ‘Going Romance ’ 2000, Utrecht, 30 November-2 December, ed. by Beyssade, Claire, Bok-Bennema, Reineke, Drijkoningen, Frank, and Monachesi, Paola, 305–42. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar