Hostname: page-component-89b8bd64d-7zcd7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-06T17:30:11.621Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Scale Structure, Degree Modification, and the Semantics of Gradable Predicates

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 February 2026

Christopher Kennedy  and
Louise McNally
Christopher Kennedy*
Affiliation:
Northwestern University
Louise McNally*
Affiliation:
Universitat Pompeu Fabra
*
Kennedy, Department of Linguistics Northwestern University 2016 Sheridan Rd. Evanston, IL 60208 [kennedy@northwestern.edu]
McNally, Department de Traducció i Filologia Universitat Pompeu Fabra La Rambla, 30-32 08002 Barcelona Spain [louise.mcnally@upf.edu]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In this article we develop a semantic typology of gradable predicates, with special emphasis on deverbal adjectives. We argue for the linguistic relevance of this typology by demonstrating that the distribution and interpretation of degree modifiers is sensitive to its two major classificatory parameters: (1) whether a gradable predicate is associated with what we call an open or closed scale, and (2) whether the standard of comparison for the applicability of the predicate is absolute or relative to a context. We further show that the classification of an important subclass of adjectives within the typology is largely predictable. Specifically, the scale structure of a deverbal gradable adjective correlates either with the algebraic part structure of the event denoted by its source verb or with the part structure of the entities to which the adjective applies. These correlations underscore the fact that gradability is characteristic not only of adjectives but also of verbs and nouns, and that scalar properties are shared by categorially distinct but derivationally related expressions.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Language , Volume 81 , Issue 2 , June 2005 , pp. 345 - 381
Copyright
Copyright © 2005 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

Barker, Chris. 2002. The dynamics of vagueness. Linguistics and Philosophy 25. 1–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bartsch, Renate, and Vennemann, Theo. 1973. Semantic structures: A study in the relation between syntax and semantics. Frankfurt: Athäenum.Google Scholar
Bierwisch, Manfred. 1989. The semantics of gradation. Dimensional adjectives, ed. by Bierwisch, Manfred and Lang, Ewald, 71–262. Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bolinger, Dwight. 1972. Degree words. The Hague: Mouton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Borer, Hagit. 1998. Deriving passive without theta roles. Morphological interfaces, ed. by Lapointe, Stephen, Brentari, Diane K., and Farrell, Patrick M., 60–99. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Bresnan, Joan. 1973. Syntax of the comparative clause construction in English. Linguistic Inquiry 4. 275–343.Google Scholar
Cresswell, Max J. 1977. The semantics of degree. Montague grammar, ed. by Partee, Barbara, 261–92. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Cruse, D. Allan. 1986. Lexical semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Demonte, Violeta. 2004. Merge of adjectives in DP and interface conditions. Madrid: Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, ms.Google Scholar
Doetjes, Jenny. 1997. Quantifiers and selection. Leiden: Rijksuniversiteit Leiden dissertation.Google Scholar
Dowty, David R. 1991. Thematic proto-roles and argument selection. Language 67. 547–619.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gazdar, Gerald. 1980. A phrase structure syntax for comparative clauses. Lexical grammar, ed. by Hoekstra, Teun, van, Harry Hulst, der, and Morgan, Michael, 165–79. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Graff, Delia. 2000. Shifting sands: An interest-relative theory of vagueness. Philosophical Topics 20. 45–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hay, Jen. 1998. The non-uniformity of degree achievements. Paper presented at the 72nd annual meeting of the Linguistic Society of America, New York City.Google Scholar
Hay, Jen, Kennedy, Christopher; and Levin, Beth. 1999. Scale structure underlies telicity in ‘degree achievements’. Semantics and Linguistic Theory 9. 127–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hazout, Ilan. 1995. Comparative ellipsis and logical form. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 13. 1–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heim, Irene. 1985. Notes on comparatives and related matters. Austin: University of Texas, MS.Google Scholar
Heim, Irene. 2000. Degree operators and scope. Semantics and Linguistic Theory 10. 40–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heim, Irene, and Kratzer, Angelika. 1998. Semantics in generative grammar. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Hellan, Lars. 1981. Towards an integrated analysis of comparatives. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
Hendriks, Petra. 1995. Comparatives in categorial grammar. Groningen: University of Groningen dissertation.Google Scholar
Jackendoff, Ray. 1996. The proper treatment of measuring out, telicity, and perhaps even quantification in English. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 14. 305–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kamp, J. A. W. 1975. Two theories of adjectives. Formal semantics of natural language, ed. by Keenan, Edward, 123–55. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kennedy, Christopher. 1999a. Gradable adjectives denote measure functions, not partial functions. Studies in the Linguistic Sciences 29. 65–80.Google Scholar
Kennedy, Christopher. 1999b. Projecting the adjective: The syntax and semantics of gradability and comparison. New York: Garland. [Santa Cruz: University of California, Santa Cruz dissertation, 1997.].Google Scholar
Kennedy, Christopher. 2001. Polar opposition and the ontology of ‘degrees’. Linguistics and Philosophy 24. 33–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kennedy, Christopher. 2002. Comparative deletion and optimality in syntax. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 20. 553–621.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kennedy, Christopher. 2003. Towards a grammar of vagueness. Paper presented at the Princeton Semantics Workshop, May 16-17, Princeton, NJ.Google Scholar
Kennedy, Christopher, and McNally, Louise. 1999. From event structure to scale structure: Degree modification in deverbal adjectives. Semantics and Linguistic Theory 9. 163–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klein, Ewan. 1980. A semantics for positive and comparative adjectives. Linguistics and Philosophy 4. 1–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klein, Ewan. 1991. Comparatives. Semantik: Ein internationales handbuch der zeitgenössischen forschung, ed. by Stechow, Arnim von and Wunderlich, Dieter, 673–91. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Knowles, John. 1974. The degree adverbial. Journal of English Linguistics 8. 21–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krifka, Manfred. 1989. Nominal reference, temporal constitution and quantification in event semantics. Semantics and contextual expression, ed. by Bartsch, Renate, Benthem, Johann van, and van, Peter Boas, Emde, 75–115. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krifka, Manfred. 1992. Thematic relations as links between nominal reference and temporal constitution. Lexical matters, ed. by Sag, Ivan and Szabolcsi, Anna, 29–53. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Krifka, Manfred. 1998. The origins of telicity. Events and grammar, ed. by Rothstein, Susan, 197–235. Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Landman, Fred. 1989. Groups, 1. Linguistics and Philosophy 12. 559–605.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lasersohn, Peter. 1995. Plurality, conjunction and events. Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lasersohn, Peter. 1999. Pragmatic halos. Language 75. 522–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lehrer, Adrienne. 1985. Markedness and antonymy. Journal of Linguistics 21. 397–429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levin, Beth, and Rappaport, Malka. 1986. The formation of adjectival passives. Linguistic Inquiry 17. 623–61.Google Scholar
Lewis, David K. 1979. Scorekeeping in a language game. Journal of Philosophical Logic 8. 339–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Link, Godehard. 1983. The logical analysis of plurals and mass terms: A lattice theoretical approach. Meaning, use, and interpretation of language, ed. by Bäuerle, Rainer, Schwarze, Christoph, and Stechow, Amim von, 302–23. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Ludlow, Peter. 1989. Implicit comparison classes. Linguistics and Philosophy 12. 519–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McConnell-Ginet, Sally. 1973. Comparative constructions in English: A syntactic and semantic analysis. Rochester, NY: University of Rochester dissertation.Google Scholar
McNally, Louise, and Kennedy, Christopher. 2002. Degree vs. manner ‘well’: A case study in selective binding. Cuadernos de lingüīstica 9, ed. by Arche, Maria Jesús, Fábregas, Antonio, and Trombetta, Augusto M.. Madrid: Instituto Universitario Ortega y Gasset.Google Scholar
McNally, Louise, and Kennedy, Christopher. 2005. Degree vs. manner ‘well’: A case study in selective binding. Generative approaches to the lexicon, ed. by Bouillon, Pierrette, Isahara, Hitoshi, Kanzaki, Kyoko, Lee, Chungmin, and Pustejovsky, James. Dordrecht: Kluwer, to appear.Google Scholar
Paradis, Carita. 2001. Adjectives and boundedness. Cognitive Linguistics 12. 47–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pustejovsky, James. 1995. The generative lexicon. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ramchand, Gillian C. 1997. Aspect and predication. Oxford: Clarendon Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rotstein, Carmen, and Winter, Yoad. 2004. Total adjectives vs. partial adjectives: Scale structure and higher-order modifiers. Natural Language Semantics 12. 259–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rullmann, Hotze. 1995. Maximality in the semantics of WH-constructions. Amherst: University of Massachusetts dissertation.Google Scholar
Sapir, Edward. 1944. Grading: A study in semantics. Philosophy of Science 11. 93–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seuren, Pieter A. M. 1973. The comparative. Generative grammar in Europe, ed. by Kiefer, Ferenc and Ruwet, Nicolas, 528–64. Dordrecht: Reidel.Google Scholar
Seuren, Pieter A. M. 1978. The structure and selection of positive and negative gradable adjectives. Chicago Linguistic Society 14. 336–46.Google Scholar
Stanley, Jason. 2000. Context and logical form. Linguistics and Philosophy 23. 391–434.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stanley, Jason. 2002. Nominal restriction. Logical form and language, ed. by Peter, Georg and Preyer, Gerhard, 365–68. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Sybesma, Rynt. 1999. The Mandarin VP. Boston: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tenny, Carol U. 1995. How motion verbs are special: The interaction of semantic and pragmatic information in aspectual verb meanings. Pragmatics and Cognition 3. 31–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tsujimura, Natsuko. 2001. Degree words and scalar structure in Japanese. Lingua 111. 29–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Unger, Peter. 1975. ignorance. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Vanden Wyngaerd, Guido. 2001. Measuring events. Language 77. 61–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
von Stechow, Arnim. 1984a. Comparing semantic theories of comparison. Journal of Semantics 3. 1–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
von Stechow, Arnim. 1984b. My reply to Cresswell’s, Hellan’s, Hoeksema’s and Seuren’s comments. Journal of Semantics 3. 183–99.Google Scholar
Wechsler, Stephen. 2005. Resultatives under the ‘event-argument homomorphism’. The syntax of aspect, ed. by Erteschik-Shir, Nomi and Rapoport, Tova. Oxford: Oxford University Press, to appear.Google Scholar
Wheeler, Samuel. 1972. Attributives and their modifiers. Noûs 6. 310–34.Google Scholar
Williamson, Timothy. 1994. Vagueness. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Yoon, Yoongeun. 1996. Total and partial predicates and the weak and strong interpretations. Natural Language Semantics 4. 217–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar