the syntax and semantics of relativization and quantification

215
(6.43)(a) VP
✟ ❍❍
✟ ✟✟✟ ❍
❍
❍
V
❍ ✟ ✟✟✟✟ ❍
❍ ❍
pisi-ta DP
a.few-acc
✟ ✟✟ ❍
D(indef)
‘(I saw) a few llamas.’
(b) VP
❍
✟ ✟✟✟ ❍
❍
❍
V
❍
✟ ✟✟✟
pisi-ta
a.few-acc
❍
❍
NP
llama-ta
llama-acc
❍
❍
❍
DP
e
✟ ✟✟ ✟ ❍❍
❍
❍
NP
✏
✏ ✏✏✏✏ Ana-q llama-n-ta
Ana‘s llama-3sg-acc
D(def)
‘(I saw) a few of Anas llamas’. (from 6.32(b))
As in the case of adjectives, the interpretation here is the one expected in the
case of a DP-internal weak quantifier too, again because of the semantic vacuousness
of the indefinite D. However, I propose to capture the differing behavior of
weak quantifiers and adjectives by assuming that the apparently partitive readings
allowed in the case of weak quantifier discontinuous noun phrases are a result of the
composition of the weak quantifier with the definite noun phrase as illustrated in
(6.43(b)).
Therefore I propose that a weak quantifier can combine directly with a type e
DP and the result is interpreted as an indefinite, partitive expression. In fact, an
analysis in which quantifiers regularly and perhaps universally take complements of
type e can be found in [Matthewson 2001]. Here I adopt a slightly more flexible
approach in that I presume that this is only one option for weak quantifiers in
Quechua, and still assume that quantifiers can also combine directly with a type
nominal as we saw above in (6.43(a)).
6.4.2.3 Strong quantifiers
Finally we turn to the case of strong quantifiers. Recall that strong quantifiers
did not obey the generalization that seemed to prohibit discontinuous noun phrases