the syntax and semantics of relativization and quantification

47
(2.51) Sapa(nka)
each
irqi
child
[[nuqa-q
I-gen
kinsa
three
manzana
apple
mikhu-ra-n.
eat-past-3sg
‘I took three apples and each child ate them.’
apa-sqa-y]]-ta
take-nm-1sg-acc
(2.52) Sapa(nka)
each
irqi
child
[[nuqa-q
I-gen
apa-sqa-y]
take-nm-1sg
mikhu-ra-n.
eat-past-3sg
‘I took three apples and each child ate them.’
kinsa
three
manzana]-ta
apple-acc
Consultant comment on both sentences: A total of three were bought. The
children may have shared them.’
2.5.2 Scope interactions between the head and the subject
Further evidence for the E-type anaphora analysis of relative clauses with weakly
quantified heads, and against an analysis in which a raised head sometimes has
a forced definite interpretation comes from sentences in which the subject of the
relative clause is quantified. An example is given in (2.53). Here, the internal head
is quantified by huk, ‘one’, which appears to induce a narrow scope interpretation
as I have proposed for pisi.
(2.53) Asunta mikhu-ra-n [[sapa irqi-q huk t’anta
Asunta eat-past-3sg each/every child-gen one bread
ranti-sqa-n]]-ta
buy-nm-3sg-acc
‘Each child bought one roll and Asunta ate them (one roll per child).’
Note that (2.53) does not mean ‘Asunta ate one roll that each child bought’ (even
on the reading where ‘each child’ seems to escape the relative clause to gain scope
over ‘one roll’ 17 ) because it contains the information that each child bought exactly
one roll. Furthermore, (2.53) raised no problems for my Quechua consultants, while
17 Abusch [1994] notes that English each does seem to have this clause-escaping
property.