Flexibility and rigidity: Multiplicatives, frequency and ... - Linguistics

Flexibility and rigidity: Multiplicatives, frequency and quantification adverbs
Adverbs and situations. In addition to intuitive descriptions, specific characterizations of
frequency (freq-) adverbs and adverbs of quantification (Q-adverbs) have also been offered:
van Geenhoven 2004, 2005 and Johansdottir 2005 explicitly address the distinctions between
these adverb types. Building on ordering and scope considerations from Hungarian, a highly
discourse-configurational language (cf É. Kiss 2002, ms), the paper argues for specific
temporal and scope properties of these adverbs. Explicit support is provided for the claim that
freq-adverbs and Q-adverbs differ in the type of constituent modified, as shown by the position
occupied by these adverbs. Q-adverbs (e.g. often) quantify over situations (de Swart 1993, 1996,
Heim 1990), and they must take scope over the (boldfaced) predicational material in the clause
in Hungarian (cf É. Kiss ms). Freq-adverbs (such as frequently), in contrast, determine the
frequency of a certain situation type within a larger time interval, and they appear inside the
predicational component of a clause. The different positions are clearly observable in
Hungarian, where freq-adverbs appear in the predicational component, within the same domain
as foci and negation, while Q-adverbs have wider scope, and are ordered among quantifiers:
(1) [ topics [ quantifiers / Q-adverbs [ focus / negation / freq-adverb [ V [... XP .. ]]]]]
Times, iteration and habituality. As often assumed, (the different positions of) freq-adverbs
and Q-adverbs correlate with iterativity and habituality, respectively. Independent support for
this observation is provided by the effect of preverbal particles, located in the predicational
domain: reduplicated particles can yield iterative, but not habitual interpretation. The paper
provides arguments in support of a specific view of temporal structure which is compatible
with the emerging pattern: it is shown that temporal arguments (including iterative and
reference time) appear within the predicational domain. Under this view, the adverbial pattern
follows if freq-adverbs require a time interval argument (which can only appear in the
predicational domain), but Q-adverbs are purely quantificational and quantify over situations.
Flexible multiplicatives. In contrast with freq- and Q-adverbs, multiplicatives (e.g. three
times) have considerably freer distribution in Hungarian. They can modify any countable
situation/predicate, including a situation description modified by a freq- (2) or a Q-adverb.
(2) Feri [kétszer sûrûn] csengetett / [sûrûn kétszer] csengetett
F-nom twice frequently rang frequently twice rang
'Feri rang frequently twice (two occasions; 2 > freq) / frequently rang twice (freq > 2)'
Iteration and coercion. Since freq-adverbs and Q-adverbs are tied to specific, iterable
positions in the clause, it is predicted that both of these adverbs can be iterated. This prediction
is borne out; thus functional uniqueness, sometimes proposed as a property of these adverbs
(e.g. van Geenhoven 2005, Johansdottir 2005), cannot be maintained. Cinque 1999 and Ernst
2002 deny functional uniqueness. However, in Cinque 1999 adverb iteration is constrained by a
limit on the available (corresponding) functional heads. The paper argues that iteration – for
multiplicatives, freq- and Q-adverbs alike – is, in theory, unconstrained. The number of adverbs
is restricted by parsing limitations and the availability of coercion operations.
(3) Feri négyszer háromszor kétszer csengetett
F-nom four.times three.times twice rang
'Feri rang twice three times on four occasions' (mult; four times > three times > twice)
(4) Feri néha gyakran csengetett
F-nom seldom often rang
'Feri seldom rang often' (iterated Q-adverbs; seldom > often)
Hungarian freq- and Q-adverbs show a fixed ordering, determined by the availability of a time
argument. It is unexpected in a free word order language, but follows from temporal structure.

References
Cinque, G. 1999. Adverbs and Functional Heads. Oxford: Oxford University Press
É. Kiss, K. 2002. The Syntax of Hungarian. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
É. Kiss, K. ms. Free word order, (non-)configurationality and phases. ms, Research Institute of
Linguistics, Hungarian Academy of Sciences
Ernst, T. 2002. The Syntax of Adjuncts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
van Geenhoven, V. 2004. For-adverbials, frequentative aspect, and pluractionality. Natural
Language Semantics. 12
van Geenhoven, V. 2005. Atelicity, Pluractionality, and Adverbial Quantification. in H.
Verkuyl, H. de Swart and A. van Hout (eds) Perspectives on Aspect. Dordrecht: Springer
Johansdottir, K. 2005. Temporal adverbs in Icelandic: Adverbs of quantification vs. frequency
adverbs. Working Papers in Scandinavian Syntax 76
Heim, I. 1990. E-type pronouns and donkey anaphora. Linguistics and Philosophy 13
de Swart, H. 1993. Adverbs of Quantification: A Generalized Quantifier Approach. New York
and London: Garland
de Swart, H. 1996. (In)definites and genericity. in M. Kanazawa, C. Piñon and H. de Swart
(eds) Quantifiers, Deduction and Context. Stanford: CSLI