Plural definites and domain restriction in Romance and Germanic

Across Romance and Germanic languages, plural definites either have the three following uses, or none of them. (a) They can refer to the maximal plural individual satisfying the description, without being anaphoric or contextually restricted; (b) They can serve as arguments of kind predicates; (c) they can be generic and enter the restrictor of a modal adverb of quantification like ‘usually’ (and its counterpart in other languages). We use compatibility with ‘usually’ as a test for genericity, because even non-generic referential plural definites (say [The NPs] in English) can restrict some adverbs of quantification, including ‘generally’, an often overlooked fact. The relationship between (b) and (c) has been observed, but their connection with (a) has gone unnoticed, and our generalization, to our knowledge, has never been formulated as such. Our goal is to substantiate it and to show that it sheds a new light on the cross-linguistic comparison of Romance and Germanic languages regarding genericity, bare plurals, and plural definites. We conclude the paper by fitting existential readings of Italian and English Bare Plurals into the picture.

Publication Details

Journal
Open Journal Systems (Global Science & Technology Forum)
Published
2025-09-09
DOI
https://doi.org/10.18148/sub/2025.v29.1233
Primary Topic
Geochemistry and Geologic Mapping
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Plural definites and domain restriction in Romance and Germanic

Open Journal Systems (Global Science & Technology Forum)
Geochemistry and Geologic Mapping
article

Plural definites and domain restriction in Romance and Germanic

article en

Abstract

Across Romance and Germanic languages, plural definites either have the three following uses, or none of them. (a) They can refer to the maximal plural individual satisfying the description, without being anaphoric or contextually restricted; (b) They can serve as arguments of kind predicates; (c) they can be generic and enter the restrictor of a modal adverb of quantification like ‘usually’ (and its counterpart in other languages). We use compatibility with ‘usually’ as a test for genericity, because even non-generic referential plural definites (say [The NPs] in English) can restrict some adverbs of quantification, including ‘generally’, an often overlooked fact. The relationship between (b) and (c) has been observed, but their connection with (a) has gone unnoticed, and our generalization, to our knowledge, has never been formulated as such. Our goal is to substantiate it and to show that it sheds a new light on the cross-linguistic comparison of Romance and Germanic languages regarding genericity, bare plurals, and plural definites. We conclude the paper by fitting existential readings of Italian and English Bare Plurals into the picture.

Open Journal Systems (Global Science & Technology Forum)
Quality Education
Openalex Percentile: Top 31%
Geochemistry and Geologic Mapping
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Plural definites and domain restriction in Romance and Germanic · Open Journal Systems (Global Science & Technology Forum) (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS