Documentation

Linglib.Studies.Gasparri2025

Gasparri (2025): Bare Singular Names and Genericity #

[Gas25]

Journal of Semantics 42(1–2): 127–135.

Predicativists treat bare singular names (BSNs) like Ruth as predicative DPs: ⟦∅ Ruth⟧ = ⟦the⟧ [λx. x is called Ruth]. If names are count nouns, BSNs should pattern with definite singulars like the tiger for genericity. The rows in Data/Examples/Gasparri2025.json show BSNs CAN get generic readings, but exhibit generic recalcitrance — they are harder to read generically than ordinary definite singulars, and need a licensor (naming-convention context, Q-adverb, locative) to recover.

Main declarations #

Judgment of the row's generic reading, if recorded.

Equations
Instances For
    theorem Gasparri2025.generic_recalcitrance (row : Data.Examples.LinguisticExample) :
    row Examples.allrow.feature? "licensor" = some "none"(genericOf row = some Features.Judgment.acceptable row.feature? "subject_type" = some "definite_common")

    Generic recalcitrance: without a licensor, no bare singular name has an acceptable generic reading, while every definite common NP does. This is the asymmetry predicativism leaves unexplained: if Ruth is just ⟦the⟧ + a predicate, it should pattern with the tiger.

    theorem Gasparri2025.licensing_enables_generic (row : Data.Examples.LinguisticExample) :
    row Examples.allrow.feature? "subject_type" = some "bare_name"row.feature? "licensor" = some "generic_context"genericOf row = some Features.Judgment.acceptable

    Naming-convention contexts license generic readings of BSNs: recalcitrance is not a categorical ban.

    Kind-level predicates (extinct) accept definite commons and quoted names but not bare names: quotation rescues the kind-level parallel.