Also as expected, modifying the universal quantifiers by fast increased their propensity to take wide scope.
In sentences with two determiner quantifiers, we expect that what will govern the final preference of the perceiver is the nature of the two quantified phrases: use of a distributive universal quantifier such as each in English or jeder in German may result in narrow scope readings for the topicalized phrase (ein Aufsatz), whereas quantifiers that are not distributive (alle/all) shouldn't show such a strong preference for the narrow scope reading of the topicalized phrase.
Scope preferences depend on the particular type of universal quantifier on the subject alle fast alle jeder (all) (almost all) (every) Percentage wide-scope 54% 32% 26% interpretation for the indefinite DP/NP Percentage wide-scope 46% 68% 74% interpretation for the subject fastjeder (almost every) Percentage wide-scope 12% interpretation for the indefinite DP/NP Percentage wide-scope 88% interpretation for the subject
These are first rewritten in tuple relational calculus using both kinds of quantification and using implication with universal quantifiers.
Since SQL does not have a universal quantification construct, programmers must negate its EXISTS construct to capture universal quantifiers.
There are close semantic connections, as noted by Haspelmath (1997: 12, 154), between the distributive universal quantifiers and the free-choice quantifiers, and free-choice quantifiers may diachronically evolve into universal quantifiers.
Finally, the free-choice quantifiers in Chinese behave much more like universal quantifiers than indefinite determiners in that they usually occupy a preverbal position in sentence, and are not allowed in some indefiniteness-inclined sentential positions (more detail on this term later).
34) We conclude here that further evidence is necessary for a covert topic analysis of universal quantifiers.
Zubizarreta proposes that the binding configuration in (82), (83), and (84) is established at AS, where the universal quantifier is represented as a topic.
McCawley (1994: 190) notices the following scope difference with the universal quantifier.
Yet it preserves the peculiarity of its syntactic position in so far as such an elliptical answer is interpreted as having a narrow scope that only comprises the VP and leaves out the universal quantifier in subject position.
The main observation that has emerged from this body of work is the fact that children are often reported to disregard the position of quantifiers in their comprehension of relative scope; in particular, it is claimed that the universal quantifier
every is interpreted in the same way regardless of its position in a sentence; this phenomenon is referred to as quantifier spreading (see Inhelder and Piaget 1964; Bucci 1978; Donaldson and Lloyd 1974 for early observations of the phenomenon, and Philip and colleagues who coined the term).