In spite of the existence of a vast literature on any, no clear consensus has finally emerged as to its semantic nature and behaviour. We argue here that the deep unity of any is to be found in the link that this item sets up between scalarity and arbitrariness in the sense of Fine (1985). The traditional distinction between any as a free choice (FC) or as a polarity sensitive (PS) element is put in a radically new perspective: any is analysed as scalar at root, along the lines of Lee & Horn (1994), but it emerges either as FC or PS depending on which type of link between scalarity and arbitrariness on events is constructed. So, the `two' any appear as two different but related strategies towards the same problem, instead of two parallel and accidentally similar behaviours
Any: from scalarity to arbitrariness
1998-01-01
Abstract
In spite of the existence of a vast literature on any, no clear consensus has finally emerged as to its semantic nature and behaviour. We argue here that the deep unity of any is to be found in the link that this item sets up between scalarity and arbitrariness in the sense of Fine (1985). The traditional distinction between any as a free choice (FC) or as a polarity sensitive (PS) element is put in a radically new perspective: any is analysed as scalar at root, along the lines of Lee & Horn (1994), but it emerges either as FC or PS depending on which type of link between scalarity and arbitrariness on events is constructed. So, the `two' any appear as two different but related strategies towards the same problem, instead of two parallel and accidentally similar behavioursI documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
