Focusing modifiers and degree modifiers: also/too/as well; even; only/just

[nschneid]

Warning: Detailed linguistic explanation, but with a potentially simple solution.

The guidelines say (p. 20):

Adverbs of quantity such as “just” and “only” should be annotated as Ds whenever possible.

1. “There_S is_F only_D [one piece of cake]_A”
2. “[The supermarket]_A is_F just_D around_S [the corner]_A”

"Only" and "just" are complicated. In the cake example it seems to be an approximator of a quantity (#35), which we have decided is E: only one piece of cake, and not more. These can also modify a distance: "I live only/just 3 miles away." Or they serve as nonquantitative degree modifiers: "The water is only warm, not hot." I think these should be E where possible, and D only if they truly modify a scene. That way it will be consistent with "There is about one piece of cake."

Then there are what CGEL (pp. 586-595) calls "focusing modifiers": there is an emphasis on the size or expansion of a set. "Only" and "just", when used as focusing modifiers, can serve as adjectives or adverbs:

• Adjective:
  • Only John likes cats.
  • John likes only cats.
• Adverb:
  • John only likes cats. (Ambiguous: could have either of the readings of the two adjective sentences, or "only" could describe the degree of liking!)

Other focusing modifiers—including "also", "too", "as well"—mark an additional item in a set, where the initial item may have been in a previous sentence.

• Focusing an entity:
  • John also likes cats.
  • John likes cats also.

The above are ambiguous: "JOHN, too, likes cats" (expanding the set of cat-likers to include John) or "John likes CATS in addition to the things already mentioned" (expanding the set of things John likes to include cats) or "John LIKES cats in addition to doing/feeling other things with respect to cats). It should be clear in most contexts, and it seems like it should be possible to disambiguate this in UCCA.

• Focusing a scene—these are less ambiguous:
  • John promised to eat fish, and also to brush his teeth.
  • John promised to eat fish. He also promised to brush his teeth.

And there is "even", which highlights an extreme/surprising exemplar of a set:

• Even John likes cats (focusing John)
• John even likes cats (ambiguous, depends on stress)
• John likes even cats (focusing cats)

I couldn't find guidelines for focusing modifiers. Perhaps the focusing modifier should be an E of the unit centered by the set-item, if a non-scene unit, or a D if the set items are scenes:

• [John_C also_E]_A likes_S cats_A (reading: John is one of the people who likes cats)
  John_A [also_E]_A- likes_S [cats_C]_-A (reading: cats are among the things John likes)
  John_A also_D likes_S cats_A (reading: John LIKES cats in addition to other ways he interacts with cats)
• [John promised [to eat fish]_A]_H and_L [(John)_A also_D (promised)_P to brush his teeth]_H

[omriabnd]

All this makes a lot of sense, but since it considerably adds to the cognitive load, I was wondering there's a way to defer that to another layer.
Is "only" really an approximator in the cake example? My hunch is that it won't be outragously wrong to say all these things are part of an information structural / discourse layer, which means that maybe by right we should mark them as Fs in the foundational.

[omriabnd]

Nathan will write a suggestion.

[nschneid]

I'll try to write some guidelines to this effect.

[nschneid]

Floating quantifiers should probably be treated similarly:

• All of them have left: [All_Q of_R them_C]_A have_F left_P (cf. Partitives, Partitives/subsets #26)
• They all have left: [They_C all_Q]_A have_F left_P
• They have all left: [They_C]_A- have_F [all_Q]_-A left_P

[omriabnd]

makes sense

…

On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 5:01 PM Nathan Schneider ***@***.***> wrote: Floating quantifiers should probably be treated similarly: - All of them have left: [All_Q of_R them_C]_A have_F left_P (cf. Partitives, #26 <#26> ) - They all have left: [They_C all_Q]_A have_F left_P - They have all left: [They_C]_A- have_F [all_Q]_-A left_P — You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#41 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AIG8674IUhocaAWUv2iC38HFubC1x6BWks5uqwy1gaJpZM4Xa9rQ> .