Two notes on the theory of definiteness

Bibliographic Data

ID10140632
AuthorsRenaat Declerck (KU Leuven, corresponding author)
Year1986
Volume22
Issue1
Pages25-39
Publication date1986-03-01
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueJournal of Linguistics (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0022-2267 • E-ISSN: 1469-7742
PublisherCambridge University Press (CUP) (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1017/s0022226700010549
OpenAlexW2147822064
LanguageEN
Citations received4
References cited17

The terms definite and indefinite, when used in relation to NPs, can be handled in two different ways. One can treat definiteness as a formal (syntactico-morphological) category and make use of the syntactic features [±definite], as in Chomsky (1965). One can also go into the question of how definite and indefinite NPs are used, i.e. the question of when and why a (formally) definite NP is preferred to an indefinite one, or vice versa. If we take the latter approach, we are investigating definiteness as a semantico-pragmatic category

Definiteness · Epistemology · Linguistics · Metaphysics · Philosophy of language · Positive definiteness · Positive-definite matrix · Relation (database · Computer Science · Historical Linguistics and Language Studies · Linguistics and Discourse Analysis · Mathematics · Philosophy · Syntax, Semantics, Linguistic Variation

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub