Equative Semantics #
@cite{kennedy-2007} @cite{rett-2020} @cite{schwarzschild-2008} @cite{thomas-deo-2020}
Compositional semantics for equative constructions ("as tall as").
At-Least vs. Exactly #
The literal semantics of the equative is "at least as tall as" (≥). The "exactly as tall as" reading arises via scalar implicature: the speaker chose "as tall as" over the stronger "taller than", implicating that "taller than" is false, yielding equality.
This parallels numeral strengthening: "three" literally means "at least three" and is strengthened to "exactly three" by implicature.
Alternative: Granularity-Based Account #
Degree.Granularity offers a different explanation:
the "exactly" reading arises because just signals finest granularity,
and the finest equative is already the strongest (so just's negative
component is vacuous). See just_vacuous_iff in Degree.Granularity.
Equative literal semantics: "A is as tall as B" iff μ(A) ≥ μ(B). This is the "at least as" reading.
Equations
- Semantics.Degree.Equative.equativeLiteral μ a b = (μ a ≥ μ b)
Instances For
Equative strengthened semantics: "A is as tall as B" iff μ(A) = μ(B). This is the "exactly as" reading, derived by implicature.
Equations
- Semantics.Degree.Equative.equativeStrengthened μ a b = (μ a = μ b)
Instances For
The strengthened reading entails the literal reading.
Negated equative: "A is not as tall as B" iff μ(A) < μ(B). Negation of the at-least semantics yields strict less-than.
Equations
- Semantics.Degree.Equative.negatedEquative μ a b = (μ a < μ b)
Instances For
Negated equative is the negation of the literal equative.