Talk:Quantifier (linguistics)

Nesting

This section seems to have strayed in from somewhere like Quantifier (logic). Is there no description of nesting in natural languages? If not, the section should go. Deltahedron (talk) 06:29, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You are right in that there is a lot of formula stuff in (the first part of) that section. The reason why I allocated it here is that (the second part of) it discusses ambiguity arising from quantification suffixes in natural language, which is not an issue of formal langage/logic. Maybe the section should be split, and its first part should go to Quantifier (logic)? - Jochen Burghardt (talk) 07:16, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This reference might be helpful: Edward Keenan; Denis Paperno (2012). Handbook of Quantifiers in Natural Language. Studies in Linguistics and Philosophy. Vol. 90. Springer Science & Business Media. p. 16. ISBN 9400726813. Deltahedron (talk) 21:21, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I split the section "Nesting" as suggested above, and included your above reference. - Jochen Burghardt (talk) 09:20, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Clarification on numerals

Not totally sure if I should just delete the tag or should a few sentences be added later in the article, but I can confirm that quantifiers either express relative or indefinite numbers, never specific amounts like actual numbers (0-9) do. --CorporalKobold (talk) 01:43, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

My question was: is each numeral a determiner? If yes, the paranthesis is redundant, if no, it is not. I'd suggest to add an explanatory sentence like "A numeral cannot be a quantifier since it isn't a determiner" in the first, and to keep the paranthesis as is in the second case. - Jochen Burghardt (talk) 16:06, 29 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Blank and redirect

I’ve blanked and redirected this page since it's a lower quality fork of material already covered in generalized quantifier and scope (formal semantics). I'd be happy to discuss other solutions, including “demoting to stub”. Botterweg14 (talk) 13:54, 15 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm in favour of removing the formalisms and demoting the rest to stub status. I think we need an article on quantifiers in natural language, which can then link to generalized quantifier for the formal stuff. As it stands, that article demonstrates everything in terms of English quantifiers (with a few remarks on their ambiguities), which sucks for people (like me) who want a comparison of quantification in different languages. (Not that the article as it stood provided that!) -- Perey (talk) 09:58, 27 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]