Textbook Gradability in Natural Language Logical and Grammatical Foundations Heather Burnett Ebook All Chapter PDF

Gradability in Natural Language Logical
and Grammatical Foundations Heather

Burnett
Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://textbookfull.com/product/gradability-in-natural-language-logical-and-grammatic
al-foundations-heather-burnett/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...
Logical Form Between Logic and Natural Language 1st

Edition Andrea Iacona (Auth.)
https://textbookfull.com/product/logical-form-between-logic-and-
natural-language-1st-edition-andrea-iacona-auth/
Deep learning in natural language processing Deng
https://textbookfull.com/product/deep-learning-in-natural-
language-processing-deng/
Deep Learning for Natural Language Processing Develop

Deep Learning Models for Natural Language in Python
Jason Brownlee
https://textbookfull.com/product/deep-learning-for-natural-
language-processing-develop-deep-learning-models-for-natural-
language-in-python-jason-brownlee/
Python Natural Language Processing Advanced machine

learning and deep learning techniques for natural
language processing 1st Edition Jalaj Thanaki
https://textbookfull.com/product/python-natural-language-
processing-advanced-machine-learning-and-deep-learning-
techniques-for-natural-language-processing-1st-edition-jalaj-
Deep Learning in Natural Language Processing 1st
Edition Li Deng
https://textbookfull.com/product/deep-learning-in-natural-
language-processing-1st-edition-li-deng/
Bayesian analysis in natural language processing 2nd

Edition Cohen S
https://textbookfull.com/product/bayesian-analysis-in-natural-
language-processing-2nd-edition-cohen-s/
Manual of Grammatical Interfaces in Romance Susann

Fischer
https://textbookfull.com/product/manual-of-grammatical-
interfaces-in-romance-susann-fischer/
Natural Language Processing 1st Edition Jacob

Eisenstein
https://textbookfull.com/product/natural-language-processing-1st-
edition-jacob-eisenstein/
Natural Language Processing in Artificial Intelligence

1st Edition Brojo Kishore Mishra
https://textbookfull.com/product/natural-language-processing-in-
artificial-intelligence-1st-edition-brojo-kishore-mishra/
OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 9/11/2016, SPi
Gradability in Natural Language

OXFORD STUDIES IN SEMANTICS AND PRAGMATICS

general editors: Chris Barker, New York University, and Chris Kennedy,
University of Chicago
published
1 Definite Descriptions
Paul Elbourne
2 Logic in Grammar
Polarity Free Choice, and Intervention
Gennaro Chierchia
3 Weak Island Semantics
Márta Abrusán
4 Reliability in Pragmatics
Eric McCready
5 Numerically Qualified Expressions
Christopher Cummins
6 Use-Conditional Meaning
Studies in Multidimensional Semantics
Daniel Gutzmann
7 Gradability in Natural Language
Logical and Grammatical Foundations
Heather Burnett
8 Subjectivity and Perspective in Truth-Theoretic Semantics
Peter Lasersohn
in preparation
Meaning over Time
The Foundations of Systematic Semantic Change
Ashwini Deo
Measurement and Modality
Daniel Lassiter
Plural Reference
Friederike Moltmann
The Semantics of Evidentials
Sarah E. Murray
A History of Formal Semantics
Barbara Partee
Gradability in
Natural Language
Logical and Grammatical
Foundations
HEATHER BURNETT
1
3
Great Clarendon Street, Oxford, ox2 6dp,
United Kingdom
Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford.
It furthers the University’s objective of excellence in research, scholarship,
and education by publishing worldwide. Oxford is a registered trade mark of
Oxford University Press in the UK and in certain other countries
© Heather Burnett 2017
The moral rights of the author have been asserted
First Edition published in 2017
Impression: 1
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in
a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the
prior permission in writing of Oxford University Press, or as expressly permitted
by law, by licence or under terms agreed with the appropriate reprographics
rights organization. Enquiries concerning reproduction outside the scope of the
above should be sent to the Rights Department, Oxford University Press, at the
address above
You must not circulate this work in any other form
and you must impose this same condition on any acquirer
Published in the United States of America by Oxford University press
198 Madison Avenue, New York, NY 10016, United States of America
British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data
Data available
Library of Congress Control Number: 2016936522
ISBN 978–0–19–872479–7 (hbk.)
978–0–19–872480–3 (pbk.)
Printed in Great Britain by
Clays Ltd, St Ives plc
Links to third party websites are provided by Oxford in good faith and
for information only. Oxford disclaims any responsibility for the materials
contained in any third party website referenced in this work.
To my parents
Contents
General preface x
Acknowledgments xi
List of abbreviations xiv
 Introduction 
.. Organization of the book 
 Vagueness and linguistic analysis 
.. Introduction 
.. Our Classical Semantic Theory 
... Classical First order logic 
... Extensions in linguistics 
.. The phenomenon of vagueness 
... Borderline cases 
... Fuzzy boundaries 
... The Sorites paradox 
.. Tolerant, Classical, Strict 
... Definition 
... Account of the puzzling properties 
.. Lasersohn’s () Pragmatic Halos 
... Definition 
... Comparison with Tolerant, Classical, Strict 
.. Conclusion 
 Context sensitivity and vagueness patterns 
.. Introduction 
.. Adjectival context sensitivity patterns 
.. Universal vs existential context sensitivity 
.. Potential vagueness and adjectival vagueness patterns 
... (A)symmetric vagueness 
.. Conclusion 
 The Delineation Tolerant, Classical, Strict framework 
.. Introduction 
.. Language and classical semantics 
viii contents
... Classical semantics for relative adjectives 

... Classical semantics for absolute/non-scalar
adjectives 
... The paradox of absolute scalar adjectives 
.. Tolerant/strict semantics 
... The properties of indifference 
.. Predictions of the DelTCS analysis 
... Context sensitivity results 
... Gradability results 
... Potential vagueness results 
... Other empirical consequences 
.. Conclusion 
.. Appendix: Longer proofs 
 Scale structure in Delineation semantics 
.. Introduction 
.. Scale structure patterns 
... Non-scalar adjectives 
... Summary of scale structure data 
.. Scale structure in Delineation semantics 
.. Conclusion 
 Beyond Delineation semantics 
.. Introduction 
.. Scale structure in Degree semantics 
... Kennedy’s () Degree analysis 
... Comparison between Kennedy () and DelTCS 
.. Interpretive Economy and Bayesian pragmatics 
... Bayesian pragmatics 
... Adjectival interpretation 
... Summary 
.. Degree Tolerant, Classical, Strict 
... Results 
.. Conclusion 
 Beyond the adjectival domain 
.. Introduction 
.. Context sensitivity and vagueness patterns 
... Summary 
.. Mereological Delineation Tolerant, Classical, Strict 
... Language 
... Classical semantics 
contents ix
... Tolerant/strict semantics 

... Summary 
.. Definite plural DPs and maximality 
... Language and classical semantics 
... Tolerant/strict semantics 
... Gather predicates vs numerous predicates 
... Negation and homogeneity with definite
plurals 
.. Conclusion 
.. Appendix: Longer proofs 
 Conclusion 
References 
Index 
General preface
Oxford Studies in Semantics and Pragmatics publishes original research

on meaning in natural language within contemporary semantics and
pragmatics. Authors present their work in the context of past and
present lines of inquiry and in a manner accessible to both scholars
whose core areas of expertise are in linguistic semantics and pragmatics,
and to researchers in related and allied fields such as syntax, lexicol-
ogy, philosophy, and cognitive science. The series emphasizes rigorous
theoretical analysis grounded in detailed empirical investigation of
particular languages.
This is a companion series to Oxford Surveys in Semantics and
Pragmatics. The Surveys series provides critical overviews of the major
approaches to core semantic and pragmatic phenomena, a discussion
of their relative value, and an assessment of the degree of consensus
that exists about any one of them. The Studies series equally seeks to
put empirical complexity and theoretical debate into comprehensible
perspective, but with a narrower focus and correspondingly greater
depth. In both series, authors develop and defend the approach and line
of argument that they find most convincing and productive.
In this contribution to the series, Heather Burnett investigates the
semantics of gradability: the principles of meaning that provide the basis
for expressions of comparison, intensification, and degree. Burnett’s
central thesis is that gradability can be derived from the interaction of
a set of more basic, and conceptually necessary, principles governing
the interpretation of context-dependent expressions and the tolerance of
categorization processes. This approach contributes to a long tradition
in semantics and philosophy that seeks to link the semantics of grad-
ability to a general theory of linguistic vagueness; where Burnett pushes
beyond previous work is in developing a formal framework that can
explain grammatical distinctions between classes of gradable predicates
that have previously been thought to require reference to an additional
abstract scalar representation system. This volume challenges this view
and provides a fresh and sophisticated alternative to contemporary
theories of the semantics of gradability.
Acknowledgments
This work would never have been possible without all the help and
support that I have received from friends and colleagues during my
time as a doctoral student in the Department of Linguistics at UCLA
and as a Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC)
postdoctoral fellow in the Département de linguistique et de traduction
at l’Université de Montréal.
Although credit is due to many many people, I have to single out Paul
Égré for the enormous contributions that he has made to both the con-
tent of this monograph and my personal and professional development.
I thank him for so many things, including but not limited to: introducing
me to the exciting world of non-classical logics, showing me how to fill in
the CNRS application form, laughing at my jokes (even the ones making
fun of philosophers, Normaliens and French people), showing me how
to eat a hamburger French-style (i.e. with a knife and fork) and letting
me sleep in his kid’s room when I was homeless in New York.
More generally, I thank the members of the Institut Jean Nicod at the
Ecole normale supérieure in Paris (particularly members of the LIN-
GUAE group: Emmanuel Chemla, Vincent Homer, Philippe Schlenker,
Benjamin Spector, and Jérémy Zehr, as well as Claire Beyssade, Francis
Corblin, Alda Mari, David Nicolas, and François Récanati) for welcom-
ing me both as a student and as a visiting postdoctoral researcher. The
time that I have spent at Jean Nicod has been incredibly rewarding
(both academically and personally), and the influence of the ideas being
developed in this lab can be clearly seen in the major themes explored
in the book.
The first part of this book (chapters 2–5) is based on my 2012 disserta-
tion The Grammar of Tolerance: On vagueness, context-sensitivity and the
origin of scale structure, which was completed in the Linguistics depart-
ment at UCLA. My supervisors, Ed Keenan and Dominique Sportiche,
as well as Hilda Koopman, Jessica Rett, Yael Sharvit, and Ed Stabler
have all made innumerable vital contributions to this project, and I will
 Credit for this last one is, of course, also due to Rachida, Amir, and, above all, to my
roommate Isaac.
xii acknowledgments
be forever grateful for their expertise, mentorship, and friendship in

semantics and beyond.
The work that I began as a graduate student, I continued as a postdoc
within the context of an SSHRC postdoctoral fellowship at l’Université
de Montréal. In addition to being one of my closest collaborators and
friends, Mireille Tremblay was the ideal postdoctoral supervisor, giving
me guidance, but also an enormous amount of freedom to explore new
interesting ideas and then to chase them across continents. This work
never would have been possible without her.
During my postdoctoral work, I also benefitted greatly from shorter
research stays in stimulating linguistics departments around the world.
In the winter of 2013, I spent a very productive month working with
Louise McNally and the rest of the GLiF group at the Universitat
Pompeu Fabra. I would like to thank Louise, Gemma Barberà, Berit
Gehrke, Scott Grimm, Laia Mayol, and Isidora Stojanovic for talking
to me about adjectives and showing me how to grill and eat calçots.
I also spent a very exciting couple of months at NYU in 2014, and
I would like to especially thank my host, Chris Barker, as well as
Dylan Bumford, Simon Charlow, Lucas Champollion, Orin Percus, Cara
Shousterman, and Anna Szabolsci for many helpful academic and non-
academic discussions. Salvador Mascarenhas also gets a special mention
for being my linguistics/philosophy drinking buddy in both Paris and
New York . . . and for coming to rescue me at the 79th Police Precinct
when I got caught up in tensions associated with the rapid gentrification
of Brooklyn.
As I mentioned, many of the main ideas developed in the first part of
the book come from my doctoral dissertation, and earlier versions of the
proposals outlined here have been published in the journals Linguistics
& Philosophy (37:1–39) and the Journal of Applied Non-Classical Logics
(24:35–60). Likewise, Chapter 7 takes up and extends some of the pro-
posals found in the chapter ‘Vague determiner phrases and distributive
predication’ (which appears in Marija Slavkovik and Dan Lassiter (eds.)
New Directions in Logic, Language, and Interaction. Springer: FoLLI
Lecture Notes in Computer Science 7415. pp. 175–194.) Likewise, some of
the discussion concerning logical theories of vagueness and linguistics
found in chapter 2 is also taken up in the (joint) handbook chapter (with
Peter Sutton) Vagueness and natural language semantics (under review).
Furthermore, during the writing of my dissertation and this book, I
have been generously supported by the Social Sciences and Humanities
Research Council of Canada (Doctoral fellowship (#752-2007-2382) and
acknowledgments xiii
Postdoctoral fellowship (#756-2012-0045)), the USA/France Partner

University Fund grant (Theoretical/Experimental Linguistic Cognition
Advanced Studies grant (UCLA/ENS, Paris)), and by the UCLA Depart-
ment of Linguistics.
I have also been very fortunate to have had the chance to interact with
a very large number of scholars in the areas of semantics, pragmatics,
logic, and the philosophy of language. The long list of researchers that
I have corresponded with about this material (and whose comments and
suggestions have greatly improved the manuscript) includes, but is by no
means limited to: Natasha Abner, Alan Bale, Mel Bervoets, Rajesh Bhatt,
Denis Bonnay, John Burgess, Daniel Büring, Pablo Cobreros, Jenny
Doetjes, Itamar Francez, Brendan Gillon, Thomas Graf, Meg Grant,
Volker Halbach, Irene Heim, Greg Kobele, Manuel Kriš, Dan Lassiter,
Eliot Michaelson, Friederike Moltmann, Rick Nouwen, Paul Pietroski,
Walter Pedersen, Martin Prinzhorn, Dave Ripley, Galit Sassoon, Viola
Schmitt, Roger Schwarzschild, Stephanie Solt, Alexis Wellwood, Yoad
Winter, and Elia Zardini. Furthermore, I must single out the contribu-
tions of Robert van Rooij to this project. Some of the ideas found in
this work were sparked by his class on vagueness at the 2011 ESSLLI in
Ljubljana (co-taught with Pablo Cobreros, Dave Ripley, and Paul Égré)
and his razor-sharp comments and critiques greatly improved both the
form and the presentation of the DelTCS framework. I also particularly
thank Chris Kennedy for his very detailed and insightful comments
on versions of this manuscript, which greatly strengthened both the
empirical and theoretical contributions of this work.
Finally, I thank Shiri Lev-Ari, Camilla Gibb, and Olivia Conway-Gibb
for supporting me through finishing various versions of this work.
And, above all, I thank my parents and my sister Kate for all the love,
support, and inspiration that they have given me over the course of
my life.
List of abbreviations
AA absolute scalar adjective

AAP partial absolute scalar adjective
AAT total absolute scalar adjective
AAA absolute adjective axiom
BP Be precise
CC comparison class
CEM classical extensional mereology
C-model Classical model
CP Contrast Preservation
CST Classical Semantic Theory
DegP Degree phrase
DegS Degree semantics
DegTCS Degree Tolerant, Classical, Strict
DelS Delineation semantics
DelTCS Delineation Tolerant, Classical, Strict
DD Downward difference
DP determiner phrase
FOL First order logic
G Granularity
I Incomparability
IE Interpretive Economy
LP Logic of Paradox
MC Mereological Convexity
MD Minimal Difference
M-DelTCS Mereological Delineation Tolerant, Classical, Strict
MI Montagovian Individual
MSH Mereological Structure Hypothesis
NR No Reversal
NS non-scalar adjective
P-vague potentially vague
PH Pragmatic Halos
PA Partial Axiom
RA relative scalar adjective
S Symmetry
list of abbreviations xv
SA scalar adjective
SC Strict Convexity
SP Shared Parts
SWO strict weak order
TA Total Axiom
TC Tolerant Convexity
TCS Tolerant, Classical, Strict
T-model Tolerant model
UD Upward Difference
VP verb phrase
wff well-formed formula
1
Introduction
This book presents a new theory of the relationship between vagueness,

context sensitivity, and scale structure in natural language. In particular,
this work is devoted to the description and analysis of the distribution of
these phenomena within and outside the adjectival domain of English
and other Indo-European languages.
A more precise and developed exposition of the phenomenon known
as vagueness will be given in Chapter 2; however, we can illustrate some
of the puzzles that it raises with the following example: Suppose we take
someone who is 1.9 m tall, and suppose that we agree that, because we
are talking about average male heights, he is tall. Furthermore, suppose
that we have a long line of people ordered based on height and that their
heights differ by only 1 cm each. The 1.9 m tall man is at the front of the
line, and there is someone who is only 1.5 m tall at the end. We can agree
that the last person is not tall. Given this set-up, there must be some
point in this line at which we move from a tall person to his not tall
follower, who is 1 cm shorter than he is. But where is this point? Since
adding or subtracting a single centimetre is such a small change, it seems
absurd to think that changing someone’s height by this much could ever
serve to affect whether or not we would call them tall. We call relations
like ‘± 1 cm’ (in this context) tolerance relations or indifference relations,
since they encode amounts of change that do not make a difference to
categorization. When we can find a tolerance relation for an adjective,
we call the adjective tolerant, i.e. we call tall a tolerant predicate because
statements like (1) seem true.
(1) For all x, y, if x is tall and x and y’s heights differ by at most 1 cm,
then y is also tall.
Note, furthermore, that the negation of tall (not tall) is also tolerant: in
a context such as the one described above, (2) also seems true.
Gradability in Natural Language. Heather Burnett. © Heather Burnett 2017.

First published 2017 by Oxford University Press.
2 introduction
(2) For all x, y, if x is not tall and x and y’s heights differ by at most
1 cm, then y is also not tall.
Clearly the fact that both tall and not tall are tolerant creates a puzzle:
why do we not conclude that both the 1.9 m man and the 1.5 m man
are tall and not tall at the same time? Paradoxes of this type are known
as Sorites paradoxes, and they will be discussed in much greater detail
throughout the book.
Another adjective that shows a similar pattern is straight: In most
situations, adding a 1/10 mm bend to a stick is such an irrelevant change
that it will never be sufficient to make a stick that we call straight not
called straight. Thus, if we were to line up a set of sticks that differ by
1/10 mm bend from the perfectly straight ones to the really bendy ones,
then (3) seems true.
(3) For all x, y, if x is straight and x and y differ by a single 1/10 mm
bend, then y is also straight.
However, unlike tall, whose negation is also tolerant, even though
adding or subtracting a 1/10 mm bend is such a small change, the
corresponding statement with not straight is false: in particular (4) is
falsified by the case where we move from x that has a 1/10 mm bend (so
is not straight) to y that has absolutely no bends.
(4) False: For all x, y, if x is not straight and x and y differ by a single
1/10 mm bend, then y is also not straight.
In summary, on the one hand, adjectives like tall and straight are both
tolerant, but on the other, straight displays an asymmetry that tall
does not.
The second phenomenon that will be treated in this work is context
sensitivity. To be more specific, we will call a predicate P context sensitive
just in case, for some individual x, we can find a context in which P
applies to x, and we can find another context in which P does not apply
to x, without changing the properties of x and y. The adjectives tall and
straight both have this property: someone who can be considered tall
when we are considering jockeys might not be considered tall when we
 The name of these puzzles comes from a puzzle attributed to Eubelides of Miletus known
as “the Heap” (soros being Greek for heap):

Would you describe a single grain of wheat as a heap? No. Would you describe two grains
of wheat as a heap? No . . . You must admit the presence of a heap sooner or later, so where
do you draw the line? (from the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.)
introduction 3
are considering average men. Likewise, we saw above that an object with
a very small bend can be sometimes considered to be straight; however,
in a context in which very slight bends make a large difference to our
purposes, the very same object would not be considered straight.
This being said, tall and straight display a different pattern when it
comes to being context sensitive. For example, as discussed in Kennedy
(2007) and Syrett et al. (2010) (among others), adjectives like tall can
shift their criteria of application across contexts in a way that adjectives
like straight cannot. If I have two objects, one of which is (noticeably)
taller than the other, but neither are particularly tall, I can still use the
predicate tall to pick out the taller of the two.
(5) Pass me the tall one.
OK: even if neither/both is/are tall.
However, using straight in such a linguistic construction is only possible
if exactly one of the two is (very close) to perfectly straight.
(6) Pass me the straight one.
# if neither/both is/are straight.
The third phenomenon treated in this work is scalarity. Again, tall and
straight pattern alike on this dimension in that they can both appear in
the comparative and many other degree constructions (7).
(7) a. This stick is taller/straighter than that one.
b. This stick is very tall/straight.
However, once more, if we look at the full range of data concerning
gradability and scale structure, tall and straight show a different pattern:
for example, certain scalar modifiers like almost and completely are
natural with straight, but not with tall.
(8) a. ??John is almost/completely tall.
b. This stick is almost/completely straight.
The main goal of Chapters 2–5 is to develop an account of both the
similarities and differences between various subclasses of adjectives with
respect to each of these three phenomena (vagueness, context senstivity,
and scalarity). The principle subclasses that will be empirically distin-
guished are the following:
 Consider, for example, the barrel of a rifle that must be perfectly straight for our shots
to be accurate.
4 introduction
(9) Relative scalar adjectives (RAs):

e.g. tall, short, expensive, cheap, nice, friendly, intelligent, stupid,
narrow, wide
(10) Total absolute adjectives (AAT s):
e.g. empty, full, clean, smooth, dry, straight, flat
(11) Partial absolute adjectives (AAP s):
e.g. dirty, bent, wet, curved, crooked, dangerous, awake
(12) Non-scalar adjectives (NSs):
e.g. atomic, geographical, polka-dotted, pregnant, illegal, dead,
hexagonal
I propose that the patterns concerning the behavior of tall and straight
described above and other patterns to be discussed in the work are
all reflexes of a single underlying difference in the semantics of these
lexical items involving (a certain kind of) context sensitivity. Moreover, I
propose that the data concerning both vagueness and scale structure can
be derived from the interaction between (lack of) context sensitivity and
tolerance/indifference relations associated with general cognitive cate-
gorization processes. Building on insights into the connection between
context sensitivity and scalarity from the work of Klein (1980) (among
others) and insights into the connection between tolerance relations and
the Sorites paradox from the work of Cobreros et al. (2012b) (among
others), I propose a new logical framework called Delineation Tolerant,
Classical, Strict (DelTCS) that captures the intimate and complex rela-
tionship between these three aspects of adjectival meaning.
Chapters 6 and 7 look at extensions of the framework developed
in Chapters 2–5. An important class of the extensions we will look at
concerns how the DelTCS framework can be applied outside the adjec-
tival domain to develop an analysis of context sensitivity, vagueness,
and gradability patterns associated with constituents of the determiner
phrase (DP) category. It has been long observed that there exist impor-
tant parallels between certain kinds of adjectives and certain kinds of
DPs when it comes to vagueness and scale structure. Although these
parallels will be outlined in great detail in the book, we can observe a first
cross-domain parallel using (among other constructions) degree modi-
fiers that combine with constituents of different syntactic categories. For
example, in many languages, a universal scalar modifier, such as French
 As observed by Bolinger () and Moltmann (), similar adjectival patterns are
possible in some dialects of English (ex. This room is all empty ≈ This room is completely
introduction 5
tou(te)s ‘all’, can combine with both adjectives like droit ‘straight’ and
definite plural DPs like les filles ‘the girls’ to create a parallel maximizing
interpretation.
(13) a. La rue est toute droite.
The road is all straight
‘The road is completely straight.’
b. Toutes les filles sont arrivées.
All the girls are arrived
‘All the girls arrived.’
Although examples such as (13) (and others to be discussed in Chapter
7) suggest that definite plural DPs and total adjectives have similar
scale structure properties, we will also see that context sensitivity/
vagueness/scale structure have slightly different manifestations with
DPs than with adjectives. In particular, I will argue that we see a different
typology of context sensitivity, vagueness, and scale structure patterns
in the DP domain than in the adjectival domain. Chapters 6 and 7 are
therefore devoted to capturing both the similarities (such as (13)) and
the proposed differences between adjectival and DP constituents within
a mereological extension (Simons, 1987; Hovda, 2008, among others) of
the DelTCS system (called M-DelTCS).
I will propose that the scales associated with DPs are derived from
statements about their context sensitivity and vagueness in the same
basic way as with adjectives. This is what creates the observed cross-
domain parallels. However, I will also propose that the different kinds
of ontological relations that characterize the domains into which DPs
and adjectives denote have important consequences for how the appli-
cation of these constituents can vary across comparison classes and how
they display the characteristic properties of vague language. In other
words, by virtue of the fact that DP constituents are interpreted into
domains that have mereological (i.e. part-structure) relations on them,
their context sensitivity and vagueness is constrained in a way that the
context sensitivity and vagueness of adjectival constituents is not. In
turn, by virtue of the logical structure of the M-DelTCS framework,
these differences in context sensitivity and vagueness will be translated
into differences in scale structure. Based on these results, I conclude that
empty). However, adjectival all is not fully productive in English in the way that its counter-
parts in the Romance languages (or even in German) are. Indeed, Moltmann () refers
to English all as ‘deficient’ with respect to its cognates in other Indo-European languages.
6 introduction
the Delineation TCS system (and its mereological extension M-DelTCS)

provides a broad and versatile framework for analyzing the connections
between context sensitivity, vagueness, and gradability that we observe
in natural language phenomena across different syntactic categories.
1.1 Organization of the book

Chapter 2 (Vagueness and linguistic analysis) serves as an introduction to
one of the main empirical phenomena to be analyzed in the monograph
and the formal tools that will be used in the analysis. As such, it has two
main parts: in the first part (Sections 2.2–2.3), I present the empirical
phenomenon known as vagueness in the linguistics and philosophical
literatures, and I outline why this phenomenon appears so threatening
to our classical semantic theories in logic and linguistics. In the second
part of the chapter (Sections 2.4–2.5), I present the basic account of the
puzzling properties of vague language that I will adopt in this work:
Cobreros et al.’s (2012b) Tolerant, Classical, Strict (TCS) similarity-based
non-classical logical framework. I then present a similar framework that
has been very influential in linguistics: Lasersohn’s (1999) Pragmatic
Halos framework. I give a comparison between the two approaches and
argue that, while Cobreros et al.’s (2012b) analysis (as applied to the
interpretation of English) is empirically superior, they share many of
the same driving intuitions. I therefore suggest that one way of looking
at TCS is as a more nuanced version of the halos approach. Readers that
are already familiar with the puzzles associated with vagueness and their
proposed solutions within TCS can easily skip this chapter without any
consequences for their understanding of the rest of the book.
Chapter 3 (Context sensitivity and vagueness patterns) presents the
main empirical patterns associated with adjectival context sensitivity
and vagueness. In line with previous work on the topic, I argue that
the different scale structure classes of adjectives in (9)–(12) vary with
respect to comparison class-based context sensitivity. I argue that to
properly understand this variation, it is useful to adopt two patterns
of comparison class-based context sensitivity: (what I will call) uni-
versal context sensitivity and existential context sensitivity. Intuitively,
predicates that are universally context sensitive show a greater range
of meaning variation than predicates that are existentially context sen-
sitive. In this chapter, I argue that three of the four scale-structure
subclasses presented above can be distinguished based on their context
organization of the book 7
sensitivity: RAs are universally context sensitive, both partial and AAT s
are existentially context sensitive, and NSs are not context sensitive.
This chapter also motivates an important empirical connection between
vagueness (i.e. the appearance of the properties described in Chapter 2)
and the scale structure classes in (9)–(12). In particular, I show that
the distribution of the puzzling properties of vague language is tied
to these lexical class distinctions, and, I propose, following authors
such as Kennedy and McNally (2005) and Kennedy (2007), that the
observed dependencies argue in favor of a closer relationship between
the phenomena of vagueness and scale structure than is often assumed
in the literature.
Chapter 4 (The Delineation Tolerant, Classical, Strict framework)
presents the DelTCS non-classical logical system for modelling the
relationship between context sensitivity, vagueness, and gradability in
the adjectival domain. I give an analysis of the context sensitivity/
vagueness patterns described in Chapter 3 within this framework, and
I discuss the empirical predictions that my analysis makes for a wide
range of semantic and pragmatic phenomena associated with adjectival
predicates.
Chapter 5 (Scale structure in Delineation semantics) presents both
new and previously discussed data associated with the scale structure
of members of the four principle classes of adjectives that are studied
in this work. Following much previous research, I argue that the adjec-
tives in each of the classes shown at the beginning of this chapter are
associated with scales that have different properties. In particular, as
we will see, there are empirical arguments for proposing that absolute
total adjectives are associated with scales that have maximal elements,
absolute partial adjectives are associated with scales that have minimal
elements, and relative adjectives are associated with scales that have
neither minimal nor maximal elements. I show in this chapter that
the association of an adjective with a scale with the correct properties
is already predicted by the analysis presented in Chapter 4 set within
the DelTCS architecture. In other words, I argue that, once we have an
(independently necessary) analysis of context sensitivity and vagueness
in the adjectival domain, we get an analysis of adjectival scale structure
“for free.”
Chapter 6 (Beyond Delineation semantics) studies a first class of
extensions of the framework developed in Chapters 2–5: theoreti-
cal/formal extensions. More precisely, this chapter explores to what
8 introduction
extent the enrichment of current theories of the semantics of gradable

expressions, besides Delineation semantics (DelS), with the structure of
a non-classical logic such as Tolerant, Classical, Strict can be useful to
understanding the complex relationships between context sensitivity,
vagueness, and scale structure that were discussed in Chapters 2–5.
I focus particularly on the detailed comparison of the DelTCS frame-
work and current analyses of the absolute/relative distinction set within
Degree semantics (DegS), with particular attention to the differences
and similarities between DelTCS and (a parallel formalization of) the
account presented in Kennedy (2007). I argue that, while these two
proposals do differ in important ways, significant, non-trivial (and not
immediately obvious) similarities exist between them. Based on this
observation, I propose that it is worthwhile to study how Kennedy’s
DegS proposal could be extended within the structure of the TCS
framework, and I give such an extension, called DegTCS. I argue that
the DegTCS extension provided in this chapter allows not only for a
more direct comparison between Delineation and Degree frameworks,
but also allows for a new characterization of Kennedy’s (2007) important
Interpretive Economy principle.
Chapter 7 (Beyond the adjectival domain) studies a second class of
extensions of the framework: empirical extensions. More specifically,
this chapter presents new data concerning the distribution of vagueness,
context sensitivity, and scale structure properties outside the adjectival
domain. I argue that three of the four principle “scale structure” classes
of adjectives have analogues in the DP domain and that these subclasses
of DPs can be distinguished in a similar (although not identical) manner
to their counterparts in the adjectival domain through their vagueness,
context sensitivity, and scale structure properties. I give a mereological
extension of the DelTCS framework and show how statements concern-
ing DP vagueness and context sensitivity within the new framework can
be used to derive the mereologically based scales that are independently
proposed to be associated with various kinds of DPs.
Finally, Chapter 8 (Conclusion) summarizes the main empirical and
theoretical claims made by this work and draws some final conclusions
on the nature of vagueness and scalarity in natural language.
2
Vagueness and linguistic

analysis
2.1 Introduction
This chapter serves as an introduction to both one of the main empirical
phenomena to be analyzed in this monograph and the formal tools that
will be used in the analysis. As such, it has two main parts: in the first
part (Sections 2.2–2.3), I present the empirical phenomenon known as
vagueness in the linguistics and philosophical literatures, and I outline
why this phenomenon appears so threatening to our classical seman-
tic theories in logic and linguistics. Although the puzzles associated
with vague language have received an enormous amount of attention
in the field of philosophy, they have been much less studied from a
grammatical perspective. Therefore, in the first part of the chapter, I
describe the ways in which vague predicates challenge the currently
dominant approaches to natural language semantics. Thus, I argue that
the problem of accounting for vagueness is also a central problem for
the field of formal linguistics.
In the second part of the chapter (Sections 2.4–2.5), I present the basic
account of the puzzling properties of vague language that I will adopt
in this work: Cobreros et al.’s (2012b) Tolerant, Classical, Strict (TCS)
similarity-based non-classical logical framework. Unlike many other
works on this topic, I will not begin by reviewing all the many and varied
previous accounts of vague language, nor will I provide a comprehensive
comparison between the TCS approach and its competitors. There are
two reasons for this: firstly, excellent general introductions to the phe-
nomenon of vagueness and the wide variety of approaches on the market
already exist. Secondly, and more importantly, many of the debates in
the philosophical literature that have given rise to the wide range of
 See, for example, Keefe (), Chapter  of Smith (), the papers in Dietz and
Moruzzi () etc. See also van Rooij (), Cobreros et al. (b), and Cobreros et al.
(a) for comparisons between TCS and other frameworks.
Gradability in Natural Language. Heather Burnett. © Heather Burnett 2017.

First published 2017 by Oxford University Press.
10 vagueness and linguistic analysis
theories of vagueness are not particularly relevant for linguistics. For

example, a major issue with respect to which philosophers tend to differ
is to what extent a logical system that models vague language ought to
preserve the features of classical First order logic (FOL). From a lin-
guist’s point of view, comparisons with FOL are pertinent only insomuch
as, as we will see in Section 2.2, it appears that natural languages do share
a certain set of properties with FOL. In other words, many concerns
that motivate many philosophical theories of vagueness do not directly
apply to the project of providing a semantics for fragments of natural
language that contain vague expressions. However, as we will see, the
consideration of some of the new data discussed in this book will have
implications for what kind of theories of vagueness are appropriate for
modelling the full range of patterns treated in this work. Thus, when
this new data reveals ways in which existing accounts make different
predictions, I will make remarks accordingly.
The chapter is organized as follows: I mentioned above that vague
predicates appear to be problematic for our Classical Semantic Theories
(CSTs); therefore, before discussing vagueness, I outline what I take to
be the defining features of CSTs. Then, in Section 2.3, I briefly exemplify
the phenomenon of vagueness with a couple of classic examples and
discuss why these examples appear puzzling for our CSTs. Of course,
a more in-depth empirical study of vague adjectives is given in the rest
of the book. In Section 2.4, I present the TCS account of vague language,
and, finally, in Section 2.5, I present (and formalize) a similar framework
that has been very influential in linguistics: Lasersohn’s (1999) Pragmatic
Halos (PH) framework. I give a comparison between the two approaches
and argue that, while Cobreros et al.’s (2012b) analysis (as applied to the
interpretation of English) is empirically superior, they share many of the
 A concrete example: As we will see in Section ., many speakers (the author included)
judge sentences of the form A is both P and not P as non-contradictory when A is a borderline
case of P. However, given that such FOL translations of such sentences are contradictions,
many philosophical theories maintain the contradictory nature of such statements. For
example, Keefe () says (p. ) (and see also similar sentiments in Fine () and
van Deemter ()):
Many philosophers would soon discount the paraconsistent option (almost) regardless of
how well it treats vagueness on the grounds of . . . the absurdity of p ∧ ¬p both being true
for many instances of p.
Thus, we can already see that theories of vagueness, which by design, have no way of dealing
with overt contradictions (either by allowing them, as in paraconsistent logics, or explaining
them away in a non-paraconsistent approach), are already inadequate semantic/pragmatic
theories for languages like English.
our classical semantic theory 11
same driving intuitions. Thus, one way of looking at TCS is as a more

nuanced version of the halos approach.
2.2 Our Classical Semantic Theory

Although the languages and the models that we will deal with in the rest
of the book will be more complicated than those of classical FOL, it is
useful to take a moment to review this system, while highlighting the
aspects that will be challenged by the existence of vague constituents.
2.2.1 Classical First order logic

The language of FOL is defined as follows:
Definition 2.2.1 Vocabulary. The vocabulary of FOL consists of a
series of individual constants a1 , a2 . . . , individual variables x1 , x2 . . . ,
unary predicate symbols P, Q, R . . . , quantifiers ∀ and ∃, and connectives
∧, ∨, ¬ and →, plus parentheses.
Definition 2.2.2 Syntax.
1. Variables and constants (and nothing else) are terms.
2. If t is a term and P is a predicate symbol, then P(t) is a well-formed
formula (wff).
3. If φ and ψ are wffs, then ¬φ, φ ∧ ψ, φ ∨ ψ, φ → ψ, ∀xφ, and ∃xφ
are wffs.
4. Nothing else is a wff.
Now we define the semantics for FOL. We first define models that consist
of a set of individuals D and a function m.
Definition 2.2.3 Model. A model is a tuple M = D, m where D is a
non-empty domain of individuals and m is a mapping on the non-logical
vocabulary satisfying,
1. for a constant a1 , m(a1 ) ∈ D
2. for a predicate P, m(P) ⊆ D.
The interpretation of variables is given by assignments.
 In this chapter, for simplicity, I will limit the discussion to systems with unary predicate
because the n−ary predicate case is simply a straightforward generalization of the unary
predicate case.
12 vagueness and linguistic analysis
Definition 2.2.4 Assignment. An assignment in a model M is a func-

tion g : {xn : n ∈ N} → D (from the set of variables to the domain D).
A model together with an assignment is an interpretation.
Definition 2.2.5 Interpretation. An interpretation I is a pair M, g,
where M is a model and g is an assignment.
We first associate an element from the domain D with every interpreta-
tion I and every term t.
Definition 2.2.6 Interpretation of terms.
1. If x1 is a variable, then I (x1 ) = g(x1 )
2. If a1 is a constant, then I (a1 ) = m(a1 )
Finally, the satisfaction relation () is defined as in Definition 2.2.7.
In what follows, for an interpretation I = M, g, a variable x1 , and
a1 a constant, let g[a1 /x1 ] be the assignment in M that maps x1 to a1
and agrees with g on all variables that are distinct from x1 . Also, let
I [a1 /x1 ] = M, g[a1 /x1 ].
Definition 2.2.7 Satisfaction (). For all interpretations I = M, g,
1. I P(t) iff I (t) ∈ m(P)
2. I ¬φ iff I φ
3. I φ ∧ ψ iff I φ and I ψ
4. I φ ∨ ψ iff I φ or I ψ
5. I φ → ψ iff if I φ, then I ψ
6. I ∀x1 φ iff for every a1 in D, I [a1 /x1 ] φ
7. I ∃x1 φ iff there is some a1 in D, I [a1 /x1 ] φ
In the next sections, we will discuss a number of theorems and argu-
ments of FOL. Thus, we define the consequence relation between sets of
formulas as follows:
Definition 2.2.8 Consequence (). A set of formulas is a conse-
quence of a set of formulas (written ) iff every interpretation
that is a model of is also a model of .
1. Instead of {ψ} {φ}, we will write ψ φ.
2. A formula φ is valid (written φ) iff Ø φ.
 As is common, I will use a to refer to both the expression in the language and its
2
interpretation (I(a2 )), provided that it is clear from context which is meant.
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
its way. In Greenland, B. cordatus is very common in the dog, and probably also
in man, though few cases have been recorded. B. mansoni Cobb. (= B.
liguloides Leuck.) was, till recently, known only in the larval state from China and
Japan. Iijima, however, has found older specimens in the latter country. B.
cristatus Dav. is a species founded somewhat doubtfully on two fragments
found, one in a child, the other in a man, in France.
Occurrence of Cestodes in Domestic Animals.[103]—Among domestic

animals, the dog is, undoubtedly, the most frequently attacked by Taeniae. Six
species of Taenia (T. serrata, marginata, coenurus, echinococcus, krabbei, and
possibly T. serialis), Dipylidium caninum (the commonest form), Mesocestoides
lineatus, and three or four species of Bothriocephalus have been found in the
dog. The table of life-histories (p. 83) shows that sheep, rabbits and other
Rodents serve as the intermediate hosts, in which the cystic stages of the
species of Taenia are found. Hence the prevalence of T. serrata in a given
locality is connected with the abundance there of the rabbit and hare, in which
the larva (Cysticercus pisiformis) occurs. Bothriocephalus cordatus develops
from the young stage present in the fish which the Icelanders give to their dogs.
In Iceland and certain parts of Australia T. echinococcus infests one-third to one-
half the number of dogs examined; a fact connected with the frequency of
Echinococcus in man in these countries.
In sheep the most noteworthy and dangerous parasite is Coenurus cerebralis (or
the cystic stage of the dog-taenia, T. coenurus), which gives rise to the disease
known as "gid" or "staggers." It is found in various parts of the brain or spinal
cord, and the symptoms differ according to the position of the parasite. If this
presses upon one hemisphere the sheep describes circles and finally falls: if on
the optic lobes, the eyes are affected: if the pressure affects the cerebellum the
movements of the sheep are uncertain and incoordinated. Four or six weeks
after the appearance of the symptoms, death results from cerebral paralysis, or
from general debility, and the loss of sheep incurred by this disease (happily less
frequent in England than formerly) has been calculated by Youatt at a million for
France annually; at 35 per cent of the flocks for England in bad seasons; and
about 2 per cent for Germany. Besides sheep, which are most subject to "gid"
during their first year, various ruminants—Goat, Ox, Moufflon, Chamois, Roe,
Antelope, Reindeer, Dromedary—are attacked in the same way. A similar form,
Coenurus serialis Baill., is common in the wild rabbit in this country, and in
Australia in the hare and squirrel. It forms large swellings in the connective
tissue of various parts of the body, but usually does not affect the health of the
host. It is not known in what carnivore Taenia serialis Baill. normally occurs.
Experiments have, however, shown that it develops rapidly in dogs.
The preventive measures which are steadily diminishing the prevalence of the
Cestode parasites in man in some parts of Western Europe cannot be dealt with
here, but it may be noticed that the Jewish observance with regard to swine is
the surest preventive measure against taeniasis and trichinosis. Careful
inspection of meat and general cleanliness, are the leading measures that in
these hygienic matters secure the greatest immunity from disease.
Table of the Life-Histories of the principal Cestodes of Man and the

Domestic Animals.
Cestode. Final host. Larva. Intermediate host.

Rabbit, Hare, Mice
Taenia serrata Cysticercus
Dog (liver and
Goeze pisiformis Zed.
peritoneum)
Monkeys,
Cyst. tenuicollis Ruminants,
T. marginata Batsch Dog, Wolf
Rud. Ungulates (in
peritoneum)
T. saginata Goeze
(= Ox, Giraffe (in
Man Cyst. bovis Cobb.
T. mediocanellata muscles)
Küch.)
Pig, Man,
Cyst. cellulosae
Monkeys, Bear,
Rud. (? Cyst.
T. solium Rud. Man Dog, Cat, Black
acanthotrias
Rat (in various
Weinl.)
organs)
Cat and
other Cyst. fasciolaris Rat, Mouse, Bat
T. crassicollis Rud.
Felidae, Rud. (liver)
Stoat
Brain of Sheep,
Ox, Goat,
Dog, Arctic Coenurus
T. coenurus Küch. Dromedary,
Fox cerebralis Rud.
Camel,
Antelope, Horse
Coenurus serialis Rabbit (connective
T. serialis Baill. ? Dog
Baill. tissue)
T. echinococcus Dog, Dingo, Echinococcus Man, Monkeys,
v. Sieb. Jackal, polymorphus many
Wolf Dies.(incl. Carnivores,
Rodents,
E. multilocularis Ungulates,
found in Man) Ruminants, and
Marsupials; also
in Turkey and
other birds
Moniezia expansa Sheep, Ox,
Unknown
Rud. Goat, etc.
Thysanosoma Sheep,
Unknown
fimbriata Dies. Cervidae
Stilesia
Sheep Unknown
globipunctata Riv.
Anoplocephala
Horse Unknown
perfoliata Goeze
Dipylidium caninum
Cysticercoid larva Body-cavity of
L. (= Taenia
Man, Dog, (Fig. 43), Trichodectes
cucumerina Bloch
Cat Cryptocystis and Pulex of
= T. elliptica
trichodectis Vill. Dog
Batsch)
Cercocystis Vill.
Hymenolepis [104] (develops
Mouse, Rat Usually absent
murina Duj. in parental
host)
H. nana v. Sieb. Man Unknown
Meal-moth, Asopia
H. diminuta Rud. (= (Pyralis)
Man,
Taenia farinalis; also
Mouse, Cercocystis Vill.
flavopunctata certain
Rat
Weinl.) Orthoptera and
Coleoptera
The Ostracods
Candona
Duck, rostrata and
Drepanidotaenia
Goose, Cercocystis Vill. Cypris
gracilis Zed.
Wild Duck compressa, and
also Cyclops
viridis
Cypris
D. anatina Krabbe Duck " " incongruens,
and also Perch
Cyclops
D. setigera Fröh. Goose " "
brevicaudatus
D. infundibuliformis Common
" " House-fly
Goeze Fowl
Dicranotaenia Duck " " Cypris ovum
coronula Duj.
Davainea ? Limax cinereus,
Fowl " "
proglottina Dav. L. agrestis
D.
madagascariensis Children Unknown
Dav.
D. friedbergeri
Pheasant Unknown ? Ants
v. Linst.
Mesocestoides
Dog Unknown
lineatus Goeze
Probably first
enters an
Plerocercoid, i.e
Invertebrate
Bothriocephalus Man, Dog, solid, elongate
host, which is
latus Brems. ? Cat larva, with no
eaten by Pike,
bladder
Perch, Trout,
etc.
Fig. 40.—A, Stickleback (Gasterosteus aculeatus) infested by an advanced larva

of Schistocephalus solidus Crepl. B, The larva. All × 1½. (From specimens in
the Cambridge University Museum.)
Structure and Development of Cestoda.[105]—Of the unsegmented Cestodes,

Caryophyllaeus mutabilis, from the intestine of carp and other Cyprinoid fishes,
is the most easily accessible form. Triaenophorus nodulosus, which is very
useful for the study of the excretory system, occurs mature in the pike. In the
body-cavity of the Stickleback (Fig. 40) a large, broad, yellow worm may
sometimes be found, the larva of Schistocephalus solidus Crepl., which occurs
in the intestine of Terns, Storks, Mergansers, and other birds. Species of Ligula
are found in the same birds. The intestine of a Lophius or Cyclopterus ("lump-
fish") contains, usually, the early and intermediate stages of various Cestodes,
while the alimentary canal of Elasmobranchs often contain many peculiar
Tetrarhynchidae and other forms. For the study of development, the Taenia
anatina from the duck may be used. The ripe proglottides are collected, and the
eggs placed with Cypris ovum in an aquarium, with the probability that some of
the embryos will enter the Ostracod, and the peculiar Cysticercoid may be bred.
[106] Cysticercus pisiformis and Coenurus serialis, which occur commonly in
rabbits, are also suitable objects for examination.
A Cestode such as Echinobothrium (Fig. 36) is divisible into head and

proglottides. Moniez has suggested that the head is really the morphologically
hinder end of the body, in which case the formation of proglottides would closely
resemble the mode of segmentation of an Annelid larva. The close similarity,
however, between the Cysticercoid larva (Fig. 43, F) and the Cercaria of a liver-
fluke, seems to show that the anterior end is the same in both cases, and since
it bears the central part of the nervous system, we may reasonably call it the
"head." Moreover the hinder end of a Platyhelminth usually possesses the chief
excretory pore. Another difficulty is the determination of dorsal and ventral
surfaces. Authors are agreed,—on the analogy of Trematodes, in which the
testes are usually dorsal and the ovaries ventral,—that the dorsal and ventral
aspects of a Cestode are determined by the position of these organs, although
the often radially formed "head," the lateral or superficial position of the genital
apertures, and the variability of these features, render it a matter of considerable
doubt whether "dorsal" and "ventral" are more than useful conventional terms.
The suckers and hooks are borne on a muscular cap, the "rostellum," which is
only slightly developed in the Ichthyotaeniae. The body is solid, and is divisible
into an outer muscular coat—enveloped in a (possibly epidermal) investing
membrane—and an inner parenchymatous tissue containing the chief part of the
excretory, nervous, and reproductive systems. One or two pairs of longitudinal
excretory vessels are present, usually connected by transverse ducts and
opening by a single terminal pore. Occasionally a regularly paired arrangement
of lateral or secondary pores is present (Figs. 38 and 41, for.sec). Flame-cells
occur at the end of the fine tubules (Fig. 38), and the whole system is well
developed, but may undergo degenerative changes in the older proglottides.
The central nervous system varies according to the degree of differentiation of
the rostellum; and, owing to the difficulty of staining the nerves and the
contradictory statements of authors, we do not yet possess a fully reliable
account of the nervous system even of the commoner Taeniae. Free nerve
endings and other sensory terminations have been recently stated to exist in the
cuticle of Cestodes and Trematodes. If true, this would tend to show that the
parasitic mode of life of these animals demands a complex nervous system
comparable with that of the Turbellaria.
Fig. 41.—Diagrammatic transverse section of Schistocephalus solidus Crepl., from
the Wild-duck, illustrative of the Cestodes with uterine aperture (uto). × 12.
cs, Cirrus-sac; for.sec, one of the paired lateral openings of the excretory
vessels; ln, longitudinal nerve; ov, ovary; ovd, oviduct; par.m,
parenchymatous muscles; r.sem, receptaculum seminis; sh.gl, shell-gland; te,
testes; ut, uterus; uto, uterine pore; vag, vagina; vd, vasa deferentia; yd, yolk-
duct; yg, yolk-glands (black); ♂ , male, ♀ , female genital aperture. (After
Riehm.)
The reproductive organs, unlike the preceding systems, are discontinuous from
one proglottis to the next. The male and female organs and their mutual
connexions, especially in the unsegmented Cestodes, may be compared in
detail with those of Trematodes, but the difference between the arrangement of
the generative organs of various Cestodes is very great.[107] The penis (Fig. 41,
cs) is evaginated through the male pore (Fig. 41, ♂ ), and inserted far into the
vagina (♀, vag) of the same or another segment of the tape-worm.
Fig. 42.—A, Free-swimming, six-hooked larva of Bothriocephalus latus Brems.

(the broad tape-worm of Man), still enclosed in a ciliated (possibly cellular)
double membrane or mantle. In this condition it may continue to live in water
for a week or more, but eventually throws off its ciliated coat (as in B) and
commences to creep about vigorously by the aid of its hooks, in search of its
first host, which is at present unknown. (After Schauinsland.) × 600.
From this fact and the anatomical relations of the vagina, it is becoming
increasingly probable that the so-called uterus of Trematodes is an organ
corresponding to the vagina of Cestodes, and not to the uterus of Cestodes. The
latter opens to the exterior in Schistocephalus, Bothriocephalus, and some other
Cestodes of fishes by a special pore (Fig. 41, uto). Through this, some of the
eggs (which in these genera give rise to ciliated larvae) are enabled to escape,
and need not wait for the detachment of the proglottis, as must happen in the
Taeniidae, where the uterus is closed. This uterus, a true physiological one, is
probably the homologue of the "canal of Laurer" ("Laurer-Stieda canal," or
"vagina") of Trematoda. The fertilised ovum and yolk are brought together into
the "ootype," where the shell-gland forms the egg-shell around them (Fig. 41,
sh.gl) and the egg is then passed into the uterus. The ovum segments to form a
minute six-hooked larva, which may (Bothriidae, Fig. 42) or may not (Taeniidae)
be ciliated. Thus in Taenia serrata the proglottides are shed with the faeces of
the host (dog), and they protect the young from the desiccating influence of the
surroundings. If inadvertently eaten by a rabbit along with herbs, the proglottis
and larval envelope are digested, and by its six hooks the tiny larva bores
through the gastric wall into the portal vein, and so into the liver. Here the hooks
are thrown off, and the solid mass of cells becomes vacuolated.
Fig. 43.—Stages in the development of Dipylidium caninum L. (= Taenia elliptica

Batsch, T. cucumerina Bloch), the commonest of the Dog-Taeniae; compare
Fig. 44. A, Six-hooked larva (now often spoken of as an "Onchosphaera"); B,
larva elongating; formation of a central lacuna; C, larva further advanced; D,
distinction between body and tail is visible; E, invagination of the rostellum is
commencing; F, Cysticercoid larva with four suckers, invaginated rostellum,
and excretory vessels. c, Calcareous concretions in cells of the larva; ex.o,
excretory aperture; ex.v, excretory vessels; inv, invagination commencing;
rost, rostellum; sc, suckers. (After Grassi and Rovelli; highly magnified.)
Fig. 44.—Schematic longitudinal sections through the larvae of Dipylidium

caninum L. All these stages are passed in the body-cavity of the Dog-flea
(Pulex serraticeps). (Compare Fig. 43 for further details.) A, Six-hooked larva
with developing rostellum (shaded) and suckers (black). In this species the
invagination (C, invag.) occurs after the formation of these organs, and not,
as in most Taeniae, before it. B, Invagination commencing; the hooks are
developing above the rostellum, while beneath it the nervous system (dotted)
is seen. C, The invagination has now carried the suckers inwards. The tail
has become distinct, and the whole larva at this stage is known as a
Cysticercoid. hk, Larval hooks; invag, mouth of the invagination; n, central
nervous system; rost, rostellum and hooks; sc, suckers, of which only two
can be seen in a longitudinal section; four are really present. (After Grassi
and Rovelli.)
At one pole an invagination occurs, at the bottom of which the rostellum,

suckers, and hooks are gradually formed, but inside out as compared with the
head of the Taenia serrata. At this stage the larva (Cysticercus pisiformis) has
usually issued from the liver and attached itself to the omentum. The
invagination projects into the cavity of the bladder, within which a watery fluid
accumulates. Thus the "bladder worm" is formed, the head of which is
evaginated if the larva be introduced into the digestive system of a dog. The
bladder and neck of invagination are digested, while the head, protected by
these, remains, and forms the neck, from which the proglottides are afterwards
segmented off. In Taenia (Hymenolepis) murina the whole development may
take place in the parental host, the larva living in the villi, the adults in the cavity
of the same rat's intestine (Grassi). The different forms of Cestode larvae
depend largely upon the presence and degree of development of the caudal
vesicle or bladder, which in Scolex polymorphus (Fig. 38) (the young stage of
Calliobothrium filicolle Zsch.) is practically absent. If the bladder be small, the
larva is known as a Cysticercoid. For example, the common Dipylidium caninum,
which lives in the dog, has such a larva, the development of which is explained
and illustrated by Figs. 43 and 44. The bladder becomes exceeding capacious in
Coenurus and Echinococcus.
Table for the Discrimination of the more usual Cestodes of Man and
Domestic Animals.[108]
I. Scolex in most cases with hooks; uterus with a median and lateral
branches; yolk-glands simple, median; genital pore single; dorsal
excretory vessel narrower than the ventral, without a circular
commissural trunk; eggs without pyriform apparatus (processes of the
ovarian membrane)
Gen. Taenia L. (s. str.)
A. Genital ducts pass on the ventral side of the
nerve and of the two longitudinal excretory
vessels T. crassicollis Rud.
B. Genital ducts pass between the dorsal and ventral longitudinal vessels.
a. Nerve present on dorsal side of genital ducts.
α. Head armed T. solium Rud.
β. Head unarmed T. saginata Goeze.
b. Nerve on ventral side of genital ducts.
Dog-Taeniae[109]
Head armed; genital pore marginal and
— Single
Many proglottides; strobila several centimetres long; small hooks
with guard.
Bifid hooks, which are
— 230µ-260µ long[110]; genital pore very
distinct T. serrata Goeze.
— 136µ-157µ long; genital pore not very
salient T. serialis Ball.
Entire large hooks, which are
— 180µ-220µ long; length of mature
segments double their width T. marginata Batsch.
— 150µ-170µ long; length of mature
segments treble their width T. coenurus Küch.
3-4 segments; a few mm. long T. echinococcus
v. Sieb.
— Double and bilateral Dipylidium caninum
L.
Head unarmed; two genital pores on ventral Mesocestoides
surface lineatus Goeze.
II. Scolex without hooks; one or two transverse uteri present; one or two
genital pores and yolk-glands, the latter never median; genital ducts
pass on the dorsal side of the nerve; eggs with pyriform apparatus.
A. One transverse uterus present.
a. Uterus with bullate egg-sacs; pyriform apparatus without horns; genital
ducts between dorsal and ventral vessels
Thysanosoma Dies.
α. Head large (1.5 mm.); square lobed testes in median field; posterior
margin of segments fimbriated; genital pore double
T. fimbriata Dies.
β. Head small; no fimbriae; pore rarely double T. giardii Riv.
b. Uterus without saccular dilatations; segments Anoplocephala E.
short, thick, and slightly imbricate Blanch.
Horse-Taeniae.
α. Head very large A. plicata
— No posterior lobes Zed.
— Four posterior lobes A. perfoliata
Goeze.
β. Head small, without posterior lobes A. mamillana Mehl.
B. Two uteri and two genital pores present; horns of pyriform apparatus
well developed; genital ducts pass on the dorsal side of the
longitudinal vessels
Moniezia R. Bl.
a. Interproglottidal glands [111] arranged in linear series (planissima
group)
M. planissima S. and H. M. benedeni Mz. M. neumani Mz.
b. Interproglottidal glands saccular (expansa group)
M. expansa Rud. M. oblongiceps S. and H. M. trigonophora S. and H.
c. Interproglottidal glands absent (denticulata M. denticulata Rud.
group) M. alba Perr.
C. Uterus single or double, without spore-like egg-sacs; eggs with a single
shell; genital pores irregularly alternate; strobila narrow; testes absent
from median part of the field
Stilesia Raill.
a. A transverse uterus in middle part of median S. centripunctata
field; head 2 mm. diameter Riv.
b. Two lateral uteri in each segment; head less
than 1 mm. in diameter S. globipunctata Riv.
III. Scolex almost invariably provided with hooks; genital pores on left border
of segment; eggs with three shells but no cornua. Segments broader
than long; posterior angles salient.
Hymenolepis Weinl.
a. Scolex with a single series of 24-30 hooks, each 14-18µ long
H. nana v. Sieb. H. murina Duj.
b. Scolex very small, unarmed H. diminuta Rud.
IV. Scolex provided with two elongated muscular pits. Body segmented; three
genital apertures in middle of ventral surface
Bothriocephalus Rud.
Body 2-20 metres in length
B. latus Brems. B. cristatus Dav. (doubtful species). B. cordatus Leuck. B.
mansoni Cobb. (= B. liguloides Leuck.)
Classification of Cestodes.—The following classification, which, so far as the

Taeniidae are concerned, follows that employed by Railliet, Blanchard, and most
recent writers, includes only a few representative genera:—
1. Fam. Cestodariidae Mont. (Monozoa Lang).

Gen. Caryophyllaeus, Archigetes, Gyrocotyle, Amphilina.
2. Fam. Bothriocephalidae.
Sub-Fam. 1. Bothriocephalinae. Gen. Bothriocephalus, Schistocephalus,
Triaenophorus (= Tricuspidaria).
Sub-Fam. 2. Ligulinae. Gen. Ligula.
Sub-Fam. 3. Solenophorinae. Gen. Solenophorus, Duthiersia.
Sub-Fam. 4. Diphyllinae. Gen. Echinobothrium.
3. Fam. Tetrarhynchidae.
Gen. Tetrarhynchus.
4. Fam. Tetraphyllidae.
Sub-Fam. 1. Phyllobothrinae. Gen. Phyllobothrium, Echeneibothrium,
etc.
Sub-Fam. 2. Phyllacanthinae. Gen. Calliobothrium, Anthobothrium, etc.
5. Fam. Taeniidae.
Sub-Fam. 1. Cystotaeninae. Gen. Taenia s. str.
Sub-Fam. 2. Anoplocephalinae. Gen. Moniezia, Thysanosoma, Stilesia,
Anoplocephala.
Sub-Fam. 3. Cystoidotaeninae. Gen. Dipylidium, Hymenolepis,
Drepanidotaenia, Dicranotaenia, Echinocotyle, Davainea.
Sub-Fam. 4. Mesocestoidinae. Gen. Mesocestoides, Dithyridium.
Sub-Fam. 5. Ichthyotaeninae. Gen. Ichthyotaenia, Corallobothrium.
CHAPTER IV
MESOZOA
DICYEMIDAE—STRUCTURE—REPRODUCTION—OCCURRENCE: ORTHONECTIDAE—
OCCURRENCE—STRUCTURE: TRICHOPLAX: SALINELLA.
The Mesozoa are an obscure group, the position of which in the animal kingdom
is still doubtful. The name Mesozoa was given to the group by its discoverer, E.
van Beneden,[112] as he concluded that they were intermediate between the
Protozoa and the higher Invertebrates. Recent authors, however, have called
attention to the resemblance existing between them and the "sporocysts" of
Trematodes, and though we still are ignorant of certain important points in their
life-histories, the Mesozoa are most conveniently (and probably rightly)
considered as an appendix to the Platyhelminthes.
Fig. 45.—A, B, C, Stages in the development of the vermiform larva in Dicyema

typus van Ben. (After Ed. van Beneden.) cal, "Calotte"; gc, germinal cell; n,
nucleus of endodermal cell.
The animals composing this group are minute and parasitic, and are composed
of a small number of cells. They may be divided into two families: the
Dicyemidae, which occur exclusively in the kidneys of certain Cephalopods
(cuttle-fish); and the Orthonectidae, which live in the brittle-star Amphiura
squamata, the Nemertine Nemertes lacteus, or the Polyclad Leptoplana
tremellaris. In addition to the undoubted Mesozoa, certain anomalous forms—
Trichoplax adhaerens and Salinella salve—may be referred to this group.
Fig. 46.—Dicyemennea eledones Wag., from the kidney of Eledone moschata. A,

Full-grown Rhombogen with infusoriform embryos (emb); B, one of the latter
developing; C, fully formed; D, calotte, composed of the upper nine cells
shown in the figure. (After Ed. van Beneden and Whitman.) emb, Infusoriform
embryo; g, part of endoderm-cell where formation of these embryos is rapidly
proceeding; n.ect, nucleus of ectoderm-cell; n.end, nucleus of endoderm-cell;
p, "calotte."
Dicyemidae.—If the kidney of Eledone moschata, a Cephalopod common on

our south-western shores, be opened, a number of fine, yellowish, hair-like
filaments may be seen attached at one end to its inner surface, floating in the
fluid contained in the renal cavity. These may be Dicyemennea eledones Wag.,
although another form, Dicyema moschatum Whit., also occurs in the same
host. D. eledones (Fig. 46) is 7 to 9 mm. long, transparent, and is composed of
one large inner cell with a simple nucleus (Fig. 46, n.end), and of an outer layer
of ciliated cells, nine of which form the "calotte" or pole by which the animal is
attached. Within the former (endodermal) cell the formation of urn-shaped
"infusoriform embryos" takes place (B and C), the fate of which is not known, but
they are possibly the males. The individual which produces these larvae is called
a "Rhombogen." Other individuals which produce a more elongated larva
("vermiform larva," Fig. 45) are called "Nematogens," and Whitman has
described a third kind, which produce first infusoriform, and then vermiform,
larvae (Secondary Nematogens).[113]
The occurrence of the known species of Dicyemids (a group which has not been
investigated on our coasts) is as follows:—
Species. Host.
Dicyema typus van Ben. Octopus vulgaris.
D. clausianum van Ben. O. macropus.
D. microcephalum Whit. O. de Filippi.
D. moschatum Whit. Eledone moschata.
D. macrocephalum van Ben. Sepiola rondeletii.
D. truncatum Whit. Rossia macrosoma, Sepia elegans, S.
officinalis.
D. schultzianum van Ben. S. biseralis, Octopus vulgaris.
Dicyemennea eledones Wag. Eledone moschata, E. aldrovandi.
D. mülleri Clap. E. cirrosa.
D. gracile Wag. Sepia officinalis.
Conocyema polymorphum S. officinalis, Octopus vulgaris.
van Ben.
Orthonectida.[114]—Two species of Orthonectids are fairly well known,

Rhopalura giardii Metschn. from Amphiura squamata, and R. intoshii Metschn.
from Nemertes lacteus. The latter appears to be very rare, the former occurring
in 2 to 5 per cent of the number of hosts examined. The parasites occur in a
granular "plasmodium," the nature of which is uncertain. Metschnikoff regards it
as formed by the Orthonectids, and he considers that the cellular envelope, by
which it is sometimes enclosed, is developed from the neighbouring tissue of the
host. These granular, sometimes nucleated, plasmodial masses, which can
perform active amoeboid movements in sea-water, occur attached to the ventral
part of the body-cavity of Amphiura, and between the gut-branches and body-
wall in Nemertes. Should these hosts be infected by great numbers of the
Orthonectids, their sexual organs degenerate (as is the case with pond-snails
attacked by sporocysts[115]), and it is possible that the remains of these organs
may constitute the "plasmodia" (Braun).
Rhopalura giardii is of distinct sexes. Either males or females are found in one
Amphiura. Two kinds of females, flattened unsegmented, and cylindrical
segmented forms, are known. They consist of a ciliated ectodermal layer
enclosing an endodermal mass of eggs, between which is a fibrillar layer usually
considered to be of a muscular nature. The cylindrical female gives rise to eggs
which develop, probably exclusively, into males. The flattened female produces
eggs from which females alone arise, though the origin of the two forms of this
sex is not well ascertained. The males contain spermatozoa which fertilise the
eggs of the cylindrical female, whereas the ova of the flat form probably develop
parthenogenetically.
Fig. 47.—Rhopalura giardii Metschn. (from the brittle-star Amphiura squamata). ♂,

Full-grown male (× 800); ♀ 1, flattened form of female (× 510); ♀ 2, cylindrical
female (× 510). (After Julin.)
Trichoplax.[116]—This anomalous animal has only been found in aquaria,

originally in the marine aquarium at Graz by Schulze. It has the appearance of a
large, flattened, ciliated Amoeba (1.5-3 mm. in diameter), but is distinguished by
its structure. The upper surface is composed of a flattened epithelium. The lower
surface is made up of cylindrical ciliated cells, which pass imperceptibly into the
branched cells, embedded in a hyaline matrix, which compose the middle layer
of the body. No distinct organs, and beyond simple fission, no mode of
reproduction, have been observed. One species, T. adhaerens, is known, but
has never been met with in a free state.
Salinella.[117]—This is another aquarium-animal, found by Frenzel in the

Argentine, in an artificial saline solution with which he filled some aquaria. It
measures .2 mm. in length, and has a somewhat flattened, barrel-shaped
appearance. A single layer of ciliated cells bounds a central cavity opening at
each end. Fission, and conjugation followed by encystment, have been
observed. One form, S. salve, is known from salines taken from Cordova.
NEMERTINEA
BY
LILIAN SHELDON
Staff Lecturer in Natural Science, Newnham College, Cambridge.
CHAPTER V
NEMERTINEA
INTRODUCTORY—EXTERNAL CHARACTERS—ANATOMY—CLASSIFICATION—
DEVELOPMENT—HABITS—REGENERATION—BREEDING—GEOGRAPHICAL
DISTRIBUTION—LAND, FRESH-WATER, AND PARASITIC FORMS—AFFINITIES
The Nemertinea form a compact group, the affinities of which have not been at
present clearly determined. Several species were mentioned and described in
the works of various naturalists during the latter half of the eighteenth century,
though their anatomy was not understood until considerably later. The first
mention of any member of the group was made by the Rev. W. Borlase in his
Natural History of Cornwall, published in 1758. He gives a short description and
a rough figure of Lineus marinus. From that time the increase in the knowledge
of the group was very gradual. New species were from time to time described,
but few of the descriptions could boast of much completeness, and many
erroneous views were held until comparatively recent years. The group was very
variously classified, but the general arrangement in early times seems to have
been to unite it with the Planarians. Valuable contributions to the history of the
development were made in 1848 and the few subsequent years by Desor,[118]
Gegenbaur,[119] Krohn,[120] and Leuckart and Pagenstecher[121]; and more
recently by Metschnikoff[122] and Salensky.[123]
Nemertines for the most part closely resemble one another in all essential
points, though they differ considerably in size, colour, and external details. They
vary in length from less than an inch to thirty yards, this extreme size being
attained by Lineus marinus.
Fig. 48.—Lineus marinus Mont., from the living specimen in the coiled condition.
Plymouth. × 1. a, Anterior end; b, posterior end.
Fig. 49.—L. marinus, from the same specimen as Fig. 48, in the expanded
condition. a, Anterior end; b, posterior end.
Nemertines are common on the British coasts; about forty species have been
recorded from this area. On turning over a stone on a sandy or muddy shore in a
pool left by the receding tide, there may often be seen a coiled mass, having the
appearance of a uniform slimy string twisted into a complicated knot. If it be
carefully removed, the ends can generally be made out, one bluntly rounded and
the other slightly tapering (Fig. 48, a and b). Occasionally there may be seen
attached to the blunter end a fine thread, which moves about freely. This thread
may, by an instantaneous movement, be drawn into the body, no trace of its
existence being left except at the tip of the head, where a small pore is visible;
this is the orifice through which it was withdrawn. Shortly afterwards the thread
may be again shot out, the process being instantaneous and often accomplished
with great force. This thread (Fig. 50, p) is the proboscis, a very important and
characteristic organ in Nemertines.
Most Nemertines are marine; they are mostly indifferent to climate and to the
nature of the soil on which they live.
A few forms live on land (e.g. Tetrastemma agricola,[124] Geonemertes

palaensis,[125] and G. chalicophora[126]) or in fresh water (e.g. Tetrastemma
aquarum dulcium[127] and T. lacustre[128]) in various parts of the globe. There
are also parasitic forms; the best known of which is Malacobdella.[129] A pelagic
form, Pelagonemertes,[130] has been described by Moseley.
Fig. 50.—Side view of head of Cerebratulus (Micrura) tristis Hubr., showing the
everted proboscis. Naples. × 2. Drawn from a spirit specimen. c.s, Cephalic
slit; m, mouth; p, proboscis.
External Characters.—A typical Nemertine possesses an elongated worm-like

body (Fig. 49), which is usually thrown into numerous close coils (Fig. 48). In
section it may be either round or more or less flattened, with the lateral edges in
some cases quite thin and almost fin-like. One or two broad, flattened, and leaf-
shaped forms are known, but such a condition is exceptional, and the forms in
which it occurs have probably assumed it owing to the adoption of special
modes of life.
In the ordinary forms the posterior end of the body is pointed either bluntly or
sharply. The head is somewhat broader than the rest of the body, and often
assumes a spatulate form. Eyes (Fig. 51, e) are usually present either in one or
several pairs, or in symmetrically-arranged groups on each side of the head. The
mouth (Fig. 58, m) is situated near the front end of the body on the ventral
surface, and is usually rendered conspicuous by being surrounded by thick
tumid lips. It varies in form from being slit-like to elliptical. At the anterior end of
the body a small terminal pore occurs; this is the external opening of the
proboscis (Fig. 51, p.p).
Nemertines are often very diversely and brilliantly coloured, the hues most
commonly found being white, yellow, green, deep purple, and various shades of
red and pink. The ventral surface is usually paler in colour than the dorsal, and
the latter is often marked by longitudinal and transverse stripes (Fig. 59) in
contrasting colours.
The whole animal is enveloped in a layer of mucus, which sometimes becomes

hardened to form a tube, and this may be still further strengthened by an
admixture of particles of sand or earth.
The body is capable to a great extent of contraction and extension, a Nemertine

many inches long being apt, when irritated or alarmed, to contract itself to the
length of not more than half an inch. Hence, unless the animal is kept and
carefully watched, a very erroneous idea may be conceived as to its size.
Anatomy.—The body-wall consists of several layers (Fig. 52), which in a typical

highly-developed Nemertine are as follows:—
1. An external epidermic layer (ep), consisting of ciliated cells, among which are
placed numerous unicellular glands. These glands probably secrete the mucus
in which the Nemertine is usually enveloped; their contents when in the body are
very highly refracting. The epidermis rests on a basement membrane (b.m).
2. The two or three muscular layers, arranged as either an external circular and
an internal longitudinal, or an inner and an outer circular separated by a
longitudinal layer, or, as in the figure (c.m and l.m), two longitudinal separated by
a circular layer.
Fig. 51.—Amphiporus lactifloreus Johnst., drawn from the living specimen, from
the dorsal surface. Plymouth. × 2. e, Eyes; g, generative organs; n.g, nerve
ganglion; p.p, proboscis pore; p, proboscis.
3. A fairly thick connective-tissue layer often found between the epidermis and
the muscles, into which latter it gradually merges (s.t).
The Digestive System.—The mouth is placed on the ventral surface near the
anterior end of the body (Figs. 53, 58, m). It leads into a straight oesophagus
(Fig. 53, oes), whence passes off the intestine (int), which is continued as a
straight non-convoluted tube to the anus (a), situated terminally at the posterior
end of the body. The intestine is thrown out throughout the greater part of its
course into paired lateral pouches.
Fig. 52.—Diagrammatic transverse section of a Nemertine (Schizonemertea)

through the middle region of the body. b.m, Basement membrane; c.m,
circular muscle layer; d.b, dorsal blood-vessel; ep, epidermis; g, generative
organs; int, intestine; l.b, lateral blood-vessel; l.m, longitudinal muscle layers;
n.c, lateral nerve-cord; n.l, nerve plexus; p, proboscis; p.s, proboscis sheath;
s.t, subcutaneous layer.
The alimentary canal is lined throughout by a ciliated epithelium. The

oesophagus has, in addition to this layer, an outer thick coat of large granular
cells, which probably have a glandular function.
Proboscis.—The most characteristic organ of the Nemertines is the proboscis

(Figs. 50, 53, 54). For many years its disposition and function were
misunderstood, and it was supposed to be a portion of the digestive system. The
proboscis, which lies dorsal to the alimentary canal, opens at the extreme
anterior end of the body by a small pore (Figs. 51, 53, 58). When retracted it is
sometimes considerably folded, and lies in a long pouch or sheath. To the walls
of this sheath it is attached round its anterior end; and strong muscles unite its
posterior extremity to the sheath a short distance from the posterior end of the
latter.
The proboscis seems to be exclusively a tactile and protective and defensive
organ, for which functions it is eminently fitted by the great ease and rapidity with
which it is everted or thrust out from the body. It consists of two distinct regions
(Fig. 54, g.p and m.p). In the retracted state the anterior part is a hollow tube
with very thick muscular walls made up of several layers. At the base of this part
in many of the Nemertines there is situated a sharp-pointed spine projecting
forward into the lumen, and several smaller stylets situated in a pair of vesicles
close to the base of the central spine. The position of the spines in the everted
proboscis is shown in Fig. 57. The posterior part of the proboscis is also a tube,
but instead of being muscular, its walls are glandular. This posterior glandular
part is never everted.
Fig. 53.—Diagrammatic drawing of a Nemertine from the dorsal surface to show

the position of some of the principal organs. a, Anus; c.s, cephalic slit; g,
generative organs; int, intestine with its lateral diverticula; m, mouth; n.c,
lateral nerve-cord; n.g, nerve ganglion; oes, oesophagus; p, proboscis; p.p,
proboscis pore; p.s, proboscis sheath.
The eversion is effected by a turning inside out of the anterior part of the
proboscis (Fig. 54). The process whereby the proboscis is retracted has been
very aptly compared to the effect which would be produced by the inversion of
the finger of a glove, accomplished by pulling a string attached to its tip on the
inside, the anterior muscular part being comparable to the finger and the
glandular part to the string. It is thus obvious that in the everted condition the

Textbook Gradability in Natural Language Logical and Grammatical Foundations Heather Burnett Ebook All Chapter PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Textbook Gradability in Natural Language Logical and Grammatical Foundations Heather Burnett Ebook All Chapter PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Textbook Gradability in Natural Language Logical and Grammatical Foundations Heather Burnett Ebook All Chapter PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Gradability in Natural Language Logical

and Grammatical Foundations Heather

Logical Form Between Logic and Natural Language 1st

Deep learning in natural language processing Deng

Deep Learning for Natural Language Processing Develop

Python Natural Language Processing Advanced machine

Bayesian analysis in natural language processing 2nd

Manual of Grammatical Interfaces in Romance Susann

Natural Language Processing 1st Edition Jacob

Natural Language Processing in Artificial Intelligence

Gradability in Natural Language

OXFORD STUDIES IN SEMANTICS AND PRAGMATICS

... Classical semantics for relative adjectives 

... Tolerant/strict semantics 

Oxford Studies in Semantics and Pragmatics publishes original research

be forever grateful for their expertise, mentorship, and friendship in

Postdoctoral fellowship (#756-2012-0045)), the USA/France Partner

AA absolute scalar adjective

This book presents a new theory of the relationship between vagueness,

Gradability in Natural Language. Heather Burnett. © Heather Burnett 2017.

as “the Heap” (soros being Greek for heap):

(9) Relative scalar adjectives (RAs):

the Delineation TCS system (and its mereological extension M-DelTCS)

1.1 Organization of the book

organization of the book 7

extent the enrichment of current theories of the semantics of gradable

Vagueness and linguistic

Gradability in Natural Language. Heather Burnett. © Heather Burnett 2017.

10 vagueness and linguistic analysis

theories of vagueness are not particularly relevant for linguistics. For

our classical semantic theory 11

same driving intuitions. Thus, one way of looking at TCS is as a more

2.2 Our Classical Semantic Theory

2.2.1 Classical First order logic

The interpretation of variables is given by assignments.

12 vagueness and linguistic analysis

Definition 2.2.4 Assignment. An assignment in a model M is a func-

Occurrence of Cestodes in Domestic Animals.[103]—Among domestic

Table of the Life-Histories of the principal Cestodes of Man and the

Cestode. Final host. Larva. Intermediate host.

Fig. 40.—A, Stickleback (Gasterosteus aculeatus) infested by an advanced larva

Structure and Development of Cestoda.[105]—Of the unsegmented Cestodes,

A Cestode such as Echinobothrium (Fig. 36) is divisible into head and

Fig. 42.—A, Free-swimming, six-hooked larva of Bothriocephalus latus Brems.

Fig. 43.—Stages in the development of Dipylidium caninum L. (= Taenia elliptica

Fig. 44.—Schematic longitudinal sections through the larvae of Dipylidium

At one pole an invagination occurs, at the bottom of which the rostellum,

Classification of Cestodes.—The following classification, which, so far as the

1. Fam. Cestodariidae Mont. (Monozoa Lang).

Fig. 45.—A, B, C, Stages in the development of the vermiform larva in Dicyema

Fig. 46.—Dicyemennea eledones Wag., from the kidney of Eledone moschata. A,

Dicyemidae.—If the kidney of Eledone moschata, a Cephalopod common on

Orthonectida.[114]—Two species of Orthonectids are fairly well known,

Fig. 47.—Rhopalura giardii Metschn. (from the brittle-star Amphiura squamata). ♂,

Trichoplax.[116]—This anomalous animal has only been found in aquaria,

Salinella.[117]—This is another aquarium-animal, found by Frenzel in the

A few forms live on land (e.g. Tetrastemma agricola,[124] Geonemertes

External Characters.—A typical Nemertine possesses an elongated worm-like