Predicates like gather and ones like be numerous have both been described as ‘collective predicates,’ since they predicate something of a plurality. The two classes of predicates differ, however, with respect to plural quantifiers (e.g. all), which are grammatical with gather-type predicates but ungrammatical with numerous-type predicates. Here, I show that the gather/numerous opposition derives from mereological properties that are familiar from the domains of telicity and mass/count. I address problems of undergeneration and overgeneration with two technical innovations: first, I weaken the property of divisibility to Champollion’s concept of stratified reference; second, I provide mechanisms to rule out accidental satisfaction of the logical property. More broadly, I place collective predication in a larger context by building empirical connections to mass/count and collectivity across semantic domains.

中文翻译：

---

聚集/大量反对

谓词（如gather和谓词众多）都被称为“集合谓词”，因为它们谓词为多个。然而这两个类谓词的不同，相对于多个量词（例如所有），这是与语法聚集型谓词但不通众多型谓词。在这里，我表明聚集/众多对立来自于t谐和质量/计数领域所熟悉的仅有的兽性。我通过两项技术创新来解决欠生和过生问题：首先，我削弱了Champollion的分层参照概念的可分割性。第二，我提供了排除意外满足逻辑属性的机制。更广泛地说，我通过建立跨语义域的质量/数量和集体的经验联系，将集体谓词置于更大的范围内。