The acceptability of any-DPs in existential modal sentences presents a challenge for theories of NPI licensing: existential modal sentences appear to differ substantially from other environments in which any-DPs are acceptable (in particular, they lack a downward-entailing operator). One approach to this challenge has been to, first, take any-DPs to be subject to an environment-based downward-entailingness condition—they have to occur in an environment that is Strawson downward-entailing with respect to their domain (cf. Kadmon and Landman 1993)—and, second, to derive such an environment in existential modal sentences by means of exhaustification (e.g., Fox 2007). This note presents new evidence for such a two-layered approach (cf. Crnič 2017, 2019). The evidence comes from a striking contrast in the behavior of singular vs. plural any-DPs in existential modal sentences. The paper concludes by charting some relations between any-DPs and other polarity items.

存在模态句子中任何-DPs的可接受性对NPI 许可理论提出了挑战：存在模态句子似乎与任何-DPs 可以接受的其他环境有很大不同（特别是它们缺乏向下关联的运算符）。应对这一挑战的一种方法是，首先，采取任何-DPs 受制于基于环境的向下蕴涵条件——它们必须发生在关于其领域的 Strawson 向下蕴涵的环境中（参见 Kadmon 和 Landman 1993）——其次，要推导出这样一个存在模态句中的环境通过穷举（例如，Fox 2007）。本说明为这种两层方法提供了新证据（参见 Crnič 2017、2019）。证据来自存在模态句子中单数与复数any -DPs 行为的鲜明对比。本文最后通过图表绘制任何-DPs 和其他极性项目之间的一些关系。