(45) S/P: [[a friend of mine 2 ] 1 wants [to buy [a car] 5 ] 6 ] 3
DT: [WANT ([FRIEND (ME 2 )] 1 [BUY (PRO 4 , CAR 5 )] 6 )] 3
RT:The box notation introduced in (45) is actually useful in earlier examples as well. For example, in order to distinguish
the different ways in which indefinite NPs fail to have existential claims, we can encode questioning, negation, and so
forth as operators on a box that encloses the non-asserted portions of the referential tier:^214
(46) a.S/P: [Did Joan 1 buy[a car] 2 ?] 3
RT:b.
S/P: [Joan 1 didn't 4 buy [a car] 2 ] 3
DT: [NEG 4 [BUY ([JOAN] 1 [CAR] 2 ] 3 ] 5
RT:At this point the character of these operators in the referential tier begins to become clearer: they arevaluationsof
concepts in the sense of section 10.6. A constituent whose index is connected to a grounding arrow has the valuation
external, i.e. it is understood as referring to a real entity. A constituent whose index is cut off fro mgrounding has a
nonspecific or irrealis construal. Different operators encode different valuations that lead to such construals.
PHRASAL SEMANTICS 403
(^214) (46b)containsonefurtherinnovationthatrequires comment.Theeventof Joan's buyingis claimed notto havetakenplace; thereforeits index, 3, falls insidetheneg boxin
RT. However, the sentenceasserts something about whatdidn't happen. This corresponds to the index 5 on the entire sentencein the DT and RT. The question (46a), by
contrast, makes no assertion, so the extra index outside the operator is absent.