@article{EndrissHinterwimmer2006,
  author    = {Endriss, Cornelia and Hinterwimmer, Stefan},
  title     = {Quantificational Variability Effects with plural definites},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus-19512},
  year      = {2006},
  abstract  = {In this paper we compare the behaviour of adverbs of frequency (de Swart 1993) like usually with the behaviour of adverbs of quantity like for the most part in sentences that contain plural definites. We show that sentences containing the former type of Q-adverb evidence that Quantificational Variability Effects (Berman 1991) come about as an indirect effect of quantification over situations: in order for quantificational variability readings to arise, these sentences have to obey two newly observed constraints that clearly set them apart from sentences containing corresponding quantificational DPs, and that can plausibly be explained under the assumption that quantification over (the atomic parts of) complex situations is involved. Concerning sentences with the latter type of Q-adverb, on the other hand, such evidence is lacking: with respect to the constraints just mentioned, they behave like sentences that contain corresponding quantificational DPs. We take this as evidence that Q-adverbs like for the most part do not quantify over the atomic parts of sum eventualities in the cases under discussion (as claimed by Nakanishi and Romero (2004)), but rather over the atomic parts of the respective sum individuals.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{EndrissHinterwimmer2007,
  author    = {Endriss, Cornelia and Hinterwimmer, Stefan},
  title     = {Direct and indirect aboutness topics},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus-19640},
  year      = {2007},
  abstract  = {We propose a definition of aboutness topicality that not only encompasses individual denoting DPs, but also indefinites. We concentrate on the interpretative effects of marking indefinites as topics: they either receive widest scope in their clause, or they are interpreted in the restrictor of an overt or covert Q-adverb. We show that in the first case they are direct aboutness topics insofar as they are the subject of a predication expressed by the comment, while in the second case they are indirect aboutness topics: they define the subject of a higher-order predication - namely the set of situations that the respective Q-adverb quantifies over.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{EndrissHinterwimmer2007,
  author    = {Endriss, Cornelia and Hinterwimmer, Stefan},
  title     = {Direct and indirect abountness topics},
  isbn      = {978-3-939469-88-9},
  year      = {2007},
  language  = {en}
}
@phdthesis{Endriss2002,
  author    = {Endriss, Cornelia},
  title     = {The double scope of quantifier phrases},
  publisher = {Univ.-Bibliothek Publ.-Stelle},
  address   = {Potsdam},
  isbn      = {978-3-935024-47-1},
  issn      = {1616-7392},
  pages     = {63},
  year      = {2002},
  language  = {en}
}
@phdthesis{Endriss2009,
  author    = {Endriss, Cornelia},
  title     = {Quantificational Topics : a Scopal Treatment of Exceptional Wide Scope Phenomena},
  series = {Studies in Linguistics and Philosophy},
  volume    = {86},
  journal   = {Studies in Linguistics and Philosophy},
  publisher = {Springer Netherlands},
  address   = {Dordrecht},
  isbn      = {978-90-481-2302-5},
  doi       = {10.1007/978-90-481-2303-2},
  pages     = {XI, 306 S.},
  year      = {2009},
  language  = {en}
}