(i) the locality of so-called numeral floating quantifiers

The unexpected acceptability (for many speakers) of what is claimed to be unacceptable is typically attributed to some extra factor, such as focus. To the extent that the notion 'focus' can be made explicit and the relevant claim is made falsifiable, such an attempt to save the alleged generalization turns out to be of not much help. We checked this while preparing the WCCFL paper (UCDavis) although we did not mention it in the paper since we did not find it necessary to do so; the paper shows that even if the focus-based attempt to save the generalization were successful, a particular implementation of the idea such as the one found in Miyagawa and Arikawa (2003, the UCLA 12/2004 handout) -- see the WCCFL paper by Hoji&Ishii -- makes a wrong negative prediction and hence their hypothesis is falsified. If one wished to propose a different implementation, one should try that. Once that has been done, its empirical consequences can be tested in regard to the negative predictions it makes.