Typologizing and Ontologizing

doi:10.1017/9781108766401.014

Part V - Typologizing and Ontologizing

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 06 October 2022

Edited by

Daniel Altshuler

Show author details

Daniel Altshuler: Affiliation:
University of Oxford

Book contents

Get access

Summary

A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.

Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'

Type: Chapter
Information: Linguistics Meets Philosophy , pp. 275 - 334

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108766401.014 [Opens in a new window]

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Print publication year: 2022

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Altshuler, D. (2016). Events, States, and Times. Berlin: De Gruyter.CrossRef Google Scholar

Anderson, C. (2016). An Alternatives Based Account of Some-Exclamatives. LSA talk, January 9.Google Scholar

Bach, E. (1986a). The algebra of events. Linguistics and Philosophy, 9, 5–16.Google Scholar

Bach, E. (1986b). Natural language metaphysics. Studies in Logic and the Foundations of Mathematics, 114, 573–595.Google Scholar

Baerman, M., Brown, D., & Corbett, G. (2005). The Syntax–Morphology Interface: A Study of Syncretism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Bale, A. (2011). Scales and comparison classes. Natural Language Semantics, 19, 169–190.Google Scholar

Bartsch, R., & Vennemann, T. (1972). The grammar of relative adjectives and comparison. Linguistische Berichte, 20, 19–32.Google Scholar

Barwise, J. (1981). Scenes and other situations. The Journal of Philosophy, 78, 369–397.Google Scholar

Barwise, J., & Perry, J. (1983). Situations and Attitudes. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Beck, S., Krasikova, S., Fleischer, D., Gergel, R., Hofstetter, S., Savelsberg, C., Vanderelst, J., & Villalta, E. (2009). Crosslinguistic variation in comparison constructions. Linguistic Variation Yearbook, 9, 1–66.CrossRef Google Scholar

Beck, S., Oda, T., & Sugisaki, K. (2004). Parametric variation in the semantics of comparison: Japanese vs. English. Journal of East Asian Linguistics, 13, 289–344.Google Scholar

Beltrama, A., & Bochnak, M. R. (2015). Intensification without degrees cross-linguistically. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 33, 843–879.CrossRef Google Scholar

Bittner, M. (2003). Word order and incremental update. In Proceedings from the 39th Annual Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistics Society, Vol. 1 (pp. 634–664). Chicago Linguistics Society.Google Scholar

Bittner, M. (2005). Future discourse in a tenseless language. Journal of Semantics, 12, 339–388.CrossRef Google Scholar

Bittner, M. (2006). Ontology for human talk and thought (not robotics). Theoretical Linguistics, 32, 47–56.Google Scholar

Bittner, M. (2014). Temporality: Universals and Variation. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Bochnak, M. R. (2015a). Degree achievements in a degree-less language. In Pasquereau, J. (Ed.), Proceedings of Semantics of Underrepresented Languages of the Americas (SULA) 8 (pp. 17–32).Google Scholar

Bochnak, M. R. (2015b). The degree semantics parameter and cross-linguistic variation. Semantics and Pragmatics, 8, 1–48.Google Scholar

Bochnak, M. R., & Bogal-Allbritten, E. (2015). Investigating gradable predicates, comparison, and degree constructions in underrepresented languages. In Bochnak, M. R., & Matthewson, L. (Eds.), Methodologies in Semantic Fieldwork (pp. 110–134). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Bogal-Allbritten, E., & Coppock, E. (2020). Quantification, degrees, and beyond in Navajo. In Hallman, P. (Ed.), Degree and Quantification (pp. 121–162). Leiden: Brill.CrossRef Google Scholar

Bowler, M. (2016). The status of degrees in Walpiri. In Grubic, M. & Mucha, A. (Eds.), Proceedings of The Semantics of African, Asian and Austronesian Languages 2, pages 1–17. Universitatsverlag Potsdam.Google Scholar

Brasoveanu, A. (2009). Measure noun polysemy and monotonicity: Evidence from Romanian pseudopartitives. In Schardl, A., Walkow, M., & Abdurrahman, M. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 38th Meeting of the North East Linguistic Society (pp. 139–150). Ottawa: North East Linguistic Society.Google Scholar

Burnett, H. (2012). The role of microvariation in the study of semantic universals: adverbial quantifiers in European & Quebec French. Journal of Semantics, 29, 1–38.Google Scholar

Bußmann, H. (1996). Routledge Dictionary of Language and Linguistics. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Carlson, G. (1977). Reference to Kinds in English. PhD dissertation, University of Massachusetts.Google Scholar

Castroviejo Miró, E., & Schwager, M. (2008). Amazing DPs. In Friedman, T. & Ito, S. (Eds.), Semantics and Linguistic Theory (SALT), Vol. 18 (pp. 176–193).Google Scholar

Champollion, L. (2010). Parts of a Whole: Distributivity as a Bridge between Aspect and Measurement. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Church, A. (1932). A set of postulates for the foundation of logic. Annals of Mathematics, 33, 346–366.CrossRef Google Scholar

Cresswell, M. (1976). The semantics of degree. In Partee, B. H. (Ed.), Montague Grammar (pp. 261–292). Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar

Cresswell, M. (1990). Entities and Indices. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar

Davidson, D. (1967). The logical form of action sentences. In Rescher, N. (Ed.), The Logic of Decision and Action (pp. 105–122). Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh.Google Scholar

Doetjes, J. (2007). Adverbial quantification: Degree versus frequency. Lingua, 117, 685–720.Google Scholar

Dotlačil, J., & Nouwen, R. (2016). The comparative and degree pluralities. Natural Language Semantics, 24, 45–78.CrossRef Google Scholar

Fine, K. (2012). Counterfactuals without possible worlds. Journal of Philosophy, 109, 221–246.Google Scholar

Gallin, D. (1975). Intensional and Higher-Order Modal Logic. Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar

Greenberg, J. (1963). Some universals of grammar with particular reference to the order of meaningful elements. In Greenberg, J. (Ed.), Universals of Language (pp. 73–113). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Grosu, A., & Landman, F. (1998). Strange relatives of the third kind. Natural Language Semantics, 6, 125–170.Google Scholar

Haspelmath, M., & Buchholz, O. (1998). Equative and similative constructions in the languages of Europe. In van der Auwera, J., & Baoill, D. O. (Eds.), Adverbial Constructions in the Languages of Europe (pp. 277–334). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRef Google Scholar

Henkin, L. (1963). A theory of propositional types. Fundamenta Mathematicae, 52, 323–344.Google Scholar

Hintikka, J. (1957). Modality as referential multiplicity. Ajatus, 20, 49–64.Google Scholar

Hock, H. H. (2005). Analogical change. In Joseph, B., & Janda, R. (Eds.), The Handbook of Historical Linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Kaplan, D. (1976). How to Russell a Frege-Church. Journal of Philosophy, 72, 716–729.Google Scholar

Kaplan, D., & Montague, R. (1960). A paradox regained. Journal of Formal Logic, 1, 79–90.Google Scholar

Katz, G. (2003). Event arguments, adverb selection, and the stative adverb gap. In Lang, E., Maienborn, C., & Fabricius-Hansen, C. (Eds.), Modifying Adjuncts (pp. 455–474). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar

Keenan, E. (2015). Individuals explained away. In Bianchi, A. (Ed.), On Reference (pp. 384–402). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Keenan, E. (2018). Eliminating The Universe: Logical Properties Of Natural Language. Singapore: World Scientific.Google Scholar

Kennedy, C. (1999). Projecting the Adjective. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Kennedy, C. (2005). Parameters of Comparison. Presentation at Cornell University.Google Scholar

Kennedy, C. (2007). Vagueness and grammar: The semantics of relative and absolute gradable predicates. Linguistics and Philosophy, 30, 1–45.Google Scholar

Kennedy, C, & McNally, L. (2005). Scale structure, degree modification, and the semantics of gradable predicates. Language, 81, 345–381.Google Scholar

King, J., & Lewis, K. (2018). Anaphora. In Zalta, E., E. (Ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.Google Scholar

Klein, E. (1980). A semantics for positive and comparative adjectives. Linguistics and Philosophy, 4, 1–45.Google Scholar

Klein, E. (1982). The interpretation of adjectival comparatives. The Journal of Linguistics, 18, 113–136.Google Scholar

Kratzer, A. (1989). An investigation of the lumps of thought. Linguistics and Philosophy, 12, 607–53.CrossRef Google Scholar

Kratzer, A. (2007). Situations in natural language semantics. In Zalta, E. N. (Ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. CSLI.Google Scholar

Krifka, M. (1989). Nominal reference, temporal constitution and quantification in event semantics. In Bartsch, R., van Benthem, J., & van Emde Boas, P. (Eds.), Semantics and Contextual Expression (pp. 75–15). Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar

Krifka, M. (1990). Four thousand ships passed through the lock: Object-induced measure functions on events. Linguistics and Philosophy, 13, 487–520.Google Scholar

Krifka, M. (1992). Thematic relations as links between nominal reference and temporal constitution. In Sag, I. & Scabolcsi, A. (Eds.), Lexical Matters (pp. 29–54). CSLI Publications.Google Scholar

Kripke, S. (1959). A completeness theorem in modal logic. Journal of Symbolic Logic, 24, 1–14.Google Scholar

Landman, F. (2000). Predicate-argument mismatches and the adjectival theory of indefinites. In Coene, M. & d’Hulst, Y. (Eds.), From NP to DP (pp. 211–237). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Landman, M. (2006). Variables in Natural Language. PhD thesis, University of Massachusetts at Amherst.Google Scholar

Landman, M., & Morzycki, M. (2003). Event-kinds and the representation of manner. In, Antrim, N. M., Goodall, G., Schulte-Nafeh, M., & Samiian, V. (Eds.), Proceedings of the Western Conference on Linguistics (WECOL) 2002, Vol. 14 (pp. 136–147). California State University.Google Scholar

Lasersohn, P. (1995). Plurality, Conjunction and Tense. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar

Lewis, D. (1975). Adverbs of quantification. In Keenan, E., E. (Ed.), Formal Semantics of Natural Language (pp. 178–188). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Liefke, K. (2014a). A Single-Type Semantics for Natural Language. PhD thesis, Tilburg University.Google Scholar

Liefke, K. (2014b). A single-type semantics for the PTQ*-fragment. Sinn und Bedeutung, 18, 253–270.Google Scholar

Liefke, K. (2015). A single-type logic for natural language. Journal of Logic and Computation, 25, 1111–1131.CrossRef Google Scholar

Liefke, K., & Werning, M. (2018). Evidence for single-type semantics: An alternative to e/t-based dual-type semantics. Journal of Semantics, 35, 639–685.Google Scholar

Lin, J.-W. (2005). Time in a language without tense: The case of Chinese. Journal of Semantics, 23, 1–53.CrossRef Google Scholar

Link, G. (1983). The logical analysis of plurals and mass terms: a lattice-theoretical approach. In Bäuerle, R., Schwarze, C., & von Stechow, A. (Eds.), Meaning, Use and Interpretation of Language (pp. 302–323). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar

Matthewson, L. (2006). Temporal semantics in a superficially tenseless language. Linguistics and Philosophy, 29, 673–713.Google Scholar

Matthewson, L. (2013). On how (not) to uncover cross-linguistic variation. In Proceedings of the North East Linguistic Society 42 (pp. 323–342). GLSA.Google Scholar

Matthewson, L. (2014). The measurement of semantic complexity: How to get by if your language lacks generalized quantifiers. In Newmeyer, F. & Preston, L. (Eds.), Formal Complexity (pp. 241–263). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Moltmann, F. (2013). Abstract Objects and the Semantics of Natural Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Montague, R. (1970). English as a formal language. In Visentini, B. (Ed.), Linguaggi nella societé nella tecnica (pp. 189–223). Milan.Google Scholar

Montague, R. (1973). The proper treatment of quantification in ordinary English. In Hintikka, J., Moravcsik, J., & Suppes, P. (Eds.), Approaches to Natural Language (pp. 221–242). Dordrecht: Reidel.CrossRef Google Scholar

Mucha, A. (2013). Temporal interpretation in Hausa. Linguistics and Philosophy, 36, 371–415.Google Scholar

Nakanishi, K. (2007). Measurement in the nominal and verbal domain. Linguistics and Philosophy, 30, 235–276.Google Scholar

Neeleman, A., van de Koot, H., & Doetjes, J. (2004). Degree expressions. The Linguistic Review, 21, 1–66.Google Scholar

Norde, M. (2009). Degrammaticalization. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Parsons, T. (2000). Underlying states and time travel. In Achille Varzi, J. H. & Pianesi, F. (Eds.), Speaking of Events. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Partee, B. H. (1973). Some structural analogies between tenses and pronouns in English. The Journal of Philosophy, 7, 601–609.Google Scholar

Partee, B. H. (1984). Nominal and temporal anaphora. Linguistics and Philosophy, 7, 243–286.Google Scholar

Partee, B. H. (2009). Do we need two basic types? Snippets, 20, 37–41.Google Scholar

Pearson, H. (2010). How to do comparison in a language without degrees. Sinn und Bedeutung 14, 356–372.Google Scholar

Putnam, H. (1973). Meaning and reference. Journal of Philosophy, 70, 699–711.Google Scholar

Quine, W. (1948). On what there is. The Review of Metaphysics, 2, 21–38.Google Scholar

Ramchand, G. (2016). Situations and Syntactic Structures. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Rett, J. (2013). Similatives and the degree arguments of verbs. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 31, 1101–1137.Google Scholar

Rett, J. (2014). The polysemy of measurement. Lingua, 143, 242–266.Google Scholar

Rett, J. (2015). Antonymy in space and other strictly-ordered domains. Perspectives on Spatial Cognition: Baltic International Yearbook of Cognition, Logic and Communication, 10, 1–33.Google Scholar

Rett, J. (2020). Separate but equal: a typology of equative constructions. In Hallman, P. (Ed.), Degrees and Quantification (pp. 163–204). Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar

Ritchie, K. (2016). Can semantics guide ontology? Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 94, 24–41.CrossRef Google Scholar

Rothstein, S. (2009). Individuating and measure readings of classifier constructions: evidence from Modern Hebrew. Brill’s Annual of Afroasiatic Languages and Linguistics, 1, 106–145.Google Scholar

Schlenker, P. (2006). Ontological symmetry in language: A brief manifesto. Mind & Language, 21, 504–539.CrossRef Google Scholar

Schwarz, F. (2012). Situation pronouns in determiner phrases. Natural Language Semantics, 20, 431–475.Google Scholar

Schwarzschild, R. (2005). Measure phrases as modifiers of adjectives. Recherches Linguistiques de Vincennes, 34, 207–228.CrossRef Google Scholar

Schwarzschild, R. (2012). Directed scale segments. In Chereches, A., (Eds.), Semantics and Linguistic Theory (SALT), Vol. 22 (pp. 65–82).Google Scholar

Schwarzschild, R. (2013). Degrees and segments. In Snider, T. (Ed.), Semantics and Linguistic Theory (SALT), Vol. 23 (pp. 212–238).Google Scholar

Schwarzschild, R., & Wilkinson, K. (2002). Quantifiers in comparatives: A semantics of degree based on intervals. Natural Language Semantics, 10, 1–41.Google Scholar

Sharvit, Y. (2013). On the universal properties of tense embedding: The lesson from before. Journal of Semantics, 31, 243–286.Google Scholar

Starr, W. (2014). What ‘if’? Philosopher’s Imprint 14, 1–27.Google Scholar

Stassen, L. (1985). Comparison and Universal Grammar: An Essay in Universal Grammar. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Stojnić, U., & Altshuler, D. (2021). Formal properties of ‘now’ revisited. Semantics and Pragmatics, 14, 3.Google Scholar

Stone, M. (1997). An anaphoric parallel between modality and tense. University of Pennsylvania Department of Computer and Information Science Technical Report.Google Scholar

Thomason, R. (1980). A model theory for propositional attitudes. Linguistics and Philosophy, 4, 47–70.CrossRef Google Scholar

Thomason, S. (2001). Language Contact. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar

Tonhauser, J. (2011). Temporal reference in Paraguayan Guaraní, a tenseless language. Linguistics and Philosophy, 34, 257–303.CrossRef Google Scholar

Zimmermann, T. (1989). Intensional logic and two-sorted type theory. Journal of Symbolic Logic, 54, 65–77.Google Scholar

Zwarts, J. (1997). Vectors as relative positions: A compositional semantics of modified PPs. Journal of Semantics, 14, 57–86.Google Scholar

References

Alexiadou, A., & Anagnostopoulou, E. (2008). Structuring participles. In Chang, C. B. & Haynie, H. J. (Eds.), Proceedings of WCCFL, Vol. 26 (pp. 33–41). Somerville: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar

Altshuler, D., Parsons, T., & Schwarzschild, R. (2019). A Course in Semantics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Asher, N. (2007). A type driven theory of predication with complex types. Fundamentæ Informaticæ, 84(2), 151–183.Google Scholar

Asher, N. (2011). Lexical Meaning in Context: A Web of Words. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Baggio, G. (2018). Meaning in the Brain. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Barwise, J., & Perry, J. (1983). Situations and Attitudes. Cambridge, MA: MIT press.Google Scholar

Bennett, M., & Partee, B. H. (1972). Towards the Logic of Tense and Aspect in English. Technical report, System Development Corporation, Santa Monica.Google Scholar

Brown, R. (1973). A First Language: The Early Stages. London: George Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar

Champollion, L. (2015). The interaction of compositional semantics and event semantics. Linguistics and Philosophy, 38, 31–66.Google Scholar

Chomsky, N. (1995). Language and nature. Mind, 104(413), 1–61.Google Scholar

Dowty, D. R. (1979). Word Meaning and Montague Grammar: The Semantics of Verbs and Times in Generative Semantics and in Montague’s PTQ. Dordrecht: Reidel.Google Scholar

Embick, D. (2004). Structure of the resultative participles in English. Linguistic Inquiry, 35(3), 355–592.Google Scholar

Fine, K. (1994). Essence and modality. Philosophical Perspectives, 8, 1–16.Google Scholar

Fine, K. (2005). Modality and Tense: Philosophical Papers. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRef Google Scholar

Fine, K. (2014). Truthmaker semantics for intuitionist logic. Journal of Philosophical Logic, 43(2), 549–577.Google Scholar

Fine, K. (2017). Naive metaphysics. Philosophical Issues, 27(1), 98–113.Google Scholar

Gehrke, B., & McNally, L. (2015). Distributional modification: The case of frequency adjectives. Language, 91(4), 837–868.Google Scholar

Hallman, P. (2009a). Instants and Intervals in the Event/State Distinction. Ms., University of California, Los Angeles.Google Scholar

Hallman, P. (2009b). Proportions in time: Interactions of quantification and aspect. Natural Language Semantics, 17, 29–61.Google Scholar

Henderson, R. (2015). Pluractional Demonstrations. Paper presented at SALT 26.Google Scholar

Hinzen, W. (2016). On the grammar of referential dependence. Studies in Logic, Grammar and Rhetoric, 46(1), 11–33.Google Scholar

Kamp, H., & Reyle, U. (1993). From Discourse to Logic. Dordrecht: Reidel.Google Scholar

Kaplan, D. (1989). Demonstratives. An essay on the semantics, logic, metaphysics, and epistemology of demonstratives and other indexicals (Ms. 1977, reprinted). In Almog, J. P. J. & Wettstein, H. (Eds.), Themes from Kaplan (pp. 481–563). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Kratzer, A. (2000). Building statives. Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, 26, 385–399.Google Scholar

Landman, F. (1992). The progressive. Natural Language Semantics, 1(1), 1–32.Google Scholar

Landman, F. (2008). 1066: On the differences between the tense-perspective-aspect systems of English and Dutch. In Rothstein, S. (Ed.), Theoretical and Crosslinguistic Approaches to the Semantics of Aspect (pp. 107–166). Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Leech, G. (1971). Meaning and the English Verb. London: Longman.Google Scholar

Lewis, D. (1973). Counterfactuals. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.Google Scholar

Lewis, D. (1986). On the Plurality of Worlds. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Marr, D. (1982). Vision. A Computational Investigation into the Human Representation and Processing of Visual Information. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman and Company.Google Scholar

Mittwoch, A. (1988). Aspects of English aspect: On the interaction of perfect, progressive and durational phrases. Linguistics and Philosophy, 11, 203–254.Google Scholar

Moltmann, F. (2017). Natural language ontology. In Oxford Encyclopedia of Linguistics (pp. 51–94).Google Scholar

Moltmann, F. (2020). Natural language ontology. In Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.Google Scholar

Owens, R. E. (2001). Language Development: An Introduction, 5th ed. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.Google Scholar

Parsons, T. (1990). Events in the Semantics of English: A Study in Subatomic Semantics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Pietroski, P. (2018). Conjoining Meanings. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Portner, P. (1998). The progressive in modal semantics. Language, 74, 760–787.Google Scholar

Portner, P. (2003). The temporal semantics and modal pragmatics of the perfect. Linguistics and Philosophy, 26, 459–510.Google Scholar

Potts, C. (2007). The dimensions of quotation. In Barker, C. & Jacobson, P. (Eds.), Direct Compositionality (pp. 405–431). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Pustejovsky, J. (1995). The Generative Lexicon. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Ramchand, G. (2014). Stativity and Present Tense Epistemics’. Proceedings of SALT 24: 102–121.Google Scholar

Ramchand, G. (2018). Situations and Syntactic Structures: Rethinking Auxiliaries and Order in English. Linguistic Inquiry Monograph 77. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Strawson, P. (1959). Individuals: An Essay in Descriptive Metaphysics. London: Methuen.Google Scholar

Taylor, B. (1977). Tense and continuity. Linguistics and Philosophy, 1(2), 199–220.CrossRef Google Scholar

Vendler, Z. (1967). Linguistics in Philosophy. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar

Vlach, F. (1981). The semantics of the progressive. In Tedeschi, P. & Zaenen, A. (Eds.), Syntax and Semantics, Vol. 14: Tense and Aspect (pp. 271–292). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Book contents

Part V - Typologizing and Ontologizing

Summary

Access options

References

References

References

Save book to Kindle

Save book to Dropbox

Save book to Google Drive