Existential Disclosure (revised version of LP-1990-17) Paul Dekker Abstract: The work of Kamp [1981] and Heim [1982] in the early eighties has started a new branch of semantic theorizing within the format of discourse represen- tation theory (DRT). More recently, compositional, dynamic reformulations of the DRT framework have been given that enhance comparison of DRT with more classical semantic theories, in particular, Montague grammar, and that enable an integration of results (Barwise [1987], Rooth [1987], Asher and Wada [1988], Zeevat [1989], Groenendijk and Stokhof [1990], Muskens [1990]). Groenendijk and Stokhof [1990] in particular formulates a dynamic Montague grammar (DMG), in which the paradigmatic Montague grammar of the seventies is adapted in order to incorporate DRT-results. In this paper I want to show how existing treatments of relational nouns, adverbial modification and tense in discourse can be formulated within such dynamic frameworks. Although there are vaste differences between the three kinds of phenomena, they have one feature in common. In existing treatments they all involve the specification of an implicit argument. Relational nouns appear to have implicit object arguments which can be specified by comple- ment phrases. Many adverbs have been interpreted as predicates that range over events implicitly introduced by verb phrases. And in temporal discourse reference times implicitly referred to in one sentence are related to reference times involved in subsequent discourse. In all three cases we find expressions with implicit arguments referred back to by other expressions. A dynamic semantics provides a natural framework for the treatment of these phenomena. In a dynamic semantics nouns and verbs with implicit arguments can be interpreted as functions from individuals to sentence denotations, that is, to context change potentials. Thus, they may be interpreted in precisely the same way as nouns and verbs without implicit arguments. However, the expressions which carry implicit arguments can be taken to introduce objects into the context which are available for optional adnominal, adverbial or temporal specification. The proposals made in this paper are programmatic, compositional reformu- lations of existing treatments of relational nouns, adverbs and tense. The point is to show that a compositional system of dynamic interpretation provides a natural framework for the description of the phenomena involved. Although the reformulations are cast within the framework of DMG, such reformulations are not restricted to this particular framework. As I hope the following sections show, a completely parallel treatment of the phenomena at issue is possible in any compositional reformulation of DRT. I have chosen to use DMG because it is relatively simple, at least to those who are used to Montagovian semantics. The paper is organized as follows. In section 1, I review very shortly the rudimentary but compositional dynamic reformulation of DRT into DMG proposed by Groenendijk and Stokhof. In this section I show that dynamic interpre- tation comes along with the possibility of what I will call `existential disclosure', the possibility of addressing (dynamic) existentially closed (implicit) arguments as if they were free variables. The subsequent sections 2-4 show how existential disclosure can be employed to model the specifi- cation of implicit arguments of nouns and verbs by means of adnominal modifi- cation, adverbial modification and temporal operators.