Orthodox semantics for natural language modals give rise to two puzzles for their interactions with disjunction: Ross’s puzzle and the puzzle of free choice permission. It is widely assumed that each puzzle can be explained in terms of the licensing of ‘Diversity’ inferences: from the truth of a possibility or necessity modal with an embedded disjunction, hearers infer that each disjunct is compatible with the relevant set of worlds. I argue that Diversity inferences are too weak to explain the full range of data. Instead, I argue, modals with embedded disjunctions license ‘Independence’ inferences: from the truth of a modal with an embedded disjunction, hearers infer that each disjunct is an independent alternative among the relevant set of worlds. I then develop a bilateral inquisitive semantics for modals that predicts the validity of these Independence inferences. My account vindicates common intuitions about both Ross’s puzzle and the puzzle of free choice permission, and explains the full range of data.

自然语言模态的正统语义为它们与析取的交互带来了两个难题：罗斯的难题和自由选择许可的难题。人们普遍认为，每个谜题都可以根据“多样性”推理的许可来解释：从具有嵌入分离的可能性或必然性模态的真相，听者推断每个分离都与相关的世界集兼容。我认为多样性推断太弱，无法解释所有数据。相反，我认为，带有嵌入析取的模态许可“独立”推理：从带有嵌入析取的模态的真相中，听者推断每个析取是相关世界集之间的独立替代。然后，我为模态开发了一种双边探究语义，用于预测这些独立性推理的有效性。我的叙述证明了关于罗斯难题和自由选择许可难题的共同直觉，并解释了所有数据。