 According to (Forbes 2000) the need for such an explanation already threatens the univocality of a verb such as ‘look for’ as it occurs in ‘look for that woollen sweater’ and ‘look for some woollen sweater’. Observing that search verbs are action verbs, Forbes applies Davidson’s event semantics to them (Davidson 1967). In this semantics, as developed in (Parsons 1990), search verbs become predicates of events, and in relational (specific) readings, the object searched for is said to be in a thematic relation to the event, one denoted by ‘for’; thus ‘some search e is for that woollen sweater’. But in unspecific readings, no thematic relation is invoked; rather, the quantified NP is used to characterize the search. So we would have ‘some search e is characterized by ^(a(woollen(sweater)))’, i.e., e is an a-woollen-sweater search (Forbes 2000, 174–6; 2006, 77–84). What it is for a search to be characterized by a quantifier, say ^(a(woollen(sweater))), is explained in terms of ‘outcome postulates’. For the current example, as a first approximation, a search is characterized by ^(a(woollen(sweater))) iff any course of events in which that search culminates successfully includes an event of finding a woollen sweater whose agent is the agent of the search. Similar postulates can be given for, e.g., the meeting of expectations and the satisfaction of desires: a state of desire is characterized by ^(a(woollen(sweater))) iff any course of events in which that desire is satisfied includes an event of getting a woollen sweater whose recipient is the agent of the search (Forbes 2006, 94–129). 