DOCSLIB.ORG

A Bibliography on Event Semantics and Related Matters

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A Bibliography on Event Semantics and Related Matters A Bibliography on Event Semantics and Related Matters Events: Modification, Aspect and Lexical Meaning Cleo Condoravdi and Hana Filip LSA Institute Stanford July, 2007 References [1] Abusch, Dorit. 1985. On Verbs and Time. Doctoral dissertation, University of Massachusetts at Amherst. [2] Abusch, Dorit. 1986. Verbs of Change, Causation, and Time. Technical Report CSLI-86-50, Center for the Study of Language and Information, Stanford University. [3] Abusch, Dorit. 2005. Causatives and Mixed Aspectual Type. In Gregory N. Carlson and Francis J. Pelletier, eds., 29–61. [4] Abusch, Dorit and Mats Rooth. 1990. Temporal Adverbs and the English Perfect. NELS 20, 1–15. [5] Alexiadou Artemis, Monika Rathert and Arnim von Stechow (eds.). 2003. Perfect Explorations. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. [6] Allen, James. 1983. Maintaining Knowledge about Temporal Intervals. CACM 26, 832–843. [7] Allen, James. 1984. Towards a General Theory of Action and Time. Arti- ficial Intelligence 23, 123–154. [8] Arregui, Ana. To appear. When aspect matters: the case of would- conditionals. Natural Language Semantics. [9] Artstein, Ron. 2006. Quantificational Arguments in Temporal Adjunct Clauses. Linguistics and Philosophy 28, 541–597. 1 [10] Asher, Nicholas. 1992. A Default, Truth Conditional Semantics for the Progressive. Linguistics and Philosophy 15, 463–508. [11] Asher, Nicholas. 1993. Reference to Abstract Objects in Discourse. Dor- drecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. [12] Asher, Nicholas and Pierre Sablayrolles. 1995. A Typology and Discourse Semantics for Motion verbs and Spatial PPs in French. Journal of Seman- tics 12, 163–209. [13] Bach, Emmon. 1981. On Time, Tense, and Aspect: An Essay in English Metaphysics. In Peter Cole, ed., Radical Pragmatics, 63–81. New York: Academic Press. [14] Bach, Emmon. 1986. The Algebra of Events. Linguistics and Philosophy 9, 5-16. [15] Bartsch, Renate. 1976. The Grammar of Adverbials. Amsterdam: North Holland Publishing Company. [16] Bartsch, Renate. 1995. Situations, Tense and Aspect. Dynamic Discourse Ontology and the Semantic Flexibility of Temporal System in German and English. Berlin-New York: Mouton de Gruyter. [17] Barwise, K. Jon. 1981. Scenes and Other Situattions. The Journal of Phi- losophy 77, 369–397. [18] Bayer, Samuel. 1995. Confessions of a Lapsed Neo-Davidsonian. Doctoral dissertation, Brown University. [19] Bayer, Samuel. 1996. The Size of Events. Semantics and Linguistic Theory VI , 1–16. [20] Beaver, David and Cleo Condoravdi. 2003. A Uniform Analysis of Before and After. Semantics and Linguistic Theory XIII, 37–54. [21] Beck, Sigrid and Arnim von Stechow. 2006 Dog after Dog Revisited. SSinn und Bedeutung 10. [22] Bennett, Brandon, and Antony P. Galton. 2004. A Unifying Semantics for Time and Events. Artificial Intelligence 153, 13–48. [23] Bennett, Jonathan. 1988. Events and their Names. Oxford: Clarendon Press. [24] van Benthem, Johan. 1983. The Logic of Time. A Modeltheoretic Investi- gation into the Varieties of Temporal Ontology and Temporal Discourse. Dordrecht: Reidel. 2 [25] Bertinetto, Pier Marco. 1994. Statives, progressives, and habituals: Analo- gies and differences. Linguistics 32, 391–423. [26] Binnick, Robert I. 1991. Time and the Verb: A Guide to Tense and Aspect. Oxford: Oxford University Press. [27] Bohnemeyer, J¨urgen and Mary Swift. 2004. Event realization and aspectual interpretation. Linguistics and Philosophy, 27: 263–296. [28] Bonomi, Andrea. 1997. The Progressive and the Structure of Events. Jour- nal of Semantics 14, 173–205. [29] Bonomi, Andrea and Paolo Casalegno. 1993. Only: Association with Focus in Event Semantics. Natural Language Semantics 2, 1–45. [30] Borer, Hagit. 2005. Structuring Sense. Oxford: Oxford University Press. [31] Brand, Myles. 1982. Physical Objects and Events. In Werner Leinfellner, Eric Kraemer and Jeffrey Schank, eds., 106–116. [32] Butt, Miriam and Wilhelm Geuder (eds.). 1998. The Projection of Argu- ments: Lexical and Compositional Factors. Stanford: CSLI Publications. Carlson, Gregory N. 1977. A Unified Analysis of the English Bare Plural. Linguistics and Philosophy 1, 413–58. [33] Carlson, Gregory N. 1984. On the Role of Thematic Roles in Linguistic Theory. Linguistics 22, 259–279. [34] Carlson, Gregory N. 1998. Thematic Roles and the Individuation of Events. In Susan Rothstein, ed., 35–51. [35] Carlson, Gregory N. and Francis J. Pelletier. 2005. Reference and Quan- tification: The Partee Effect. Festschrift for Barbara Hall Partee. Stanford: CSLI Publications. [36] Carlson, Lauri. 1981. Aspect and Quantification. In Philip J. Tedeschi and Annie Zaenen, eds., 31–64. [37] Casta˜neda, Hector-Neri. 1967. Comments. In Nicholas Rescher, ed., The Logic of Decision and Action. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press. [38] Chierchia, Gennaro. 1995. Individual-Level Predicates as Inherent Gener- ics. In Gregory N. Carlson and Francis J. Pelletier, eds., The Generic Book, 176–223. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. [39] Cipria, Alicia and Craige Roberts. 2000. Spanish Imperfecto and Pret´erito: Truth Conditions and Aktionsart Effects in Situation Semantics. Natural Language Semantics 8, 297–347. 3 [40] Comrie, B. 1976. Aspect. An Introduction to the Study of Verbal Aspect and Related Problems. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. [41] Condoravdi, Cleo. 2002. Temporal Interpretation of Modals: Modals for the Present and for the Past. In David Beaver, Stefan Kaufmann, Brady Clark and Luis Casillas, eds., The Construction of Meaning. Stanford: CSLI Publications. [42] Condoravdi, Cleo. 2007. NPI Licensing in Temporal Clauses. In Hedde Zeijl- stra and Jan-Philipp Soehn, eds., Proceedings of the Workshop on Negation and Polarity. University of T¨ubingen. [43] Condoravdi, Cleo. In press. Punctual Until as a Scalar NPI. In Kristin Hanson and Sharon Inkelas, eds., The Nature of the Word. Cambridge: MIT Press. [44] Cresswell, Max J. 1995. Adverbial Modification. Dordrecht: Reidel. [45] Davidson, Donald. 1967. The Logical Form of Action Sentences. Reprinted in Donald Davidson 1980, 105–122. [46] Davidson, Donald. 1969. The Individuation of Events. Reprinted in Donald Davidson 1980, 163–180. [47] Davidson, Donald. 1980. Essays on Actions and Events. Oxford: Clarendon Press. [48] Decklerck, Renaat. 1979. Aspect and the Bounded/Unbounded (Telic/ Atelic) Distinction. Linguistics 17, 761–794. [49] Dekker, Paul. 1997. Cases, Adverbs, Situations and Events. In Hans Kamp and Barbara H. Partee, eds., Context Dependence in the Analysis of Lin- guistic Meaning, 383–404. Amsterdam: Elsevier. [50] Deo, Ashwini. 2006. Tense and Aspect in Indo-Aryan Languages: Variation and Diachrony. Doctoral dissertation, Stanford University. [51] D¨olling, Johannes, Tatjana Heyde-Zybatow and Martin Sch¨afer(eds.). 2007. Event Structures in Linguistic Form and Interpretation. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. [52] Dowty, David. 1979. Word Meaning and Montague Grammar. Dordrecht: Reidel. [53] Dowty, David. 1982. Tenses, Time Adverbs and Compositional Theory. Linguistics and Philosophy 5, 405–426. 4 [54] Dowty, David. 1986. The Effects of Aspectual Class on the Temporal Struc- ture of Discourse: Semantics or Pragmatics? Linguistics and Philosophy 9, 37–61. [55] Dowty, David. 1989. On the Semantic Content of the Notion “Thematic Role.” In Barbara Partee, Gennaro Chierchia and Ray Turner, eds., Prop- erties, Types, and Meanings, vol. II , 69–130. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. [56] Dowty, David. 1991. Thematic Proto-Roles and Argument Selection. Lan- guage 67, 547–619. [57] Eberle, Kurt. 1990. Eventualities in a Natural Language Understand- ing System. In Karl Hans Bl¨asius,Ulrich Hedtst¨uck, and Claus-Rainer Rollinger, eds., Sorts and Types in Artificial Intelligence, 209–239. Berlin: Springer–Verlag. [58] Eckardt, Regine. 1994. Does Information Flow in Event Structures? Manuscript, Universit¨atT¨ubingen. [59] Eckardt, Regine. 1998. Adverbs, Events and other Things. Issues in the Semantics of Manner Adverbs. T¨ubingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag. Linguis- tische Arbeiten, 379. [60] Eckardt, Regine. 2002. Event Semantics. In Fritz Hamm and Thomas Ede Zimmermann, eds., Semantics, 91–127. Hamburg: Helmut Buske Verlag. [61] Egg, Markus. 1995. The Intergressive as a New Category in Verbal Aktion- sart. Journal of Semantics 12, 311–356. [62] van Eijck, Jan and Hans Kamp. 1997. Representing Discourse in Context. In Johan van Benthem and Alice ter Meulen, eds., Handbook of Logic and Language, 179–237. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. [63] Engelberg, Stefan. 2002. Intransitive Accomplishments and the Lexicon: The Role of Implicit Arguments, Definiteness, and Reflexivity in Aspectual Composition. Journal of Semantics 19, 369–416. [64] Fernando, Timothy. 2004. Inertia in Temporal Modification. Semantics and Linguistic Theory XIV, 56–73. [65] Filip, Hana. 1990. Thematic Roles and Aktionsart. Proceedings of the West- ern Conference on Linguistics (WECOL) 20, 88–99. Fresno: California State University. [66] Filip, Hana. 1992. Aspect and Interpretation of Nominal Arguments. Chicago Linguistic Society (CLS) 28, 139–158. 5 [67] Filip, Hana. 1993. Aspect, Situation Types and Noun Phrase Semantics. Doctoral dissertation, University of California at Berkeley. [68] Filip, Hana. 1996. Integrating Telicity, Aspect and NP Semantics: the Role of Thematic Structure. In Jindrich Toman, ed., Approaches to Slavic Lin- guistics III , 61–96. Ann Arbor: Michigan Slavic Publications. [69] Filip, Hana. 1999.Aspect, Eventuality Types, and Noun Phrase Semantics. New York: Garland Publishing. [70] Filip, Hana. 2000. The Quantization Puzzle.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Philosophy of Linguistics
    Philosophy of Linguistics Brian Rabern Philosophy DSB 4.04c 0131 651 5178 [email protected] Geoff Pullum Linguistics DSB 2.23 0131 650 3603 [email protected] Meetings The class meetings are from 11:00 to 13:00 each Wednesday from 19th September to 28th November in Old Library 2.19, Geography building, Old Infirmary complex (weeks 1–3 and 6–11) and in 01M.469 Teaching Room 12 (Doorway 3), Medical School building. Class meetings are mandatory. Readings Required reading is to be done before the class meets; background reading to be studied as time and specific interests permit. Assessment (i) short paper (1000-1500 words) to be turned in by 5 p.m. on Monday 15th October (topics will be provided); (ii) final essay examination with choice of questions from the whole of the course. Week 1 (19th September; Old Library 2.19): Introduction What linguistics is. Linguistics as a special science. Syntax and semantics as conceived in logic. Charles Morris’s trichotomy of syntax, semantics, and pragmatics. Philosophy of science applied to linguistics. Required reading • Hunter, Geoffrey (1971) Metalogic: An Introduction to the Metatheory of Standard First Order Logic (Berkeley: University of California Press), pp. 4–13. Background reading • Stainton, Robert (2014) ‘Philosophy of linguistics’, Oxford Handbooks Online. Online at https://works.bepress.com/robertstainton/126/ Week 2 (26th September; Old Library 2.19): Language and languages The metaphysics of linguistics. The vexed question of whether language should be regarded as psychological, social, or purely abstract. The descriptive linguistics of the American structuralists and the mentalist/cognitive backlash; ‘God’s truth’ (realism) vs.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 7 Linguistics As a Science of Structure Ryan M
    Chapter 7 Linguistics as a science of structure Ryan M. Nefdt University of the Western Cape Generative linguistics has rapidly changed during the course of a relatively short period. This has caused many to question its scientific status as a realist scientific theory (Stokhof & van Lambalgen 2011; Lappin et al. 2000). In this chapter, I argue against this conclusion. Specifically, I claim that the mathematical foundations of the science present a different story below the surface. I agree with critics that due to the major shifts in theory over the past 80 years, linguistics is indeed opened up to the problem of pessimistic meta-induction or radical theory change. However, I further argue that a structural realist approach (Ladyman 1998; French 2006) can save the field from this problem and at the same time capture its structural nature. I discuss particular historical instances of theory change in generative grammar as evidence for this interpretation and finally attempt to extend it beyond the gener- ative tradition to encompass previous frameworks in linguistics. 1 Introduction The generativist revolution in linguistics started in the mid-1950s, inspired in large part by insights from mathematical logic and in particular proof theory. Since then, generative linguistics has become a dominant paradigm, with many connections to both the formal and natural sciences. At the centre of the newly established discipline was the syntactic or formal engine, the structures of which were revealed through modelling grammatical form. The generativist paradigm in linguistics initially relied heavily upon the proof-theoretic techniques intro- duced by Emil Post and other formal logicians to model the form language takes (Tomalin 2006; Pullum 2011; 2013).1 Yet despite these aforementioned formal be- ginnings, the generative theory of linguistics has changed its commitments quite 1Here my focus will largely be on the formal history of generative syntax but I will make some comments on other aspects of linguistics along the way.
    [Show full text]
  • Aristotle on Verbal Communication: the First Chapters of De Interpretatione
    EJPC 7 (2) pp. 239–253 Intellect Limited 2016 Empedocles: European Journal for the Philosophy of Communication Volume 7 Number 2 © 2016 Intellect Ltd Critical Review. English language. doi: 10.1386/ejpc.7.2.239_3 CRITICAL REVIEW ANITA KASABOVA Sofia University VLADIMIR MARINOV New Bulgarian University Aristotle on verbal communication: The first chapters of De Interpretatione ABSTRACT KEYWORDS This article deals with the communicational aspects of Aristotle’s theory of significa- Aristotle tion as laid out in the initial chapters of the De Interpretatione (Int.).1 We begin De Interpretatione by outlining the reception and main interpretations of the chapters under discussion, verbal communication rather siding with the linguistic strand. We then argue that the first four chap- signification ters present an account of verbal communication, in which words signify things via linguistic expressions thoughts. We show how Aristotle determines voice as a conventional and hence acci- convention dental medium of signification: words as ‘spoken sounds’ are tokens of thoughts, language use which in turn are signs or natural likenesses of things. We argue that, in this way, 1. We follow the standard linguistic expressions may both signify thoughts and refer to things. This double edition of the Greek account of signification also explains the variety of ontological, logical and psycho- text of Int. by Minio- logical interpretations of the initial chapters of Int. Paluello (1949: 47–72), unless otherwise stated. All references to Aristotle’s works 239 11_EJPC 7.2_Critical review article_239-253.indd 239 11/22/16 1:55 PM Anita Kasabova and Vladimir Marinov follow the citation 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Linguistics As a Resouvce in Language Planning. 16P
    DOCUMENT RESUME ED 095 698 FL 005 720 AUTHOR Garvin, Paul L. TITLE' Linguistics as a Resouvce in Language Planning. PUB DATE Jun 73 NOTE 16p.; PaFPr presented at the Symposium on Sociolinguistics and Language Planning (Mexico City, Mexico, June-July, 1973) EPRS PPICE MF-$0.75 HC-$1.50 PLUS POSTAGE DESCRIPTORS *Applied Linguistics; Language Development; *Language Planning; Language Role; Language Standardization; Linguistics; Linguistic Theory; Official Languages; Social Planning; *Sociolinguistics ABSTPACT Language planning involves decisions of two basic types: those pertaining to language choice and those pertaining to language development. linguistic theory is needed to evaluate the structural suitability of candidate languages, since both official and national languages mast have a high level of standardizaticn as a cultural necessity. On the other hand, only a braodly conceived and functionally oriented linguistics can serve as a basis for choosiag one language rather than another. The role of linguistics in the area of language development differs somewhat depending on whether development is geared in a technological and scientific or a literary, artistic direction. In the first case, emphasis is on the development of terminologies, and in the second case, on that of grammatical devices and styles. Linguistics can provide realistic and practical arguments in favor of language development, and a detailed, technical understanding of such development, as well as methodological skills. Linguists can and must function as consultants to those who actually make decisions about language planning. For too long linguists have pursued only those aims generated within their own field. They must now broaden their scope to achieve the kind of understanding of language that is necessary for a productive approach to concrete language problems.
    [Show full text]
  • What Is Linguistics?
    What is Linguistics? Matilde Marcolli MAT1509HS: Mathematical and Computational Linguistics University of Toronto, Winter 2019, T 4-6 and W 4, BA6180 MAT1509HS Win2019: Linguistics Linguistics • Linguistics is the scientific study of language - What is Language? (langage, lenguaje, ...) - What is a Language? (lange, lengua,...) Similar to `What is Life?' or `What is an organism?' in biology • natural language as opposed to artificial (formal, programming, ...) languages • The point of view we will focus on: Language is a kind of Structure - It can be approached mathematically and computationally, like many other kinds of structures - The main purpose of mathematics is the understanding of structures MAT1509HS Win2019: Linguistics Linguistics Language Families - Niger-Congo (1,532) - Austronesian (1,257) - Trans New Guinea (477) - Sino-Tibetan (449) - Indo-European (439) - Afro-Asiatic (374) - Nilo-Saharian (205) - Oto-Manguean (177) - Austro-Asiatic (169) - Tai-Kadai (92) - Dravidian (85) - Creole (82) - Tupian (76) - Mayan (69) - Altaic (66) - Uto-Aztecan (61) MAT1509HS Win2019: Linguistics Linguistics - Arawakan (59) - Torricelli (56) - Sepik (55) - Quechuan (46) - Na-Dene (46) - Algic (44) - Hmong-Mien (38) - Uralic (37) - North Caucasian (34) - Penutian (33) - Macro-Ge (32) - Ramu-Lower Sepik (32) - Carib (31) - Panoan (28) - Khoisan (27) - Salishan (26) - Tucanoan (25) - Isolated Languages (75) MAT1509HS Win2019: Linguistics Linguistics MAT1509HS Win2019: Linguistics Linguistics The Indo-European Language Family: Phylogenetic Tree
    [Show full text]
  • Why Major in Linguistics (And What Does a Linguist Do)? by Monica Macaulay and Kristen Syrett
    1 Why Major in Linguistics (and what does a linguist do)? by Monica Macaulay and Kristen Syrett What is linguistics? Speakers of all languages know a lot about their languages, usually without knowing that they know If you are considering becoming a linguistics it. For example, as a speaker of English, you major, you probably know something about the possess knowledge about English word order. field of linguistics already. However, you may find Perhaps without even knowing it, you understand it hard to answer people who ask you, "What that Sarah admires the teacher is grammatical, exactly is linguistics, and what does a linguist do?" while Admires Sarah teacher the is not, and also They might assume that it means you speak a lot of that The teacher admires Sarah means something languages. And they may be right: you may, in entirely different. You know that when you ask a fact, be a polyglot! But while many linguists do yes-no question, you may reverse the order of speak multiple languages—or at least know a fair words at the beginning of the sentence and that the bit about multiple languages—the study of pitch of your voice goes up at the end of the linguistics means much more than this. sentence (for example, in Are you going?). Linguistics is the scientific study of language, and However, if you speak French, you might add est- many topics are studied under this umbrella. At the ce que at the beginning, and if you know American heart of linguistics is the search for the unconscious knowledge that humans have about language and how it is that children acquire it, an understanding of the structure of language in general and of particular languages, knowledge about how languages vary, and how language influences the way in which we interact with each other and think about the world.
    [Show full text]
  • Leibniz and German As a Language of Science1 Two Years Ago, One Of
    Published in: Dia-e-logos Vol. 1 (2004) Nr. 1, Pp. 11-17. 4. Gerhard Stickel: Leibniz And German As A Language Of Science1 Two years ago, one of the four major German science organisations representing about 80 institutes named itself "Wissenschaftsgemeinschaft Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz" (Science Society Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz; WGL). The German Language Institute is also a member of this society. It was predominantly the representatives of the natural science institutions who chose Leibniz as their patron, motivated by the wish to be recognised in the international world of science under the illustrious name of this eminent polymath. As I found to my surprise, most of the Leibniz admirers in the natural Sciences were hardly aware that this eminent lawman, philosopher, mathematician, physicist and inventor had also given important impulses to linguistics. My intention is not to deal with Leibniz as a language theoretician and language researcher. Instead, I want to recall a small part of Leibniz’s work which every now and then is also noted in the liberal arts: his writings on, and for, the German language. The two minor works in question are no strictly scientific treatises, but essay-like memorials. The older of the two, presumably written around the year 1682, is entitled “Ermahnung an die Deutschen, ihren Verstand und ihre Sprache besser zu üben, samt beigefugtem Vorschlag einer deutschgesinnten Gesellschaft” (Exhortation to the Germans to better exercise their reason and their language, with the added Suggestion of a German-minded society; EaD). In newer editions, the second essay carries the title “Unvorgreifliche Gedanken, betreffend die Ausübung und Verbesserung der deutschen Sprache” (Unpremeditated thoughts on the practice and the improvement of the German language; UG) and was written around the year 1697, almost 300 years ago.
    [Show full text]
  • Philosophy of Language in the Twentieth Century Jason Stanley Rutgers University
    Philosophy of Language in the Twentieth Century Jason Stanley Rutgers University In the Twentieth Century, Logic and Philosophy of Language are two of the few areas of philosophy in which philosophers made indisputable progress. For example, even now many of the foremost living ethicists present their theories as somewhat more explicit versions of the ideas of Kant, Mill, or Aristotle. In contrast, it would be patently absurd for a contemporary philosopher of language or logician to think of herself as working in the shadow of any figure who died before the Twentieth Century began. Advances in these disciplines make even the most unaccomplished of its practitioners vastly more sophisticated than Kant. There were previous periods in which the problems of language and logic were studied extensively (e.g. the medieval period). But from the perspective of the progress made in the last 120 years, previous work is at most a source of interesting data or occasional insight. All systematic theorizing about content that meets contemporary standards of rigor has been done subsequently. The advances Philosophy of Language has made in the Twentieth Century are of course the result of the remarkable progress made in logic. Few other philosophical disciplines gained as much from the developments in logic as the Philosophy of Language. In the course of presenting the first formal system in the Begriffsscrift , Gottlob Frege developed a formal language. Subsequently, logicians provided rigorous semantics for formal languages, in order to define truth in a model, and thereby characterize logical consequence. Such rigor was required in order to enable logicians to carry out semantic proofs about formal systems in a formal system, thereby providing semantics with the same benefits as increased formalization had provided for other branches of mathematics.
    [Show full text]
  • The History of Formal Semantics, Going Beyond What I Know First-Hand
    !"#$"##% Introduction ! “Semantics” can mean many different things, since there are many ways to be interested in “meaning”. One 20th century debate: how much common ground across logic, philosophy, and linguistics? The History of ! Formal semantics, which says “much!”, has been shaped over the last 40+ years by fruitful interdisciplinary collaboration among linguists, Formal Semantics philosophers, and logicians. ! In this talk I’ll reflect mainly on the development of formal semantics and to a lesser extent on formal pragmatics in linguistics and philosophy starting in the 1960’s. Barbara H. Partee ! I’ll describe some of the innovations and “big ideas” that have shaped the MGU, May 14, 2011 development of formal semantics and its relation to syntax and to (= Lecture 13, Formal Semantics Spec-kurs) pragmatics, and draw connections with foundational issues in linguistic theory, philosophy, and cognitive science. May 2011 MGU 2 Introduction “Semantics” can mean many different things ! I’m not trained as a historian of linguistics (yet) or of philosophy; what I know best comes from my experience as a graduate student of Chomsky’s ! “Semantics” used to mean quite different things to linguists in syntax at M.I.T. (1961-65), then as a junior colleague of Montague’s at and philosophers, not surprisingly, since different fields have UCLA starting in 1965, and then, after his untimely death in 1971, as one different central concerns. of a number of linguists and philosophers working to bring Montague’s " Philosophers of language have long been concerned with truth and semantics and Chomskyan syntax together, an effort that Chomsky reference, with logic, with how compositionality works, with how himself was deeply skeptical about.
    [Show full text]
  • The Logica Yearbook
    - -- - - -- - the logica yearbook 2006 - -- - - - --- the logica yearbook -- - 2006 Are concepts a priori? 1 2 Materna Are concepts a priori? 3 the logica yearbook 2006 4 Materna Are concepts a priori? 5 THE LOGICA YEARBOOK 2006 Edited by Ondřej Tomala and Radek Honzík FILOSOFIA Prague 2019 6 Materna Publication of the Logica Yearbook 2006 as well as the organisation of the Logica 2006 conference was supported by grant no. 401/04/0117 of the Grant Agency of the Czech Republic. Published by , 2007 Institute of Philosophy Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic, Prague Edited by Ondřej Tomala and Radek Honzík Design and typesetting by Martin Pokorný Cover © Marta Bílková Copyright of the papers held by the individual authors, unless otherwise noted Printed by PB tisk Příbram, Czech Republic ISBN 978-80-7007-254-7 (print book) ISBN 978-80-7007-582-1 (e-book) DOI 10.47376/filosofia.2007.1 Are concepts a priori? 7 TABLE OF CONTENTS A PREFACE .................................................... 9 Francesco Belardinelli COUNTERPART SEMANTICS FOR QUANTIFIED MODAL LOGIC ............... 11 Alexandre Costa-Leite COMBINING MODAL CONCEPTS: PHILOSOPHICAL APPLICATIONS ............. 23 Marie Duží THE USE-MENTION DISTINCTION .................................... 33 Antonín Dvořák and Vilém Novák FUZZY TYPE THEORY AS A TOOL FOR LINGUISTIC ANALYSIS ................ 51 María J. Frápolli WHAT IS A LOGICAL CONSTANT? THE INFERENCE-MARKER VIEW ............ 63 Brian Hill “REALISTIC” BELIEF DYNAMICS ..................................... 77 Bjørn Jespersen SIX WAYS OF KNOWING WHETHER .................................. 93 John T. Kearns RECAPTURING THE EPISTEMIC DIMENSION OF LOGIC ..................... 105 Katarzyna Kijania-Placek ON CIRCULAR ACCEPTANCE ....................................... 117 Vojtěch Kolman LOGICISM AND THE RECURSION THEOREM ............................. 127 Arnold Koslow A TALE OF twO SCHEMATA: TARSKIAN (FINITARY) TRUTH AND RAMSEYAN MENTAL STATES ...................................
    [Show full text]
  • 'Verbs of Change, Causation, and Time'. Center for the Study of Language and Information Report No
    REFERENCES Abusch, Dorit. 1986. 'Verbs of Change, Causation, and Time'. Center for the Study of Language and Information Report No. 86-50. Stanford University. Aksu, A. A. 1978. Aspect and Modality in the Child's Acquisition ofthe Turkish Past Tense. Ph.D dissertation, University of California at Berkeley. Antinucci, F., and R. Miller. 1976. 'How Children Talk ab out What Happened'. Journal of Child Language 3, 167-189. Asher, Nicholas. 1986. 'Belief in Discourse Representation Theory'. Journal of Philosophical Logic 15, 127-189. Asher, Nicholas. Forthcoming. Abstract Objects, Semanties, and Anaphora. Asher, Nicholas and Hajime Wada. 1988. 'A Computational Account of Syntactic, Semantic and Discourse Principles far Anaphora Resolution'. Journal of Semantics 309-344. Austin, John. 1961. Philosophical Papers. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Axelrod, Melissa. 1990. The Koyukon language. Ph.D Dissertation, University of Alaska. Bach, Emmon. 1980. 'Tenses and aspects as functions on verb-phrases'. In C. Rohrer (ed.), Time, Tense and Quantifiers. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer. Bach, Emmon. 1986. 'The Algebra of Events'. Linguistics and Philosophy 9.1, 5-16. 437 438 REFERENCES Bach, Emmon. In press. 'The Metaphysics of Natural Language'. In Proceedings of the Seventh International Congress on Logic, Methodology, and Philosophy of Science. Baker, C. L. 1989. The Syntax ofEnglish. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. Bakhtin, M. M. 1981. Translated by Emerson, C., and M. Holquist. The Dialogic Imagination. Austin, Texas: University of Texas Press. Banfield, Ann. 1981. Unspeakable Sentences: Narration and Representation in the Language of Fiction. Boston imd London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. Bar-Hillel, Yehoshua. 1954. 'Indexical Expressions' . Mind 63, 359-376. Bauer, G.
    [Show full text]
  • Integration Complexity and the Order of Cosisters
    Integration complexity and the order of cosisters William Dyer Oracle Corp [email protected] Abstract subjectivity (Scontras et al., 2017); (2) a bi- The cost of integrating dependent constituents nary hierarchy based on features such as rel- to their heads is thought to involve the distance ative/absolute (Sproat and Shih, 1991), stage- between dependent and head and the complex- /individual-level (Larson, 1998), or direct/indirect ity of the integration (Gibson, 1998). The for- (Cinque, 2010); or (3) a multi-category hierarchy mer has been convincingly addressed by De- of intensional/subsective/intersective (Kamp and pendency Distance Minimization (DDM) (cf. Partee, 1995; Partee, 2007; Truswell, 2009), re- Liu et al., 2017). The current study addresses inforcer/epithet/descriptor/classifier (Feist, 2012), the latter by proposing a novel theory of in- tegration complexity derived from the entropy and perhaps most famously, semantic features of the probability distribution of a dependent’s such as size/shape/color/nationality (Quirk et al., heads. An analysis of Universal Dependency 1985; Scott, 2002). Similarly, prepositional corpora provides empirical evidence regard- phrases and adverbials have been held to fol- ing the preferred order of isomorphic cosis- low a hierarchy based on manner/place/time ters—sister constituents of the same syntactic (Boisson, 1981; Cinque, 2001) or thematic roles form on the same side of their head—such as such as evidential/temporal/locative (Schweikert, the adjectives in pretty blue fish. Integration 2004). While these models may be reasonably complexity, alongside DDM, allows for a gen- eral theory of constituent order based on inte- accurate—though see Hawkins(2000); Truswell gration cost.
    [Show full text]