Recent Local Linguistics Events

 

Upcoming events

Events from 2004

Events from 2002

Events from 2001

Events from 2000

Events from 1999

Events from 1998

 

 

MIT LING-LUNCH

Thursday, October 23, 2003 at 12:30, MIT E39-335 (conference room)
Hideki Kishimoto Kobe University
TBA
Abstract: TBA
For more information, contact Shoichi Takahashi or Ivona Kucerova.

MIT - Phonology Circle

Wednesday, October 22, 2003, at 12-1:30 PM, in E39-335

Tamina Stephenson

"Anti-homophony and Optimal Paradigms in the Spanish present subjunctive"
Abstract: Spanish present subjunctive verbs differ from their indicative counterparts primarily in a change in theme vowel. Indicative theme vowel /a/ becomes /e/ in the subjunctive, /e/ becomes /a/, and /i/ becomes /a/ (e.g., ind. /amamos/, 'we love' becomes subj. /amemos/, whereas ind. /tememos/, 'we fear' becomes subj. /temamos/). I suggest that this pattern results from a constraint against homophony between indicative and subjunctive forms, combined with paradigm uniformity constraints and a few particular properties of the Spanish verbal system. My analysis is cast in McCarthy's (2002) Optimal Paradigms framework, a version of Optimality Theory in which candidates consist of entire inflectional paradigms built around a given stem.

  For further information, please contact D.Steriade

MIT - Phonology Circle

Friday, October 17, 2003, at 3:00 PM - room E9-335

Keith Johnson Ohio State University

"The perceptual representation of linguistic/phonetic objects in memory"
Abstract: Phonetic differences between talkers must be "normalized out" by listeners so that the talker's intended speech segments can be recovered. Study of this talker normalization process reveals the nature of linguistic/phonetic objects in memory. The talk will describe the two most successful accounts of this process and show how they fail. I will then describe an exemplar-based model of speech perception which does account for the phenomena of talker normalization. Formant ratio theory holds that vowels are like musical chords - as the relative positions of the notes within the chord define it, so the relative positions of vowel formants define the vowel. This view is wrong. Listeners are influenced by context, adapt over a few words to a new talker, can be induced by suggestion to "normalize" vowels, and perceive differently depending on whether they see a male or female face. None of these phenomena is predicted by the formant ratio theory. Vocal tract normalization theory holds that listeners evaluate speech sounds relative to the vocal tract that produced the speech. This view is also wrong. Speech production patterns are not pure anatomy. Talkers differ in how they produce the "same" speech sounds, gender is performed differently across languages, listeners are influenced by familiarity with the talker, stereotypical voices are processed more quickly than nonstereotypical voices, and listeners show priming effects from exposure to particular speech tokens as long as a week after exposure. None of these phenomena is predicted by the vocal tract normalization model. A model that uses the concept of exemplar-based memory for perceptual objects will be presented. This model accounts for the phenomena of perceptual talker normalization and has interesting implications for phonological theory.

  For further information, please contact D.Steriade

HARVARD UNIVERSITY GSAS workshop in comparative syntax and linguistic theory

Friday, October 17, 2003, at Harvard University
Time: 4 pm; Place: Fong auditorium (1st floor, Boylston Hall)
Refreshments: 3rd floor, Boylston Hall (after the talk)
Howard Lasnik University of Maryland
"The EPP and Repair by Ellipsis"
Abstract: TBA

posted on http://www.fas.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/ling-cslt

MIT LING-LUNCH

Thursday, October 16, 2003 at 12:30, MIT E39-335 (conference room)
Heejeong Ko
MIT
"Cyclic Linearization and Asymmetry in Scrambling "
Abstract:

A series of works in the framework of Derivation by Phase (Chomsky 1999) has argued that certain information is sent by the syntax to the interface components at each Phase - for example, that syntax communicates with the phonology at the end of each phase via Spell-out (Chomsky 2001, Nissenbaum 2001). This approach suggests that Linearization at PF in particular is cyclically determined by syntax. Though some evidence from languages with rigid word order supports this prediction (Fox and Pesetsky 2003 for Object Shift in Scandinavian languages), it is has not been clear whether evidence for cyclic linearization can be found in scrambling languages. This paper provides such evidence.

In particular, I show that cyclic Spell-out offers an explanation for asymmetries between external and internal arguments in Korean scrambling (Lee 1989, Lee 1992; see also Saito 1985 for Japanese). I also demonstrate that cyclic Linearization accounts for asymmetric distributions between high and low adverbials with respect to floating quantifiers. Further, the interactions between argument structure and various positions of floating quantifiers are discussed in terms of Linearization process at PF (cf. Miyagawa 1989). In consequence, this paper implies that (i) we are allowed to drop the ad-hoc stipulation that subject cannot undergo scrambling (cf. Saito 1985), (ii) Scrambling does obey the core property of cyclic Linearization as much as Object Shift in Scandinavian languages, and (ii) Holmberg Generalization, captured by Fox & Pesetsky (2003), is not a language-specific constraint, but rather a universal principle that may extend to SOV scrambling languages.

For more information, contact Shoichi Takahashi or Ivona Kucerova.

MIT - Phonology Circle

Wednesday, October 15, 2003, at 12-1:30 PM, in E39-335

Seth Cable

"Phonological Noun - Verb Dissimilarities in
Optimal Paradigms"
Abstract:

In some languages, nouns obey a different set of phonological generalizations from verbs (Smith 1997, 1999, 2001). This raises the question "Is phonology actually sensitive to the syntactic categories of its inputs?"

I argue that contrary to appearance, phonology is never sensitive to the syntactic categories of its inputs. Rather, any phonological differences between the nouns and verbs of a language are the result of a paradigm uniformity effect (Burzio 1999, Kenstowicz 1997, Kiparsky 1998), combined with prior, independently observable differences in the inflectional paradigms of nouns and verbs. Furthermore, the Optimal Paradigms (McCarthy 2002) theory of paradigm uniformity effects can be used to analyze particular cases of phonological N-V dissimilarities that, previously, had appeared to offer deep challenges to parallelist, constraint-based theories of opacity (c.f. Bobaljik 1997).

 

For further information, please contact D.Steriade

HARVARD UNIVERSITY

GSAS Workshop on IE Linguistics and Poetics

Friday, October 10, 2003, 4:30 - 5:30 at Harvard University: Boylston Hall 105
Ana Galjanic
Harvard University, Dept. of the Classics
"Hittite 'kammaras' and Greek 'akhlus': Some Nebulous Links"

Abstract:

This paper draws yet another comparison between Hittite and Greek. It argues for (a) an Anatolian lexical borrowing in Greek, attested as an isolated gloss in the lexicographer Hesychius, and (b) a notional and semantic correspondence between two motifs found in Hittite and Homeric texts respectively. Comparison of a peculiar phenomenon found in several Hittite myths about vanishing gods - mist enveloping the house (kammaras) - with the equally peculiar phenomenon of 'akhlus' attested in Greek epic, points to a possible common 'motifeme' shared between the two traditions.

A reception will follow.


posted on http://www.fas.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/ling-cslt

MIT LING-LUNCH

Thursday, October 9, 2003 at 12:30, MIT E39-335 (conference room)
Morris Halle, MIT
Ora Matushansky, CNRS
"Morpho-phonology of adjectival inflection in Russian "
Abstract:

TBA

For more information, contact Shoichi Takahashi or Ivona Kucerova.

MIT - Phonology Circle

Wednesday, October 8, 2003, at 12-1:30 PM, in E39-335

Michael Kenstowicz
MIT

... leads discussion of Juliette Blevins's
Evolutionary Phonology ms.
Abstract:

TBA

 

For further information, please contact D.Steriade

MIT LING-LUNCH

Thursday, October 2, 2003 at 12:00, MIT E39-335 (conference room)
Idan Landau
MIT and Ben Gurion University
"The Scale of Finiteness and the Calculus of Control"
Abstract:

Prevalent treatments of Obligatory Control (OC) derive the distribution of PRO from either government or case theory. However, ample crosslinguistic evidence demonstrates that PRO is case-marked just like any other DP. The phenomenon of finite control in the Balkan languages and in Hebrew, where subjunctive complements exhibit OC, demonstrates that the licensing of PRO must be sensitive to the distribution of the features [Tense] and [Agr] both on I and C. OC is conceived as an instance of Agree; a local calculus, interacting with feature checking and deletion, determines that PRO is in general the "elsewhere" case of referential subjects. However, the two types of subjects may alternate in certain environments, an inexplicable fact for most existing accounts. The system proposed naturally extends to other types of complements, like inflected infinitives and obviative subjunctives. The resulting typology offers a systematic picture of the intricate ways in which finiteness and control interact in different languages.

For more information, contact Shoichi Takahashi or Ivona Kucerova.

HARVARD UNIVERSITY

Friday, September 26, 2003 at 4:00 at Harvard University: Lower Library, Robinson Hall
Taro Kageyama
Kwansei Gakuin University
"Semantic vs. Morphological Boundedness: Resultative and Motion
Constructions in English and Japanese"

Abstract:

Not available.


posted on http://www.fas.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/ling-cslt

MIT LING-LUNCH

Thursday, September 25, 2003 at 12:00, MIT E39-335 (conference room)
Abdelkader Fassi-Fehri
Université de Paris III
"Nominal Parameters and Ontologies at the Interface"
Abstract:

There is a growing literature on how nominal arguments can be semantically interpreted (in connection with types, genericity, plurality, (in)definiteness, etc.), and how their syntax can be computed through various merges of l-heads or f-heads and/or phrases. Increasing proposals have been made to identify the nature/source of variation, most of which are typically formal, in the sense that they involve only morpho-syntactic properties of f-heads, f-features, or f-chains, and hardly significant association with transparent semantics. E.g. 'strength' or 'weakness' of D, or Number (Nb), have motivated overt/covert Spell-out of D as an article, or as an N-in-D (see e.g. Longobardi 2001, Bouchard 2002, etc.). Variation in f-merges has also been advocated (see e.g. Borer 2002, Munn & Schmitt 2000, etc.). Few proposals have been made which take the variation to be semantic in nature (e.g. 'type-driven', as in Chierchia 1998, or determinacy-driven via hierarchical L-types, as in Dayal 2002). The question of which features (and/or parameters) and how many of them are naturally made available to UG through the C-I interface (or SEM), to enable Ls to name entities in a more natural (and presumably computationally efficient) way has hardly been seriously addressed.

Consider kind (K), mass (M), collective/group (G), and object/individual (I) phenomenologies, documented in various semantic works, and expressed through various formal means in Ls. Assume that these notions are associated with ontologically nominal entities, which are built on two features (with two values). Let the latter be [B%" at] for 'atomic' and [B%" sng] for 'singularity'. These features are assembled as complexes of attribute-value pairs (associated with K, M, G, and I), and they input N grammars at L-syntax (Lower Syntax).

Ls like A (Arabic) mark Is ([+sng, +at]), through a classifier morphology (which inputs K or M, and outputs I). English (E), I assume, associates plural (pl) morphology (which is ambiguous) with K (inputting M and outputting K). Merge takes place in H-syntax (Higher Syntax) at the Number Level (Nb L). The domain of denotation/reference saturation for nominal arguments, I assume, is H-syntax, which merges NbPs and DPs. If K is associated with Nb at H-syntax, then L has K-names as the NbL, as in E, making unnecessary the resort to D. If L does not associate Nb with K, then it has to look higher, at D, as in A and R. Since it is K which needs to be marked through pl in E, we predict that both Ks and Ms will be bare, if they form a contrasting pair. M pairs with K in the E case, since singulars (sg) cannot be bare. The latter merge with a Num(eral) at H-syntax, and can be treated as the unmarked form of the pl (when pl is associated with Pl of Is). When L marks Is, as in A, at L-syntax, they can be bare, provided that they are 'weak'. The pl (and dual) morphology marks Pl at H-syntax in A, but Pl here is not denotational, only quantificational. A (empty) D is then necessary, as in the sg case, to allow existential closure. The prediction then is that in type A Ls, the four types of Ns can be bare, provided that they are quantifiers (Qs). Typically, if Pl (the marked case) is a bare Q, then all other types (which are less marked) are bare Qs.

Variation in merging D with Nb and Num in H-syntax will hopefully derive variation in genericity expression across Ls. Time permitting, syntactic/semantic parallels between Proper names (PNs), BNs, and Def descriptions will be examined. It will be shown that PNs crucially do not behave like K-names.

The talk will focus on A facts, which are novel and quite appealing, but comparison with E, R, H, BP, among other Ls, will be tempted.

P.S. This talk is dedicated to the memory of Ken Hale, a great linguist and a great man. It is the first time I return to MIT, but cannot benefit from his profound insights and his human kindness.

For more information, contact Shoichi Takahashi or Ivona Kucerova.

MIT LING-LUNCH

Thursday, September 18, 2003 at 12:30, MIT E39-335 (conference room)
Juan Uriagereka
University of Maryland and University of the Basque Country
"Spell-out Consequences"
Abstract:

This talk re-examines the Multiple Spell-out analysis introduced in Uriagereka (1999) from the perspective of a Probe/Goal system of the sort in Chomsky (2002), based on ideas from Collins (2003) regarding the primacy of head-complement relations. The paper discusses several empirical and formal challenges posed to the earlier model, particularly inasmuch as it unnecessarily assumed the Linear Correspondence Axiom in Kayne (1994). The innovation proposed here entirely assimilates (External) Merge (EM) to Move understood as Internal Merge (IM), which includes imposing an intrinsic asymmetry on EM of the sort standardly assumed in IM. Whenever this asymmetry is not met by the structure itself, the system spontaneously sends the specifier into early Spell-out, thereby granting the assymetry. This successfully distinguishes in particular head-complement from specifier-head relations, only the latter resulting in necessary Spell-out. The article also analyzes base-generated adjunctions, for which asymmetry is provided by the very operation of adjunction (which, thus, requires no ancillary Spell-out) and other sorts of islands arising for adjuncts and chains which would violate the Uniformity Condition if left active in the derivation (instead of being spelled-out).

For more information, contact Shoichi Takahashi or Ivona Kucerova.

 

 

MIT LING-LUNCH

Thursday, September 11, 2003 at 12:30, MIT E39-335 (conference room)
Linnaea Stockall
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
"MEG evidence for a decompositional analysis of the English Irregular Past Tense "
Abstract:

The lack of cross-modal priming from irregular verbs to their stems (Marslen-Wilson, 1995) has been used to support dual-route theories of inflection in which irregular past tense forms are memorized while regulars are compiled.
Clear priming effects have been reported in cases where the prime is a regular verb form and the target is a verb stem (spinning primes spin). Crucially, inhibition is found in cases where the prime and target overlap in form, but have no plausible morphological relationship (spinach inhibits spin).

Allen and Badecker (2002) show that some irregular past tense forms do prime their stems. In pairs like gave-give where the past-tense form and the stem have a high degree of orthographic overlap, the irregular past tense does not prime the stem form. But in pairs like taught-teach where there is much less overlap, the irregular past tense forms do prime their stems.

A reasonable interpretation of the Allen & Badecker results is that irregular past tense forms do prime their stems. But in cases where the irregular past tense form has a high degree of orthographic overlap with its stem, the form overlap also induces competition effects that cancel out the priming.

This experiment supports this interpretation and the decompositional analysis of the irregular past tense, and details the stages at which root/stem priming and form inhibition occur in lexical processing. The experiment uses the materials of Allen & Badecker, but uses a visual-visual priming paradigm. In addition to two irregular verb conditions (high vs. low form overlap) and the pure form overlap condition, we added an identity condition in order to obtain a baseline priming measure.

Pylkkänen & Marantz (2003) review several MEG studies showing that an evoked response component occurring approximately 350ms after the onset of visually presented lexical stimuli (the M350) is sensitive to identity priming (Pylkkänen et al (2001) and morphological priming (Pylkkänen et al (2002a)), but not to phonological competition effects (Pylkkänen et al (2002b)). This component, then, is predicted to show priming effects for both categories of irregular verb.

Paired t-tests revealed significant differences in the latency of the M350 component for the identity condition (F=1,7; p<0.01)(control mean=355ms, prime mean=324ms), the gave-give condition (F=1,7; p<0.05) (control mean=374ms, prime mean=348ms) and the taught-teach condition (F=1,7; p<0.05) (control mean=371ms, prime mean=339ms).T-tests also revealed significant effects of condition on reaction times in a way that is consistent with the literature on visual-visual priming. Past tense forms induce priming effects on their stems at the processing stage indexed by the M350, regardless of degree of form overlap. These results, taken together with recent evidence that morphological priming is categorically distinct from semantic priming (Feldman, 2000), provide support for a decompositional analysis of the English irregular past tense.


Works cited:
Allen, M., and Badecker, W. (2002). Inflectional Regularity: Probing the Nature of Lexical Representation in a Cross-Modal Priming Task. Journal of Memory and Language 46, 705-722.
Pylkkänen, L. and Marantz, A. (2003). Tracking the time course of word recognition with MEG. Trends in Cognitive Science. 7, 187-189.

For more information, contact Shoichi Takahashi or Ivona Kucerova.

 

 

 

MIT     WORKSHOP ON ALTAIC IN FORMAL LINGUISTICS (WAFL) 2003


May 16-18, 2003

All sessions held in E51-335.

All attendees, including presenters, must register for the workshop.

For advance registration, we can accept only checks drawn on US banks in US dollars, made payable to MIT.

Received by April 30, 2003: Students $15; Non-Students $25

Received after April 30, 2003: Students $25; Non-Students $35

For more information, please see our webpage: http://linguistics-philosophy.mit.edu/altaic

 

FRIDAY MAY 16

9:30- 9:45 Opening Remarks

9:45-10:30 Overview of the Session on Comparative Altaic
Jaklin Kornfilt (Syracuse University) & Shigeru Miyagawa (MIT)

10:30-11:00 When in-situ languages diverge:Altaic vs. Non-Altaic
Heejeong Ko (MIT)

11:00-11:30 Intervention Effects in the Interpretation of Turkish and Japanese Indefinites
Meltem Kelepir (Eastern Mediterranean Univ.)

11:30-12:00 Coffee Break

12:00-12:30 Raising Specifiers: A macroparametric account of SOR in some Altaic languages
James Yoon (University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign)

12:30-1:00 Morphological Causatives in Japanese and Korean
Sachiko Kato & Masatoshi Koizumi (Tohoku University)

1:00-2:30 Lunch

2:30-3:00 Children's Accusative Marked Indefinites
Nihan Ketrez (University of Southern California)

3:00-3:30 Unaccusative Transitives and BurzioUs Generalization: Reflexive Constructions in Japanese
Nobuko Hasegawa (Kanda University of International Studies)

3:30-4:00 Coffee Break

4:00-4:30 A Phrasal Affix in Turkish
Jorge Hankamer (UC Santa Cruz)

4:30-5:00 Further evidence for pied-piping in Japanese
Hisashi Morita (Assumption University, Thailand)
SATURDAY MAY 17

WAFFLE BREAKFAST!!!

10:00-10:30 Phase in Japanese: Evidence from the Distribution of Negative Polarity Items
Yoshimi Maeda (Sophia University)

10:30-11:00 Aspectual Composition and Nominal Reference: Evidence from Turkic Languages
Sergei Tatevosov (Moscow State University)

11:00-11:30 Coordination: the same size fits well
Soonhyuck Park (University of Wisconsin-Madison)

11:30-12:00 Coffee Break

12:00-12:30 Constraints on possessor raising and its structure in Korean
Gwanhi Yun (U. of Arizona)

12:30-1:00 Us Linguists
Kaori Furuya (Graduate Center of the City University of New York)

1:00-2:30 Lunch

2:30-3:00 Dorsal Consonant Harmony in Karaim
Andrew Nevins (MIT) and Bert Vaux (Harvard)

3:00-3:30 Syllable Contact and Manner Assimilation Across Turkic Languages
Karen Baertsch & Stuart Davis (Indiana University)

3:30-4:00 Reduplication in Tuvan: Exponence, readjustment and phonology
K. David Harrison & Eric Raimy (Swarthmore College)

4:00-4:30 Coffee Break

4:30-6:00 Invited Talk: Jan-Olof Svantesson (Lund University): What Happens to Mongolian Vowel Harmony?
SUNDAY MAY 18

10:00-11:30 Invited Talk: M|rvet Eng (University of Wisconsin): Copulas and Functional Categories in Turkish

11:30-12:00 Masked Island Effects in Japanese
Yoshihisa Kitagawa (Indiana) and Satoshi Tomoika (U. Delaware)

12:00-12:30 Coffee Break

12:30-1:00 Inmost Wins in Turkish Stress
Sharon Inkelas & Orhan Orgun (UC Berkeley)

1:00-1:30 Reduplication Without RED: Morphological and prosodic motivations on Turkish reduplication
Fetiye Karabay (University of Southern California)

1:30-2:00 Classifiers, particles, and Japanese DP
William McClure (Queens College/CUNY Graduate Center)

2:00-2:30 Indeterminates and Determiners
Akira Watanabe (Univ. of Tokyo)

Alternates:

Light Verbs and Complex Predicates in Turkic (Claire Bowern, Harvard)
Nominalizations as Meaning Changing Operations (Chongwon Park, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign)
Syncope in Crimean Tatar (Darya Kavitskaya , Yale)
The phonetic signs of categorical variation in Korean stop phonology (Gwanhi Yun & Scott R. Jackson, Univ. of Arizona)

MIT LING-LUNCH

Thursday, May 15, 2003 at 12:30, MIT E39-335 (conference room)
Kai von Fintel & Sabine Iatridou
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
"Since Since"

Abstract:

This paper is about one sentence, its structure, its meaning, and how exactly it comes to mean what it means. The sentence is

"Tony has been happy since he has been taking Prozac".

To understand the sentence and its compositional semantics, we need to figure out the proper treatment of the perfect, the meaning of "since", and make some interesting assumptions about the hidden structure of the temporal adjunct clause.

[PS: If you want a real life example or two, do a Google search on a phrase like "since I have been". It won't be hard to find examples like this:"Since I have been taking your kelp pills, I haven't had any trouble with my heels."].

For more information, contact anevins@MIT.EDU.

MIT - Phonology Circle


Friday, May 9, 2003, at 1:00 PM, in 66-160

Olga Vaysman
MIT

TBA

Abstract:

TBA

For further information, please contact czoll@MIT.EDU

UMass, Amherst: Linguistics Colloquium

Friday, May 9, 2003 at 3:30PMa in Machmer W-24 , followed by a reception in the Department,
Janet Fodor
TBA

Abstract

Not available at this time.

For futher information, contact Minjoo Kim or check out the Web site.

 

MIT LING-LUNCH

Thursday, May 8, 2003 at 12:30, MIT E39-335 (conference room)
Hideaki Yamashita
"Phase Theory and the Locality Condition of NPI Licensing in Japanese"

Abstract:

Not available at this time.

For more information, contact anevins@MIT.EDU.

MIT - Phonology Circle


Friday, May 2, 2003, at 1:00 PM, in 66-160

Jonathan Barnes
Boston University

"Initial-Syllable Prominence: What is it and where does it come from?"

Abstract:

Patterns of Positional Neutralization (hereafter PN, Steriade 1994) have increasingly become a central proving ground for theories of the phonetics-phonology interface; while it is clear that certain positions stand out as generally more likely than others to host the relatively greater numbers of contrasts associated with "strong" positions, it is equally clear that not all strong positions are strong for the same reasons, or in the same ways. That phonetics plays a central role in determining which contrasts will be most commonly neutralized in which positions is indisputable; how direct a role that must ultimately be is a matter of some contention.

This study singles out one such strong position, the initial syllable, for examination. Initial syllables are a particularly edgy case, in that while their propensity to function as strong licensers of contrast is widely acknowledged, the reasons for this positional prominence are less than clear. While patterns of phonetic strengthening of initial material are increasingly well-understood (Cho and Jun 2002, Byrd 2000, Keating, Cho, Fougeron and Hsu 1999, Dilley, Shattuck-Hufnagel and Ostendorf 1996, Fougeron and Keating 1996, inter alia), some recent approaches to initial-syllable effects (Beckman 1998, Smith 2002) discount phonetics as the driving force behind initial-syllable PN patterns, attributing strong licensing there instead to the psycholinguistic prominence of initial material. A much-needed re-appraisal of the typology of initial syllable strength effects, however, seriously undermines this hypothesis. I will show that while the psycholinguistic-prominence approach predicts numerous unattested or poorly attested patterns to be natural and common, an appeal to the phonetics of initial position accurately predicts the shape of the attested typology. I argue additionally for an approach to the typology of PN which locates the role of phonetics in generating attested diversity exclusively in the process of phonologization, whereby gradient phonetic effects beget categorical phonological patterns. The typology of initial syllable PN thus follows from, but is not synchronically beholden to, the phonetic profile of initiality.

For further information, please contact czoll@MIT.EDU

MIT Linguistics Colloquium

Friday, May 2, 2003, from 3:30 to 5:00 p.m. in Room Room 4-237 at MIT.
Joan Bresnan, Stanford University
Categoricity and Gradience in the Dative Alternation
or: What does language use have to do with syntactic theory?

Abstract:

Not available at this time.

For more information, contact Pranav Anand or Marketa Ceplova.

MIT LING-LUNCH

Thursday, May 1, 2003 at 12:00, MIT E39-335 (conference room)
Barry Schein
USC, MIT
"Life among subevents"

Abstract:

Past Tense in both (1) and (2) implicates that Soul and the requiem have ceased to be equally dead; but, (1) says that Ray Charles revived Soul and (2), that he revived the requiem.

(1) Soul was as dead as the requiem until Ray Charles sat at the piano.

(2) #The requiem was as dead as Soul until Ray Charles sat at the piano.

As there is a special relationship between Tense and the subject, which Kratzer (1995) and Musan (1997) call the lifetime effect, what is over is over only as the result of some change in the condition of the subject, be it death or disfigurement (3-5), decomposition (6) or resurrection (7):

(3) Ted Kennedy resembles JFK.

(4) #Ted Kennedy resembled JFK.

(5) JFK resembled Ted Kennedy.

(6) Aunt Theresa dead resembled Queen Victoria.

(7) Lazarus resembled Uncle Ephraim napping.

With other arguments, analogous relationships condition their own participation in what is being described:

(8) Gorbachev is from the USSR.

(9) #Gorbachev is from post-Soviet Russia/ Tsarist Russia.

(10) I never made it to Leningrad, but I visited St. Petersburg last week. (Saul 1997a)

(11) #I never made it to St. Petersburg, but I visited St. Petersburg last week.

With several arguments, sentences show multiple, independent but coordinated lifetime effects,

(12) Gorbachev went from (a boyhood in) the USSR (now gone) to (a desk at) MSNBC Online (airing first in the mid-nineties); and each argument may be the occasion for adverbial modifiers to (successively) narrow or shift (cf. (6)) the local neighborhood of the lifetime effect,

(13) The former Soviet republics, struggling against the EU economy, resemble Imperial Russia (when (she was)) besieged by Napoleon.

All dimensions of the lifetime effects reduce to (iterative) adverbial modification, adapting ForbesB!G (1999) proposal to dress up (14) as (15), if the Davidsonian analysis of (16) is augmented at least as in (17) to provide each argument with its own event.

(14) Superman leaps tall buildings more often than Clark Kent does. (Saul 1999)

(15) Superman Superman-izing leaps tall buildings more often than Clark Kent Clark Kent-izing.

(16) John buttered the toast in the kitchen at midnight.

Agent(e,x1) & butter(e) & Theme(e,x2) & in(e,x3) & at(e, x4)

(17) Agent(e1,x1) & Cause(e1,e2) & Theme(e2,x2) & butter(e2) &

      Overlap(e2,e3) & in(e3,x3) & Overlap(e3,e4) & at(e4,x4)

Alex Barber. 2000. A pragmatic treatment of simple sentences. Analysis 60.4: 300-308.

Graeme Forbes. 1997. How much substitutivity? Analysis 57.2: 109-113. Graeme Forbes. 1999. Enlightened semantics for simple sentences. Analysis 59.2: 86-91.

Lila R. Gleitman, Henry Gleitman, Carol Miller, Ruth Ostrin. 1996. Similar, and similar concepts. Cognition 58.3: 321-376.

Angelika Kratzer. 1995. Stage-level and individual-level predicates. In G.N. Carlson & F.J. Pelletier, ed. The Generic Book. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. 125-175.

Joseph G. Moore. 1999. Saving substitutivity in simple sentences. Analysis 59.2: 91-105.

Renate Musan. 1997. Tense, predicates, and lifetime effects. Natural Language Semantics 5.3: 271-301.

Jennifer M. Saul. 1997a. Substitution and simple sentences. Analysis 57.2: 102-108.

Jennifer M. Saul. 1997b. Reply to Forbes. Analysis 57.2: 114-118.

Jennifer M. Saul. 1999. Substitution, simple sentences, and sex scandals. Analysis 59.2: 106-112.

Thomas Ede Zimmermann. 2002. WhatB!Gs in two names? ms. Frankfurt.

For more information, contact anevins@MIT.EDU.

HARVARD UNIVERSITY

Thursday, May 1, 2003 at 4:30 at Harvard University: Boylston 110, Fong Auditorium
Prof. H. C. Melchert
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
"Latin insolescere, Hittite sulless- and PIE Statives in -e-"

Abstract:

Not available.

posted on http://www.fas.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/ling-cslt

HARVARD UNIVERSITY

Wednesday, April 29, 2003 at 4:00 at Harvard University, Boylston 105
Cal Watkins
Harvard University
"The Third Donkey"

Abstract:

TBA

posted on http://www.fas.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/ling-cslt

MIT - Phonology Circle


Friday, April 25, 2003, at 1:00 PM, in 66-160

Steven Lulich
MIT

"Russian [v]: An Acoustic Study"

Abstract:

It is well known that Russian obstruent clusters are subject to voicing assimilation, by which the last obstruent determines the voicing of the entire cluster. Sonorants generally do not participate in voicing assimilation, either as triggers or as targets, although it has been suggested that non-syllabic or 'short' sonorants may be transparent to voicing assimilation. The segment [v] occupies a special position within the Russian sound system, in that it behaves both as an obstruent and as a sonorant. Specifically, [v] behaves as a sonorant before sonorants, and as an obstruent elsewhere. The phonological nature of [v] in Russian has been subject to numerous studies over the past half-century, but its phonetic nature has received comparatively little attention. This study presents results of an experiment carried out in order to explore the acoustic nature of [v] in Russian. Before a sonorant, [v] was not found to trigger voicing assimilation. Before an obstruent, an asymmetry was found between [+voice] and [-voice]. In word-final clusters, which normally devoice, inter-speaker variability was found if [v] was the final obstruent.

For further information, please contact czoll@MIT.EDU

UMass, Amherst: Linguistics Colloquium

Friday, April 25, 2003 at 3:30PMa in Machmer W-24 , followed by a reception in the Department,
Paul Hagstrom
Boston University
"Attempts to reveal who remembers where I left what"

Abstract

Baker (1970) noticed that questions like "Who remembers where we bought what?" has a reading that seems to violate the wh-island condition, where the answer pairs the uppermost and lowermost wh-word, and since then a number of proposals have been put forward as to why this might be. In this talk, I'll use this observation as a pretext to introduce the "in situ" semantics proposed for wh-questions (and in particular of these "pair-list" readings that multiple wh-questions can have) in Hagstrom (1998). This analysis, sort of a fusion of Hamblin's (1973) and Reinhart's (1998) proposals, can give us a fairly straightforward account of how these "Baker questions" arise, and how we can capture the "wh-triangle" effects observed by Dayal (1996). We'll then forge ahead into more speculative areas, including some of the restrictions on pair-list readings with an in situ wh-word inside an island (Garrett 1996, Dayal 2000), and the issue of how Superiority violations seem to affect the availability of pair-list readings. The goal of this talk is primarily to add another small success to the repertoire of this Hamblin-style alternative semantics for questions, and to clarify some of the (several) issues still confronting it.

For futher information, contact Minjoo Kim or check out the Web site.

MIT Linguistics Colloquium

Friday, April 25, 2003, from 3:30 to 5:00 p.m. in Room E51-395 at MIT.
Michael Brody, University College London and Hungarian Academy of Sciences
"String Theory"

Abstract:

After briefly introducing the methodology of elegant syntax (Brody 1998, 2003), I argue that the operation of merge (or the result of merge in the representational view) of the minimalist approach is not a plausible basic building block for the construction of syntactic structures. These considerations will lead to mirror theory (Brody 1997, 2000, see also Abels 2000, 2002, Brody and Szabolcsi 2003, Bury 2003, Kobele 2002, Kobele Collier Taylor, and Stabler 2002, Starke 2001, Williams 2002 and others for various developments and alternatives). I plan to discuss some issues where this framework forces, or leads to, novel solutions, like the nature of the EPP, representations for bracketing "paradoxes",parameters for some recently discussed word order universals, or trace binding and triggering issues of remnant VP chains. But I intend to concentrate on the option that also naturally arises within the approach, of stating all c-command based ("syntactic") constraints on a string of nodes linearly ordered by the immediate domination relation. Given this possibility, the more inclusive concept of a tree could be inaccessible to syntactic principles.

For more information, contact Pranav Anand or Marketa Ceplova.

 

Boston University

The undergraduate Linguistics Society (BULA) presents...

Thursday, April 24, 2003 - at 7 PM CAS 316

 

"Elucidating the Neural Bases of Speech"
Prof. Frank Guenther, Boston University, will present an overview of his research.

For a preview, see:

http://www.cns.bu.edu/~guenther
http://www.cns.bu.edu/~speech

The presentation will be followed by the BULA year-end party. Don't miss this chance to network with other students who are interested in language and linguistics. Come for the snacks, stay for the socializing!

For more information, contact bula@louis-xiv.bu.edu.
 

MIT LING-LUNCH

Thursday, April 24, 2003 at 12:30, MIT E39-335 (conference room)
Rajesh Bhatt and Roumyana Pancheva
 (University of Texas/MIT) and (USC)
"Late Merge of Degree Clauses"

Abstract:

We propose that the Degree Head and the Degree Clause form a constituent not at the point where the Degree Head is Merged, but after the overt QR of the Degree Head and countercyclic Merger of the Degree Clause. We will be assuming a model of grammar where `covert' and `overt' operations are interspersed. Within this model, the only difference between `covert' and `overt' operations is which link of the chain is pronounced.

1. More Swedes liked `Expedition Robinson' [than Norwegians did].

Degree Head                       Degree Clause

The Degree Head forms a constituent with the main clause AP/NP/AdvP. The Degree Clause is merged independently of the merger position of the Degree Head; it can be adjoined at different heights (e.g., at the AP level, the infinitival IP level or the matrix IP level in (2)).

2. Mary's father tells her to work harder than her boss does.

The Degree Head raises via overt QR to a position where the Degree Clause is introduced via countercyclic merger; the two form a constituent which is interpreted as a degree quantifier binding the degree variable in the main clause degree predicate (i.e., in the spirit of Gueron and May's 1984 analysis of extraposition, see Fox & Nissenbaum 1999's analysis of extraposistion, and Fox 2001's analysis of ACD). Our analysis is able to capture the correlation between ellipsis resolution and the scope of the comparative discussed in Heim (2000), as well as show that the scope of the comparative is determined by the surface position of the comparative clause.

For more information, contact anevins@MIT.EDU.

HARVARD UNIVERSITY

Tuesday, April 22, 2003 at 3:00 at Harvard University in Sever 206
Claire Bowern
Harvard University
"Bardi Song Poetry"

Abstract:

The Nyhulnyulan languages of North-Western Australia have a rich variety of song poetry styles, ranging from charms and curses to the exoteric "loodin" songs to initiation ritual texts. In this talk I will review the styles of song poetry, their influences, and some of the archaic features that are preserved in the song texts.

posted on http://www.fas.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/ling-cslt

Harvard University: 1st Annual Undergraduate Linguistics Colloquium

For further information please contact Nassira Nicola (nicola@fas.harvard.edu)

This colloquium has beeni nitiated wtih the goal of developing an intercollegiate community of linguistics enthusiasts at the undergraduate level. In keeping with this broad aim, the conference is open to all interested students regardless of area of interest or level of training. Professor Ray Jackendoff of Brandeis University will be featured as our keynote speaker, and undergraduates will present their own research in talks and discussions.

The registration fee for this two-day conference will be $10 for each pre-registered participant or $15 at the door. Pre-registration is strongly encouraged. Those interested in attneding are asked to send their name, their school's name, and their e-mail address along with the registration fee to the address below. Please make checks out to the Harvard College Linguistics Group.

LinG Colloquium Registration
c/o Laura Openshaw
314 Lowell Mail Center
Cambridge, MA 02138

April 19 and 20, 2003, at 1:00 PM, in 66-160

Saturday, April 19

9:00

Continental Breakfast

10:00

Opening Session
10:30

Benjamin Jackson (Harvard College): ''Vocal Percussion: A Phonetic Description''
11:00

Manuela Gonzaga (University of Lisbon, Portugal): ''The Structure of DP in European Portuguese: Evidence from Adjectives and Possessives''
11:30

Choon-Kyu Lee (University of Southern California): ''On-line Sentence Processing: The Importance of Experience''
12:00

Daniel Lassiter (Harvard College): ''The Pragmatic Function of the Particle the:n in Ancient Greek''
12:30

Deborah Mortion (Harvard College): ''What, Where, When, Why, How: A Comprehensive Analysis of Korean-English Codeswitching''
1:00

Lunch
2:00

Discussions

(1) Rachel Halsema (Dartmouth College): ''Language Policy in a Pluralistic Society: The View from South Africa''

(2) Charles Chang (Harvard College) and Julie Tanaka (Japan Women's University/Wellesley College): ''Loanwords and Second-Language Learning''

(3) Jessica Graves and Amanda Ivins (Gallaudet University): ''American Sign Language and the Deaf Community''
3:00

Stuart LaRosa (University of Florida): ''Empirical Support for a Minimalist Analysis of Zero Derivation''
3:30

Vanessa Armoogum (Université de Paris VIII): "The Copula in Mauritian Creole''
4:00

Nassira Nicola (Harvard College): ''Noun-Verb Pairs in American Sign Language: An Alternative Approach to Description and Derivation''
4:30

Hunter Brooks (Dartmouth College): ''Word-Initial *b in Proto-Indo-European: Saved by the *bel-?''

Sunday, April 20
9:00

Continental Breakfast
10:00

Emma Gardner (McGill University): ''Trends in Phrase-Final Raising and the Quotative `be like' in Canadian Youth''
10:30

Discussions

(1) Blake Boulerice (Harvard College): ''Creole Genesis: A Theoretical or a Historical Question?''

(2) Jocelyn M. Wood (Boston University): ''The Acquisition of Non-Native Phonemes''

(3) Lucas Butler (Harvard College): ''Word Learning and Symbolic Knowledge: Clues from Child Development Research''
11:30

Professor Ray Jackendoff (Brandeis University): ''What's in the Lexicon?''
12:30

Closing Session

HARVARD UNIVERSITY - GSAS Workshop in comparative syntax and linguistic theory

Friday, April 18, 2003 at 4:00 at Harvard University in Fong Auditorium
Richard Larson
Stony Brook
Adverb Attachment and "Scope"

Abstract:

posted on http://www.fas.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/ling-cslt

MIT - Phonology Circle


Friday, April 18, 2003, at 1:00 PM, in 66-160

Bert Vaux and Bridget Samuels
Harvard University

"Lifting the veil of perception: The Split Effect and perceptual integration"

Abstract:

In this talk we investigate the linguistic factors involved in the construction of perceptual categories, focusing on consonants. Bastian, Eimas, and Liberman 1961 found that the syllable [slit] is heard as &split& when a short interval of silence (> 40 ms) is introduced between the noise at the beginning of the syllable and the vocalic portion. This "Split Effect" has been replicated in many subsequent
studies, and has been linked to acoustic factors such as closure duration, release burst, and formant transition structure, interacting in an
integrative fashion (Tartter, Kat, Samuel, and Repp 1983, Repp 1984). Given that no single factor can be identified as responsible for the Split Effect, though, several important possibilities remain unaddressed when considering the question of why we hear p (rather than silence, or t or k or glottal stop) when presented with s-[silence]-lit:

--Does the lexicon play a role? (cf. Miller, Dexter, and Pickard 1984, Chiappe, Chiappe, and Siegel 2002)
--Split is an English word, stlit and sklit aren't
--Frequency effects? Spl is a more common (word-initial) cluster than stl and skl
--Do phonotactics play a role?
--Spl is a possible (word-initial) cluster, stl and skl arent
--What is the exact range of acoustic variables involved?
--Most studies of the Split Effect have focused on properties of the s. Do the acoustic properties of l play any role?
--Ohala (in his discussion of the p/g gap) has claimed that silence is closest to the acoustic characteristics of [p]. This predicts that p will be the dominant percept in a wide range of contexts, regardles of the nature of adjacent segments. Does this prediction hold water?
--Does the quality of a following vowel influence the percept?

To investigate these questions we constructed and executed a number perceptual experiments involving minimal modifications to the paradigms employed by Dorman, Raphael and Liberman 1979, and Repp 1984, 1985.

Contexts tested included:

--s_l in different prosodic positions, and s_l from one prosodic position (e.g. intervocalic) inserted into a different prosodic position (e.g. word-initial)
--C1_C2 where C1[C]C2 is phonotactically impossible in English
--C1_C2 where inserting p would produce a nonword but inserting t or k would produce a real word, and each of the permutations of this scheme
--s_Vt, with V ranging over the entire English vowel inventory
--V_V

We report here on our preliminary findings, including:

--The Split Effect is robust; speakers are unable to suppress it even after a) becoming linguists and/or b) being made aware of the effect, unless (for some speakers) the resultant cluster profoundly violates sonority sequencing constraints.
--Pace Ohala, &p& is not the dominant percept for inserted silence in all contexts.
--&p& predominates in #s_lV, but &t& in Vs_lV
--the percept of &t& vs. &p& varies according to frontness of following vowel (in #s_V)
--Glottal stop is the dominant percept in some contexts
--There is no evidence that lexical frequency or cluster frequency are involved.

For further information, please contact czoll@MIT.EDU

MIT LING-LUNCH

Thursday, April 17, 2003 at 12:00, MIT E39-335 (conference room)
Adam Szczegielniak
Harvard University
"ACD is possible only in raising type relatives, evidence from Polish and Russian"

Abstract:

It will be demonstrated that in Polish and Russian relative clauses are formed via a Matching or Raising analysis depending on the type or relative marker used. Relative clauses with a complementizer type marker require a raising analysis and a relative clauses with a relative pronoun type marker require a matching analysis, with the exception of adjunct relatives where a raising analysis is possible. Evidence for this comes from contrasts in the ability to have appositive vs. restrictive interpretations, contrasts in the ability to have a degree reading, Condition-C effects, as well as idioms.

Examination of ACD effects in Polish and Russian shows that ACD is only possible in contexts when a raising derivation (Sauerland 1998) is available. Thus, ACD is possible only when the marker is a complementizer type one, or, in the case of the relative pronoun type marker, ACD is only possible with adjuncts.

I adopt a model where ACD is resolved via QR (May 1991). Scope effects discussed in Kennedy (1997), as well as WCO effects in Harley (2000), will be shown to hold in Polish and Russian to the same degree as they do in English. However, it will be argued that QR, unlike feature checking movement, takes place immediately when a quantifier expression is introduced into the derivation. Relative clauses generated via a raising analysis will have the quantifier expression/head noun introduced simultaneously with the relative. This allows the relative to be pipe piped together with the head noun via QR, and thus resolving ACD. In cases of a matching analysis, the relative is Late Inserted (Lebaux 1998) after QR applies to the head noun and ACD is not resolved.

It will be argued that this analysis holds for ACD in English too. This will be supported by examples of Idiomatic and expletive constructions (Pesetsky 2000) where it will be shown that ACD is blocked because a raising derivation is impossible. Furthermore, I will argue that the lack of Condition-C effects in ACD do not have to be a result of extraposition, as proposed by Fox (2000), but can be analyzed as a reflex of QR feeding A movement.


For more information, contact anevins@MIT.EDU.

HARVARD UNIVERSITY - GSAS Workshop in comparative syntax and linguistic theory

Friday, April 11, 2003 at 4:00 at Harvard University in Harvard Hall 201
Beth Levin
Stanford University
"Objecthood and Object Alternations"

Abstract:

   In a 1999 paper, "Objecthood: An Event Structure Perspective," I revisited some major challenges of objecthood, showing that they could be fruitfully explored in the context of recent work on the structure of verb meaning and the linguistic representation of events. In this talk, I describe the first steps in an investigation of the implications of this work for understanding the origins and properties of English object alternations. I will claim that object alternations arise with verbs whose roots are basically associated with simple event structures. Since, as I argue in the 1999 paper, principles of event structure-to-syntax mapping make no demands on the objects of such verbs, these verbs are open to more than one choice of object, assuming the appropriate licensing mechanisms are available. This possibility, in turn, gives rise to the phenomenon called "object alternations."

posted on http://www.fas.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/ling-cslt

MIT - Phonology Circle


Friday, April 11, 2003, at 1:00 PM, in 66-160

Andrés Pablo Salanova
MIT

Two examples of truncation in Mebengokre (Je)

Abstract:

In this talk, we describe two processes in the grammar of Mebengokre

(Je family, central Brazil) which are most insightfully analysed as consisting of morphological truncation. The first, third person inflection, consists in the dropping (or, in related languages, debuccalization or spirantization) of initial consonants of a certain class:

(1) jajkwa `mouth' --> ajkwa `his/her mouth'

djiri `put' --> iri `put it'

pyne `hold' --> une `hold it'

The particularities of third person inflection in this language, namely that it is in complementary distribution with full complement-NPs immediately contiguous to the inflecting head, force us to argue against truncation as a phonological process triggered at a prosodic juncture, an attractive alternative that unifies truncation with at least two other processes observed in similar contexts. The case for truncation being morphological comes from differences between it and the other two "juncture processes" in cases in which a potential undergoer is preceded by proclitic material that is not in a complement relation to it.

The second process to be examined is finite-stem formation, which involves the truncation of a final consonant from a participial form of a verb:

(2) mor --> mo `cut'

apej --> ape `finish'

rwyk --> ruw `descend'

Though the case for truncation in this case is not as clear, the main argument for it being that the final consonants in the participial forms are not predictable, we show some interesting insights on the phonological shape of finite stems that follow if we exploratorily adopt this analysis.

To sum up, we look at some languages related to Mebengokre and discuss the possible concatenative origins of the "truncation morpheme".

For further information, please contact czoll@MIT.EDU

Boston University

Cognitive and Neural Systems Colloquium

Friday, April 11, 2003, at 2:00 PM in Room B02, 677 Beacon Street, Boston, MA.

Refreshments after the lecture in Room B01.
Peter Schiller
Department of Brain and Cognitive Sciences,
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
"Look and see:  How the brain does it"
Abstract:

Not available at this time.

For further information, contact Susanne Daley, 617-353-7857, sdaley@cns.bu.edu.
 

UMass, Amherst: Linguistics Colloquium

Friday, April 11, 2003 at 3:30PMa in Machmer W-24 , followed by a reception in the Department,
Bruce Hayes
'Some Inductive Methods for Phonological Learning"

Abstract

See the Web site.

For futher information, contact Minjoo Kim or check out the Web site.

MIT LING-LUNCH

Thursday, April 10, 2003 at 12:00, MIT E39-335 (conference room)
Rajesh Bhatt
University of Texas/MIT
TBA

Abstract:

   Not available at this time.

For more information, contact anevins@MIT.EDU.

MIT - Phonology Circle


Friday, April 4, 2003, at 1:00 PM, in 66-160

Bert Vaux
Harvard University

TBA

Abstract:

TBA

For further information, please contact czoll@MIT.EDU

Boston University

Cognitive and Neural Systems Colloquium

Friday, April 4, 2003, at 2:00 PM in Room B02, 677 Beacon Street, Boston, MA.

Refreshments after the lecture in Room B01.
Steven Greenberg
Computer Science Institute, University of California at Berkeley
"Pronunciation variation is key to understanding spoken language"
Abstract:

Not available at this time.

For further information, contact Susanne Daley, 617-353-7857, sdaley@cns.bu.edu.
 

MIT Linguistics Colloquium

Friday, April 4, 2003, from 3:30 to 5:00 p.m. in Room E51-395 at MIT.
Guglielmo Cinque

This talk has been cancelled.

For more information, contact Pranav Anand or Marketa Ceplova.

 

UMass, Amherst: Linguistics Colloquium

Friday, April 4, 2003 at 3:30PMa in Machmer W-24 , followed by a reception in the Department,
Uli Sauerland
"Universal Quantification in Language Acquisition and Disorder"

Abstract

See the Web site.

For futher information, contact Minjoo Kim or check out the Web site.

MIT LING-LUNCH

Thursday, April 3, 2003 at 12:30, MIT E39-335 (conference room)
Justin Fitzpatrick
MIT
"Deletion Through Movement"

Abstract:

I describe and analyze here a phenomenon of question truncation that I call aux-drop. Aux-drop questions are argued to differ minimally from full questions in that the inverted auxiliary, though present early in the derivation, is interpreted neither phonologically nor semantically. This analysis finds a natural place in a theory in which head movement is syntactic (not purely phonological) and spell-out is cyclic. The analysis explains the emergence of the factative effect-a phenomenon initially identified in "bare sentences" in, e.g., Haitian and Fon Gbe-in an obscure corner of certain languages that normally require full tense specification in finite clauses, as well as the possibility of morphological mismatch in aux-drop questions.
 

For more information, contact anevins@MIT.EDU.

Boston University

Cognitive and Neural Systems Colloquium

Friday, March 28, 2003, at 2:00 PM in Room B02, 677 Beacon Street, Boston, MA.

Refreshments after the lecture in Room B01.
Patrick Cavanagh
Department of Psychology, Harvard University
"The language of vision"
Abstract:

Not available at this time.

For further information, contact Susanne Daley, 617-353-7857, sdaley@cns.bu.edu.
 

Boston University

Applied Linguistics Speaking Series

Wednesday, March 26, 2003, at 7:00 PM; CAS 318
Victor Manfredi
 "Tense parameters and serial verbs"

(a complete draft of this paper is available on request)
Abstract:

The Benue-Kwa group of Niger-Congo divides according to three properties which, remarkably enough, are correlated. First, Bamgbos.e (1974) notes a ban on realizing aspectually unrelated sequences of events within a single finite clause in Yoruba; the same restriction holds in Nupe (Stewart et al. 2001) and Gbe (da Cruz 1997; Aboh 2002), but not in Akan, E.do or Igbo. The banned sentences, which Christaller called "accidental combinations" (1875, 144), are just a subset of "covert coordinations" as defined by Stewart (2001, 71). Taken at face value, the ban might be a "semantic parameter" à la Chierchia (1995) but it turns out to track a second property, which is morpho-phonological. The limited freedom of clausemate events in Yoruba, Nupe and Gbe (hereafter, YNG) goes along with the fact in those languages that finite inflection takes the form of proclitics on the predicate root, or other types of auxes. In Akan, E.do and Igbo (AEI) by contrast, finite inflection overtly marks every eventive predicate head, serialized or otherwise, as a suffix and/or a nonlexical tone pattern. Simplex, tensed finite predicates also reveal a third difference, interpretive in nature: in YNG they are ambiguous between simple past (compatible with a temporal adverb like yesterday) and present perfect (compatible with now), but in AEI the past and present perfect are expressed through distinct inflectional patterns.

A fourth property is relevant to the preceding three, but unlike them it groups AEI and YNG together versus Indo-European. Many Benue-Kwa roots which are classified as 'verbs' on inflectional grounds, e.g. by Bamgbos.e (1972) and U.walaaka (1983), are lexicalized in Indo-European as secondary predicates: adverbs, predicate adjectives and prepositions (Larson 1991) or as relational nouns. Similarly, roots in both AEI and YNG are radically underspecified with respect to certain lexical classifications in Indo-European, such as the Italian distinction between unaccusative and transitive/unergative codings of event structure (Burzio 1981).

The foregoing points motivate a theory of serial tensemarking. Assuming that quantized events must be temporally anchored (Enç 1987; Verkuyl 1993), the correlation in AEI of freely sequential serial events with the exclusion in those same languages of present perfect readings for finite, simplex eventive predicates, follows from two independent claims about inflection:

(i) In AEI, but not in YNG, a finite eventive predicate occupies an aspectual or polarity-related position in the functional superstructure of the clause, a position which hosts overt inflection.

(ii) Although the inflection mentioned in (i) has consequences for tense construal, it is below T, because the morphology in question lacks temporal denotation in the strict sense (unlike English -ed).

On the phonetic side, (i) is supported by overt inflection of finite predicates in AEI via suffixation and prosody&emdash;absent in YNG. The Gbe progressive is not a counterexample because its finite component is the copula-like aux, not the aspectual suffix on the main predicate (Manfredi 1997); neither is the suffixed Ewe habitual, because it is generic i.e. atemporal (Westermann 1930, 75; Warburton et al. 1968, 72). As to interpretation, (i) is supported by the restricted temporal reference of finite eventive predicates in AEI versus YNG, assuming an economy-based Y-model where structurally 'higher' means 'less ambiguous'. In AEI, the position of the finite verb is as high as Aspect because its suffixes track the features [count] and [event] (= Verkuyl's [SQA] and [ADD TO]). In E.do for example an object agreement suffix inside inflection registers the cardinality of the lowest referential argument (Stewart 1997). (ii) restates the idea that "the absence of V-to-I movement sets serializing languages apart from non-serializing languages which have V-to-I movement in overt syntax or at LF" (Muysken & Veenstra 2002, 25). Assuming that "morphological tense categorially selects (c-selects) V" (Déchaine 1993, 297), (ii) predicts the mismatch in Benue-Kwa between the morphosyntactic (i.e. PF-related) category 'verb' and the lexical category 'big V' (distinct from Adv, Adj, P and N). Throughout Indo-European, by contrast, at least the simple past is a "true tense", and all primary predicates must therefore contain a 'big' VP.

This theory denies the view of grammaticalization theorists (Hyman 1971; Lord 1973, 1975; Givón 1975) that serial constructions are missing in Igbo; unanimously rejected by Igbo specialists (Winston 1973; Nwachukwu 1976b; Emenanjno. 1981; U.walaaka 1982; Williamson 1982; Ihio.nu. 1988) it has been revived by Stewart (2001), cf. Baker & Stewart (1999, 2002). Other corrolaries can be listed. Terminological separation of serial verbs from covert coordination is circular. Yoruba "splitting verbs" (Awobuluyi 1969) correspond to two kinds of Igbo "verb-verb compounds", and linear order in such compounds doesn't require special movement principles (Collins 2002). Adverb tests for verb raising à la Pollock (1989) are invalid in Benue-Kwa for "adverbs" which are either auxiliary verbs or "modifying" serial predicates (Bamgbos.e 1973). To explicate the above, I begin by presenting Bamgbos.e's restriction in terms of Igbo versus Yoruba (§2), and dismissing two previous analyses (§3), before testing an alternative across all six languages (§4) and beyond Benue-Kwa (§5). §6 concludes.

For more information, contact linguist@bu.edu.
 

HARVARD UNIVERSITY - GSAS Colloquium Series

Friday, March 21, 2003 at 4:00 at Harvard University in Boylston 110
Paul Hagstrom
Boston University
"Question particles on the move"

Abstract:

   Languages that do not move question words on the surface quite frequently mark questions with a question particle, often found at the periphery of the clause. We will start by taking Japanese questions as the canonical example, where a question particle "ka" appears clause-finally in questions. While word order in Japanese is generally quite free, there are certain restrictions that occur in question forms: Indefinite pronouns such as "dareka" 'someone' and disjunctions such as "John-ka Bill" 'John or Bill' cannot comfortably appear in a position that would be structurally between the question word and the position of the question particle. These "intervention" effects, an interesting interaction with islands, the availability of "pair-list" readings, and comparison to historically earlier Japanese lead to the hypothesis that the question particle undergoes movement: Specifically, the question particle is analyzed as forming a constituent with the wh-word initially, but then moves overtly to the position we see it in on the surface (in Japanese). Other languages reveal apparent confirmation and shed light on other aspects of wh-question formation (primarily we will look at Sinhala, Okinawan, and Navajo, in addition to Japanese and Premodern Japanese), as well as raise questions about the relations between the pieces of morphology involved in question forms, indefinites, and disjunction.

posted on http://www.fas.harvard.edu/mailman/listinfo/ling-cslt

MIT LING-LUNCH

Thursday, March 20, 2003 at 12:00, MIT E39-335 (conference room)
Maria Cristina Cuervo
MIT
"Really Affected Arguments: Datives in Causatives & Inchoatives"

Abstract:

In many languages, dative arguments can appear with causative and inchoative verbs. In Spanish, dative DPs that combine with causative verbs (1a) (e.g. romper 'break', abrir 'open', quemar 'burn') look exactly like datives in double object constructions (DOC, (1b)): they are preceded by a, they are doubled by a dative clitic, they follow the accusative object in normal (wide focus) word order. I show that in spite of appearances, dative with causatives can, and should, be distinguished both semantically and structurally from datives in DOC, and from benefactive high applicatives.

(1)a. Emilio le rompio la radio a Carolina
        Emilio CL.DAT broke the radio Carolina.DAT
        'Emilio broke the radio on Carolina' (Lit. 'Emilio broke Carolina the radio')

    b. Pablo le mando un diccionario a Gabi
       Pablo CL.DAT sent a dictionary Gabi.DAT
       'Pablo sent Gabi a dictionary'

Building on work on causative and inchoative predicates by Levin 1999 and Nash 2002 (among others), and Pylkkanen's analysis of DOC as low applicatives, I develop an analysis of dative arguments with causative and inchoatives as affected arguments. Affectedness is defined structurally, as the interpretation of arguments that participate in two events (the lower of which is a resulting state). This approach makes predictions for the availability and interpretation of datives in other 'causative' configurations that embed a non-verbal small clause-like predication phrase, e.g. resultatives, PPs, particles.

The analysis is part of a general theory (under construction) of the syntax and semantics of datives as applied arguments, that builds on the distinction between low and high applicatives (Pylkkanen 2002) and the properties of the event structures in which datives are licensed.

Levin, B. 1999. "Objecthood: An event structure perspective". In CLS 35, volume 1: The Main Session.

Nash, L. 2002. "Entre la flexion et le verbe: syntaxe, morphologie, acquisition" Document de synthese pour l'habilitation, Univ. de Paris 7.

Pylkkanen, L. 2002. "Introducing Arguments". Doctoral dissertation, MIT.

For more information, contact anevins@MIT.EDU.

MIT - Phonology Circle


Friday, March 14, 2003, at 1:00 PM, in 66-160

David Harrison
NYU

"Pattern and Probability in Vowel Harmony"

Abstract:

Vowel harmony, a pattern of co-occurrence among natural classes of vowel phonemes, plays a major role in the organization of sound systems in Uralic-Altaic (and especially Turkic) languages. Based on new empirical data from nine Turkic languages, we develop a probability-based model of harmony as pattern pervasiveness. We show how speakers' behavior in applying harmony relates to the pervasiveness of the pattern as compared to the random probability of that pattern. Probability allows us to determine a threshold below which speakers will no longer perceive a pattern, and it ceases to be productive. The model thus fits both descriptively and predictively with the documented evolution of harmony in Altaic (Turkic) languages.

For further information, please contact czoll@MIT.EDU

 

MIT LING-LUNCH

Thursday, March 13, 2003 at 12:00, MIT E39-335 (conference room)
Michela Ippolito
"Quantification over times in Counterfactuals"

Abstract:

   Not available at this time.

For more information, contact anevins@MIT.EDU.

MIT - Phonology Circle


Friday, March 7, 2003, at 1:00 PM, in 66-160

Shabnam Shademan
UCLA

"Epenthetic Vowel Harmony in Farsi"

Abstract:

Epenthesis in Farsi arises in loanwords. Farsi bans branching onsets, and foreign loans are modified to conform to this phonological requirement by means of vowel epenthesis. The epenthetic vowel is either [e], or a copy of the following vowel.

I analyze vowel copy epenthesis as the result of autosegmental spreading from the following vowel. The constraints that prevent certain vocalic features from associating with particular consonant types can prevent vowel-to-vowel spreading, and, hence, allow the default epenthetic vowel [e] to surface. The details of these constraints depend on the compatibility of the consonant features and the vocalic features that are spreading. Three main factors predict this compatibility. First, the consonant's participation in spreading depends on the consonant's place of articulation and the vocalic features that are spreading (e.g., coronal consonants are compatible with front vowels). Second, the rounded vowels must be distinguished from each other based on their degree of rounding, which affects their compatibility with consonant features. Third, a consonant's participation is influenced by its duration.

This talk will show that the pattern of split epenthesis in Farsi supports two main theoretical claims:

(1) intervening consonants participate in vowel-to-vowel spreading; and

(2) phonological processes can be sensitive to non-contrastive phonetic properties.

For further information, please contact czoll@MIT.EDU

MIT Linguistics Colloquium

Friday, March 7, 2003, from 3:30 to 5:00 p.m. in Room E56-270 MIT.
Lisa Selkirk, University of Massachusetts at Amherst
"Focus Prosody: Interface Economy and Surface Enhancement"

Abstract:

This paper addresses three related issues:  

1.  The nature of Focus marking in PF, the surface syntactic representation which interfaces with SPR, the phonological representation of the sentence. Phonological patterns motivate two major types of Focus, presentational (newness) Focus (= small focus)  and contrastive (alternatives) Focus (= big FOCUS).  These two major types of Focus only partially overlap in their phonological and phonetic properties: the properties of small focus are a subset of the properties of big FOCUS.   Thus the phonological patterning supports the notion that a corresponding featural distinction must be made between these Focus types in PF, and in LF, where the semantics must derive the corresponding differences in meaning and conditions of use.

2. The general character of the Focus-phonology interface .  This paper provides support for the position of Truckenbrodt (1995) according to which (i) a universal theory of the Focus-phonology relation is based only on constraints relating Focus in the PF, the interface syntactic representation,  to prosodic prominence (stress) in SPR, the interface phonological representation,  and (ii) the relations of Focus to other phonological properties like pitch accenting and prosodic phrasing are indirect, the consequence of what are arguably markedness-determined enhancements  of that prominence in the surface phonology.  A corollary of this Focus-Prominence theory of the interface is that Focus projection (Selkirk 1984, 1995) is eliminated as a syntactic/semantic phenomenon.  This is shown to be advantageous:  the distribution of pitch accents characterized by the theory of Focus projection is obtained through the interaction of the Focus-prominence constraints on the interface and markedness constraints on the relation between (stress prominence) and tonal accent.

3. The specific nature of the Focus-Prominence interface constraints themselves.  The interface constraints relating Focus to prosodic structural prominence are argued to be paradigmatic in character, calling for a constituent in PF with a particular type of Focus to correspond to a terminal string of SPR containing a particular level of prosodic prominence in the prosodic hierarchy:
    

These distinct levels of prominence are argued to be the source of the properties that characterize and distinguish between these Focus types in the phonology and phonetics of the sentence.

For more information, contact Marketa Ceplova.

MIT LING-LUNCH

Thursday, March 6, 2003 at 12:00, MIT E39-335 (conference room)
William Snyder
University of Connecticut
On the nature of syntactic variation: Evidence from acquisition

Abstract:

  For research on children's acquisition of syntax, a major theoretical advance was the idea of "parameters" -- points of substantive but tightly constrained variation within an otherwise invariant computational system. In a parametric framework, children's acquisition of syntax reduces primarily to identifying the correct parametric values for the target language.

Yet, in recent years syntacticians have sought to minimize any role of substantive parameters, and have worked towards the ideal of a single, invariant computational component for human language. A leading strategy has been to reduce apparent variation in syntax to variation in the lexical entries for functional heads.

From an acquisitional perspective, the following questions are central: What points of variation in fact exist in the human language faculty? How does the child determine the correct values? And how does this process relate to the observable time-course of child language development? In this talk I will present several case-studies from my own acquisition research, and discuss how these studies might bear on larger questions for the nature of syntactic variation.

For more information, contact anevins@MIT.EDU.

MIT Linguistics Colloquium

Friday, February 28, 2003, from 3:30 to 5:00 p.m. in Room E51-395 at MIT.
Philippe Schlenker, UCLA
"A Semantic (Re-)Interpretation of Binding Theory"

Abstract:

Binding Theory is traditionally considered a part of syntax, in the sense that some derivations that would otherwise be interpretable are ruled out by purely formal principles. Thus 'John(i) likes him(i)' would in standard semantic theories yield a perfectly acceptable interpretation; it is only because of Condition B that the sentence is deviant on its coreferential reading. We will explore an alternative in which some binding-theoretic principles (esp. Condition C, Condition B and a modified version of the Locality of Variable Binding argued for in Fox 2000 and Büring 2002) follow directly from the interpretive procedure (albeit a somewhat non-standard one). In a nutshell, these principles are taken to reflect the way in which sequences of evaluation (=assignment functions) are constructed in the course of the interpretation of a sentence. The bulk of the work is done by a principle of Non-redundancy, which prevents any given object from appearing in different positions of any given sequence.

For more information, contact Pranav Anand or Marketa Ceplova.

UMass, Amherst: Linguistics Colloquium

Friday, February 21, 2003 at 3:30PMa in Machmer W-24 , followed by a reception in the Department,
Peter Ladefoged
"Collecting butterflies and speech sounds: The nature of phonetic categories"

Abstract

When classifying butterflies and other species, Linnaeus thought he was revealing the pattern of Nature and thus getting a glimpse of the mind of God. Nevertheless his classification of natural phenomena was similar to that produced by Darwin when outlining evolution. The IPA classification of speech sounds aims to provide symbols for all linguistically relevant sounds in a Linnaean style. The symbols represent intersections of categories for, e.g. the place, manner and voicing of possible sounds. Nevertheless the IPA classification has similarities to the Chomsky-Halle feature system, which aims to reveal the human mind. Another approach to classifying speech sounds is to consider a language as a social institution, an ever-changing property of a society, rather than an abstraction in a speaker's mind. This leads to a similar but slightly different set of categories for describing sounds, one that reflects both the auditory and articulatory constraints on a society's language. As a result of these dual constraints, the hierarchy of phonological features cannot be like Linnaean or Darwinian classifications, always branching from a single higher node. In addition, as Firth thought, it may be impossible to set up a universal system. The set of classificatory devices can never be fully known. Languages die and appear, and do not fall into systems where everything hangs together.

For futher information, contact Minjoo Kim or check out the Web site.

Boston University

Cognitive and Neural Systems Colloquium

Friday, February 21, 2003, at 2:00 PM in Room B02, 677 Beacon Street, Boston, MA.

Refreshments after the lecture in Room B01.
Andrew King
Laboratory of Physiology, University of Oxford
"How plastic is spatial hearing?"
Abstract:

Not available at this time.

For further information, contact Susanne Daley, 617-353-7857, sdaley@cns.bu.edu.
 

MIT LING-LUNCH

Thursday, February 20, 2003 at 12:00, MIT E39-335 (conference room)
TBA
TBA

Abstract:

   Not available at this time.

For more information, contact anevins@MIT.EDU.

UMass, Amherst: Linguistics Colloquium

Thursday, February 20, 2003 at 4:00PM (Campus Center Auditorium)

Freeman Lecture
Peter Ladefoged
"Saving endangered languages"

Abstract

Not available at this time.

For futher information, contact Minjoo Kim or check out the Web site.

MIT Linguistics Colloquium

Friday, February 14, 2003, from 3:30 to 5:00 p.m. in Room E51-335 at MIT.
Rolf Noyer
University of Pennsylvania
"Distributed Morphology and the Early Slavic Verb"

Abstract:

 The Old Church Slavonic and Old Russian verb has been extensively studied, and the essential facts concerning its phonology and morphology have been established in large part (Lunt 2001). The present paper offers several refinements of the received picture from the perspective of Distributed Morphology (Halle & Marantz 1993) and recent work deriving complex verb inflection from syntactic structure (Oltra-Massuet 2000, Arregi 2001). Particular attention will be given to the derivation of aspect and its interaction with imperfect and aorist tense morphology.

For more information, contact Pranav Anand or Marketa Ceplova.

UMass, Amherst: Linguistics Colloquium

February 14, 2003 at 3:30PMa in Machmer W-24 , followed by a reception in the Department,
Sigrid Beck
"A Semantic explanation for intervention effects"

Abstract

See the Web site.

For futher information, contact Minjoo Kim or check out the Web site.

UMass, Amherst: Linguistics Seminar

February 13, 2003 at 4:00 in Bartlett 206.
Sigrid Beck
"Focus on 'again'"

Abstract

See the Web site.

For futher information, contact Minjoo Kim or check out the Web site.

MIT LING-LUNCH

Thursday, February 13, 2003 at 12:00, MIT E39-335 (conference room)
Martha McGinnis
U. Calgary and MIT
"Idiomatic evidence for the distinctness of causatives and inchoatives"

Abstract:

   There are two main theories of the internal structure of causative verbs. One view holds that a causative verb contains an inchoative verb as well as an additional causative element, which thematically licenses an additional syntactic argument (1). The other view holds that the causative and the inchoative are distinct: the two share the same lexical root, but each contains a different functional head, one causative and the other inchoative (2). In this talk, I will revisit a discussion in Levin and Rappaport-Hovav 1995 which sheds an interesting new light on this issue.

(1) a. The door opened: [INCH [open]] . .

b. Mary opened the door: [CAUS [INCH [open]]]

(2) a. The door opened: [INCH [open]] . .

b. Mary opened the door: [CAUS [open]]

   Levin and Rappaport-Hovav note that certain idiosyncratic causatives have no inchoative counterpart. They propose that in general, inchoatives are more restrictive than causatives: if an inchoative can combine with an idiosyncratic Theme, then so can its causative counterpart, but not vice versa. I will argue that, if correct, Levin and Rappaport-Hovav's generalization supports the approach in (1), where the causative contains the inchoative structure. However, I will also demonstrate that the generalization is false: there are idiosyncratic inchoatives that lack a causative counterpart. The fact that some idioms are restricted to causatives, while others are restricted to inchoatives, lends new support to the view that the two derivations are distinct.

Levin, Beth, & Malka Rappaport-Hovav. 1995. Unaccusativity: At the Syntax-Lexical Semantics Interface. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

For more information, contact anevins@MIT.EDU.

UMass, Amherst: Linguistics Seminar

February 11, 2003 aat 4:00 in Bartlett 206.
Chris Potts
"Expressive content: composition and denotation"

Abstract

See the Web site.

For futher information, contact Minjoo Kim or check out the Web site.

UMass, Amherst: Linguistics Colloquium

February 10, 2003 at 3:30 in Machmer W-26.
Chris Potts
"Conventional implicatures, a distinguished class of meanings"

Abstract

See the Web site.

For futher information, contact Minjoo Kim or check out the Web site.

UMass, Amherst: Linguistics Colloquium

February 7, 2003 at 3:30 in Machmer W-26.
Chris Kennedy
"Towards a grammar of vagueness"

Abstract

See the Web site.

For futher information, contact Minjoo Kim or check out the Web site.

UMass, Amherst: Linguistics Seminar

February 6, 2003 at 4:00 in Bartlett 206.
Chris Kennedy
"Argument contained ellipsis and the interpretation of variable binding"

Abstract

See the Web site.

For futher information, contact Minjoo Kim or check out the Web site.

Boston University

The undergraduate Linguistics Society (BULA), the Italian Students Association, and the German Club present...

Wednesday, February 5, 2003, at 7:00 PM in CAS room 313.

 

"Found in Translation":
Insights on Translation and Interpretation
Wondering what to do with your language degree? Ever thought about being a translator? Come meet professional translators and interpreters from fields including textual translation and legal, medical, and social services interpreting. Representing a variety of languages, spoken and signed, panelists will present students with a taste of the work they do and the important role it plays in a diverse society.

Speakers include Boston University professors and translators Zrinka Stahuljak and Will Waters, American Sign Language interpreter (and Ph.D. student) Robert G. Lee, medical interpreter Grace Peters from Children's Hospital, legal interpreter Dean Stevens, and social and legal services translator Lawrence Thomases of Centro Presente in Cambridge.

ASL/English interpreters will be present and refreshments will be provided.

   

For more information, contact bula@louis-xiv.bu.edu.
 

MIT : IAP workshop on Markedness and the Lexicon

Friday, January 24 - Saturday, January 25, 2003
MIT Building 66, room 110
 

For information, and (evolving) schedule information, see:

http://web.mit.edu/steriade/www/schedule_2.html


For more information, contact steriade@mit.edu.


Go to current linguistic events

Go to linguistics events from 2002

Go to linguistics events from 2001

Go to linguistics events from 2000

Go to linguistics events from 1999

Go to linguistics events from 1998
Back to general linguistics links
Back to Linguistics home page
Back to MFLL home page