1 / 34

Reference to individuals in natural language

Reference to individuals in natural language. Henri ëtte de Swart Barcelona, May 2005. What is this course about? . Reference to individuals in natural language What is reference? Why study reference to individuals in natural language? Across languages?

johana
Download Presentation

Reference to individuals in natural language

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Reference to individuals in natural language Henriëtte de Swart Barcelona, May 2005

  2. What is this course about? • Reference to individuals in natural language • What is reference? • Why study reference to individuals in natural language? Across languages? • Relevance for linguistics? For cognitive science?

  3. Semantics • Semantics: study of meaning expressed by elements of a language or combinations thereof. • What is meaning? • What is language?

  4. What is meaning? • The red light means that you cannot go in. • {a,b,c} means ‘the set consisting of the elements a, b, and c.’ • The French word “chien” means ‘dog.’ • Do you know the meaning of the word hypochondriac? • To denote, to be described or defined as, sense, significance, acceptation, denotation.

  5. Not our job.. • No deeper meaning or inner significance. • What is the meaning of life? • No intentions, purposes, etc. • What do you mean by that look? • No natural meaning. • Those clouds mean rain.

  6. Semantics in linguistic theory • Natural language as a system of communication. • Function: transfer of information. • Communication implies speaker and hearer.

  7. Speaker-hearer speaker hearer Intend  Phrase  Speak Comprehend  Understand  Hear Speech sound

  8. Language-cognition-world language cognition world

  9. Concepts and denotations language concepts denotations cognition world

  10. Truth conditional and conceptual semantics language cognition world Truth-conditional semantics Conceptual semantics

  11. Beyond words… • Lexical semantics: meaning of words. • Beyond words: meaning of constituents, sentences, even discourses. • Relevance of structure: • ‘John hit Peter’  ‘Peter hit John’ • Word order  Subject-Object relation  Agent-Patient relation.

  12. Compositionality • Principle of Compositionality of meaning: the meaning of a complex whole is a function of the meaning of the composing parts, and the way in which they are put together. • Lexical and structural information jointly determine the meaning of constituents and sentences.

  13. Variation across languages • Natural languages vary: lexicon, sounds, syntactic structure. • Generative linguistics: universal grammar (innate) and parametrisation. • Optimality theory (OT): universal constraints (innate/learnt) and different orders of constraints.

  14. Pro-drop • Some languages allow ‘empty’ subjects (e.g. Italian), others don’t (e.g. English). • Piove [Italiaans] • It is raining [English] • Pro-drop parameter: on or off (child has to learn the right setting). Assumes empty categories in linguistic representations.

  15. Competition in OT: ‘soft constraints’ • Subject constraint: ‘Every sentence has a subject.’ • Meaning constraint: ‘Every word in the sentence must be meaningful.’ • Prince & Smolensky (1997): relative weight of constraints determines English vs. Italian. • English: Subject C >> Meaning C • Italian : Meaning C >> Subject C.

  16.  Typology in OT pro-drop no pro-drop

  17. Variation in meaning • Basic assumption: human cognition is universal. • Knowledge of first-order logic or equivalent leads to similar claims about entailments and other inference relations. • Prediction: semantics is always universal. • No variation in meaning?????

  18. Locus of semantic variation • Semantic variation arises: • (i) in the distribution of labor between forms and meanings. • (ii) at the syntax-semantics interface. • (iii) at the semantics-pragmatics interface.

  19. Semantic Variation I • Tense and aspect. E.g. English Progressive vs. French Simple Present tense. • John is eating an apple • #John eats an apple/ John bikes to school. • Jean est en train de manger une pomme. • Jean mange une pomme/Jean va à l’école en vélo.

  20. Perfect Tenses • ‘Universal’ Perfect; for or since • Mary has lived in London for three years (now). • Marie a vécu à Londres pendant trois ans (#maintenant). • Marie vit à Londres depuis trois ans. • Mary lives in London since three years.

  21. Perfect tenses in discourse • French uses Passé Composé to tell a story (e.g. Camus); English does not; Dutch does sometimes. • Aujourd’hui, maman est morte (PC). Ou peut-être hier, je ne sais pas (PR). J’ai reçu un télégramme de l’asile (PC) (…). Mother died today (SP). Or maybe yesterday, I don’t know (PR). I had a telegram from the home (SP): (...). Vandaag is moeder gestorven (VTT). Of misschien gisteren, ik weet het niet (OTT). Ik ontving een telegram uit het gesticht (OVT): (...)

  22. Questions about tense/aspect • Questions about tense and aspect in cross-linguistic semantics. • What forms are available in a language? • How are truth-conditional meanings distributed over available forms? • Are certain meanings only available as ‘hidden’ aspectual shifts (coercion)? • How are the forms used in discourse (dynamic semantics, pragmatics)?

  23. Semantic variation II • Meaning of determiners. E.g. Dutch Sommige vs. English some. • Some flowers grew behind the shed. • #Sommige bloemen groeiden achter de schuur. • ‘Some do, others don’t’

  24. Bare plurals • English bare plurals: existential or generic. • Dogs were playing in the garden.  • Dogs like to play. Gen • Bare plurals in Romance: existential, not generic.

  25. Italian • Elefanti di colore bianco hanno creato in passato grande curiosità. • Elephants of color white have raised in the past great curiosity. • *Ucelli di zone paludose sono intelligenti. • Birds of the marshlands are intelligent. • Gli ucelli di zone paludose sono intelligenti.

  26. French • No bare plurals, but indefinite plurals. • Only existential, not generic (like Italian). • Des enfants jouaient dans la rue. • Indef-pl children were playing in the street. • *Des enfants aiment le chocolat. • Indef-pl children like chocolate. • Les enfants aiment le chocolat.

  27. Incorporation • Incorporation in West Greenlandic, Hindi, Hungarian, etc, not in English, Romance: direct relation between verb and object. • Arnajarq eqalut-tur-p-u-q. [WG] A.abs salmon-eat-Ind-[-tr]-3sg. ‘Arnajaraq eats salmon/is a salmon-eater.’

  28. Questions about bare plurals • How are bare plurals related to other NPs/DPs (scope, anaphora, quantificational force, referential force, incorporation). • How are bare plurals related to bare singulars? To bare mass nouns? To indefinite plurals as in French? • If generic reference is strongly related to ‘bareness’, why do Romance bare plurals not allow generic readings?

  29. Semantic Variation III • “Despite the simplicity of the one-place connective of propositional logic (p is true if and only if p is not true) and of the laws of inference in which it participates (e.g. the Law of Double Negation: from p infer p, and vice versa), the form and function of negative statements in ordinary language are far from simple and transparent.” Horn (1989)

  30. Negative quantifiers • ‘Split’ scope in Germanic languages. • Iedereen is geen genie. Dutch • Everyone is no genius (split: ) • Jeder Arzt hat kein Auto. • Every doctor has no car.

  31. ‘Split’ scope with modals. • Ze hoeven geen verpleegkundigen te ontslaan. • They need no nurses to fire  • Hanna sucht kein Buch • De re: there is no book that Hanna is looking for. • De dicto: the object of H’s quest is not a book. • ‘split’: it is not the case that what H. is looking for is a book.

  32. Double Negation and Negative Concord • Multiple negations: DN and NC • Nobody said nothing. (Eng) xy • Niemand zei niets. (Dutch) xy • Nadie miraba a nadie. (Spa) xy • Nessuno ha parlato con nessuno. (Ital) xy • Personne n’a rien dit. (Fr) ambiguous

  33. Questions about DN and NC • Negative Concord raises problems for the principle of compositionality of meaning: two negative expressions, but only one semantic negation. • How are double negation and negative concord languages related? (typology of negation).

  34. Aims of this course • Learn semantic tools to address reference to individuals in natural language: type theory, lambda abstraction, type shift, DRT. • Learn to use these tools to address questions about reference to individuals in a particular language/ in a cross-linguistic perspective. • Enjoy doing natural language semantics!

More Related