vers le site de l'ENS
Lien vers l'accueil
lancer la recherche

» Conférences d’après mars 2011 : nouveau site


EALing 2008

Organisé par : Dominique Sportiche (ENS / UCLA)

Le Département d’études cognitives de l’École normale supérieure de Paris organise sa sixième école internationale d’automne en linguistique (EALing 2008), avec le soutien de la Fondation de l’École normale supérieure et de l’École doctorale Cognition, langage, interaction de l’université Paris VIII.
Cette école interdisciplinaire se donne comme objectif de présenter certains aspects de la théorie linguistique formelle et quelques approches en sciences cognitives fondées sur des modèles de grammaire issus d’une telle théorie. Son contenu varie d’année en année mais inclut généralement :
– des introductions générales à la recherche contemporaine en linguistique,
– des cours intensifs d’introduction à quelques domaines centraux de la théorie linguistique,
– des séminaires et conférences relatifs aux sujets de recherches en cours,
– des séminaires de discussion sur les rapports entre les recherches sur la théorie de la grammaire et des domaines connexes (linguistique computationnelle, neuro-imagerie, neuro-linguistique, psycho-linguistique).

Ressources en ligne

  • Implicatures (le 16 septembre 2008) — Bart Geurts et Nausicaa Pouscoulous
    Program: Recently, so-called quantity implicatures have received considerable attention in the semantic and pragmatic literature. Prototypical instances of such implicatures arise when the speaker uses a relatively weak scalar expression, like "some", where a stronger one might have been employed. Thus, according to the standard pragmatic story, "Some of the kangaroos are sick" conveys, inter alia, that not all the kangaroos are sick, and this is not as part of the meaning of "some" but rather because the speaker should have said that all the kangaroos are sick, if that is what he believed to be the case. One of the issues in the recent literature is whether this standard story is on the right track, in the first place, or whether a radically different, semantic treatment is called for. Other, and related, issues concern the interpretation of scalar expressions in embedded positions, free choice permission, the acquisition of scalar terms, and how adults process these expressions.
    1/ September 16, 2008 at 9:10 am,
    2/ September 17, 2008 at 9:10 am,
    3/ September 18, 2008 at 9:10 am,
    4/ September 19, 2008 at 9:10 am.

  • Order, Structure, Derivation (le 16 septembre 2008) — Klaus Abels
    Program: In this course I will discuss the relation between theories of linear order, hierarchical structure, and the structure of syntactic derivations. In particular, I will discuss how a generalized version of the constraint against improper movement generates correct expectations about possible and impossible linear orders. I will discuss the relation between the hierarchy of functional projections within the clause and the generalized constraint on improper movement. I also discuss the possibility of reducing one to the other or both to the theory of locality.
    1/ September 16, 2008 at 10:40 am,
    2/ September 17, 2008 at 10:40 am,
    3/ September 18, 2008 at 10:40 am,
    4/ September 19, 2008 at 10:40 am.
    Requisites: The course is an advanced course in syntax.
  • On the Syntax and Semantics of Imperatives (le 16 septembre 2008) — Sabine Iatridou
    We will be investigating the type of sentences called imperatives, which can be used as commands and permissions. The lectures will contain a brief overview of the most frequented research areas in the existing syntactic and semantic literature and will focus on certain open questions. This course touches on verbal morphosyntax, clausal structure, negation, modals, mood, performatives, apparent mismatches between syntactic form and semantic interpretation.
    1/ September 16, 2008 at 1:30 pm,
    2/ September 17, 2008 at 1:30 pm,
    3/ September 18, 2008 at 1:30 pm,
    4/ September 19, 2008 at 1:30 pm.
    Requisites: Basic knowledge in syntax and semantics.
  • The New Presupposition Debate (le 17 septembre 2008) — Philippe Schlenker
    Program: For the last 30 years, dynamic semantics has dominated research on presupposition computation. The dynamic framework was criticized from the start, however, because it is so expressive that it can stipulate in the lexical entries of its operators the data it was supposed to explain in the first place. Several new approaches seek to address this problem of explanatory depth. We will provide a brief survey of a subset of those.
    1/ September 17, 2008 at 4:30 pm,
    2/ September 18, 2008 at 4:30 pm,
    3/ September 19, 2008 at 4:30 pm.
    Requisites: Students should have some basic experience with logic and/or formal semantics. It is recommended (though not mandatory) that students take Klinedinst’s and Rothschild’s Foundations of Presupposition Theories class as a preparation to the present sessions.
  • On Degree Semantics (and Syntax) (le 22 septembre 2008) — Arnim von Stechow
    Program: The degree argument is pervasive in natural language. Unlike the individual argument but like the world/situation-argument, the time, and the event argument, the degree argument is implicit. Degree semantics is mostly concerned with the analysis of comparative and superlative constructions of gradable adjectives and adverbs. But many other constructions crucially rely on the existence of a degree argument: some nominalisations (the love of Anna, the velocity of the car), how-questions, comparative quantifiers based on gradable adjectives (many, most, few), exclamatives and the complements of emotive factives (It is amazing how clever Max is, What an idiot John is!) among others. The lectures give an introduction into the basic notions of degree semantics and syntax, an application to some interesting constructions and the construction of LFs from surface syntax. Among the possible topics to be treated are:
    – What are degrees? Construction of degrees as equivalence classes based on empirical equivalence relations, numerical degrees (2 meters) as special cases thereof.
    – Comparative constructions, numerical degree phrases and cross-polar anomaly, the interpretation of quantifiers in than-clauses. Scope interactions of the comparative with verbal quantifiers (modals). The positive.
    – Superlative constructions.
    – Syntax and semantics: The construction of logical forms from surface syntax.
    1/ September 22, 2008 at 9:00 am,
    2/ September 23, 2008 at 9:00 am,
    3/ September 24, 2008 at 9:00 am,
    4/ September 25, 2008 at 9:00 am.
    Literature (will be made available as downloads on my homepage): The construction of degrees will be based on (Cresswell, 1976) and (Klein, 1991). The analysis of comparative constructions is based on (von Stechow, 1984b, von Stechow, 1984a) updated by recent work by (Heim and Kennedy, 2002), (Heim, 2006), (Schwarzschild and Wilkinson, 2002), (Beck, 2008) among others. For the interaction of the comparative with modals see (Heim, 2001) and (Krasikova, 2007). For the positive see (Cresswell, 1976) and (von Stechow, 2007). The analysis of comparative and superlative quantifiers is based on (Hackl, 2000, Hackl, 2006). The discussion of superlative constructions builds on work by (Szabolcsi, 1986), (Heim, 2004 (1999)), (Sharvit and Stateva, 2002). For the construction of LFs see (von Stechow, 2008).
    – Beck Sigrid, 2008. Quantifiers in than-clauses, Ms. Tübingen University.
    – Cresswell M.J. 1976. "The Semantics of Degree", in Montague Grammar, ed. B. Partee, 261–292. New York: Academic Press.
    – Hackl Martin, 2000. Comparative Quantifiers, Linguistics Department, MIT: PhD dissertation.
    – Hackl Martin, 2006. On the Grammar and Processing of Proportional Quantifiers: ’Most’ versus ’More than Half’, Ms. Pomona College.
    – Heim Irene, 2001. "Degree Operators and Scope", in Audiatur Vox apientiae. A Festschrift for Arnim von Stechow, eds. Caroline Féry and Wolfgang Sternefeld, 214–239. Berlin: Akademie-Verlag.
    – Heim Irene, and Kennedy Chris, 2002. Semantics of Degree, Ms. Lecture Notes, Fall 2002. Boston, MIT.
    – Heim Irene, 2004 (1999). Notes on Superlatives, Ms. Draft, MIT.
    – Heim Irene, 2006. Remarks on Comparatives as Generalized Quantifiers, Ms. Cambridge, Massachusetts.
    – Klein Ewan, 1991. "Comparatives", in Semantik. Ein internationales Handbuch der zeitgenössischen Forschung [Semantics. An International Handbook of Contemporary Research], eds. Dieter Wunderlich and Arnim von Stechow, 673–691. Berlin-New York: Walter de Gruyter.
    – Krasikova Sveta, 2007. "Universal Modals in Comparatives", in Sinn und Bedeutung, 12. Oslo.
    – Schwarzschild Roger, and Wilkinson Karina, 2002. "Quantifiers in Comparatives: A Semantics of Degree Based on Intervals", Natural Language Semantics, 10:1–41.
    – Sharvit Yael, and Stateva Penka, 2002. "Superlative Expressions, Context, and Focus", Linguistics and Philosophy, 25:453–504.
    – Szabolcsi Anna, 1986. "Comparative Superlatives", in Papers in Theoretical Linguistics, eds. Fukui, Rappaport and Sagey, 245–266. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT.
    – von Stechow Arnim, 1984a. "My Reaction to Cresswell’s, Hellan’s, Hoeksema’s, and Seuren’s Comments", Journal of Semantics, 3:183–199.
    – von Stechow Arnim, 1984b. "Comparing Semantic Theories of Comparison", Journal of Semantics, 3:1–77.
    – von Stechow Arnim, 2007. "The temporal adjectives früh(er)/spät(er) and the semantics of the positive", in Quantification, Definiteness, and Nominalisation, eds. A. Giannakidou and M. Rathert, 17. Oxford: Oxford Press.
    – von Stechow Arnim, 2008. Syntax and Semantics, Ms. Tübingen University.

  • Structures and Strategies: Topics on the Structural Correlate of Discourse-Related Syntactic Operations (le 22 septembre 2008) — Adriana Belletti
    Program: A number of discourse-related syntactic structures will be investigated in terms of a detailed cartography of syntactic configurations. Special attention will be devoted to the analysis of cleft (and pseudo-cleft) sentences in different (Romance) languages aiming at differentiating their possibly varying discourse value and at clarifying their relation with other (clause and small clause) structures, as well as to the analysis of structures crucially involving the edge of the clause. The issue as to how different syntactic computations may be made appeal to in similar contexts will also be carefully discussed, bringing evidence from acquisition (and pathology) in the domain of subject versus object relative clauses and passive.
    1/ September 22, 2008 at 10:30 am,
    2/ September 23, 2008 at 10:30 am,
    3/ September 25, 2008 at 10:30 am.
    Requisites: Some familiarity with the recent literature on minimalism and cartography.
  • Microvariation in Syntactic Doubling (le 22 septembre 2008) — Sjef Barbiers
    Program: Syntactic doubling, e.g., subject pronoun doubling, wh-pronoun doubling, possessive doubling, auxiliary doubling, negative concord, agreement, etc., raises a number of questions about the architecture of natural language, such as:
    – Does doubling violate compositionality/economy?
    – Why is redundancy of (morpho-)syntactic information possible or necessary?
    – Which syntactic structures allow doubling?
    – What are the systematic properties of doubling?
    – How to account for cross-linguistic differences in syntactic doubling, in particular minimal differences between closely related dialects?
    In this course I will discuss these issues within the framework of the ESF project European Dialect Syntax (Edisyn).
    1/ September 22, 2008 at 1:30 pm: Introduction to microcomparative syntax and doubling
    Barbiers S. (2008). "Microvariation in Syntactic Doubling, An Introduction." In: S. Barbiers, O. Koeneman, M. Lekakou, and M. van der Ham (eds.), Microvariation in Syntactic Doubling. Syntax and Semantics Volume 36. Bingley: Emerald.
    Barbiers S. (to appear). "Locus and Limits of Syntactic Microvariation." In J. Nerbonne and F. Manni (eds.), Special issue of Lingua.
    2/ September 23, 2008 at 1:30 pm: ONE doubling
    Barbiers S. (2005). "Variation in the Morphosyntax of ONE." Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics, 8 (3), 159–183.
    Barbiers S. (2006). "Indefinite Numerals ONE and MANY and the Cause of Ordinal Suppletion.
    3/ September 24, 2008 at 1:30 pm: Focus particle doubling
    Bayer J. (1996). Directionality and Logical Form: On the Scope of Focusing Particles and WH-in situ. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
    Büring D. and Hartmann K. (2001). "The Syntax and Semantics of Focus Sensitive Particles in German." Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 19, 229–281.
    Kayne R. (2000). "Overt versus Covert Movement." Chapter 13 of R. Kayne, Parameters and Universals. New York-Oxford: OUP.
    4/ September 25, 2008 at 1:30 pm: WH-doubling
    Barbiers S., Koeneman O., and Lekakou M. (submitted). Syntactic Doubling and the Structure of Chains.
    Requisites: A good background in syntax and syntactic theory.
  • Using Eye Movements to Study Spoken Language (le 22 septembre 2008) — Michael K. Tanenhaus
    Program: In this course we review some of the burgeoning literature on the use of eye movements to study spoken language processing, focusing on issues of interest to researchers in linguistics. We highlight some of the seminal studies and examine how this ‘visual world’ approach to studying language processing can be used to address issues in phonetics, spoken word recognition, parsing, reference resolution and interactive conversation. We consider some of the methodological issues that come to the fore when psycholinguists use eye movements to examine spoken language comprehension, including issues of data analysis.
    1/ September 22, 2008 at 3:00 pm,
    2/ September 23, 2008 at 3:00 pm,
    3/ September 24, 2008 at 3:00 pm,
    4/ September 25, 2008 at 3:00 pm.
    Topics: phonetics/phonology, referential domains, and some mix of expectation/attention to be determined in part by the collective interests of the students in the class.
  • Grammar in Performance and Learning Models (le 22 septembre 2008) — Edward Stabler
    Program: What models of language recognition, production, and learning can account for the basic properties that human languages have? This course will describe the surprising consensus that has emerged in grammar, and will explore computational models of recognition, incremental reanalysis, and learning of languages, with particular attention to discontinuous dependencies of the sort found in remnant movement and reduplication. We would like to understand why common patterns of these sorts are natural and expected.
    1/ September 22, 2008 at 4:30 pm,
    2/ September 23, 2008 at 4:30 pm,
    3/ September 24, 2008 at 4:30 pm,
    4/ September 25, 2008 at 4:30 pm.
    Requisites: No particular background is required, but some acquaintance with formal grammars and basic computing will be helpful.
  • Categorial Grammars for Computing the Correspondence between Syntax and Semantics: An Example of Interplay between Mathematical Logic and Computational Linguistics (le 22 septembre 2008) — Christian Rétoré
    Program: Ajdukiewicz (1931) introduced categorial grammars for the formal language of ordinary mathematical logic, and Bar-Hillel (1953) adapted it to word order in view of natural language formalisation. Lambek (1958) turned it into a plain logical system, a non commutative ancester of Girard’s linear logic (1986). Now that the relation of the Lambek calculus to intuitionistic logic and typed lambda-calculus is well mastered, following Church’s representation of predicate calculus (1930), from a categorial analysis one can compute, as explored by Montague in the seventies, a representation of the conveyed meaning, a lambda term encoding a logical fomula. We will discuss the possiblity to extend such a correspondence to linguistically more relevant syntax model like Stabler’s minimalist grammars, or to richer semantics (discourse, lexical semantics).
    1/ September 22, 2008 at 6:30 pm.
    – "La théorie des langages", La Gazette des mathématiciens (Société mathématique de France), 115 (2008), 35–62.
    – "Logique", La Gazette des mathématiciens (Société mathématique de France), 116 (2008), 29–63.
    The logic of categorial grammars, Lecture Notes. Rapport de Recherche INRIA 5703.
  • Auxiliary Selection: A Test Case for Optimization at the Lexicon/Syntax Interface (le 23 septembre 2008) — Géraldine Legendre
    Program: This talk will address the issue of auxiliary selection (be versus have) in both the present perfect and in passive constructions cross-linguistically. The present perfect exhibits considerable variation cross-linguistically. Some well-known languages (e.g., Italian, French, Dutch, and German) exhibit a split; others exclusively select have (e.g., Spanish); yet others exclusively select be (e.g., Slavic languages, Shetland English, and some Italian dialects). In contrast, the choice of auxiliary in passive constructions in these languages is highly restricted: it is never have but (almost) exclusively be. I propose that the choice of a particular auxiliary in a given context in any language results from optimizing over two mappings: one between lexico-aspectual properties and argument status (internal versus external), the other between argument status and the marked auxiliary have – provided that the constraints on such mappings are violable and re-rankable cross-linguistically. In particular, I argue against a direct mapping from lexico-aspectual properties to auxiliary, derive three universals of auxiliary selection from the formal OT analysis, and discuss how the Unaccusative Hypothesis should be construed from the present perspective. If time allows, I will also present an analysis of person-based auxiliary selection in Italian dialects and confront the difficult problem of formalizing a predictive typology of person-based splits.
    1/ September 23, 2008, at 6:30 pm.
    Requisites: Familiarity with OT but no extensive knowledge thereof.
  • Freezing and the Delimitation of Movement (le 24 septembre 2008) — Luigi Rizzi
    Program: A comprehensive formal theory of movement must include:
    1. Locality principles, determining the maximal structural space which movement can cover;
    2. Delimiting principles, determining under what conditions movement can start and must stop.
    In this talk, I will give a general overview of the issues, and then focus on delimiting principles, with special reference to the cases which force a movement chain to stop and pass the representation on to the interpretive systems. Argumental and Criterial (scope-discourse) positions are natural "delimiting" points for movement. I will look in some detail at the effects of a particular kind of delimiting principle, Criterial Freezing, terminating a chain as soon as a criterial position is reached. A system based on the criterial freezing idea will be illustrated, and will be used to offer a unitary explanation of several different cases in which movement fails: unmovability of wh-phrases from indirect questions, unmovability of subjects in various environments, etc. Various kinds of strategies that natural languages use for circumventing the freezing effects will be discussed and illustrated. In the last part of the talk I will look at the cleft construction, which seems to raise a significant challenge to the freezing approach, in that the clefted constituent can apparently continue to move (who is it _ that you met _?). I will show that some surprising properties of this kind of "extra movement" from clefts (e.g., in terms of selective sensitivity to weak islands) are naturally amenable to the freezing approach.
    1/ September 24, 2008 at 10:30 am,
    2/ September 25, 2008 at 6:30 pm.

  • Making Good on the Promissory Note: Generative Grammar in the Cognitive Science of Language (le 24 septembre 2008) — Paul Smolensky
    Program: As defined by Chomsky (1988:3, inter alia) the central questions of generative grammar are:
    1. What is the system of knowledge?
    2. How does this system of knowledge arise in the mind/brain?
    3. How is this knowledge put to use?
    4. What are the physical mechanisms that serve as the material basis for this system of knowledge and for the use of this knowledge?
    I will present a high-level overview of an argument – developed in detail in The Harmonic Mind (Smolensky & Legendre, 2006, MIT Press) — that, in the form of Optimality Theory (Prince & Smolensky 1993), generative grammar has much to contribute to research addressing all of these questions.
    1/ September 24, 2008 at 6:30 pm.



Dominique Sportiche (ENS / UCLA)

professeur associé au Département d’études cognitives de l’ENS, professeur à l’Université de Californie à Los Angeles (UCLA), linguistique.

En savoir plus sur le cycle...


EALing 2008

EALing 2009

Ealing 2010