27.2425, Calls: Historical Ling, Lexicography, Linguistic Theories, Psycholing, Typology/Germany

Wed Jun 1 14:58:32 UTC 2016

LINGUIST List: Vol-27-2425. Wed Jun 01 2016. ISSN: 1069 - 4875.

Subject: 27.2425, Calls: Historical Ling, Lexicography, Linguistic Theories, Psycholing, Typology/Germany

Moderators: linguist at linguistlist.org (Damir Cavar, Malgorzata E. Cavar)
Reviews: reviews at linguistlist.org (Anthony Aristar, Helen Aristar-Dry, Robert Coté, Sara Couture)
Homepage: http://linguistlist.org

*****************    LINGUIST List Support    *****************
                       Fund Drive 2016
                   25 years of LINGUIST List!
Please support the LL editors and operation with a donation at:
           http://funddrive.linguistlist.org/donate/

Editor for this issue: Anna White <awhite at linguistlist.org>
================================================================

Date: Wed, 01 Jun 2016 10:57:20
From: Ingo Reich [i.reich at mx.uni-saarland.de]
Subject: Polysemy and Coercion of Clause-Embedding Predicates

Full Title: Polysemy and Coercion of Clause-Embedding Predicates 

Date: 08-Mar-2017 - 10-Mar-2017
Location: Saarbrücken, Germany 
Contact Person: Marie-Luise Popp
Meeting Email: marie_luise.popp at uni-leipzig.de

Linguistic Field(s): Historical Linguistics; Lexicography; Linguistic Theories; Psycholinguistics; Typology 

Call Deadline: 15-Aug-2016 

Meeting Description:

Unlike typical Standard Average European languages such as German or English,
many under-researched languages display only a small inventory of
clause-embedding (or ''complement-taking'') predicates (CEPs), with the
consequence that many of these predicates are highly polysemous or vague
(e.g., nɔrkatɛ (Lonwolwol; Paton 1973): 'grasp, believe, trust, remember
etc.'). But even in languages with a richer inventory of CEPs, polysemy
appears in many facets (e.g., English tell 'narrate, order, inform' or Spanish
esperar 'hope, wish, expect, demand'). The polysemy of the predicates may
influence their complementation patterns (e.g., know that vs. know how to):
often, only polysemous CEPs show the full range of the language-specific
complementation patterns, with close associations of complementation types and
specific readings of the polysemous CEP. Other distributional properties are
also affected by polysemy, for instance: (a) the dual use of 'begin', 'start',
'stop', 'promise', 'threaten' and possibly other predicates as raising and
control predicates; (b) the restriction of NEG-raising with Spanish esperar to
its 'expect' reading (Popp 2016); (c) the reading-specific selection of
mood/modality in the embedded clause (Spanish sentir: 'feel' with indicative,
'regret' with subjunctive).

Predicates that do not exhibit clausal arguments in their base entry may be
turned into CEPs, e.g., verbs of sound emission (shriek → shriek that ...).
Here, notions such as ''coercion'' (Pustejovsky 1995, Asher 2011), ''lexical
subordination'' (Levin & Rapoport 1988) or ''conflation'' (Talmy 1985) may be
brought into play. The syntactic flexibility of restricted CEPs can also be
enhanced by coercion (e.g., the factive German CEP bedauern 'regret' may be
used parenthetically if interpreted as 'utter with regret').

The workshop is meant as discussion forum for researchers from different
backgrounds (especially semantics, lexical typology, corpus/computational
linguistics, psycholinguistics, historical linguistics and
lexicology/lexicography).

Invited speaker: Angelika Kratzer (UMass, Amherst)

Organizers: Marie-Luise Popp & Barbara Stiebels (University of Leipzig)

References:

Asher, Nicholas. 2011. Lexical meaning in context: A web of words. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Levin, Beth &  Tova R. Rapoport. 1988. Lexical subordination. Proceedings of
the 24th Annual meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society (CLS). 275-289.
Popp, Marie-Luise. 2016. NEG-raising in cross-linguistic perspective. MA
thesis, University of Leipzig
Pustejovsky, James. 1995. The generative lexicon. Cambridge, MA: The MIT
Press.
Talmy, Leonard. 1985. Lexicalization patterns: Semantic structure in lexical
forms. In Timothy Shopen (ed.) , Language typology and syntactic description:
Grammatical categories and the lexicon. Volume 3. 57-149. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.

Call for Papers:

We invite submission of abstracts for 30min talks (including discussion)
dealing with the following questions (inter alia):

- Which patterns of polysemy can be observed in CEPs? Are there
predictable/systematic patterns of polysemy?
- Are there cross-linguistic tendencies of co-lexification in CEPs? The CLICS
database (http://clics.lingpy.org/), for instance, reveals that 'ask' often
shows up with the two readings 'question' and 'request'. Likewise, 'believe'
and 'think' and 'know' and 'understand', respectively, are co-lexified in
quite a number of languages.
- Which distributional properties of CEPs are affected by polysemy?
- Which coercion patterns yield CEPs or affect CEPs? Does the availability of
coercion depend on general conflation patterns in the respective languages? Do
CEPs resulting from coercion exhibit specific complementation patterns?
- How should the polysemy of CEPs be modeled?
- Are there specific diachronic processes that lead to the rise or loss of
polysemy in CEPs? Does the emergence or disappearance of synonymous or
semantically similar CEPs play a role? How does the rise or loss of polysemy
relate to the complementation pattern of the respective predicates?
- Which role does the polysemy of CEPs play for their processing or
acquisition?
- Which patterns of polysemy copying of CEPs can be observed in language
contact?

Please submit a one-page abstract (single spaced, 12pt; examples and
references can be added on a second page) as pdf document to Marie-Luise Popp
(marie_luise.popp at uni-leipzig.de) by August 15, 2016.

Workshop speakers have to register for the DGfS conference and are not
supposed to speak at more than one workshop.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

*****************    LINGUIST List Support    *****************
                       Fund Drive 2016
Please support the LL editors and operation with a donation at:
            http://funddrive.linguistlist.org/donate/

This year the LINGUIST List hopes to raise $79,000. This money 
will go to help keep the List running by supporting all of our 
Student Editors for the coming year.

Don't forget to check out Fund Drive 2016 site!

http://funddrive.linguistlist.org/

For all information on donating, including information on how to 
donate by check, money order, PayPal or wire transfer, please visit:
http://funddrive.linguistlist.org/donate/

The LINGUIST List is under the umbrella of Indiana University and
as such can receive donations through Indiana University Foundation. We
also collect donations via eLinguistics Foundation, a registered 501(c)
Non Profit organization with the federal tax number 45-4211155. Either
way, the donations can be offset against your federal and sometimes your
state tax return (U.S. tax payers only). For more information visit the
IRS Web-Site, or contact your financial advisor.

Many companies also offer a gift matching program, such that
they will match any gift you make to a non-profit organization.
Normally this entails your contacting your human resources department
and sending us a form that the Indiana University Foundation fills in
and returns to your employer. This is generally a simple administrative
procedure that doubles the value of your gift to LINGUIST, without
costing you an extra penny. Please take a moment to check if
your company operates such a program.

Thank you very much for your support of LINGUIST!

----------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-27-2425	
----------------------------------------------------------
Visit LL's Multitree project for over 1000 trees dynamically generated
from scholarly hypotheses about language relationships:
          http://multitree.org/