Prevailing approaches do not have a computational lexicon

[Carl Pollard]

Hi Dan,

Nice to hear from you!

>
Hey, Carl,

I am finding this exchange between you and Mark very interesting. I am
wondering after your most recent posting, however, what you mean by
prosody.
>>

This usage of the term "prosody" in the setting of type logical grammar
(as does the term "type logical grammar) are after Glyn Morrill,
so I passed your question on to him.

Cheers,

Carl

>
>From morrill at lsi.upc.es Wed Oct  9 05:16:32 2002
From: Glyn Morrill <morrill at lsi.upc.es>
Subject: Re: Higher order grammar
To: pollard at ling.ohio-state.edu (Carl Pollard)
Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2002 11:15:04 +0200 (MET DST)
Cc: morrill at lsi.upc.es
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


Hi Carl, and Dan (please pass on)

I was looking for a term to refer to what is addressed
in sentential syntax/semantics without refering to more,
hence I did not want to refer to "phonology", because I
don't envisage that much or any of what is usually taken
to be phonology is operative at this level, and not "phonetics",
because I share the view that that is physiological rather
than cognitive. Also I wanted a term that would go some way
to being neutral between the acoustic and visual channels: I
share the view that sign languages are natural languages
just as much as spoken languages. Also, I think some of what
is usually classified as prosodics: prosodic phrasing and
some prosodic features like reduced pitch contour and
continuation rise, do enter into sentential syntax/semantics.
I was encouraged by a phonetician who told me that "prosodics",
in an older usage, was quite close to what I was aiming for.
And I like the association between "prosodics" and "prose"
since I think prosodics is roughly word order plus 'punctuation',
but in two dimensions.

I have an idea that many many years ago I heard Michael Moortgat use
the term prosodics, perhaps for what I came to use it for.  But he
stopped using it, perhaps because of the danger that people will say,
when we just mean word order, that there isn't any prosodics
there. But if you say the term is used quite universally now, perhaps
the danger patch is over. Actually I'm thinking now a bit about "real"
prosody.

Incidently, the phonetician I refered to has a long and excellent
track record, but is without a job. If you get to hear of the
possibility of a vacency somewhere, will you let me know?

Best,

-- Glyn

> Hi Glyn,
>
> Dan Everett asked me what the term "prosody" or "prosodic"
> component  means in the context of grammars that use type logic.
> In your last message you said it was a good thing you had picked
> that term instead of "phonetics" or "phonology" because of the
> ambiguity question. But I wondered what it was that prompted
> the usage (which seems to universally used by TLG folk), before
> this problem surfaced. How would you answer Dan?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Carl
>