Prevailing approaches do not have a computational lexicon

[Ash Asudeh]

Dear list members,

I draw your attention to the first line of the abstract included below for
a talk by Tanya Reinhart at MIT:

"The theoretical background assumption is that UG includes a
computational lexicon, in which operations can apply (contra to
prevailing approaches)."

I realize that this is only from an abstract for a talk, but I don't
understand a) the implication that this is a new approach, or b) the
assertion that it is contrary to prevailing approaches.

Even if "prevailing approaches" were meant to be construed as "Minimalism"
(which it often is), I think this would still be puzzling, since
Minimalism also claims to feature a computational lexicon and wants
variation to be located in the lexicon, although no substantive theory of
lexical organization or variation has been offered, in my honest opinion.

Ash

P.S. This message is being BCCed to Tanya Reinhart (BCC so she doesn't get
spammed by "reply-to-all").

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Abstract


Thematic arity operations: Parametric variations.

Tanya Reinhart (work with Tali Siloni)

The theoretical background assumption is that UG includes a
computational lexicon, in which operations can apply (contra to
prevailing approaches). The focus of the talk will be the operation of
reflexivization.  We argue that the massive linguistic variations found
with reflexivization can be reduced to two parameters:  a. Does the
operation apply in the lexicon (English, Hebrew, Dutch) or in the syntax
(Romance, German)?  b. Is the accusative case structural (French,
Italian, Dutch, German) or only thematic (Spanish, Hebrew, English)?
In structural accusative languages the Auxiliary in unaccusative
derivations is be, in thematic accusative languages, it is have. The
syntax-lexicon Parameter setting makes use of data like the following:
In the syntax setting, reflexivization is possible into ECM subjects.
(In the lexicon setting - it is not). In the lexicon setting, reflexive
nominalization is available. (In the syntax setting  it is not).