-
Reflections on the grammatical view of scalar implicatures Theoretical Linguistics (IF 0.6) Pub Date : 2024-07-04 Bo Xue, Haihua Pan
This paper first introduces the standard recipe for deriving quantity implicatures in the neo-Gricean framework. Then, it compares this pragmatic stance with the grammatical view that argues that scalar implicatures should be generated via an operator in syntax. After showing how the grammatical view can derive canonical scalar implicatures, motivations for this view are discussed which include embedded
-
On the goals of theoretical linguistics Theoretical Linguistics (IF 0.6) Pub Date : 2024-07-04 Peter W. Culicover, Giuseppe Varaschin
We review some of the main goals of theoretical linguistics in the tradition of Generative Grammar: description, evolvability and learnability. We evaluate recent efforts to address these goals, culminating with the Minimalist Program. We suggest that the most prominent versions of the Minimalist Program represent just one possible approach to addressing these goals, and not a particularly illuminating
-
Cross-linguistic insights in the theory of semantics and its interface with syntax Theoretical Linguistics (IF 0.6) Pub Date : 2024-07-04 Anna Szabolcsi
This paper highlights a small selection of cases where cross-linguistic insights have been important to big questions in the theory of semantics and the syntax/semantics interface. The selection includes (i) the role and representation of Speaker and Addressee in the grammar; (ii) mismatches between form and interpretation motivating high-placed silent operators for functional elements; and (iii) the
-
The empirical turn and its consequences for theoretical syntax Theoretical Linguistics (IF 0.6) Pub Date : 2024-07-04 Anne Abeillé
In a pioneer paper, Featherston (Featherston, Sam. 2007. Data in generative grammar: The stick and the carrot. Theoretical Linguistics 33. 269–318) advocated the use of better controlled data in theoretical linguistics. Despite diverging on many aspects, most syntactic theories are now testing their hypotheses with more data than a few linguists’ intuitions. I will examine the consequences of this
-
Large language models are better than theoretical linguists at theoretical linguistics Theoretical Linguistics (IF 0.6) Pub Date : 2024-07-04 Ben Ambridge, Liam Blything
Large language models are better than theoretical linguists at theoretical linguistics, at least in the domain of verb argument structure; explaining why (for example), we can say both The ball rolled and Someone rolled the ball, but not both The man laughed and *Someone laughed the man. Verbal accounts of this phenomenon either do not make precise quantitative predictions at all, or do so only with
-
Speech and sign: the whole human language Theoretical Linguistics (IF 0.6) Pub Date : 2024-07-04 Wendy Sandler
After more than sixty years of research, it is now widely accepted that sign languages are real languages, sharing key properties with spoken languages. This means that spoken and signed languages together comprise one natural language system in some sense. But that is not the whole story. Here I probe more deeply into the two systems, and focus on the differences between them -- differences that are
-
Large Language Models and theoretical linguistics Theoretical Linguistics (IF 0.6) Pub Date : 2024-07-04 Danny Fox, Roni Katzir
Some recent publications have made the suggestion that Large Language Models are not just successful engineering tools but also good theories of human linguistic cognition. This note reviews methodological and empirical reasons to reject this suggestion out of hand.
-
It’s time for a complete theory of partial predictability in language Theoretical Linguistics (IF 0.6) Pub Date : 2024-07-04 Louise McNally, Olivier Bonami, Denis Paperno
Given the centrality of partial predictability to linguistic experience, it plays a strikingly minor role in theoretical linguistics. For many, partial predictability is to be set aside: the job of linguistic theory is to explain the infinite generative capacity of language and the semantic compositionality that accompanies it. For others, partial predictability is evidence that such an approach is
-
Theoretical Linguistics and the philosophy of linguistics Theoretical Linguistics (IF 0.6) Pub Date : 2024-07-04 Ryan M. Nefdt
In this article, I briefly explore how theoretical linguistics and philosophy are interconnected. I focus on three possibilities, and argue that the fields are most harmonious when utilised in critical reflection of a particular target, a format officially adopted in Theoretical Linguistics since 2002.
-
Social meaning Theoretical Linguistics (IF 0.6) Pub Date : 2024-07-04 Penelope Eckert
In recent decades, semanticists moving beyond truth conditional meaning and sociolinguists moving beyond correlations with social structural categories have developed a shared interest in what is commonly called social meaning. This raises the possibility of a comprehensive theory of meaning, moving away from the exclusively propositional model of grammar, and treating language not just as structure
-
Linguistic typology in action: how to know more Theoretical Linguistics (IF 0.6) Pub Date : 2024-07-04 Alexandra Y. Aikhenvald
Linguistic typology is an all-embracing discipline central for inductively-based cross-linguistic generalizations, supported by language facts. Firsthand investigation of previously undescribed languages from regions known for their linguistic diversity helps expand our knowledge about the nature of language and the parameters of cross-linguistic variation. We explore the options of marking commands
-
The information status of iconic enrichments: modelling gradient at-issueness Theoretical Linguistics (IF 0.6) Pub Date : 2023-11-30 Kathryn Barnes, Cornelia Ebert
Linguistic structures can contribute different types of meaning alongside standard assertions, such as conventional implicatures and presuppositions, which have long been described as being non-at-issue meaning contributions. Although information status has long been handled as a binary opposition between non-at-issue and at-issue content, recent research suggests that a gradient approach may be more
-
Wh-questions in dynamic inquisitive semantics Theoretical Linguistics (IF 0.6) Pub Date : 2023-10-10 Floris Roelofsen, Jakub Dotlačil
This target article presents a type-theoretic dynamic inquisitive semantics framework, extending the first-order system presented in (Dotlačil, Jakub & Floris Roelofsen. 2019. Dynamic inquisitive semantics: Anaphora and questions. Sinn und Bedeutung 23. 365–382). Within this framework, we develop a compositional treatment of wh-questions whose basic premise is that a wh-phrase introduces a discourse
-
Subregular linguistics: bridging theoretical linguistics and formal grammar Theoretical Linguistics (IF 0.6) Pub Date : 2022-11-30 Thomas Graf
Subregular linguistics is a fairly new approach that seeks a deeper understanding of language by combining the rigor of formal grammar with the empirical sophistication of theoretical linguistics. The approach started in phonology but has since branched out to morphology and even syntax, unearthing unexpected parallels between these three domains of language. In this paper, I argue based on these results
-
Another way to look at counterfactuals Theoretical Linguistics (IF 0.6) Pub Date : 2021-10-01 Wolfgang Klein
Abstract Counterfactuals such as If the world did not exist, we would not notice it have been a challenge for philosophers and linguists since antiquity. There is no generally accepted semantic analysis. The prevalent view, developed in varying forms by Robert Stalnaker, David Lewis, and others, enriches the idea of strict implication by the idea of a “minimal revision” of the actual world. Objections
-
Another analysis of counterfactuality: replies Theoretical Linguistics (IF 0.6) Pub Date : 2021-10-01 Wolfgang Klein
-
A usage-based approach to counterfactuality: optionality of the apodosis Theoretical Linguistics (IF 0.6) Pub Date : 2021-10-01 An Van linden
-
Justifying tense and mood morphology in counterfactuals Theoretical Linguistics (IF 0.6) Pub Date : 2021-10-01 Atle Grønn
-
Taking a psychological view on another way to look at counterfactuals Theoretical Linguistics (IF 0.6) Pub Date : 2021-10-01 Eugenia Kulakova
-
Shaking up counterfactuality: even closer to the linguistic facts Theoretical Linguistics (IF 0.6) Pub Date : 2021-10-01 Jean-Christophe Verstraete,Ellison Luk
-
Not everything is a theory Theoretical Linguistics (IF 0.6) Pub Date : 2021-06-01 Roberta D’Alessandro
-
General linguistics must be based on universals (or non-conventional aspects of language) Theoretical Linguistics (IF 0.6) Pub Date : 2021-06-01 Martin Haspelmath
Abstract This paper highlights the importance of the distinction between general linguistics (the study of Human Language) and particular linguistics (the study of individual languages), which is often neglected. The term “theoretical linguistics” is often used as if it entailed general claims. But I note that (unless one studies non-conventional aspects of language, e.g. reaction times in psycholinguistics)
-
Truthmaker-based content: syntactic, semantic, and ontological contexts Theoretical Linguistics (IF 0.6) Pub Date : 2021-06-01 Friederike Moltmann
I will quickly summarize the aim and views of my article before addressing the various issues raised by the commentaries. The overall aim of the article is to give a very general outline of a novel semantics of sentences involving intensional expressions, such as attitude verbs, modals, intensional transitive verbs, based on a novel ontology of attitudinal, modal and intensional objects, entities like
-
How to tear down the walls that separate linguists: continuing the quest for clarity about general linguistics Theoretical Linguistics (IF 0.6) Pub Date : 2021-06-01 Martin Haspelmath
-
(Non)conventional aspects of language and their relation to general linguistics Theoretical Linguistics (IF 0.6) Pub Date : 2021-06-01 Susanne Fuchs,Ludger Paschen
-
Beyond universals and particulars in language Theoretical Linguistics (IF 0.6) Pub Date : 2021-06-01 Balthasar Bickel
-
On the innate building blocks of language and scientific explanation Theoretical Linguistics (IF 0.6) Pub Date : 2021-06-01 José-Luis Mendívil-Giró
-
Analysis and falsifiability in practice Theoretical Linguistics (IF 0.6) Pub Date : 2021-06-01 Adam J. R. Tallman
-
General linguistics and the nature of human language Theoretical Linguistics (IF 0.6) Pub Date : 2021-06-01 Diana Forker
-
Beware of the emperor’s conceptual clothes: general linguistics must not be based on shaky dichotomies Theoretical Linguistics (IF 0.6) Pub Date : 2021-06-01 Dietmar Zaefferer
-
On the performance of modal objects Theoretical Linguistics (IF 0.6) Pub Date : 2020-10-01 Magdalena Kaufmann
Friederike Moltmann’s target paper on object-based truthmaker semantics (in the following TSNL) offers a concise and well-written summary of the framework’s main ideas and merits specifically for the analysis of natural language modality and attitude ascriptions. In the following, I focus on select aspects of her proposal for deontic and teleological modality as well as imperative clauses, taking into
-
Attitudinal and modal objects: A view from the syntax-semantics interface Theoretical Linguistics (IF 0.6) Pub Date : 2020-10-01 Keir Moulton
-
Truthmaker semantics for natural language: Attitude verbs, modals, and intensional transitive verbs Theoretical Linguistics (IF 0.6) Pub Date : 2020-10-01 Friederike Moltmann
Abstract This paper gives an outline of truthmaker semantics for natural language against the background of standard possible-worlds semantics. It develops a truthmaker semantics for attitude reports and deontic modals based on an ontology of attitudinal and modal objects and on a semantic function of clauses as predicates of such objects. The semantics is applied to factive verbs and response-stance
-
That-clauses in attitude predicates: Giving syntax its due Theoretical Linguistics (IF 0.6) Pub Date : 2020-10-01 Robert J. Matthews
-
Content, modals and attitude predicates Theoretical Linguistics (IF 0.6) Pub Date : 2020-10-01 Gillian Ramchand
-
Syntactic, semantic and methodological aspects of an expanded ontology in the modal and attitudinal domain Theoretical Linguistics (IF 0.6) Pub Date : 2020-10-01 Boban Arsenijević
-
Propositions and attitudinal objects Theoretical Linguistics (IF 0.6) Pub Date : 2020-10-01 Wayne A. Davis
-
A Plea for equality: Remarks on Moltmann’s semantics for clausal embedding Theoretical Linguistics (IF 0.6) Pub Date : 2020-10-01 Patrick D. Elliott
-
Content individuals, truthmaking conditions, and the formal semantics of attitude reports Theoretical Linguistics (IF 0.6) Pub Date : 2020-10-01 Kristina Liefke
-
Modal objects or modal quantifiers? Theoretical Linguistics (IF 0.6) Pub Date : 2020-10-01 Aynat Rubinstein,Paul Portner
-
Strategies of inquiry: Focus and contrastive topic in polar questions Theoretical Linguistics (IF 0.6) Pub Date : 2020-06-01 Shumian Ye
The target paper by Beste Kamali and Manfred Krifka, “Focus and contrastive topic in questions and answers, with particular reference to Turkish”, draws a fundamental distinction between focus and contrastive topic: Whereas focus introduces disjunctive alternatives as a restriction on the input context, contrastive topic introduces conjunctive alternatives as a restriction on the input context. For
-
Some questions and thoughts on foci and contrastive topics in Turkish questions Theoretical Linguistics (IF 0.6) Pub Date : 2020-06-01 Jaklin Kornfilt
-
Focus and contrastive topic in questions and answers, with particular reference to Turkish Theoretical Linguistics (IF 0.6) Pub Date : 2020-06-01 Beste Kamali,Manfred Krifka
AbstractMuch recent research has recognized the importance of focus and contrastive topic in assertions for discourse coherence. However, with few exceptions, it has been neglected that focus and contrastive topic also occur in questions, and have a similar role in establishing coherence. We propose a framework of dynamic interpretation based on the notion of Commitment Spaces that show that a uniform
-
Focus and contrastive topic: More questions, and answers Theoretical Linguistics (IF 0.6) Pub Date : 2020-06-01 Beste Kamali,Manfred Krifka
-
Exhaustivity of focus and anti-exhaustivity of contrastive topic Theoretical Linguistics (IF 0.6) Pub Date : 2020-06-01 Satoshi Tomioka
Themain concept that guides through this commentary is exhaustivity associated with focus. Although this issue is not central to the authors’ analysis, I believe that it leads to intriguing and puzzling questions that are worth considering. In their discussion in 4.3, Kamali and Krifka (henceforth, K & K) analyze focus exhaustivity by using the notion of ‘denegation’, the speech act version of negation
-
Banning the disjunction of speech acts Theoretical Linguistics (IF 0.6) Pub Date : 2020-06-01 Ingo Reich
-
An inquisitive stroll in commitment spaces Theoretical Linguistics (IF 0.6) Pub Date : 2020-06-01 Edgar Onea
The target article by Kamali and Krifka proposes a novel theory of focus and contrastive topic within the framework of Commitment Space Semantics. The key intuitions are similar to some prominent ideas discussed in the literature. Focus in an utterance> signals that the discourse state it updates involves an open question that is congruent to >, as chiefly advocated in Roberts (1996) and Beaver and
-
Should I move for focus or for contrastive topic? Theoretical Linguistics (IF 0.6) Pub Date : 2020-06-01 Deniz Özyıldız
Kamali and Krifka (“K&K”) propose an analysis of focus and contrastive topic in declaratives and in questions, based on data from Turkish, within the framework of commitment space semantics (Krifka 2015). Turkish is relevant because focus and contrastive topic are marked differently from one another in polar questions: prosodically and with a segmental morpheme -mI for focus, only prosodically for
-
Additional questions on contrastive topics Theoretical Linguistics (IF 0.6) Pub Date : 2020-06-01 Andreea C. Nicolae
I found this to be an interesting and thought-provoking paper providing a very thorough analysis of the interpretation of focus and contrastive topic marking in questions and assertions couched in the framework of commitment spaces. In this commentary, I would like to discuss a few points that drew my attention, not because of any specific problem they pose, but rather because I think this framework
-
Grammatical representations versus productive patterns in change theories Theoretical Linguistics (IF 0.6) Pub Date : 2019-12-18 Ailís Cournane
Abstract In this paper, I discuss differences between representational change (i. e. in formal features and structures involved in grammatical competence) and change in quantitative patterns (i. e. in the quantitative properties of the language system in use), as relevant to my approach to incrementation. My approach differs from the standard variationist sociolinguistic approach because I argue that
-
Uninterpretable features in learning and alternative grammars? Theoretical Linguistics (IF 0.6) Pub Date : 2019-12-18 Igor Yanovich
Walkden and Breitbarth employ historical data in order to test a conjecture expressed by Trudgill (2011) regarding a link between linguistic complexity and the language-contact situation: namely, “short-term contact involving extensive adult second-language (L2) use is predicted to lead to simplification” (W&B). Specifically, the authors address this conjecture with respect to syntactic complexity
-
A developmental view on incrementation in language change Theoretical Linguistics (IF 0.6) Pub Date : 2019-12-18 Ailís Cournane
Abstract Acquisition is an intuitive place to look for explanation in language change. Each child must learn their individual grammar(s) via the indirect process of analyzing the output of others’ grammars, and the process necessarily involves social transmission over several years. On the basis of child language learning behaviors, I ask whether it is reasonable to expect the incrementation (advancement)
-
Model evaluation in computational historical linguistics Theoretical Linguistics (IF 0.6) Pub Date : 2019-12-18 Gerhard Jäger
Abstract This is a reply to the comments by Hammarström et al. (This volume) and List (This volume) on the target article Computational Historical Linguistics (This volume). There I proposed several methodological principles for research in Computational Historical Linguistics pertaining to suitable techniques for model fitting and model evaluation. Hammarström et al. debate the usefulness of these
-
On computational historical linguistics in the 21st century Theoretical Linguistics (IF 0.6) Pub Date : 2019-12-18 Harald Hammarström, Philipp Rönchen, Erik Elgh, Tilo Wiklund
We welcome Gerhard Jäger’s framing of Computational Historical Linguistics: its history and background, its goals and ambitions as well as the concrete implementation by Jäger himself. As Jäger explains (pp. 151–153), the comparative method can be broken down into seven steps and there have been attempts to formalise/automatise (some of) the steps since the 1950s. However, Jäger contrasts the work
-
Computational historical linguistics Theoretical Linguistics (IF 0.6) Pub Date : 2019-12-18 Gerhard Jäger
Abstract Computational approaches to historical linguistics have been proposed for half a century. Within the last decade, this line of research has received a major boost, owing both to the transfer of ideas and software from computational biology and to the release of several large electronic data resources suitable for systematic comparative work. In this article, some of the central research topics
-
Interpreting (un)interpretability Theoretical Linguistics (IF 0.6) Pub Date : 2019-12-18 George Walkden, Anne Breitbarth
Our target article (henceforth W&B) proposed a diachronic connection between a structural property of grammars and particular sociohistorical situations: all else being equal, we predict that in sociohistorical situations in which adult L2 learners are particularly dominant quantitatively or qualitatively, uninterpretable features will typically be lost. W&B outlines a research programme rather than
-
Complexity as L2-difficulty: Implications for syntactic change Theoretical Linguistics (IF 0.6) Pub Date : 2019-12-18 George Walkden, Anne Breitbarth
Abstract Recent work has cast doubt on the idea that all languages are equally complex; however, the notion of syntactic complexity remains underexplored. Taking complexity to equate to difficulty of acquisition for late L2 acquirers, we propose an operationalization of syntactic complexity in terms of uninterpretable features. Trudgill’s sociolinguistic typology predicts that sociohistorical situations
-
Experimental approaches to studying visible meaning. Theoretical Linguistics (IF 0.6) Pub Date : 2019-06-28 Karen Emmorey
-
Children always go beyond the input: The Maximise Minimal Means perspective Theoretical Linguistics (IF 0.6) Pub Date : 2019-10-01 Theresa Biberauer
-
Are uninterpretable features vulnerable? Theoretical Linguistics (IF 0.6) Pub Date : 2019-10-01 Elly van Gelderen