LINGUIST List 21.2501|
Mon Jun 07 2010
Calls: Semantics, Syntax/Spain
Editor for this issue: Di Wdzenczny
LINGUIST is pleased to announce the launch of an exciting new feature: Easy Abstracts! Easy Abs is a free abstract submission and review facility designed to help conference organizers and reviewers accept and process abstracts online. Just go to: http://www.linguistlist.org/confcustom, and begin your conference customization process today! With Easy Abstracts, submission and review will be as easy as 1-2-3!
Verb Meaning, Event Semantics and Argument Structure
Message 1: Verb Meaning, Event Semantics and Argument Structure
From: Olga Borik <Olga.Borikuab.cat>
Subject: Verb Meaning, Event Semantics and Argument Structure
E-mail this message to a friend
Full Title: Verb Meaning, Event Semantics and Argument Structure
Date: 02-Dec-2010 - 03-Dec-2010
Location: Barcelona, Spain
Contact Person: Olga Borik
Meeting Email: cr.cltuab.cat
Linguistic Field(s): Semantics; Syntax
Call Deadline: 20-Jun-2010
Workshop on the Lexicon-Syntax Interface:
Verb Meaning, Event Semantics and Argument Structure
The design of the lexicon-syntax interface in the architecture of the
language faculty remains one of the most fascinating and controversial
issues in theoretical linguistics. Continuing attempts to improve our
understanding of this interface help us gain further insights into many
intriguing puzzles, including the linguistic behaviour of verbs and their
The workshop will be hosted by CLT Centre de Lingüística Teòrica,
Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Bellaterra (Barcelona), Spain
Olga Borik (Olga.Borikuab.cat)
Jaume Mateu Fontanals (Jaume.Mateuuab.cat)
Second Call for Papers
This workshop aims at bringing together researchers working on the
relation between verb meaning, event semantics and argument structure.
The relationship between verb meaning and argument realization has been
a widely debated topic in linguistics for decades but no general consensus
has been reached despite the amount of high quality research in the area.
A relatively recent concept of event structure (since Pustejovsky 1991) has
been extensively argued to play a major role in argument realization.
Notably, a large body of knowledge has accumulated in the field. On the
one hand, a crucial distinction is commonly assumed between structural
meaning and idiosyncratic/root verbal meaning, which plays a role in
One of the debated issues, however, is how precisely this distinction affects
the interface issues, in particular those related to argument realization and
alternations. Different solutions have been proposed by Borer (2005),
Goldberg (1995), Hale & Keyser (2002), Levin & Rappaport-Hovav (2005),
Marantz (2001), Ramchand (2008) and many others. A related question is
whether the meaning ingredients that largely determine argument
realization are syntactic or semantic in nature (cf. (neo-)constructionist vs.
projectionist approaches). Yet another problem is to determine which
aspects of idiosyncratic/root meaning (if any) contribute to argument
realization and how this contribution should be modeled (e.g. Levin &
Rappaport-Hovav 2005, Reinhart & Siloni 2005).
On the other hand, there is a considerable variation in the morphosyntactic
realization of arguments and possible argument structure alternations of the
same type of verbs, both within one language, and cross-linguistically. The
question that arises is how to account for the observed variations and what
are the ingredients involved in predicting possible alternations?
The challenge of the present workshop is to attempt to successfully
combine these observations in a theory of lexicon-syntax interface, which is
powerful and restrictive enough to account for both regularities and
variation in the verbal domain.
Hagit Borer (University of Southern California)
Andrew McIntyre (Université de Neuchâtel)
Paul M. Pietroski (University of Maryland)
Malka Rappaport Hovav (The Hebrew University of Jerusalem)
Abstracts are invited for oral presentations (30-minute presentation plus 10-
minute discussion) on any topic that contributes to improving our
understanding of the relationship between verb meaning, event structure
and argument structure, including, but not limited to the following questions:
- What kind of guiding principles should be adopted to draw a distinction
between lexical knowledge and syntactic/semantic computation?
- When dealing with the interface between lexical semantics and syntax,
what are the minimal tools required to derive all aspects of argument
- Do we need event structure or any other system to mediate the relation
between a verbal root and its syntactic realization?
- To what extent is the elasticity of verb meaning lexically determined?
- What are the precise mechanisms to establish a connection between root
meaning and structural meaning? Is there any pre-syntactic/lexical semantic
correlation between root meaning and event and/or argument structure?
- How are argument structure alternations to be dealt with in different
models of the lexicon-syntax interface?
- How is cross-linguistic variation in argument alternations to be dealt with in
different models of the lexicon-syntax interface?
Abstracts should be at most two pages long (A4 paper), including examples
and references, with 1 inch/2.5 cm margins on all sides and 12pt font size.
The abstract should have a title but should not identify the author(s).
Submissions are limited to 1 individual and 1 joint abstract per author, or 2
joint abstracts per author. Abstracts should be written in English.
Abstracts must be submitted electronically, ONLY in PDF format to the
following address: cr.cltuab.cat
The subject of the message should be: Abstract Lexicon-Syntax workshop.
The body of the message should include the title of the abstract, the name
of the author(s), his/her (their) affiliation(s) and contact details.
June 20, 2010: Deadline for abstract submission
July 31, 2010: Notification of acceptance
December 2-3, 2010: Workshop
Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue
Page Updated: 07-Jun-2010
While the LINGUIST List makes every effort to ensure the linguistic relevance of sites listed
on its pages, it cannot vouch for their contents.