LINGUIST List 31.2576

Fri Aug 14 2020

Calls: Semantics, Syntax/Belgium

Editor for this issue: Lauren Perkins <>

Date: 14-Aug-2020
From: Jeroen van Craenenbroeck <>
Subject: The syntax and semantics of clausal complementation
E-mail this message to a friend

Full Title: The syntax and semantics of clausal complementation
Short Title: BCGL 13

Date: 17-Dec-2020 - 18-Dec-2020
Location: Brussels, Belgium
Contact Person: Jeroen van Craenenbroeck
Meeting Email: < click here to access email >
Web Site:

Linguistic Field(s): Semantics; Syntax

Call Deadline: 15-Sep-2020

Meeting Description:

CRISSP is proud to present the thirteenth installment of the Brussels Conference on Generative Linguistics (BCGL), devoted to the syntax and semantics of clausal complementation.

The conference will take place on December 17-18, 2020, in Brussels if permitted by local COVID 19-regulations, and online if not.

We are pleased to announce that the following invited speakers have agreed to give a talk at BCGL 13:
Keir Moulton (University of Toronto)
David Pesetsky (MIT)
Anna Roussou (University of Patras)

Call for Papers:

The conference welcomes contributions addressing issues and open questions related to the syntax and semantics of clausal complementation:

(1) How are finite clausal embeddings (in plain cases and/or in clausal prolepsis) formed and how do they combine with the verb?
- Are they merged as TPs first, in which case the complementizer is introduced in the matrix clause (cf. Kayne 2005, Angelopoulos 2019)? Can TPs function as arguments?
- Are they always merged as CPs, and if so, can they (i) undergo structure reduction e.g. Pesetsky (2019)’s Exfoliation, or (ii) combine with a nominalizer?

(2) In clausal prolepsis, does the pronoun form an underlying constituent with the clause? Is it merged as a predicate (Moro 1997) or an argument, and if so, is the clause merged separately as an adjunct (Bennis and Hoekstra 1986) or a predicate (Longenbaugh 2019)?

(3) How does selection work in clausal complementation: does it involve c-selection, s-selection, or a combination of both? What are the locality restrictions on selection?
- How is complementizer selection possible in cases where clauses are embedded under a noun, or in clausal prolepsis where a proform occupies the argument position?
- What kind of proforms, e.g. expletive or not, can be used in clausal prolepsis and could this choice be reduced to selection (see Postal and Pullum 1988)?
- To what extent can a uniform analysis of embedded clauses as nominal formations account for the overall distributional properties of embedded clauses?

(4) What is responsible for the distribution of embedded clauses: rightward or leftward movement? In both cases the question arises what motivates these movement steps: (a) Stowell (1981)’s Case Resistance Principle, (b) a high merger of a complementizer attracting its surface complement (Kayne 2005, Angelopoulos 2019), or (c) rules of semantic composition together with the semantic make up of clauses (Moulton 2015)?

(5) What role does finiteness play in the distribution of clauses and clausal prolepsis?

Abstract guidelines:
Abstracts should not exceed two pages, including data, references, and diagrams. Abstracts should be typed in at least 11-point font, with one-inch margins (letter-size; 8.5 by 11 inch or A4) and a maximum of 50 lines of text per page. Abstracts must be anonymous and submissions are limited to 2 per author, at most one of which is single-authored. Only electronic submissions will be accepted. Please submit your abstract using the EasyChair link for BCGL 13:

Important dates:
• First call for papers: June 2, 2020
• Second call for papers: August 16, 2020
• Abstract submission deadline: September 15, 2020
• Notification of acceptance: late October, 2020
• Conference: December 17-18, 2020

For the full call for papers, see

Page Updated: 14-Aug-2020