Program
Monday, September 15 | |||
9:00-10:00 |
Daniel Hole, Alexander Wimmer & Peng Liu, University of Stuttgart
Our talk is concerned with Minimal Sufficiency (MS) as in (1) and (2). (Grosz 2011 coined the term, but the data had been around for decades.)
Our analysis will argue that, particularly for the recalcitrant cases from Chinese, an implementation in terms of correlative constructions is needed (Dayal 1995, 1996). More conservative analyses remain available and, we suggest, are more intuitively justified for the simpler cases. On the syntactic side, we offer a morphosyntactic account of the phenomenon of scalar particle doubling, which is crucial for the Chinese case. Lastly, we will demonstrate how the syntactic side of our proposal makes the right predictions concerning the discovery of new MS data types. |
||
10:00-11:00 |
Muyi Yang, University of Osaka
Abstract |
||
11:15-12:15 |
Jiayi Zhou, University of Connecticut
Abstract |
||
Tuesday, September 16 | |||
12:30-13:30 |
Alexander Wimmer & Daniel Hole, University of Stuttgart
We are going to present our ongoing work on Chinese constructions as in (1).
The goal is to discuss prospects for a syntax-and-semantics for Chinese CECs, building on already available analyses like Kaufmann's (2017). A compositional semantics for Chinese CECs minimally needs to make well-motivated assumptions about the interactions of (a) the antecedent (b) the evaluative predicate and (c) additional functional material, most crucially for us scalar particles like cai 'only.then' as in (1) and its frequent alternate jiu 'already.then'. At least for cai, it is fairly clear that it induces universal modal force just like 'only if' does in Korean (Chung 2019). A special challenge is posed by cases of modal concord (MC) like (1): the seemingly redundant co-occurrence of bouletic xiwang 'hope' in the antecedent and bouletic hao 'good' in the consequent. For more basic CECs like [if p, good], we will follow Kaufmann (2017) and Yang (2020) in treating [if p] as a definite description of worlds, and 'good' as a predicate thereof (Sode 2018). For MC-CECs like [hope p, good], we would like to argue that they are conjunctions of two roughly equivalent modal claims with a correlate anaphoric uptake of p in the consequent. Klinedinst & Rothschild's (2012) discussion of two types offers a potential way of unifying the MC- and the more basic cases as involving two types of conjunction. |
||
Wednesday, September 17 | |||
9:00-10:00 |
Teruyuki Mizuno, Ochanomizu University
Abstract |
||
10:00-11:00 |
Magdalena Kaufmann, University of Connecticut
Abstract |
||
12:15-13:15 | General Discussion | ||