Whamit!

Speaker: James Cooper Roberts (MIT)

Title: Part is part (plus pragmatics)

Time: Thursday, November 20th, 5pm - 6pm

Location: 32-D769



Abstract: In this work, I argue that the natural language item part (and its translational equivalents) is the same as the mereological notion of PROPER PART, full stop. While this seems trivially true, state-of-the-art semantics often assumes this is not the case; Link (1983) posits two parthood relations for part of an individual and part of a plurality (MATERIAL vs. ATOMIC parts), and those who assume one relation posit additional constraints on the transitivity of parthood (Moltmann, 1997; Wagiel, 2021). The latter is done in service of the observation that parts of atomic individuals seemingly cannot be part of a plurality. For example, a world where only Jerry Seinfeld’s hand is completely covered in paint is not a verifying case for (1).

(1) Part of the New Yorkers are completely covered in paint.

I will argue against the approaches outlined above, opting to instead include parts of atoms in the denotation of plural partitives. The interpretation we get for (1), I propose, is actually the result of pragmatics rather than semantics (Grice, 1975’s MAXIM OF QUANTITY). This position is bolstered by the fact that the “inclusive” reading of a plural partitive becomes available under negation and epistemic uncertainty (cf. plurals, Sauerland et al. 2005).

[This is a practice talk for my upcoming presentation at OASIS 5.]

Speaker: Rotsuprit Saengthong (MIT)
Title: Clause Size Reduction by Projection Feature
Time: Tuesday, November 18th, 1pm - 2pm
Location: 32-D461

Abstract: I will present an ongoing project on clausal complementation. I have observed that when tested with restructuring diagnostics as used in Wurmbrand (2001), clauses containing functional elements (e.g., C and T) behave like full CPs in some environments, but in other environments, they behave as if they are smaller than expected given the presence of those functional elements. Such variation is evident in Thai control constructions, where infinitival complements contain the same morphemes as full CPs, yet lack the defining properties of CPs. For instance, certain clauses include C and T morphemes but behave syntactically like vPs. These facts suggest that the mechanisms of structure building—specifically Merge and Labeling/Projection—may operate differently in such environments. I propose that in Merge (?, ?), there may be what I tentatively call a Projection feature, which determines which head is selected for projection. I further argue that clausal reduction arises as a consequence of this operation.

Speaker: Amy Li (MIT)
Title: A phonetic correlate of velar palatalization: shorter front cavity
Time: Monday, November 17th, 5pm - 6:30pm
Location: 32-D831

Abstract: I will start this talk by practicing presenting the poster that I will bring to the ASA (poster abstract below).

Velar palatalization is a common sound change involving a velar stop becoming a palatal affricate or fricative before a front vocoid. To gain insight into its phonetic mechanisms, we test two hypotheses about factors conditioning velar palatalization by comparing similar languages with and without the change: (1) the conditioning vowels are fronter in languages with the change, resulting in fronter closure of the velar through coarticulatory assimilation; or (2) languages with the change have stronger coarticulation of velar stops with following segments, resulting in greater fronting preceding front vocoids. Specifically, we compare two Chinese languages, Mandarin, which underwent velar palatalization in the 16th-17th centuries ({k, kh, x} became {t?, t?h, ?} before high front vowels), and Cantonese, which has not undergone the change in the last millennium. Our results support hypothesis (1) but not (2). We find that Mandarin speakers produce [i] and [y] with a higher front cavity resonance (third formant for [i] and second formant for [y]), implying a shorter front cavity. Velar coarticulation, measured by locus equation slope, does not differ significantly between the two languages. This suggests that the phonetic preconditions of velar palatalization lie in an especially front articulation of the conditioning vocoid.

Then, I will discuss two new hypotheses in response to my results: (1) the conditioning vowels have small enough front cavities in languages with the velar palatalization change that that they can be considered coronal, so coarticulation of the velar consonant with this coronal vowel results in the coronal output of the change; and (2) the conditioning vowels have shorter front cavities in languages with the change due to longer tongue constrictions, which facilitate frication given coarticulation with the velar consonant. I will share some of my attempts to test these new hypotheses. Finally, I will present my planned next steps of the project, including making new recordings comparing (some varieties of) Cretan Greek, in which {k, kh, x} became {t?, t?h, ?} before [i] and [e], and standard modern Greek.