{"id":13734,"date":"2020-09-28T06:06:00","date_gmt":"2020-09-28T10:06:00","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/whamit.mit.edu\/?p=13734"},"modified":"2020-09-28T06:06:00","modified_gmt":"2020-09-28T10:06:00","slug":"lf-reading-group-9-30-tanya-bondarenko-2","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/ling-phil.mit.edu\/whamit\/2020\/09\/28\/lf-reading-group-9-30-tanya-bondarenko-2\/","title":{"rendered":"LF Reading Group 9\/30 - Tanya Bondarenko"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><strong>Speaker: <\/strong> Tanya Bondarenko<br class=\"\"><strong>Title: <\/strong>A problem with Content<br class=\"\"><strong>Time: <\/strong>Wednesday, September 30th, 1pm - 2pm<br class=\"\"><br class=\"\"><strong>Abstract: <\/strong>Under Kratzer\u0092s approach to the semantics of clausal embedding (Kratzer 2006; 2016, Moulton 2009; 2015, Bogal-Allbritten 2016;2017, Elliott 2017), embedded clauses denote not propositions (2), but individuals with content (1).<\/p>\n<p>(1)   [[that it is raining]] = ?xe. Content(x) = ?ws. it is raining in w<br clear='none'\/>\n(2)   [[that it is raining]] = ?ws. it is raining in w<\/p>\n<p>In this talk I show some evidence that the meaning in (1) is not sufficient to account for the range of what CPs can mean:  CPs across different languages are ambiguous between (1) and another meaning, which I illustrate in (3) with an example from Russian. In (3) the CP describes not a contentful individual, but the kind of a situation that took place. <\/p>\n<p>(3)   Slo\u009eilas\u0092       takaja  situacija, [?to   ja utopil  svoj    telefon]<br clear='none'\/>\n        happened   such    situation  that  I   sunk    self\u0092s  phone<br clear='none'\/>\n        \u0091A situation in which I sunk my phone happened.\u0092<\/p>\n<p>I would like to argue that the meaning of the CP in (3) is not reducible to (1) or (2). I sketch out a more abstract meaning for CPs, which is dependent on whether the argument that CP modifies is a contentful individual or a situation, and show a syntactic diagnostic in Russian that allows to distinguish between the two interpretations. <\/p>\n<p>This work is at the very beginning stage, and I am very much looking forward to your feedback!<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Speaker: Tanya BondarenkoTitle: A problem with ContentTime: Wednesday, September 30th, 1pm - 2pmAbstract: Under Kratzer\u0092s approach to the semantics of clausal embedding (Kratzer 2006; 2016, Moulton 2009; 2015, Bogal-Allbritten 2016;2017, Elliott 2017), embedded clauses denote not propositions (2), but individuals with content (1). (1) [[that it is raining]] = ?xe. Content(x) = ?ws. it is [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":26,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-13734","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-announcements"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/ling-phil.mit.edu\/whamit\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/13734","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/ling-phil.mit.edu\/whamit\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/ling-phil.mit.edu\/whamit\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ling-phil.mit.edu\/whamit\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/26"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ling-phil.mit.edu\/whamit\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=13734"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/ling-phil.mit.edu\/whamit\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/13734\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/ling-phil.mit.edu\/whamit\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=13734"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ling-phil.mit.edu\/whamit\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=13734"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ling-phil.mit.edu\/whamit\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=13734"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}