Dec 182019
 

David Pesetsky recently posted Cilene Rodrigues’ response to Everett & Gibson’s "review" of the Recursion Across Domains book for the Linguistic Society of America (LSA)’s flagship journal, Language. I posted a comment there asking why we should support the LSA given that they publish things like the E&G "review."

The discussion thread in question devolved – and this was partially my fault – into a broader discussion of the pros and cons of the LSA as a professional organization, until David, rightly, asked that everyone shift focus back to the actual topic of his post.

In the interest of that, I thought I’d write some of my further thoughts on the LSA over here, rather than in the comments on David’s post. … [read more]

Oct 202019
 
I just got home from Oslo, where I had many really interesting interactions with several linguists. One of them was a conversation with fellow visitor Jonathan Bobaljik. We were talking about the relatively well-known observation that for many alleged “syntax-semantics mapping phenomena,” the expected mappings only go through if the syntax … [read more] blogpost: Meaning contrasts: generated or parasitic?”
Oct 032019
 

Here's a thing that I'm sure happens to everyone from time to time:

  1. You read or hear about phenomenon X or generalization X or theoretical proposal X.
  2. Time passes.
  3. You happen upon some new data or a new idea, for which X proves relevant.
  4. However, it turns out that you have imperfect recall of X. Unbeknownst to you, what you have in your head is actually some rejiggered version of X – let's call it X' – which conveniently-and-suspiciously suits your current theoretical or empirical needs. … [read more]
Aug 072019
 
This is a post about listedness: what is the nature of the idiosyncratic information that is listed in the grammar. In traditional, lexicalist approaches, the listed atoms were lexical items. A lexical item contained, at minimum, a phonological form, a semantic interpretation, … [read more]
Jun 082019
 
There's been a fair amount of generative linguistics work over the past 15 years or so that identifies itself as "morphosemantics." There are several reasons why I don't think morphosemantics is a coherent notion. In this post, I'd like to detail some of these reasons. You've probably heard ~1.5 of them before, though, so if that's the case feel free to skip ahead as needed. The first reason is conceptual. As already discussed on this blog, … [read more]
Mar 052019
 
Here is a paper by Canaan Breiss and Bruce Hayes (I will refer to the paper as B&H). To offer a brief summary of B&H’s main empirical point, it shows that the choice of syntactic ‘structure’ (i.e., both the choice of terminals and their arrangement) is probabilistically biased towards avoiding phonotactically problematic sequences … [read more] blogpost: Adventures in modularity, phonological optimization edition”
Feb 212019
 
This is another post, much like this one (and very much inspired by it), that is more about professional development / career issues, and less about linguistics. So if this kind of thing interests you less, maybe skip this one. One thing that academics have to periodically do throughout their careers is write various kinds of "statements" about what they've done so far, and what they're going to do in the future. … [read more]

blogpost: Kudos

 Posted by on 01/29/2019  1 Response »
Jan 292019
 
I just stumbled upon this: ... Notice the "Published in" field: Lisa Selkirk and Angelika Kratzer have made it publicly known that this paper received a rejection in its very first round of review from Language. I don't think it can be overstated how important it is for senior people to share … [read more]