The interface of lexical semantics and conceptual structure deverbal and denominal nominalizations

Nominalizations can refer to events, instances of events or participants in an event. The particular reference is determined by the lexical semantics of the base and the suffix, and by the conceptual structure of the base. The comparison between deverbal and denominal nominalization in -ata in Italian reveals that the conceptual structure plays a crucial role in determining the reference of a nominalization. Italian nominalizations of -ata are productively derived from verbal and nominal bases. Derivations from verbal bases refer to a single event denoted by the base. Derivations from a nominal base N denote events or results corresponding to a limited number of pattems, such as a hit by N, a characteristic action of N, a period of N, a quantity that is contained in N, etc. The paper argues that the function of the suffix operates on the lexical meaning of the base, but the con~positiono f the lexical meaning of the base with the lexical meaning of the suffix is restricted by the conceptual properties of the base

Specificity and definiteness in sentence and discourse structure

In this paper, I argue that this informally given list of characteristics covers only a certain subclass of specific indefinites. […] In particular, I dispute the definition of specific indefinites as "the speaker has the referent in mind" as rather confusing if one is working with a semantic theory. Furthermore, I discuss "relative specificity", it. cases in which the specific indefinite does not exhibit wide, but intermediate or narrow scope behavior. Based on such data, I argue that specificity expresses a referential dependency between introduced discourse items. Informally speaking, the specificity of the indefinite expression something [...] expresses that the reference of the expression depends on the reference of another expression, here, on the expression a monk, not the speaker

Information structure and the referential status of linguistic expression : workshop as part of the 23th annual meetings of the Deutsche Gesellschaft für Sprachwissenschaft in Leipzig, Leipzig, February 28 - March 2, 2001

This volume comprises papers that were given at the workshop Information Structure and the Referential Status of Linguistic Expressions, which we organized during the Deutsche Gesellschaft für Sprachwissenschaft (DGfS) Conference in Leipzig in February 2001. At this workshop we discussed the connection between information structure and the referential interpretation of linguistic expressions, a topic mostly neglected in current linguistics research. One common aim of the papers is to find out to what extent the focus-background as well as the topic-comment structuring determine the referential interpretation of simple arguments like definite and indefinite NPs on the one hand and sentences on the other

Semantics and Proof Theory of the Epsilon Calculus

The epsilon operator is a term-forming operator which replaces quantifiers in ordinary predicate logic. The application of this undervalued formalism has been hampered by the absence of well-behaved proof systems on the one hand, and accessible presentations of its theory on the other. One significant early result for the original axiomatic proof system for the epsilon-calculus is the first epsilon theorem, for which a proof is sketched. The system itself is discussed, also relative to possible semantic interpretations. The problems facing the development of proof-theoretically well-behaved systems are outlined.Comment: arXiv admin note: substantial text overlap with arXiv:1411.362

The Discourse Structuring Potential of Definite Noun Phrases in Romanian

This paper investigates an alternation found with definite noun phrases in direct object position in Romanian that represents a theoretical puzzle for current theories of Differential Object Marking in this language (Gramatica Limbii Române 2005, Klein & de Swart 2011). When in direct object position and unmodified, definite noun phrases can be accompanied either by the differential object marker pe, or by the simple enclitic definite article-ul, but not by both at the same time. Based on the findings of a sentence continuation experiment, we show that pe-marking is used for noun phrases that show a high discourse structuring potential, which is reflected by their (i) likelihood of subsequent mention (Givón 1983, Arnold 2010) and (ii) topic shift potential (Givón 1983). Furthermore, this paper raises interesting questions about referent tracking in discourse, in particular whether or in what way different types of definite noun phrases contribute to the discourse structuring potential of their referents

Relative Specificity

Semantic theories of specificity are based on the assumptions that a specific indefinite has wide scope and/or a referential reading. However, there are specific indefinites that are neither wide scope expressions nor referential expressions. I call this kind of specificity “relative specificy” and take it as the most general case of specific indefinites. I propose that indefinite NPs have a referential index, like modal or temporal indices. This index can be anchored to another expression in the discourse. If the index is anchored to another referential expression, the indefinite receives a specific reading

Specificity, Referentiality and Discourse Prominence: German Indefinite Demonstratives

There are various notions of specificity, ranging from Fodor & Sag’s (1982) referentiality view to Givón’s (1983) discourse prominence view. Ionin (2006) discusses the relation between these two perspectives by analyzing the English indefinite this. She represents indefinite this as a referential operator in the sense of Fodor & Sag (1982), but also adds the felicity condition of “noteworthiness”. She notes that it is an open question how these two properties of indefinite this are linked to each other. Wright & Givón (1987) claim that the discourse prominence is primary and that referential properties are derived from it. I argue that the contrary holds: On the analysis of German indefinite demonstrative dies (‘this‘) and so’n (‘such-a’) I demonstrate how we can derive discourse properties of indefinite demonstratives from their referential properties