Dispositions Workshop 2015

Workshop on the Morphological, Syntactic and Semantic Aspects of Dispositions

University of Stuttgart, 25 June – 27 June 2015

The goal of this workshop is to explore questions about the morpho-syntax, semantics and underlying ontology of words and constructions used to describe dispositions. The central aim of the workshop is to develop a better understanding of how existing and novel insights from different approaches to dispositions can be integrated into a single theory of dispositions and their linguistic descriptions.

The Proceedings of the Workshop have been published here: http://elib.uni-stuttgart.de/handle/11682/8886

Invited Speakers

Artemis Alexiadou (University of Stuttgart)

Nora Boneh (The Hebrew University of Jerusalem)

Elena Castroviejo Miro (Centro de Ciencias Humanas y Sociales, Madrid)

Ariel Cohen (Ben Gurion University)

Bridget Copley (University of Paris 8)

Hans Kamp (University of Stuttgart)

Marika Lekakou (University of Ioannina)

John Maier (University of Cambridge)

Christopher Pinon (University of Lille 3)

Sven Lauer (University of Konstanz)

Karoly Varasdi (University of Düsseldorf)

Barbara Vetter (Humboldt University Berlin)

Questions to be addressed by the Workshop

1. What are the truth conditions of dispositional statements?

2. How are these truth conditions determined compositionally?

3. In what ways can dispositions be linguistically expressed?

4. What are linguistic tests for dispositionality?

5. Are there distinct notions of ‘disposition’ between which a linguistic theory of disposition description should distinguish?

6. Among the words that can be used to express dispositionality are nouns, adjectives and verbs. What systematic connections are there between the ways in which different parts of speech do this, in particular between deverbal nouns and adjectives and the underlying verbs?

7. What role do temporal and aspectual sentence constituents play in the verbal expression of dispositions?

8. How do dispositional statements differ from habitual and frequency statements?

9. What relations are there between dispositions and causality?

10. One of the constructions that can be used to describe dispositions are middles. (An example: the German sentence `Dieser Satz liest sich leicht’ (‘This sentence is easy to read’)). Is ‘middle’ a morpho-syntactic or a notional concept? Where do the argument positions of disposition-expressing middles come from? What is the syntax-semantics interface for these constructions?