NYU 24 - Temporal Reference
September - October 2024 - NYU
Embedded Files
(The schedule is still somewhat tentative, as we will adapt things as the seminar progresses)
Announcement: The discussion session will be held on Mondays, 3:30-5:20pm, in the Syntax/semantics lounge (linguistics building, 4th floor). The general session will be held on Tuesdays, 3:30-6:10pm, in room 103.
TOPIC
TOPIC
How does natural language refer to times? Partee 1973 famously argued that temporal dependency shouldn't be viewed in intensional (i.e. operator-based) terms but rather in anaphoric terms: just as pronouns may be viewed as time-denoting variables, some tenses may be viewed as time-denoting ones (a similar line of reasoning was later extended to modal dependency by Stone 1997). On independent grounds, it was surmised early on that pointing in sign language is sometimes an overt realization of variables. Interestingly, in American Sign Language (ASL) and in Chinese Sign Language (CSL), pointing is not restricted to individuals; it can sometimes be used to refer to times as well, thus converging with Partee's conclusion, but with one theoretical advantage: whereas tenses look nothing like pronouns in English, in ASL and CSL one and the same expression, the pointing sign, can have individual-denoting and time-denoting uses. This strengthens the case for the existence of an abstract anaphoric module that applies in comparable ways to individual and to temporal reference.
How does natural language refer to times? Partee 1973 famously argued that temporal dependency shouldn't be viewed in intensional (i.e. operator-based) terms but rather in anaphoric terms: just as pronouns may be viewed as time-denoting variables, some tenses may be viewed as time-denoting ones (a similar line of reasoning was later extended to modal dependency by Stone 1997). On independent grounds, it was surmised early on that pointing in sign language is sometimes an overt realization of variables. Interestingly, in American Sign Language (ASL) and in Chinese Sign Language (CSL), pointing is not restricted to individuals; it can sometimes be used to refer to times as well, thus converging with Partee's conclusion, but with one theoretical advantage: whereas tenses look nothing like pronouns in English, in ASL and CSL one and the same expression, the pointing sign, can have individual-denoting and time-denoting uses. This strengthens the case for the existence of an abstract anaphoric module that applies in comparable ways to individual and to temporal reference.
Beyond the existence of temporal anaphora, however, tense semantics is notoriously complex, owing to three main phenomena. First, in some languages, such as Russian, Hebrew, Greek and Japanese (but not English), the present tense may be evaluated with respect to the perspective of an attitude holder (= 'tense shift'). For instance, equivalents of Ann said a year ago that she is pregnant can be interpreted with the embedded present tense referring to Ann's 'now'. Second, in other languages, such as English, French and Greek (but not Russian, Hebrew, or Japanese), tense can remain uninterpreted in some environments (= 'tense shift'). Thus in Ann decided yesterday that she would tell her mother tomorrow that they were meeting for the last time, the past tense of were is uninterpreted. Third, there are cases in which a present tense seems to be constrained to include not just the time of utterance, but also the 'now' of an attitude holder (= 'Double Access Readings'). For instance, in Ann knew a month ago that she is pregnant, the pregnancy has to overlap with Ann's 'now' as well as with the time of utterance.
Beyond the existence of temporal anaphora, however, tense semantics is notoriously complex, owing to three main phenomena. First, in some languages, such as Russian, Hebrew, Greek and Japanese (but not English), the present tense may be evaluated with respect to the perspective of an attitude holder (= 'tense shift'). For instance, equivalents of Ann said a year ago that she is pregnant can be interpreted with the embedded present tense referring to Ann's 'now'. Second, in other languages, such as English, French and Greek (but not Russian, Hebrew, or Japanese), tense can remain uninterpreted in some environments (= 'tense shift'). Thus in Ann decided yesterday that she would tell her mother tomorrow that they were meeting for the last time, the past tense of were is uninterpreted. Third, there are cases in which a present tense seems to be constrained to include not just the time of utterance, but also the 'now' of an attitude holder (= 'Double Access Readings'). For instance, in Ann knew a month ago that she is pregnant, the pregnancy has to overlap with Ann's 'now' as well as with the time of utterance.
The seminar will offer an introduction to these topics, and it will leave ample time for discussion of ongoing work on temporal reference by seminar participants.
The seminar will offer an introduction to these topics, and it will leave ample time for discussion of ongoing work on temporal reference by seminar participants.
STRUCTURE
STRUCTURE
The current structure is as follows:
The current structure is as follows:
I. Intensional vs. extensional approaches to temporal expressions
a. Insight from sign language
b. Arguments in favor of an extensional approach
I. Intensional vs. extensional approaches to temporal expressions
a. Insight from sign language
b. Arguments in favor of an extensional approach
II. Tense semantics
II. Tense semantics
a. Tense shift
b. Tense deletion
c. Double Access Readings
a. Tense shift
b. Tense deletion
c. Double Access Readings
INSTRUCTOR
INSTRUCTOR
Email: philippe.schlenker@gmail.com
Note: P. Schlenker will be present at NYU for 8 weeks in September-October 2024. In addition, he will be at NYU for advising purposes for 3 weeks in May 2025 (precise dates to be determined later).
TIME AND PLACE
TIME AND PLACE
NYU Department of Linguistics
10 Washington Place
General sessions: Tuesdays 3:30-6:10pm, 10 WP room 103
Discussion sessions: Mondays 3:30-5:20pm, 10 WP syntax/semantics lounge (4th floor).
SYLLABUS
SYLLABUS
See below.
Honor Code
Honor Code
To foster learning and discussion, students are discouraged from using phones, tablets or laptops during class, unless this is solely to take notes and/or follow the pdf slides as they are presented (with all other applications closed).
[Summary of some data on this topic]
[Effects of laptop multitasking on users and nearby students]
Important
Important
(i) Please sign up here if you plan to attend some or all of the seminar (irrespective of whether you plan to enroll or not; this is just so that the instructor has your email address, can assess how many people will attend, and which topics will be of particular interest to the audience).
(ii) The discussion sessions (open to all graduate students, whether registered or not) will be scheduled over the summer by way of a poll.
REQUIREMENTS
REQUIREMENTS
Besides active class participation:
(i) 1 class presentation + 1 squib/mini-literature review (in some cases, the squib may be replaced with an additional class presentation);
(ii) 1 mini-term paper (to be emailed 10 days after the seminar end; ideally the mini-term paper will have been prepared by the two squibs/presentations in (i))
The squib and mini-term paper should be connected to the broad questions that will be addressed in the seminar.
You are encouraged to take the opportunity of this seminar to explore new datasets and propose new generalizations.
Please contact the instructor soon after the beginning of the term to discuss (i) and (ii).
Readings and slides
REFERENCES
REFERENCES
References that are not linked below appear in the shared Dropbox folder for the course.
Background
Partee 1973
Optional: Heim and von Fintel have a detailed book manuscript on intensional semantics
SCHEDULE AND TOPICS [to be adapted as we go]
SCHEDULE AND TOPICS [to be adapted as we go]
8 weeks in September-October - see below for sessions and readings.
–General sessions (2 hours 40 per week) will be held on Tuesdays, 3:30pm-6:10pm
–Discussion sessions (1 hour 45 per week) are open to all graduate students (whether registered or not for the course).
Note: Some sessions might be on Zoom (especially for invited talks).
Tuesday, September 3: Intensional vs. Extensional I: Insights from Sign Language
Readings: Background: Partee 1973
Start reading: Lectures Notes A, B and C, in the Dropbox folder [or relevant parts of Heim and von Fintel, Intensional Semantics]
Optional: Schlenker 2012 Temporal and modal anaphora in sign language (ASL)
Monday, September 9: discussion session: Zhuoye Zhao on tense shifting and then
Optional: Tsilia and Zhao 2024 [pdf]
Title: Tense and perspective: a solution to the then-present puzzle
Abstract: In this talk, we introduce a cross-linguistic pattern concerning the incompatibility between the temporal adverbial then and the present tense. It is demonstrated that the pattern holds in both matrix and embedded environments, and across an array of languages (including Modern Greek, Modern Hebrew, Russian and Japanese) that form a complex typology of tense shift. We use this pattern to motivate a new theory of tense where its interpretation is sensitive to a perspective parameter. Accordingly, tense shift is by means of a perspective-shifting operator, in a way similar to the operator-based analyses of indexical shift (Anand & Nevins 2004, Anand 2006, Deal 2020). We show the advantages of this analysis over alternatives that treat shifted tenses as having relative interpretations (e.g. Ogihara 1996, 2022) or with uninterpreted tense features (e.g. Ogihara & Sharvit 2012), highlighting a previously unnoticed difference between shifted present and deleted tense. Further, we argue that the perspective parameter needs to be distinguished from more familiar interpretation parameters such as the speech context and the evaluation index.
Tuesday, September 10: Intensional vs. Extensional II: Parameters vs. Variables
Readings: Lectures Notes A, B and C, in the Dropbox folder [or relevant parts of Heim and von Fintel, Intensional Semantics]
Optional: Percus, Constraints on Some Other Variables in Syntax
Monday, September 16 [contact the instructor about the topic of Squib #1]: discussion session: Anne Nguyen on temporal expressions in Vietnamese
Tuesday, September 17: Tense Semantics I
Readings: Section 1 and 2 of Ogihara and Sharvit
Optional: Heim's Comments on Abusch
Monday, September 23 [Squib #1 due!]: discussion session: Auromita Mitra on conditionals
Tuesday, September 24: Tense Semantics II
Monday, September 30: discussion session [contact the instructor about the topic of Squib #2]: Matthew Loder on features
Tuesday, October 1: Tense Semantics III
Monday, October 7: discussion session: Zhuoye Zhao on the Mandarin particle le across domains
Tuesday, October 8: Tense Semantics IV
Monday, September 14: No class!
Tuesday, October 15 [Squib #2 due!]: discussion session: Anne Nguyen on covert tense in Vietnamese NYU on a Monday schedule
Monday, October 21: discussion session: Matthew Loder on features (part II)
Tuesday, October 22 (last general session): Guest presentation (on Zoom): Haoze Li on the temporal interpretation of tenseless/bare sentences (including in Singlish)
Mini-term paper due [by email]: Friday, November 1, 2024, 9pm EST.
Instructions for the mini-squib(s)
Instructions for the mini-squib(s)
Choose between A, B, and C. In all cases, please consult with the instructor ASAP. Registered students should write one squib and give a class presentation (or write an additional squib). In some cases, the squib may be replaced with an additional class presentation.
Note: Your squib can be very short. Ideally, it should present one very clear argument or empirical problem.
A. Write a brief review of an article that concerns one of the topics that will be discussed in the seminar.
Consult with the instructor on the choice of the paper. Your squib should be empirically and formally precise. Be sure to specify in your review:
(i) the empirical problem that is addressed, and the generalizations that are discussed [state them precisely];
(ii) what the main formal proposal is;
(iii) how the formal analysis is applied to several selected examples;
(iv) what some strengths and weaknesses of the proposal are.
B. Write a squib related to one of the topics that will be discussed in the seminar. Your squib should be empirically and formally precise. The squib should be very focused, and it should:
(i) define a clear problem, which could be:
(a) an empirical problem, for instance:
a set of data for which an analysis we have discussed makes incorrect predictions,
a potential application of an analysis to significantly new examples or even data types [e.g. applying to emojis what has been developed for gestures]
a new set of data that our analyses have no account for [if so, you should eventually try to state a clear generalization]
(b) a formal problem that arises in some of the theories we have discussed;
(ii) give a precise analysis of the relevant data and formalisms;
(iii) discuss one or several possible solutions.
C. Give a class presentation, to be discussed with the instructor.
Instructions for the mini-term paper
Instructions for the mini-term paper
The mini-term paper should be a more elaborate version of B. above. The key is to find some crisp empirical and/or formal result, not to write something long. Approximate length: 6-10 pages.
Page updated
Google Sites
Report abuse