Abstracts

Pinning down what it means to have the verbal category and lexical aspect

Boban Arsenijevic, Karl-Franzens-Universität Graz

This talk proposes a new way to understand verb phrases (VPs) by focusing on how they connect meaning and syntactic structure. It builds on existing ideas using scalar semantics to explain how verbs describe events.

The core idea is that verbs express a scalar mapping between instantiations of a particular property on a particular entity and time. Technically, this involves a mapping of a real interval onto two sets: a set of time-points and a set of property instantiations on an entity. Four basic types of intervals yield the four aspectual classes: open complex intervals give processes, closed complex intervals accomplishments, binary intervals give achievements and singletons give states.

This approach concretizes previous theories identifying aspect as the defining property of the verbal category (Borer 2005, a.o.). Its further advantages include deriving the aspectual classes, as well as the upper limit of two internal arguments (one expressing the property bearer and the other specifying the bounding degree) and the measuring semantics of the direct object. Time permits, advantages in capturing subtle differences in verb prefixes will also be outlined.

Massy-Processes as Aristotelian Universals

Riccardo Baratella, University of Geneva, University of Genoa

According to a main line of research, nominalization transcriptions of predications with an imperfective aspect individuate massy-processes. However, supporters of this view don’t provide any metaphysical account of these entities. Under the assumption that there are Aristotelian Universals, we specify a class of Aristotelian Universals, and we argue that these universals are apt to be identified with massy-processes.

The Ontology of Action: Acts and Activities 

Robin Timothée Bianchi, Université de Neuchâtel

This paper proposes to reconcile two views in the ontology of action: EVENT, the view that actions are events; and PROCESS, the view that actions are processes. The argument is straightforward. If there is no real distinction between events and processes, then the opposition between these two views is dissolved. But if there is such a distinction, then there is a corresponding distinction in the agential domain between acts and activities. If so, action pluralism, the view that the category of action is not subsumed under a single ontological category, but that some actions (acts) are events and some actions (activities) are processes, is true. This paper explains and defends the premises of this argument.

Is Participation in an Event the Realization of a Disposition?

Ludger Jansen, Phil.-Theol. Hochschule Brixen, University of Rostock

Formal ontologies like the Basic Formal Ontology (BFO) know two relations bridging the sphere of continuants (objects, properties) and occurrents (events, processes): participation and realization. Participation is the relation obtaining between things or properties on the one hand and the events and processes in which they take part. In contrast, realization is specific to so-called realizable entities like dispositions, functions or roles. Dispositions are causal properties like water solubility, conductivity or elasticity which allow their bearers to participate in certain processes. A sugar cube, being a bearer of an instance of the disposition type water solubility, will dissolve when put in water, thereby realizing its disposition to dissolve in water. It is a standard axiom of that bearers participate in the realization processes of their disposition. The talk will explore in how far we should accept the opposite direction: Is every participation in an event by an object the realization of some of the object's disposition?

In Defence of Tatevosov’s Actional Classification

Anna Kulikova, HSE University

Vsevolod Masliukov, Lomonosov Moscow State University

For the past few decades, most work on lexical aspect in various languages has been largely based on Vender’s classification and its extensions. It has also served as a basis for some influential formal approaches to event structure. Our work aims to draw attention to the limitations of the Vendlerian system. We will argue that a different actional classification, that of Sergei Tatevosov (Tatevosov 2003), is empirically superior in a number of cases. To prove our point, we will look at how both systems can deal with linguistic phenomena which are not quite typical for Standard Average European languages, but attested elsewhere. Those include non-culminating accomplishments (NCAs), inceptive-stative verbs, and progressive-resultative polysemy. The comparison we make between the two classifications will reveal that Tatevosov’s system yields clear generalizations in these cases, whereas approaching the data from the Vendlerian viewpoint does not give satisfying results.

Unveiling Sortal Restrictions: New Diagnostics and Insights into the Ontology of Events and States

Claudia Maienborn, Universität Tübingen

The demarcation of the sortal range of predicates is often controversial and presents challenges regarding the distinction between linguistic knowledge and world knowledge. Above all, there is a lack of reliable, robust diagnostics. I will argue that linguistics and the philosophy of language must take on this challenge rather than dismiss it as marginal lexicographic diligence. In this vein, I propose new diagnostic tools that exploit differences in the Common Ground status of linguistic vs. world knowledge. Applying these diagnostics to determine the sortal constraints of event and state predicates can reveal fundamental ontological differences between Davidsonian eventualities and Kimian states concerning the involvement of participants.

The Covert Ontology of Process Mining: Data-Driven Event Semantics

Riley Moher and Michael Grüninger, University of Toronto

Process mining transforms event logs into valuable insights and measurements of business process knowledge, encompassing tasks like process discovery, concept drift analysis, and predictive process monitoring. These tasks require diverse and deep process knowledge, derived from event logs commonly defined by the eXtensible Event Stream (XES) Standard. While XES provides a flexible framework for describing events, the actual practice of process mining reveals additional knowledge not captured by these standards. With a focus on how process mining is actually done, rather than how it is supposed to be done, we identify intended process/event semantics that are both novel and useful for process knowledge representation in the practice of process mining. We propose three key research claims: (1) the ontology of events, as practiced in process mining, forms a novel and useful ontology of process knowledge; (2) existing event and process mining ontologies fail to capture the practical ontological commitments inherent in process mining practices; and (3) real-world business process questions and associated data from process mining serve as guiding challenges for developing novel and practical process ontologies. To address these claims, we advocate for the development of novel event ontologies based on the implicit ontologies present in process mining practices, using a framework based on real-world guiding challenges. Our methodology guides the development of a modular ontology of events tailored for process mining. This approach enhances the robustness of process mining analyses and offers a valuable framework for developing ontologies in other domains. By grounding ontology development in real-world datasets and challenges, we aim to bridge the gap between process ontology frameworks and practical application in process mining.

Lexical Decomposition of Verbs and the Notion of an Abstract State

Friederike Moltmann, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS), BCL-Université Côte d'Azur, Nice
Various linguists and philosophers have argued that (at least certain) verbs should be analysed as complex predicates of the form light verb - noun (walk - take a walk, need - have need, believe - have a belief). I will explore such an approach further, applying it to the semantics of abstract-state verbs (or 'Kimian' state verbs in Maienborn's terms). I show that such an analysis can account for serious problems for Neo-Davidsonian event semantics when applied to abstract state verbs and for a neglected restriction on explicit property reference (the property of owning a house, the property of being sleep vs. *the property of sleeping).

The Relations Between and Within Events

Michele Paolini Paoletti, University of Macerata

After distinguishing between internal and external relations, I shall introduce three strategies that can be adopted in order to show that a given relation R is external. I shall then apply these strategies to show that time-relative relations (i.e., relations that hold between times/time intervals and further entities) are external. Time-relative relations are also the relations that typically hold within and between events and processes. Therefore, the latter relations are external as well. I shall then consider some reactions to my arguments, that consist: in taking time-relative relations as (i) internal parthood or (ii) internal causal relations or (iii) as relational properties or in (iv) embracing presentism or in (v) appealing to analogies between spatial and temporal relations or to (vi) genidentity internal relations within processes. I shall show that these reactions fail and that some of them are committed to unpalatable ontological theses. 

Are events structured wholes? 

Alfonso Romero-Zuniga, Universität Tübingen

Events are central in both our scientific inquiry and our everyday life. But what are events anyway? In this talk, I try to answer this question by arguing that events are four-dimensional structured wholes, composed of matter and form. I begin by examining our pre-philosophical image of events. This image encompasses both our common-sense understanding and the scientific conception of events, which highlights features like change, speaker dependence, and internal structure. In a further step, I propose the idea of instantaneous stages, in order to make sense of events’ material parts. Analyzing the idea of events’ form represents the core of this talk. The main idea here is to analyze the concept of parthood through the concept of slot-filling. Slots represent the formal spaces that organize the components of a whole in a precise manner. In the case of events, these slots are filled by the above-mentioned stages, belonging to a specific kind. The talk concludes by exploring how this framework can contribute to discussions within the metaphysics of events, such as event individuation, events’ essences and the distinction events/processes. 

Ontological puzzles of non-intersective adjectives and as phrases

Starr Sandoval, University of British Columbia 

Quality adjectives are a subclass of non-intersective modifiers that describe the 'way' an individual holds and/or performs an identity or role (e.g.responsible driver, skillful singer, strict teacher, careful surgeon). A Larsonean analysis would paraphrase these NPs as VPs (e.g. drives responsibly) and represent them with a generic quantifier over Davidsonean events---e.g. responsible modifies typical driving events by an individual. With Maienborn 2021, I argue that events alone cannot fully represent the nuanced dimensions of a nominal that a quality adjective can modify. For example, driver and (habitual) drives are not semantically equivalent. Driver cannot merely be represented with driving events, as it involves more than just driving. Of the two, only responsible driver can refer to someone who registers their license on time or changes their oil regularly. To represent this difference, I follow Siegel 1976's paraphrase: the non-intersective effect of quality adjectives stems from an unpronounced asphrase. I represent this as phrase using Kratzerian situations in line with Moltmann 2003. At the same time, I argue a Larsonean analysis does encapsulate deep grammatical connections between the NP and the VP. I introduce novel data showing quality modifiers are restricted by their head nouns, just as habitual VPs are restricted by adverbials. To represent this connection, I use a generic quantifier that situates the nominal in the restrictor and the adjective in the nuclear scope.

How events are born: bringing morphology, syntax and semantics together

Michal Starke, Masaryk University

I will argue that small morphological cues such as cross-linguistic syncretism patterns give important insights into the birth and growth of events. Putting together syntactic asymmetries, morphological patterns and semantic interpretation, a picture emerges in which the notion of event is derived, not primitive; hierarchical, not a flat conjunction; and constructed through a multitude of small steps rigidly ordered. This will be explored through a particular focus on "aspectual" contrasts within the traditionally called imperfective aspect.

When unergativity and unaccusativity shake hands: A case study on German vehicle verbs and their motion events

Yunhe Zhao, Universität Tübingen

In terms of their grammatical properties, intransitive verbs are often divided into two classes, namely unergatives and unaccusatives. Unergatives select an agent as the grammatical subject, while unaccusatives select a patient. However, German intransitive vehicle verbs (e.g. fahren ‘drive’, fliegen ‘fly’, etc.) lie in the classification gap, because they exhibit both unergative and unaccusative properties. With vehicle verbs, both the driver (agent) and the vehicle (patient) can be syntactically implemented as subjects in German, see (1a) vs. (1b). If a passenger is present, the passenger (patient) is also allowed as a grammatical subject, see (1c).

(1)        a. Der Chauffeur ist in die Stadt gefahren.

              det.chauffeur.aux.to.det.city.driven

              ‘The chauffeur has driven to the city.’

            b. Das Auto ist in die Stadt gefahren.

              det.car.aux.to.det.city.driven

              ‘The car has driven to the city.’

            c. Der Präsident ist in die Stadt gefahren.

              det.president.aux.to.det.city.driven

              ‘The president has been driven to the city.’

In aims of explaining this unaccusativity-unergativity mismatch, I present two variants for German intransitive vehicle verbs: the unergative and the unaccusative variant. The unergative variant such as (1a) is accessed, when the agent of the motion event takes the position of grammatical subject, whereas the unaccusative variant like (1b) and (1c) is derived from the transitive use (e.g. Der Chauffeur hat das Auto/den Präsidenten in die Stadt gefahren. ‘The driver has driven the car/the president to the city.’) and can only be accessed when the cause of the motion event – i.e. the agent – is absent, so that the subject position can be taken by the patient, as an effect of causative alternation. The two variants show great potential for further researches, because their difference can be analyzed both semantically and syntactically, in that a) the subjects of the two variants receive different thematic roles, and b) they are syntactically base-generated at different positions.