Relativism and Universalism in Linguistics - Fachbereich 10 ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

182 Workshops identify a class of indefinite Cs (typically interrogative ones), along with a class of definite Cs (typically declarative ones). Complementizer selection then shows that, at least in subordinating languages, complementation is best characterized in terms of formal features which account for common patterns, despite apparent differences which can be restricted to the lexicon. At the same time it allows to draw on the similarities between Cs and determiner-like elements, such as pronouns, showing that there is a further cross-linguistic unification which can be best expressed in term of features. Constrained Relativism Is Nothing but Implicit Universalism Struckmeier, Volker University of Cologne volker.struckmeier@uni-koeln.de According to the crude version of relativism outlined in the conference proposal, languages should differ from one another because extralinguistic factors make them differ. However, this view may contain a conceptual fallacy. The discipline of linguistics has developed various models and theories that would seem to constrain the degree to which languages can actually differ for language-external reasons, namely quite simply the degree to which language-internal considerations force them to be similar to one another. It is immediately obvious, that any relativist theory that allows for restrictions (e.g. of the formalist or the functionalist type) on the variability of languages falls short of a complete description of language: While some portions of language can be shown to vary, others will unavoidably fall into the domain of universalist necessity. I will show that the typology of sentence types can cover yet one more semantico-syntactic phenomenon, namely the possibility to express attribution. I will present a common morphosyntactic structure for attributes in German, which is in effect structurally parallel to a relative clause. Attributes in German, then, constitute nothing but yet one more sentence type. This sentence type is to be expected on formalist grounds, because it comprises no new machinery whatsoever and should thus arise from the free “tinkering” of a minimalist syntax left to play. My representation also allows for a semantic analysis that regards attribution as an expectable (if not necessary) kind of structure in so far as it completes a system of “reference types”. This semantic representation might, I suppose, just as well be reinterpreted as a piece of functionalist evidence to the effect that languages might differ in morphosyntactic realizations for a given semantic operation, but not in the set of the semantic operations that these realizations serve to express. As the system of reference types also include predicative and referential structures, the major linguistic operations constitute conceptually necessary pieces of a system ou tout se tient from both a formalist and functionalist perspective. It can be claimed, then, that attributive, predicative and referential structures constitute something we can expect from any and all languages. Typological investigations seem to support this assumption in that all languages cater for these necessities in some way. If this is indeed the case, the question of relativism vs. universalism boils down to a much more modest (if somewhat malevolent) question: Given that universalism seems to be a logical necessity for major linguistic operations, what is actually left for a relativist theory to decide? To put it the other way round: If the relativist position cannot provide a substantial set of phenomena that are actually variable in the languages of the world, it actually amounts to nothing more than a description of the periphery that surrounds the universalist grammar it then logically implies.
Workshop 6 (Had): La scalarité, concept éclaté ou outil explicatif performant? Hadermann, Pascale (Ghent) / Pierrard, Michel (Brussels) / Van Raemdonck, Dan (Brussels) Wednesday, August 30, 2006 Conference room: GW1 C1070 10:15–11:00 Inkova, Olga (Univ. de Genève) Scalarité et anaphore : sur quelques expressions scalaires en russe Coffee break 11:30–12:15 Adler, Silvia (Haifa University) / Asnes, Maria (Tel Aviv University, Bar Ilan University) Prépositions au service de la scalarité 12:15–13:00 Leroy, Sarah (Univ. de Paris X) Scalarité et comparaison. Le cas de comme et tel (que) Lunch break 15:00–15:45 Hadermann, Pascale (Univ. de Gand) / Pierrard, Michel (Univ. de Bruxelles – V.U.B) / Raemdonck, Dan Van (Univ. de Bruxelles – U.L.B. & V.U.B.) Quantification versus scalarité : l'exemple de la complémentarité de tant et autant. 15:45–16:15 Ferré, Gaëlle (Univ. de Paris III) Les gestes d'accentuation du discours en anglais oral Coffee break 17:00–17:45 Tovena, Lucia (Univ. de Paris VII) Polarity and the additive vs. scalar alternance Prépositions au service de la scalarité Adler, Silvia / Asnes, Maria Haifa University / Tel Aviv University, Bar Ilan University sadler@univ.haifa.ac.il;maria.asnes@gmail.com Notre contribution portera sur deux prépositions spatio-temporelles françaises jusqu’à et audelà de qui peuvent devenir têtes de PPs scalaires. PP spatial: 1. Pousser la voiture jusqu’au garage 2. La volonté d'expansion les a poussés au-delà des Pyrénées
Page 1 and 2:
Societas Linguistica Europaea SLE 3
Page 3:
Table of Contents SLE 2006 in Breme
Page 6 and 7:
Organization Local Organizing Commi
Page 8 and 9:
4 Programme Overview Thursday, Augu
Page 10 and 11:
6 Programme Overview Saturday, Sept
Page 13 and 14:
Wednesday, August 30, 2006 Section
Page 15 and 16:
Section A: Language Contact 11 Afri
Page 17 and 18:
Section A: Language Contact 13 (8)
Page 19 and 20:
Section A: Language Contact 15 Stad
Page 21 and 22:
Section A: Language Contact 17 (3)
Page 23:
Section A: Language Contact 19 The
Page 26 and 27:
22 Sections 15:30-16:00 Oguy, Oleks
Page 28 and 29:
24 Sections The contribution of lin
Page 30 and 31:
26 Sections Perception and percepti
Page 32 and 33:
28 Sections Universelle vs. idioeth
Page 34 and 35:
30 Sections Die semantischen Regula
Page 36 and 37:
32 Sections substance (linguistic u
Page 38 and 39:
34 Sections (In fact the very “ga
Page 40 and 41:
36 Sections Relativism vs. Universa
Page 42 and 43:
38 Sections 14:30-15:00 Wischer, Il
Page 44 and 45:
40 Sections Cognitive etymology as
Page 46 and 47:
42 Sections ostbaltischen Futurs be
Page 48 and 49:
44 Sections functional heads in syn
Page 50 and 51:
46 Sections On the diachrony of Ita
Page 53 and 54:
Wednesday, August 30, 2006 Section
Page 55 and 56:
Section D: Pronouns 51 References C
Page 57 and 58:
Section D: Pronouns 53 System of Pr
Page 59:
Section D: Pronouns 55 Siewierska,
Page 62 and 63:
58 Sections We make use of a distin
Page 64 and 65:
60 Sections An Analysis of the V2 S
Page 66 and 67:
62 Sections organisations sémantiq
Page 68 and 69:
64 Sections The Iconic Function of
Page 71 and 72:
Friday, September 1, 2006 Section F
Page 73 and 74:
Section F: Phonology 69 This paper
Page 75 and 76:
Section F: Phonology 71 Despite the
Page 77:
Section F: Phonology 73 References
Page 80 and 81:
76 Sections Modal Particles in Dutc
Page 82 and 83:
78 Sections Im Vortrag sollen haupt
Page 84 and 85:
80 Sections Woolford, E. 2001. Case
Page 86 and 87:
82 Sections Negation and perfective
Page 88 and 89:
84 Sections Sekundäre Prädikate -
Page 90 and 91:
86 Sections Developments in English
Page 92 and 93:
88 Sections Scrambling in the AP an
Page 94 and 95:
90 Sections Schwartz, Bonnie et Rex
Page 96 and 97:
92 Sections various argumental and
Page 98 and 99:
94 Sections References Fanego, Tere
Page 100 and 101:
96 Sections Preverbs in Modern Geor
Page 102 and 103:
98 Sections S to R. Relating the re
Page 104 and 105:
100 Sections Rainer, Franz. 1993. S
Page 106 and 107:
102 Sections greatly remind of the
Page 108 and 109:
104 Sections Lüdtke, H. 1980. Auf
Page 110 and 111:
106 Sections Language-specific prof
Page 112 and 113:
108 Sections studies of color word
Page 114 and 115:
110 Sections We distinguish sense,
Page 116 and 117:
112 Sections Die Grammatik der deut
Page 118 and 119:
114 Sections Svorou, S. 1993. The G
Page 120 and 121:
116 Sections English and German for
Page 122 and 123:
118 Sections Versprecherkorpora meh
Page 125 and 126:
Friday, September 1, 2006 Section L
Page 127:
Workshops
Page 130 and 131:
126 Workshops 14:45-15:30 Boogaart,
Page 132 and 133:
128 Workshops (1) a. ? I wish I cli
Page 134 and 135:
130 Workshops From (3) we conclude,
Page 136 and 137: 132 Workshops Ich unterscheide drei
Page 138 and 139: 134 Workshops (genauer: perfektiv-m
Page 140 and 141: 136 Workshops complement in terms o
Page 142 and 143: 138 Workshops References Abraham, W
Page 144 and 145: 140 Workshops (3) mog uspet’, ‘
Page 146 and 147: 142 Workshops Eine Korrelation der
Page 148 and 149: 144 Workshops Aspect choice is rele
Page 151 and 152: Workshop 2 (Anc): Universalism and
Page 153 and 154: Workshop 2 - Anc 149 between initia
Page 155 and 156: Workshop 2 - Anc 151 Face-Threateni
Page 157 and 158: Workshop 2 - Anc 153 Adjusting to c
Page 159 and 160: Workshop 2 - Anc 155 This pattern i
Page 161 and 162: Workshop 3 (Cor): The encoding of e
Page 163 and 164: Workshop 3 - Cor 159 The distributi
Page 165 and 166: Workshop 3 - Cor 161 La notion de m
Page 167 and 168: Workshop 3 - Cor 163 experientialit
Page 169: Workshop 3 - Cor 165 so-called moda
Page 172 and 173: 168 Workshops Factors predicting ph
Page 174 and 175: 170 Workshops restructuring due to
Page 176 and 177: 172 Workshops References Jochen Reh
Page 178 and 179: 174 Workshops Lunch break 14:00-14:
Page 180 and 181: 176 Workshops The proper analysis o
Page 182 and 183: 178 Workshops the discussion to two
Page 184 and 185: 180 Workshops “‘Good design’
Page 188 and 189: 184 Workshops PP temporel: 3. Prolo
Page 190 and 191: 186 Workshops 2. Cadre 2.1. La scal
Page 192 and 193: 188 Workshops (1) On sebja bol’š
Page 194 and 195: 190 Workshops Polarity and the addi
Page 196 and 197: 192 Workshops Überlegungen zur Ska
Page 198 and 199: 194 Workshops We will deal with bot
Page 200 and 201: 196 Workshops (Ir)regular valency a
Page 202 and 203: 198 Workshops the number of segment
Page 204 and 205: 200 Index Köpcke, Klaus-Michael...
show all

Relativism and Universalism in Linguistics - Fachbereich 10 ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?