Yale University
Marsh Auditorium – Yale Science Building

May 12 – 14, 2023

BUSINESS MEETING: FRIDAY 11.30-12.30 EST on ZOOM. zoom info here

We expect presentations to take place in person in marsh auditorium, yale science building see map.
Please consult the current COVID policy at Yale for specific guidance -
if you are spending less than four days on campus you have to do nothing ; if you are spending four or more days on campus, you must fill out this form, filling in "Yale" as vendor and "veneeta.dayal@yale.edu" for host

this is the final program; please continue to check for possible minor revisions

information here. We regret that we cannot entertain questions from Zoom participants, but we will provide information about slack soon

Friday, May 12 program pdf

8.30 – 9 breakfast & registration
9 – 9.30welcome & opening remarks
Tamar Szabó Gendler
dean – Yale Faculty of Arts & Sciences
Raffaella Zanuttini
chair – Yale Linguistics
invited talk α
chair – Veneeta Dayal
9.30 – 10.30
Referring & quantifying without nominals: headless relative clauses across languages Reference to and quantification over individuals were identified early on as semantic properties of nominals—broadly understood as varieties of DPs/NPs with or without different kinds of D(eterminer) heads. More than fifty years ago, Montague showed us an elegant, unified treatment of referential and quantificational DPs/NPs by means of generalized quantifiers. A few years later, the referential and quantification properties of bare nominals—nominals without a D—started being investigated, in seminal work by Carlson, and then Chierchia and Dayal, who added a crucial crosslinguistic dimension. Besides nominals, there is at least one other family of constructions—largely understudied—that are capable of referring to and quantifying over individuals, albeit having no morphosyntactic resemblance to nominals: Headless Relative Clauses. They are embedded full clauses with a missing constituent but no nominal head, unlike headed relative clauses. In this talk, I define varieties of Headless Relative Clauses across languages and sketch a syntactic/semantic analysis for each variety, building on Jacobson’s and Dayal’s work on free relative clauses and Dayal’s and von Fintel’s work on free choice free relatives. In doing so, I highlight similarities and differences with the semantic behavior and the syntax/semantics interface of nominals, exploring what core semantic rules the two families of constructions share. Last, I hope to provide what is needed for those who want to study Headless Relative Clauses in whatever language they choose from whichever linguistic corner they prefer, starting with this very sentence, which contains 4 examples total of 3 different kinds of Headless Relative Clauses.
Ivano Caponigro
UC San Diego
session 1
10.30 – 11.10 Movement & interpretation of quantifiers in internally-headed relative clauseshandout Rebecca Jarvis
11.10 – 11.30 coffee break
semantic theory & language revitalization
moderator – Robert Henderson
11.30 – 1 panel.
 Jeremy Johns [slides]
 Masha Polinsky [slides]
 Liliana Sánchez
 Janett Vengoa [slides]
1 – 2.30 Lunch (on your own!)
local information
session 2
chair – Kai von Fintel
2.30 – 3.10 Simplifying the evidential condition on asking polar questionshandout Daniel Goodhue
3.10 – 3.50 Contextual bias anti-licenses NPIs in polar questionsslides Tuệ Trịnh
3.50 – 4.30 Two kinds of question-embedding strategies & veridicality alternations slides Deniz Özyıldız & Wataru Uegaki
4.30 – 4.50 coffee break
session 3
chair – Bob Frank
4.50 – 5.30 Weakening is external to 'only' handout Luis Alonso-Ovalle & Aaron Hirsh
invited talk β
5.30 – 6.30
In this talk, I will discuss new work from my lab which attempts to describe the “algorithms” that neural networks (NNs) implement implicitly, as a result of their training. I will focus specifically on NNs ability to encode abstract, compositional functions which consist of interpretable subroutines and which operate in a content-independent manner. I will discuss findings on models trained from scratch on language and vision tasks, as well as large language models (LLMs) in an in-context-learning setting.Mechanisms for compositionality in neural networks
Ellie Pavlick
Brown University

Saturday, May 13program pdf

8.30 – 9 Breakfast
invited talk γ
chair – Maria Pinango
9 – 10
Meaning in contactslides In contexts of language contact, we can observe dynamic patterns of semantic and pragmatic variation and change that pose interesting challenges for linguistic theory. Traditionally, structural approaches to linguistic architecture have been based on idealisations positing homogeneity and stability. This has been changing to a more inclusive perspective that also takes into account variability and crosslinguistic interactions and has a stronger empirical grounding in speakers’ linguistic practices and competences. What has remained unchanged, however, is an underlying assumption of distinct, bounded languages. As modern sociolinguistics has shown, this is a social construct based on European nation-state building and colonialism that cannot capture the fluidity and dynamics of language in settings of linguistic diversity. I propose a linguistic architecture that takes this in to account and is based on ‘com-sits’, representations of communicative situations that serve as an organising domain for linguistic structure and make bounded languages optional. Crucially, such an architecture can account for the dynamics of meaning in contact: drawing on evidence from different contact-linguistic settings, I show that com-sits can generate semantic structure even in the absence of bounded ‘languages’, and analyse their impact on propositional semantics, coercion and semantic transfer, pragmatic enrichment, social meaning, and nonverbal conceptual structure.
Heike Wiese
Humboldt-University Berlin
Session 4
10 – 10.40 The role of intonation & context in lack of necessity meanings in child Romanianslides Adina Camelia Bleotu, Anton Benz
  & Gabriela Brozbǎ
10.40 – 11:20 Counterfactuals (not) under discussion slides Sonia Ramotowska, Paul Marty,
 Jacopo Romoli & Paolo Santorio
11.20 – 11.40 coffee break
Session 5
chair – Elena Herburger
11.40 – 12:20 Different roads to verumslides Noa Bassel
poster session a
12.20 – 1 lightning round a
1 – 2 Lunch and pop-up mentoring pizza & salad outside!
poster session b
2 – 2.40 lightning round b
session 6
chair – Cécile Meier
2.40 – 3.20 Everyone except possibly Ann
Clemens Mayr
 & Ekaterina Vostrikova
3.20 – 3.40 coffee break
session 7
chair – Anamaria Falauş
3.40 – 4.20 Underspecified degree operators compare correlatesslides Ang Li
4.20 – 5 Trivalent Exh & the Exclusion theory of summative predicateshandout Mathieu Paillé
5 – 6 Break/transport to Marcel Hotel
conference dinner: 6 pm – 10.30 pm
6.15 – 7 poster session a

cash bar

hors d’œuvres

7 – 7.45 poster session b
8 – 9.30 dinner
9.30 – 10.30 dessert & dancing

Sunday, May 14 program pdf

8.30 – 9 Breakfast
invited talk δ
chair – Zoltán Szabó
9 – 10 Kinds, properties & atelicity
Gennaro Chierchia
Harvard University
session 8
10 – 10.40 Are there "weak definites" in bare classifier languages?
Ka-Fai Yip, Ushasi Banerjee
  & Margaret Chui Yi Lee
10.40 – 11.20 Event-internal/external quantification & the mereotopology of eventsslides Marcin Wągiel
11.20 – 11.40 coffee break
session 9
chair – Chris Barker
11.40 – 12.20 Perspectival biscuitshandout Karl Mulligan & Kyle Rawlins
invited talk ε
12.20 – 1.20
Arguments, conditionals & contextArguments (i.e., constructions of the form “P. Therefore, Q”; or“Suppose P. Then, Q”) and conditionals (i.e., “If P then Q”) are powerful means language provides us to reason about possibilities and to reach conclusions from premises. These two kinds of constructions exhibit several affinities—e.g. they both come in different varieties depending on the mood, they share some of the same connectives (i.e., “then”), they allow for similar patterns of modal subordination. In the light of these affinities, it is not surprising that prominent semantic theories of conditionals—dynamic and new suppositionalist accounts—tend to assimilate conditionals and arguments. In this talk, I shall marshall neglected linguistic evidence as well as some theoretical considerations for thinking that, despite these similarities, arguments and conditionals should be given a different semantics and I lay out a framework that can capture their affinities while accounting for their outstanding differences. A crucial piece of the puzzle is that, in order to model the distinctive dynamics of argumentative discourse, context ought to be thought of as having a distinctive hierarchical structure.

Carlotta Pavese
Cornell University
end of main session
business meeting on Zoom: Friday 19 May 11.30–12.30 est Info

  philosophy of linguistics
workshop begins 3pm

all posters —

Luis Alonso-Ovalle & Bernhard SchwarzStructural ambiguity in pseudo-partitives: the case of quantity nouns
Johanna AlstottOrdinal Numbers: Not Superlatives, but Modifiers of Superlatives
Helena Aparicio & Eszter RonaiScalar implicature rates vary within & across adjectival scales
Ido BenbajiIs nothing irreplaceable? A substitution theory of de re
Omri DoronAnother look at the Mapping Hypothesis: evidence from Hebrew
Patrick ElliottDisjunctive donkeys & overlapping updates
Nicholas FleisherSemifactives in Comparatives
Alexander Göbel & Eszter RonaiOn the meaning of intonational contours: a view from scalar inference
Leopold Hess, Corien Bary & Bob van TielCommitments de lingua & assertoric commitments: the case of expressives
Elsi Kaiser & Haley HsuOn the perceived generalizability vs. specificity of subjective predicates: Both linguistic factors & non-linguistic individual differences are at play
Alexandros KalomoirosAn approach to Hurford Conditionals
Angelika Kiss, Rebecca Tollan & Daphna HellerStructural iconicity predicts word order in improvised gestures
Jianan Liu, Shravani Patil, Hagay Schurr, Daria Seres, Olga Borik & Bert Le BruynThe theory of argument formation: between kinds & properties
Mary MoroneyMore exceedingly comparative: Adverbial & attributive Exceed comparatives
Takanobu NakamuraPartial plurality anti-presupposition & local satisfaction
Kyle RawlinsDeriving the evidence asymmetry in positive polar questions
Aynat Rubinstein & Elena HerburgerFrom temporal to concessive meanings: a semantic analysis of 'still'
Ankana Saha, Yağmur Sağ & Kathryn DavidsonFocus on demonstratives: Experiments in English & Turkish
Giorgio SbardoliniHomogeneity & the Illocutionary Force of Rejection
Yash Sinha Number morphology in Hindi coordinative compounds
Stephanie SoltNot very easy: towards the unification of scalar implicature & understatement
Marcin Wągiel & Natalia ShlikhutkaPluralities vs. clusters: A view from Ukrainian singulatives
Will Wegner, Josh Phillips & Claire BowernOn the emergence of an aspectual NPI: comparative polysemy & the case of Diyari marla
Yusuke YagiTelescope of Incremental Quantification
Yichi (Raven) ZhangOn the Modeling of Live Possibilities