LING 380M, Semantics I, Fall 2011

David Beaver
Depts. of Linguistics and Philosophy
UT Austin
Syllabus


Location
Tue/Thu 11-12:30, Ben 1.124

Course goal
This is a graduate introduction to semantics, introducing students to basic logic, compositional interpretation, and pragmatics. By the end, you should be able to follow a substantial portion of current work in the area.


Prerequisites
The range of students enrolled for this class is typically broad, including graduate students from linguistics, philosophy and language departments. So there are no specific prerequisites. However, we cover a lot of ground, so I recommend you take the class only if:
  1. You are not afraid of formalism (e.g. computer programs, math, statistics, or formal models used in physical sciences),
  2. You have some knowledge of linguistics, and
  3. You have taken at least one class in syntax OR philosophy of language OR logic.
If you cannot decide whether this is the class for you, I suggest you take a look at the Heim and Kratzer textbook (see below), or send an email explaining your concerns.

Schedule
Unit 1
 Semantic and pragmatic inference.
Unit 2
 Set Theory and Basic Logic
Unit 3
 Basic grammar (and some more logic)
Unit 4
 Quantification
Unit 5
 Anaphora and DRT
Unit 6
 Events and Temporality
Unit 7
 Intensionality

  • This schedule will be adapted according to the needs of the participants. Ideally we will have enough time at the end to add some special topics based on class interest.
Evaluation
  • There will be weekly assignments (40%), two reviews of recent journal papers (10% each), and a take-home final (30%). The final will be based on topics covered in the course textbook and on notes given out in class. 10% of the final grade will be based on class participation: questions count as much as answers!
  • The lowest of your assignment grades will be dropped, and will not count towards your final score.
  • Suggested topics and guidelines for the journal paper reviews will be made available in week 3.
  • For regular assignments, the default on each question is that you may work jointly on the problem, but must write up the solution yourself. However, when a question or question part is marked DIY, that means you must Do It Yourself, i.e. develop the solution yourself and write it up yourself, without discussion with classmates or others. The take home final is entirely DIY.
  • I prefer assignments to be typed, though for some purposes, like formulae and trees, you may submit the assignment in handwritten form. If you are likey to do more semantics in the future (and I hope you are!), this may be a good point to learn how to use the latex document typesetting program, which can be coaxed into producing good equations and trees. This program (available as freeware on Macs and PCs: do a web search) is especially good if you are a geek like me, but the learning curve is steeper than with most word processors.
  • Late assignments will only be graded on condition of email or verbal agreement at least 24 hours prior to the hand-in date, with a strict maximum of 2 such requests over the course of the semester. 


Important dates
  • Assignments will be set on Tuesdays (posted to Blackboard), due in class the following Tuesday.
  • Writing of the two  journal paper reviews will be spread over the last 10 weeks of class as part of the regular assignments. The final version of the first review will be due Oct 29 in class, and the final version of the second review will be due in the final class.
  • The take home final will be made available in the final class, and will be due the following Monday at 1PM, at my office, Calhoun 414. If I am not present, please post your answer through the door.

Contact
  • Email: dib@mail.utexas.edu.
  • Office: Calhoun Hall, 414.


Office hours and sections
  • Tue 9:30-11,  Calhoun 414
  • Thu 2-3:30, Calhoun 414

There will be extra weekly sections during the first half of the course. This is primarily to provide extra assistance with logic, sice many will not have studied it before. We will agree on a time for sections in the first two weeks.

Additional help

My RAs will be holding office hours to provide extra help with the more technical pars of the class. Details TBA.

Readings and papers
Required textbook
Irene Heim and Angelika Kratzer, Semantics in Generative Grammar, Blackwell 1998

For those who have taken no logic, I recommend:

  • Barwise and Etchemendy, Tarski's World 4.0, CSLI Press 1999

Further reading suggestions/Optional readings:

  • Lewis, David (1979): Score-keeping in a language game. In: Bauerle, R., Egli, U., and von Stechow, A. Semantics from Different Points of View, Springer Verlag.
  • Partee and Portner (eds), Formal Semantics: The Essential Readings, Blackwell 2002
    (a collection of early classics in formal semantics)
  • Levinson, Pragmatics, CUP 1983 (an excellent introduction to pragmatics)
  • Davis (ed.) Pragmatics: a reader, OUP 1991 (a great collection, with classics by e.g. Grice, Searle, Stalnaker)
More good introductions to logic:
  • Gamut L.T.F., Logic, Language, and Meaning, Vol. 1: Introduction to Logic, U of Chicago Press, 1991
  • Partee, B.H. et al., Mathematical Methods in Linguistics, Kluwer, 1993
  • Enderton, H., A Mathematical Introduction to Logic,Academic Press, 1972

Some relevant papers
Davidson, Donald (1967): The Logical Form of Action Sentences. In Nicholas Rescher (ed.), The Logic of Decision and Action, Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, reprinted in Davidson (2001) Essays on Actions and Events, Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Grice, H.P.: Logic and Conversation. In: 1991, Pragmatics - A reader. Davis (ed.), pp. 305-315.
Heim, Irene (1983): On the Projection Problem for Presuppositions. In: WCCFL 2, Barlow, M., Flickinger, D, and Wescoat, M. (eds), pp. 114-125. Reprinted in Portner and Partee (2002) Ch. 10.
Kamp, Hans (1981): A Theory of Truth and Semantic Representation. In: Formal Methods in the Study of Language, Mathematische Centrum, University of Amsterdam, Groenendijk, J., Janssen, T, and Stokhof, M. (eds.). Reprinted in Portner and Partee (2002) Ch. 8.
Ladusaw, William (1996): Negation and Polarity Items, In: Handbook of Contemporary Semantic Theory, Lappin (ed), pp.321-341.
Levinson, Stephen (1983): Ch.2 Deixis, In: Pragmatics, pp.54-94.
Lewis, David (1975): Adverbs of Quantification. In: Formal Semantics of Natural Language. Keenan, E. (ed). Cambridge University Press. Reprinted in: Formal Semantics. The Essential Readings, Partee and Portner (eds), Blackwell 2002.
Lewis, David (1979): Score-keeping in a language game. In: Semantics from Different Points of View, B&aumluerle, R., Egli, U., and von Stechow, A. (eds). Reprinted in: Formal Semantics. The Essential Readings, Partee and Portner (eds), Blackwell 2002.
Levinson, Stephen (1983): Ch.2 Deixis, In: Pragmatics, pp.54-94.
Searle, John R.: Indirect Speech Acts. In: 1991, Pragmatics - A reader. Davis (ed.), pp. 265-277.