[Prev][Next][Index]
CSLI Calendar, 6 JUNE 1996, vol.11:30
-
To: friends@Turing.Stanford.EDU
-
Subject: CSLI Calendar, 6 JUNE 1996, vol.11:30
-
From: Trudy Vizmanos <trudy@csli.Stanford.EDU>
-
Date: Wed, 5 Jun 1996 14:34:10 -0700 (PDT)
C S L I C A L E N D A R O F P U B L I C E V E N T S
______________________________________________________________________________
6 June 1996 Stanford Vol. 11, No. 30
______________________________________________________________________________
A weekly publication of the Center for the Study of Language and
Information (CSLI), Stanford University, Ventura Hall, Stanford, CA 94305-4115
____________
CSLI ACTIVITIES DURING 6 JUNE -- 14 JUNE 1996
FRIDAY, 7 JUNE
12:00 - Logic Lunch
Building 380, Room 383-N
A Nonstandard Alternative
Rick Sommer
Abstract below
MONDAY, 10 JUNE
1:15 - Semantic Workshop
Cordura Hall, Room 104
Verbal Modification by Preverbs
Barbara Stiebels, Stanford/Duesseldorf
Abstract below
NOTE: This is the final issue of the CSLI
Calendar for the 1995-96 academic year.
The first issue for 1996-97 will appear
towards the end of September 1996.
____________
The CSLI Calendar appears weekly on Wednesdays throughout the academic year.
Announcements, abstracts, and other information to appear in the Calendar can
be submitted to [mailto:incalendar@csli.stanford.edu].
Information about CSLI's research program and past issues of the CSLI Calendar
are available at [http://www-csli.stanford.edu/csli/]. The CSLI Calendar is
also posted each week to [news://nntp-csli.stanford.edu/csli.bboard].
____________
LOGIC LUNCH
on Friday, 7 June
12 noon, Building 380, Room 383-N
A Nonstandard Alternative
Rick Sommer
Although the infinite plays an essential role in nonstandard analysis,
there is a finitistically justified system of nonstandard analysis
that is capable of carrying out a significant part of the mathematics
that is used in the sciences. I will give an informal explanation of
how a well-known theorem of differential equations has a simple and
natural proof in a weak system of nonstandard analysis; the standard
proof of this same theorem has been shown, through the program of
reverse mathematics, to require stronger axioms -- the discrepancy is
explained by noting that reverse mathematics works over a base theory
that is much stronger than our system (for those who are familiar, our
system has the same strength as Kalmar elementary arithmetic).
Additionally, we will show that our system is bi-interpretable with
the system obtained by weaking the induction and comprehension axioms
of the system of WKL_0 of reverse mathematics. WKL_0 is noted for its
ability to formalize the proofs of many important theorems of ordinary
mathematics. In the talk I will not assume familiarity with
nonstandard analysis, the existence theorem for ODEs, or any of the
above named formal systems; the aim is to be non-technical, yet
informative.
____________
SEMANTIC WORKSHOP
on Monday, 10 June
1:15 p.m., Cordura Hall, Room 104
Verbal Modification by Preverbs
Barbara Stiebels
Stanford/Duesseldorf
In my talk I will show which insights the complex verbs (prefix and particle
verbs) provide in the structural, semantic and conceptual properties of verbs
and their lexical modification. The German preverbs can be divided into three
subclasses according to their semantic composition with the base verb and
their effects on its argument structure: pure aspectual markers (ein Buch
anlesen 'to read a book partly'), lexical arguments saturating a predicative
argument of the base verb (den Hut aufsetzen 'to put the hat on', den Park
durchwandern 'to walk through the park'), and lexical adjuncts, which are
integrated into the verb by an additional step of argument extension of the
base verb (sich einen Preis erschreiben 'to win a prize by writing', sein
Vermoegen verspielen 'to gamble away one's fortune'). The morphosyntactic
properties of the preverbs (prefixes vs. particles) do not play a role in
their semantic potential; both types of preverbs may occur in all three
patterns. The heterogenity of the preverbs clearly suggests that there can be
no unique (syntactic) mechanism to derive all patterns of complex verbs
(e.g. Small Clause analysis, preposition incorporation), but the standard
operations of Functional Application and Functional Composition, together with
the additional operation of Argument Extension, suffice to grasp almost
all of the patterns.
The modification of verbs by preverbs confirms the findings of Rappaport Hovav
& Levin (1996) that activity verbs may be semantically enriched by various
types of semantic predicates, whereas change of state verbs can only be
modified by preverbs that further specify the result state encoded in the
verb. I pursue a modular approach in which the generation of complex verbs is
not restricted in any way by a lexically encoded semantic selection of the
verbs or preverbs. Instead, I assume that complex verbs are freely generated
by the semantic composition of the lexical entries of the preverbs and
the base verbs. The resulting verb is evaluated in its argument structure, its
aspectual properties and its conceptual coherence and plausibility. This
approach can also account for the restrictions in the iteration of preverbs. I
will illustrate the various factors in the formation of complex verbs with
some very productive patterns in German. Moreover, I will point out some
additional properties of the lexical modification of verbs (e.g. its semantic
domain). The analyses I propose are embedded into the framework of Lexical
Decomposition Grammar (Wunderlich 1994).
____________