Form vs. meaning
Semantics vs. pragmatic meaning
Huang, Yan. 2015. Pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press. (esp. Chapters 2, 4, 8)
Kroeger, Paul. 2019. Analyzing meaning: Introduction to semantics and pragmatics. (esp. Unit 1 and Chapter 10)
Portner, Paul. 2005. What is meaning? Fundamentals of formal semantics. Oxford: Blackwell. (esp. Chapters 1, 10)
Austin, John L. 1962. How to do things with words. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Searle, John R. 1969. Speech acts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Korta, Kepa & John Perry. 2019. Pragmatics. In Edward N. Zalta (ed.), Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. Stanford, CA: Stanford University. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2020/entries/pragmatics/
Coppock, Liz & Lucas Champollion. 2020. Invitation to formal semantics. Manuscript, Boston University and New York University. http://eecoppock.info/semantics-boot-camp.pdf
Gutzmann, Daniel. 2021. Semantics vs. pragmatics. In Daniel Gutzmann, Lisa Matthewson, Cécile Meier, Hotze Rullmann, and Thomas E. Zimmermann (eds.), The Wiley Blackwell companion to semantics. John Wiley & Sons. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118788516.sem049
Szabó, Zoltán Gendler. 2008. The distinction between semantics and pragmatics. In Ernest Lepore and Barry C. Smith (eds.), The Oxford handbook of philosophy of language. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199552238.003.0017
Jakobson, Roman. 1960. Linguistics and poetics. In Thomas A. Sebeok (ed.), Style in language, 350-377. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Green, Mitchell. 2020. Speech acts. In Edward N. Zalta (ed.), Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. Stanford, CA: Stanford University. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2020/entries/speech-acts/
Videos from The Ling Space on semantics and pragmatics
In this initial lecture, I briefly characterize what pragmatics is about and what I will deal with in the rest of this part of the course.
In this lecture, I prepare the grounds for discussing the semantics-pragmatics interface by first discussing aspects of semantic meaning.
In this lecture, I discuss the differences between semantic and pragmatic meaning and ways in which semantics and pragmatics interact.
In this lecture, I discuss the primary function of language - information exchange - and say a few words about other language functions too.
In this lecture, I discuss the basics of the speech act theory.
Layers of meaning
Semantic and pragmatic presuppositions
Humor and implicatures
Huang, Yan. 2015. Pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press. (esp. Chapter 2)
Kroeger, Paul. 2019. Analyzing meaning: Introduction to semantics and pragmatics. (esp. Chapters 8, 9)
Grice, H. Paul. 1975. Logic and conversation. In Peter Cole and Morgan, J. L. (eds.), Syntax and semantics, Vol 3: Speech acts, 41-58. New York: Seminar Press.
Stalnaker, Robert. 1973. Presuppositions. Journal of Philosophical Logic 2(4), 447-457. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00262951
Huang, Yan. 2017. Neo-Gricean pragmatics. In Yan Huang (ed.), The Oxford handbook of pragmatics, 47-78. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199697960.013.12
Wilson, Deirdre and Dan Sperber. 2004. Relevance theory. In Laurence R. Horn and Gregory Ward (eds.), The handbook of pragmatics, 607–632. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Davis, Wayne. 2019. Implicature. In Edward N. Zalta (ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. Stanford, CA: Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2019/entries/implicature/
Potts, Christopher. 2012. Conventional implicature and expressive content. In Klaus von Heusinger, Claudia Maienborn, and Paul Portner (eds.), Semantics: An international handbook of natural language meaning, Vol. 3, 2516-2535. Berlin: de Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110253382.2516
Huang, Yi Ting and Jesse Snedeker. 2011. Logic and conversation revisited: Evidence for a division between semantic and pragmatic content in real-time language comprehension. Language and Cognitive Processes 26(8), 1161-1172. https://doi.org/10.1080/01690965.2010.508641
In this lecture, I start discussing different layers of meaning - assertion, presuppositions, and implicatures.
In this lecture, I start discussing presuppositions. I pay special attention to semantic presuppositions and their triggers.
In this lecture, I continue discussing presuppositions. I go through the distinction between assertion and presupposition, the concept of presupposition accommodation, and pragmatic presuppositions.
In this lecture, I start the topic of conversation maxims and implicatures. I discuss and illustrate the cooperative principle of Paul Grice.
In this lecture, I discuss three of the four Grice's maxims of conversation - quality, relevance, and quantity - and show how their violations can give rise to conversational implicatures.
In this lecture, I continue discussing conversational implicatures and then turn to conventional implicatures. Finally, I summarize what we have covered in terms of the different layers of meaning.
In this lecture, I discuss an eye-tracking study by Huang & Snedeker 2011, who show that pragmatic meanings are computed slower than semantic meanings.
In this lecture, we go through a couple of jokes and interpret them using the analytical instruments of pragmatics.
Basic notions of information structure
Givenness and its types
Formal expression of givenness
Experimental evidence for the prosodic approach
Krifka, Manfred. 2008. Basic notions of information structure. Acta Linguistica Hungarica 55(3-4), 243-276. https://doi.org/10.1556/ALing.55.2008.3-4.2
also available as
Krifka, Manfred. 2007. Basic notions of information structure. In Caroline Féry, Gisbert Fanselow, and Manfred Krifka (eds.), Working Papers of the SFB632: Interdisciplinary Studies on Information Structure 6: The notions of information structure, 13-55. University of Potsdam. https://www.sfb632.uni-potsdam.de/images/isis/isis06.pdf
Chafe, Wallace. 1976. Givenness, contrastiveness, definiteness, subjects, topics, and point of view. In Charles N. Li (ed.), Subject and topic, 25-55. New York: Academic Press.
Prince, Ellen. 1981. Toward a taxonomy of given-new information. In Peter Cole (ed.), Radical pragmatics, 223-255. New York: Academic Press.
Hajičová, Eva. 2012. Vilém Mathesius and functional sentence perspective, and beyond. In Markéta Malá and Pavlína Saldová (eds.), A centenary of English studies at Charles University: From Mathesius to present-day linguistics, 49-60. Praha: Charles University.
Kruijff-Korbayová, Ivana and Mark Steedman. 2003. Discourse and information. Journal of Logic, Language and Information 12(3), 249-259. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024160025821
Rochemont, Michael. 2016. Givenness. In Caroline Féry and Shinichiro Ishihara (eds.), The Oxford handbook of information structure, 41-63. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199642670.013.18
Šimík, Radek. 2021. Information structure and its relation to syntax, semantics, and reference. Manuscript, Charles University. https://ling.auf.net/lingbuzz/005822
Tomioka, Satoshi. 2021. Topic. In Daniel Gutzmann, Lisa Matthewson, Cécile Meier, Hotze Rullmann, and Thomas E. Zimmermann (eds.), The Wiley-Blackwell companion to semantics. John Wiley & Sons. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118788516.sem125
Wagner, Michael. 2021. Prosodic focus. In Daniel Gutzmann, Lisa Matthewson, Cécile Meier, Hotze Rullmann, and Thomas E. Zimmermann (eds.), The Wiley-Blackwell companion to semantics. John Wiley & Sons. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118788516.sem133
Šimík, Radek & Marta Wierzba. 2017. Expression of information structure in West Slavic: Modeling the impact of prosodic and word-order factors. Language 93(3), 671-709. https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2017.0040 [also available at https://ling.auf.net/lingbuzz/003304]
In this lecture we start a new topic - information structure as part of pragmatics.
In this lecture, we untangle the complex terminological and conceptual landscape of information structure.
In this lecture, we introduce three basic notions of information structure in more detail: given (vs. new), focus (vs. background), and topic (vs. comment).
In this lecture, I discuss a number of givenness types, as introduced in Ellen Prince's work.
This test has been lost due to a technical error, and was set up again on 2 April. Sorry for the inconvenience.
In this lecture, I compare givenness to three related notions - definiteness, background (to focus), and topic, and show that givenness cannot be reduced to them.
In this lecture, we go through two acceptability rating experiments which suggest that information structure and more particularly givenness is primarily expressed by prosody and only indirectly by word order.
Questions and answers; pragmatic effects of focus
Prosodic focus and semantic alternatives
Focus-sensitive particles and semantic effects of focus
Experimental evidence for the psychological reality of focus alternatives
Hamblin, Charles. 1973. Questions in Montague English. Foundations of Language 10(1), 41-53. https://www.jstor.org/stable/25000703
Karttunen, Lauri. 1977. Syntax and semantics of questions. Linguistics and Philosophy 1(1), 3-44. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00351935
Rooth, Mats. 1992. A theory of focus interpretation. Natural Language Semantics 1(1), 75-116. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02342617
Beaver, David and Brady Clark. 2008. Sense and sensitivity: How focus determines meaning. Wiley-Blackwell.
Coppock, Elizabeth and David Beaver. 2014. Principles of the exclusive muddle. Journal of Semantics 31(3), 371-432. https://doi.org/10.1093/jos/fft007
Greenberg, Yael. 2018. A revised, gradability-based semantics for even. Natural Language Semantics 26(1), 51-83. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11050-017-9140-0
Hagstrom, Paul. 2003. What questions mean. Glot International 7(7-8), 188-201.
Hamlaoui, Fatima, Marzena Żygis, Jonas Engelmann, and Michael Wagner. 2019. Acoustic correlates of focus marking in Czech and Polish. Language and Speech 62(2), 358-377. https://doi.org/10.1177/0023830918773536
Krifka, Manfred. 1998. Additive particles under stress. In Devon Strolovitch and Aaron Lawson (eds.), SALT 8: Proceedings from the 8th Conference on Semantics and Linguistic Theory, 111-128. Ithaca, NY: CLC Publications. https://doi.org/10.3765/salt.v8i0.2799
Krifka, Manfred. 2004. The semantics of questions and the focusation of answers. In Chungmin Lee, Matthew Gordon, and Daniel Büring (eds.), Topic and focus: A cross-linguistic perspective, 139-151. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Szendroi, Kriszta. 2017. Focus movement. In Martin Everaert and Henk van Riemsdijk (eds.), The Wiley Blackwell companion to syntax. John Wiley & Sons. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118358733.wbsyncom100
Velleman, Leah & David Beaver. 2016. Question-based models of information structure. In Caroline Féry & Shinichiro Ishihara (eds.), The Oxford handbook of information structure. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199642670.013.29
Spalek, Katharina, Nicole Gotzner, and Isabell Wartenburger. 2014. Not only the apples: Focus sensitive particles improve memory for information-structural alternatives. Journal of Memory and Language 70, 68-84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2013.09.001
In this lecture, we start discussing another domain of discourse pragmatics, related to the meaning of questions, focus, and alternatives.
In this lecture, I discuss the notion of focus, its semantic/pragmatic contribution, and its formal encoding.
In this lecture, we go through the basic types of questions, discuss their meaning, and the meaning of their answers.
In this lecture, I discuss the notion of question-answer congruence, what determines the focus in an answer to a question, and how alternatives are involved.
In this lecture, I start discussing other uses of focus, in particular uses where focus is associated with focus-sensitive expressions. I start with modals, adverbs, and the exclusive particle only.
In this lecture, we finish discussing the phenomenon of association with focus. We concentrate on the particles also and even.
In this lecture we discuss some psycholinguistic experimental evidence related to focus and focus alternatives. I also provide a brief summary of the block of lectures on questions, focus, and alternatives.
Approaches to language variation
Variationist sociolinguistics: Basic principles
Three waves of variationist sociolinguistics
Milroy, L. & Gordon, M. (2003). Sociolinguistics: Method and Interpretation. Oxford: Blackwell. [pdf]
Tagliamonte, S. A. (2011). Variationist sociolinguistics: Change, observation, interpretation. John Wiley & Sons. [pdf]
Eckert, P. (2012). Three waves of variation study: The emergence of meaning in the study of sociolinguistic variation. Annual review of Anthropology, 41, 87–100. [pdf]
Hudson, R. A. (1996). Sociolinguistics (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge university press. [pdf]
Labov, W. (1972). Sociolinguistic patterns. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Tagliamonte, S. A. (2006). Analysing Sociolinguistic Variation. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press. [pdf]
Tagliamonte, S. A. (2015). Making waves: The story of variationist sociolinguistics. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons. [pdf]
Age as a factor
Gender as a factor
Locally relevant variables
Style in variationist sociolinguistics
Birth and death of varieties
Auer, P., & Hinskens, F. (2005). The role of interpersonal accommodation in a theory of language change. In P. Auer, F. Hinskens, & P. Kerswill (Eds.), Dialect change: Convergence and divergence in European languages (pp. 335–357). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. [pdf]
Bailey, G., Wikle, T., Tillery, J., & Sand, L. (1991). The apparent time construct. Language variation and change, 3(3), 241–264. [pdf]
Bell, A. (1984). Language style as audience design. Language in society, 13(2), 145–204. [pdf]
Britain, D. (2009). One foot in the grave? Dialect death, dialect contact, and dialect birth in England. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 196/197, 121–155. [pdf]
Coates, J. (2015). Women, men and language: A sociolinguistic account of gender differences in language (3rd ed.). London/New York: Routledge. [pdf]
Coupland, N. (1980). Style-shifting in a Cardiff work-setting. Language in Society, 9(1), 1–12. [pdf]
Dubois, S., & Horvath, B. (1999). When the music changes, you change too: Gender and language change in Cajun English. Language variation and change, 11(3), 287–313. [pdf]
Eckert, P. (2003). The meaning of style. Texas Linguistic Forum, 47, 41–53. [pdf]
Eckert, P. (2008). Variation and the indexical field. Journal of sociolinguistics, 12(4), 453–476. [pdf]
Eckert, P., & McConnell-Ginet, S. (1999). New generalizations and explanations in language and gender research. Language in society, 28(2), 185–201. [pdf]
Gallois, C., Ogay, T., & Giles, H. (2005). Communication Accommodation Theory: A look back and a look ahead. In W. B. Gudykunst (Ed.), Theorizing about intercultural communication (pp. 121–148). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Irvine, J. T. (2001). “Style” as distinctiveness: The culture and ideology of linguistic differentiation. In P. Eckert, & J. Rickford (Eds.), Style and sociolinguistic variation (pp. 21–43). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. [pdf]
Jančák, P. (1992). Mluva v západočeském pohraničí. In Klimeš, L. & Zapletal, J. (Eds.), Západočeská vlastivěda. Sv. 2, Jazyk (pp. 105–137). Plzeň: Západočeské nakladatelství.
Kerswill, P., & Williams, A. (2000). Creating a new town koine: Children and language change in Milton Keynes. Language in society, 29(1), 65–115. [pdf]
Kerswill, P., & Williams, A. (2002). “Salience” as an explanatory factor in language change: Evidence from dialect levelling in urban England. In M. C. Jones & E. Esch (Eds.), Language change: The interplay of internal, external and extra-linguistic factors (pp. 81–110). Hawthorne, NY, USA: de Gruyter. [pdf]
Labov, W. (1966). The social stratification of English in New York City. Washington, DC: Center for Applied Linguistics. [pdf]
Labov, W. (1972). Sociolinguistic patterns. University of Pennsylvania Press.
Meyerhoff, M., & Strycharz, A. (2002). Communities of practice. In: J. K. Chambers & N. Schilling (eds.), The handbook of language variation and change (pp. 526–548). Chichester: Wiley. [pdf]
Milroy, L. (1987). Language and Social Networks. Chichester: Wiley.
Milroy, L. & Gordon, M. (2003). Sociolinguistics: Method and interpretation. Oxford: Blackwell. [pdf]
Milroy, J., & Milroy, L. (1985). Linguistic change, social network and speaker innovation. Journal of linguistics, 21(2), 339–384. [pdf]
Sankoff, G., & Blondeau, H. (2007). Language change across the lifespan:/r/in Montreal French. Language, 560–588. [pdf]
Schilling-Estes, N., & Wolfram, W. (1999). Alternative models of dialect death: Dissipation vs. concentration. Language, 75, 486–521. [pdf]
Sharma, D. (2018). Style dominance: Attention, audience, and the ‘real me’. Language in Society, 47(1), 1–31. [pdf]
Trudgill, P. (1972). Sex, covert prestige and linguistic change in the urban British English of Norwich. Language in society, 1(2), 179–195. [pdf]
Trudgill, P. (1986). Dialects in contact. Oxford: Blackwell. [pdf]
Wagner, S. E. (2012). Age grading in sociolinguistic theory. Language and Linguistics Compass, 6(6), 371–382. [pdf]
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge university press.