April 10, 2015, Meliora 366
Percy Liang, Assistant Professor of Computer Science, Stanford University
February 6, 2015, 513 Lattimore Hall
E. Allyn Smith, Assistant Professor, University of Quebec at MontrealCross-linguistic differences in disagreements arising from descriptive and evaluative propositions
Semanticists, pragmaticists, philosophers, and others have recently bee n interested in disagreements arising from evaluative propositions (especially those containing so-called 'predicates of personal taste"), as in (1), and their theoretical implications.
- A: This soup is tasty. B: No it isn't.
- A: Rochester is in Quebec. B: No it isn't.
- A: This soup is tasty, in my opinion. B: # No it isn't.
The idea is that, as compared to a descriptive proposition like (2A), valuative propositions express the opinion of the speaker, but refuting them doesn't seem to deny that the speaker holds such an opinion (Kolbel 2003, Lasersohn 2005, etc.). This would, in principle, make them similar to sentences like (3), but here, direct disagreement is not felicitous (Stevenson 2007). Stevenson argued that the same can be said of epistemic modals such as 'might': you can say 'no' to the fact that Elizabeth might visit if you know otherwise, but if someone says that they don't know whether Elizabeth will visit, saying 'no' cannot indicate that she won't.
In this talk I will present offline felicity judgment data from English and Spanish two-turn oral dialogues showing that there are differences with respect to these judgments, which creates a further puzzle. I will compare various explanations for these new data, drawing on ideas present in Stojanovic 2007 and Umbach 2012. I will further discuss the interplay of various factors in these data, including cultural politeness differences (introducing data from another dialect of Spanish with known differences in cultural norms). As time permits, I will also present data from Catalan and French.
January 23, 2015, 513 Lattimore Hall
Joyce McDonough, Associate Professor, University of Rochester, Linguistcs and Brain and Cognitive SciencesThe Dene verbal compound: representing the complex inflectional system of the Dene (Athabaskan) verb
Within a Word and Paradigm appro ach to morphology words, not morphemes, are the basic units in the lexicon (Milin et. al., 2009; Ackerman & Malouf, 2012; Blevins, 2014, 2015; Plag & Baayens, 2008, Baayens et.al. 2014, 2015). Fully inflected words are lexical units, organized into paradigms, making paradigms, which encode the relationship between words, fundamental objects in the lexicon. In this framework, much work has been done on nominal inflection and derivational systems. Much less has been done on the more complex inflectional systems of verbal morphology, which may encode rich morphosyntactic functions. In this talk I will lay out the structure of a typologically unusual and highly complex system, the Dene (Athabaskan) verb word, traditionally captured by a position class template of around 23 prefix positions used to order verbal morphemes. I'll demonstrate that is an unworkable system. Instead, the Dene verb is a unusual but simple and principled variation on compounding. The model is base d on evidence from phonetic studies and lexical patterns.
December 12, 2014, 513 Lattimore Hall
Elaine Chun, Associate Professor (English), University of South Carolina"She be acting like she's black": Linguistic blackness among Korean
Research on the use of African American English (AAE) by speakers who do not identify as African American has largely focused on how performances of racial 'crossing' (Rampton 1995) may be used to construct masculinity, often in ways that reproduce stereotypes of race and gender (Bucholtz 1999; Chun 2001; Reyes 2005; Bucholtz and Lopez 2011). Such work has drawn attention to at least a few important facts: first, a variety that linguists have classified as an ethnolect of a particular ethnic group can be used in meaningful ways by speakers outside the group; second, ethnolectal features are complexly related to other social dimensions, such as gender and class; and third, language practices have sociocultural consequences for individual identities and community ideologies.
Two concerns that remain are (1) how linguists can productively continue the important project of ethnolectal description--for example, identifying distinctive elements of AAE in ways that recognize meaningful outgroup language use, and (2) how linguists can analyze outgroup uses of AAE without simplistically suggesting that these uses necessarily reproduce stereotypes of black masculinity. In order to address these concerns, I consider the sociolinguistic status of features described by linguists as belonging to AAE, namely, six lexical or morpho-syntactic elements: habitual be, neutral third-person singular verb (e.g., she don't), multiple negation, ain't, the address term girl, and the pronoun y'all. By examining about 100 tokens used by five female youth who identify as Korean American, I discuss some of the conceptual challenges that arise for an ethnolectal model of language and draw on some sociolinguistic and linguistic anthropological concepts, such as ideology, indexicality, persona, stance, voice, and authentication to address these challenges. Finally, I show how qualitative methods of discourse analysis, which attend to the emergent complexity of how language can invoke social meanings, can usefully contribute to our understanding of how linguistic forms relate to social meaning, yet in ways that may still remain complementary with our projects of ethnolectal description.
November 14, 2014, 513 Lattimore Hall
Aaron Albin, Indiana University-BloomingtonPraatR: An architecture for controlling the phonetics software Praat with the R programming language
An increasing number of researchers are using the R programming language (http://www.r-project.org/)for the visualization and statistical modeling of phonetic data. However, R's capabilities for analyzing soundfiles and extracting acoustic measurements are still limited compared to free-standing phonetics software such as Praat (http://www.fon.hum.uva.nl/praat/). As such, it is typical to extract the acoustic measurements in Praat, export the data to a textfile, and then import this file into R for analysis. This process of manually shuttling data from one program to the other slows down and complicates the analysis workflow.
This workshop will feature an R package (`PraatR') designed to overcome this inefficiency. Its core R function sends a shell command to the operating system that invokes the command-line form of Praat with an associated Praat script. This script imports a file, applies a Praat command to it, and then either brings the output directly into R or exports the output as a textfile. Since all arguments are passed from R to Praat, the full functionality of the original Praat command is available inside R, making it possible to conduct the entire analysis within a single environment. Moreover, with the combined power of these two programs, many new analyses become possible. Further information on PraatR can be found at http://www.aaronalbin.com/praatr/.
At this workshop, the creator of PraatR will first present a conceptual overview of the package, followed by several hands-on exercises on participants' laptop computers illustrating its range of functionality. At the end of the workshop, the presenter will be available for brief consultations about how PraatR can help you in your own research.
Attendance is limited to 20 participants on a first-come-first-served basis. If you are interested in coming to the workshop, please send an e-mail stating so to Wil Rankinen at firstname.lastname@example.org.
October 17, 2014, Meliora 366
Susan Goldin-Meadow, Beardsley Ruml Distinguished Service Professor, University of ChicagoGesture as a mechanism of change
The spontaneous gestures that people produce when they talk can index cognitive instability and reflect thoughts not yet found in speech. But gesture can go beyond reflecting thought to play a role in changing thought. I consider whether gesture brings about change because it is itself an action and thus brings action into our mental representations. I provide evidence for this hypothesis but suggest that it's not the whole story. Gesture is a special kind of action--it is representational and thus more abstract than direct action on objects, which may be what allows gesture to play a role in learning.
September 12, 2014, 513 Lattimore Hall
Jim Blevins, Department of Theoretical and Applied Linguistics, Cambridge UniversityMorphology as a complex discriminative system
A number of converging lines of research have recently coalesced into an approach to morphology that combines classical WP models with contemporary data-driven methodologies. One component of this approach is distributional view of language structure and language learning. Another is a complex system conception of morphological patterns and inventories. These components are united by a dynamic communicative pressures, rather than in terms of derivational relations or static constraint satisfaction. This talk outlines some of the properties and implications of this perspective and reviews evidence that supports this type of approach over simple system models of morphology.
April 24, 2014, Kresge Room, Meliora 269
David Poeppel, Professor, Psychology and Neural Science Cognition & Perception, New York UniversityThe temporal structure of auditory perceptual experience
Speech and other dynamically changing auditory signals (and also visual stimuli) typically contain critical information required for
successful decoding at multiple time scales. What kind of neuronal infrastructure forms the basis for the requisite multi-time resolution processing? A series of neurophysiological experiments suggests that intrinsic neuronal oscillations at different, ‘privileged’ frequencies may provide some of the underlying mechanisms. In particular, to achieve parsing of a naturalistic input signal into manageable chunks, one mesoscopic-level mechanism consists of the sliding and resetting of temporal windows, implemented as phase resetting of intrinsic oscillations on privileged time scales. The successful resetting of neuronal activity provides time constants – or temporal integration windows – for parsing and decoding signals. One emerging generalization is that acoustic signals must contain some type of
edge, i.e. a discontinuity that the listener can use to chunk the signal at the appropriate granularity. Although the ‘age of the edge’
is over for vision, acoustic edges likely play an important (and slightly different) causal role in the successful perceptual analysis of complex auditory signals.
April 11, 2014, Meliora 366
Craige Roberts, Professor, Department of Linguistics, The Ohio State UniversityIndexicals, Centers and Perspective
I argue for a theory of demonstratives in which:
(a) they're anaphoric (as I argued in Roberts 2002) and in that respect are definites like definite descriptions and pronouns,
(b) they're unlike the other definites in that they really are essentially indexical, something that isn't adequately captured by King (2001), Roberts (2002), or Elbourne (2008),
(c) we can improve on the account of indexicality in Kaplan (1977), as criticized by Heim 1985, by adopting a view of indexicals in which their central feature is anchoring to a Discourse Center, a self-attributing doxastic agent.
A Discourse Center is a counterpart in the context of utterance of the notion of a Center in Lewis (1979), the latter theory modified as in Stalnaker (2008). Discourse Centers are argued to play three kinds of roles in interpretation:
(i) they are crucial features of a theory of de se interpretation, as in Lewis/Stalnaker;
but here they serve two new roles as well:
(ii) they are the presupposed anaphoric anchors for indexicals; and
(iii) they also serve as arguments of a perspective operator, in a modification of Aloni (2001), permitting an account of de re belief attributions involving all kinds of definite NPs, including indexicals themselves.
Among other things, this will permit a more flexible, perspicuous account of shifted indexicals in languages like Amharic (Schlenker 2003, Anand & Nevins 2004, Deal 2013, Sudo 2012), and a natural account of so-called fake indexicals of Kratzer (2009).
March 28, 2014, CSB 601
Casey Lew-Williams, Department of Communication Sciences and Disorders, Northwestern UniversityStatistical learning in semi-real language acquisition
Infants and toddlers have a prodigious ability to find structure (such as words) in patterned input (such as language). Learning regularities between sounds and words often occurs seamlessly in early development, leading some to conclude that statistical learning plays a role in enabling language in the first place. This might be true, or alternatively, it might be an irrelevant artifact of distilled laboratory tasks. The ultimate explanatory power depends partially on whether we define statistical learning narrowly (transitional probabilities between syllables) or broadly (any kind of input-based pattern extraction), and partially on whether statistical learning can scale up to explain natural language acquisition. Here I ask: Can statistical learning withstand the complexity inherent in (somewhat) real learning environments? I will present a series of studies that test how infants learn when presented with variability in utterance length, word length, number of talkers, social/communicative cues, and frequency resolution. To conclude, I will briefly address the question of scalability by turning to an important outcome of early statistical learning -- the ability to process language efficiently in real time -- which falls by the wayside when listeners don't accumulate language experience like a baby.
February 14, 2014, Meliora 366
Nathaniel Smith, Research Associate, Institute for Language, Cognition and Computation, University of EdinburghBuilding a Bayesian bridge between the physics and the phenomenology of social interaction
What is word meaning, and where does it live? Both naive intuition and scientific theories in fields such as discourse analysis and socio- and cognitive linguistics place word meanings, at least in part, outside the head: in important ways, they are properties of speech communities rather than individual speakers. Yet, from a neuroscientific perspective, we know that actual speakers and listeners have no access to such consensus meanings: the physical processes which generate word tokens in usage can only depend directly on the idiosyncratic goals, history, and mental state of a single individual. It is not clear how these perspectives can be reconciled. This gulf is thrown into sharp perspective by current Bayesian models of language processing: models of learning have taken the former perspective, and models of pragmatic inference and implicature have taken the latter. As a result, these two families of models, though built using the same mathematical framework and often by the same people, turn out to contain formally incompatible assumptions. Here, I'll present the first Bayesian model which can simultaneously learn word meanings and perform pragmatic inference. In addition to capturing standard phenomena in both of these literatures, it gives insight into how the literal meaning of words like "some" can be acquired from observations of pragmatically strengthened uses, and provides a theory of how novel, task-appropriate linguistic conventions arise and persist within a single dialogue, such as occurs in the well-known phenomenon of lexical alignment. Over longer time scales such effects should accumulate to produce language change; however, unlike traditional iterated learning models, our simulated agents do not converge on a sample from their prior, but instead show an emergent bias towards belief in more useful lexicons. Our model also makes the interesting prediction that different classes of implicature should be differentially likely to conventionalize over time. Finally, I'll argue that the mathematical "trick" needed to convince word learning and pragmatics to work together in the same model is in fact capturing a real truth about the psychological mechanisms needed to support human culture, and, more speculatively, suggest that it may point the way towards a general mechanism for reconciling qualitative, externalist theories of social interaction with quantitative, internalist models of low-level perception and action, while preserving the key claims of both approaches.
December 5, 2013
Jila Ghomeshi, Department of Linguistics, University of ManitobaThe Detachment Principle and the syntax of pragmatic particles
November 22, 2013
Elika Bergelson, University of Rochester, Aslin Lab, Brain & Cognitive Sciences
November 19, 2013
Don Kulick, Department of Comparative Human Development at the University of ChicagoDanes call People with Down syndrome 'mongol': politically incorrect language and ethical engagement
November 8, 2013
Scott Fraundorf, University of Rochester, Jaeger Lab, Brain & Cognitive Science
October 31, 2013
Eva-Maria RoesslerField Linguistics Talk Series
October 25, 2013
Scott Paauw, University of Rochester, Department of LinguisticsDetermining If A Language Underwent Prehistoric Creolization
October 4, 2013
Solveiga Armoskaite, University of Rochester, Department of LinguisticsA Category Neutral Simulative Plural: Evidence From Turkish
September 20, 2013, CLS Colloquia Room
Jeffrey T. Runner, Associate Professor, Linguistics and Brain & Cognitive Sciences, University of Rochester, Department of LinguisticsConstraints of the Binding Theory: Evidence from Visual World Eye-Tracking
May 14, 2013
Nadine Borchardt, Humboldt University, BerlinLanguage documentation among the Bagyeli hunter-gatherers of Cameroon
April 26, 2013
Judith Tonhauser, Associate Professor, Department of Linguistics, The Ohio State UniversityWhat's at issue? Exploring content in context
April 11, 2013
Laura Batterink, University of OregonImplicit and explicit neural mechanisms supporting language processing
February 22, 2013
Maziar Toorsarvandi, American Council of Learned Societies New Faculty Fellow Department of Linguistics and PhilosophyGapping is VP-ellipsis
February 20, 2013
Floris Roelofsen, Research Associate, Institute for Logic, Language and Computation, University of AmsterdamPolarity particles
February 8, 2013
Scott Grimm, Postdoctoral Researcher Department of Translation and Language Sciences , Pompeu Fabra UniversityGrammatical Number and Individuation
February 7, 2013
Wallace Chafe and Marianne Mithun, Professors of Linguistics, Department of Linguistics, University of California, Santa BarbaraThe Phonology of Seneca
February 4, 2013
Kathryn Davidson, Postdoctoral Fellow, Linguistics Department, University of ConnecticutInvestigating the semantic/pragmatic interface through sign language structure: the case of scalar implicature
January 18, 2013
Scott AnderBois , Visiting Faculty Linguistics DepartmentQUDs and at-issueness in Yucatec Maya attitude reports
November 9, 2012
Pauline Jacobson, Brown UniversityThe Short Answer: Implications for Direct Compositionality (and vice-versa)
October 14, 2012
Edward Vajda, Western Washington UniversityThe Ket language of Siberia
June 7, 2012
Sally Treloyn, University of MelbourneThe Substance of Song
April 9, 2012
Klinton Bicknell, Department of Psychology, UC San Diego
April 4, 2012
Bozena Pajak, Department of Linguistics, UC San Diego
March 30, 2012
Emily Tucker Prud'hommeaux, Computer Science, Oregon Health & Science University
February 17, 2012
Sudha Arunachalam, Speech, Language & Hearing Sciences, Boston UniversityThree challenges of verb learning, and how toddlers use linguistic context to meet them
December 5, 2011
Victor Kuperman, Department of Linguistics and Languages, McMaster University
October 27, 2011
Sarah Brown-Schmidt, Department of Psychology, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
October 13, 2011
Chris Potts, Department of Lingustics, Stanford University
October 4, 2011
Meghan Sumner, Department of Linguistics, Stanford University
May 12, 2011
Cynthia Fisher, Psychology Department, University of Illinois
May 9, 2011
Herb Clark, Professor of Psychology, Stanford University
April 21, 2011
Doug Roland and Hongoak Yun, The University of BuffaloSemantic Similarity, Predictability, and Models of Sentence Processing
April 18, 2011
Thomas Hörberg, Department of Linguistics, Stockholm UniversityCue-Based Argument Interpretation
April 14, 2011
Philip Hofmeister, University of California - San DiegoThe Encoding-Retrieval Relationship in Sentence Comprehension (and Production)
April 6, 2011
Raphael Berthele, University of Bern
March 31, 2011
Ed Holsinger, Department of Lingustics, University of Southern CaliforniaMeaning, Context and Representation
March 29, 2011
Jennifer M. Roche, Department of Psychology, University of MemphisDon't rush the navigator: Audience design in language production is hard to establish, but easier to maintain
March 16, 2011
Anticipation, local coherences, and the self-organization of cognitive structure in sentence processing, Department of Psychology, University of ConnecticutAnuenue Kukona
February 15, 2011
Gerhard Jaeger, Department of Linguistics , University of TuebingenGame Theoretic Pragmatics
May 24, 2010
Nicholas Altieri, Psychological and Brain Sciences, Indiana UniversityUncovering the Mechanisms of Audiovisual Speech Perception: Architecture, Decision Rule, and Capacity
April 21, 2010
Frank BechterNarrative Combinatorics: Roleshifting Versus "Aspect" in ASL Grammar
April 19, 2010
Jennifer Culbertson, Cognitive Science Department, Johns Hopkins UniversityLearning Biases and the Emergence of Typological Universals of Syntax
April 14, 2010
Noah H. Silbert, Psychological and Brain Sciences, Indiana UniversityPhonological Information Integration in Speech Perception
April 12, 2010
LouAnn Gerken, Professor of Psychology and Linguistics, University of ArizonaPredicting and Explaining Babies
March 15, 2010
Sharon Goldwater, School of Informatics, University of EdinburghFrom Sounds to Words: Bayesian Modeling of Early Language Acquisition
February 22, 2010
Gary Dell, Psychology, University of Illinois at Urbana-ChampaignImplicit Learning in the Language Production System is Revealed in Speech Errors
January 20, 2010
Jesse Snedeker, Department of Psychology, Harvard UniversityFast, Smart and Out of Control
December 7, 2009
Meghan Clayards, Centre for Research on Language Mind and Brain, McGill UniversityThe Role of Phonetic Detail, Auditory Processing and Language Experience in the Perception of Assimilated Speech
October 19, 2009
Stefan Frank, Postdoc, Institute for Language, Logic and Computation, University of AmsterdamThe Irrelevance of Hierarchical Structure to Sentence Processing
September 14, 2009
Chris Kennedy, Department of Linguistics, University of ChicagoThe Number of Meanings of English Number Words
June 26, 2009
Oleg Kiselyov (FNMOC) and Chung-chieh Shan (Rutgers)Self-Applicable Probabilistic Inference Without Interpretive Overhead
June 4, 2009
Amy Perfors, University of AdelaideLearning to Learn, Simplicity, and Sources of Bias in Language Learning
April 15, 2009
Tanya Kraljic, Center for Research in Language, UC San DiegoLearning a Talker's Speech
April 8, 2009
Matt Goldrick, Department of Linguistics , Northwestern UniversityThe Phonetic Traces of Lexical Access
February 20, 2009
Hannah Rohde, Department of Linguistics, Northwestern UniversityDiscourse-Driven Expectations in Sentence Processing
February 12, 2009
Linda Smith, Indiana UniversityBig Changes in Object Recognition Between 18 and 24 Months: Words, Categories and Action
December 4, 2008
Gary Lupyan, University of PennsylvaniaWhat Do Words Do?
November 11, 2008
Claire Cardi, Cornell UniversityWhat Were They Thinking? Finding and Extracting Opinions in the News
October 16, 2008
Ash Asudeh, Institute of Cognitives of Science & School of Linguistics and Language Studies, Carleton UniversityProduction of Ungrammatical Utterances: The Case of Resumptive Pronouns
October 16, 2008
Ida Toivonen, School of Linguistics and Applied Language Studies , Carleton UniversityThe Phonetics of Phonological Quantity in Inari Saami
October 6, 2008
Aravind Joshi, Computer Science, University of PennsylvaniaTowards Discourse Meaning: Complexity of Dependencies at the Discourse Level and at the Sentence Level
April 18, 2008
Suzanne Stevenson, Computer Science, University of TorontoBridging the Gap between Syntax and the Lexicon: Computational Models of Acquiring Multiword Lexemes
April 9, 2008
Dan Jurafsky, Linguistics, Stanford UniversityInducing Meaning from Text
March 20, 2008
Ray Jackendoff, Center for Cognitive Studies, Tufts UniversityThe Parallel Architecture and its Role in Cognitive Science
December 4, 2007
Hannele Nicholson, Lingustics , Cornell UniversityDisfluencies in Dialogue: Attention, Structure and Function
September 25, 2007
Shravan Vasishth, Linguistics, University of PotsdamDeterminants of parsing complexity: A computational and empirical investigation
September 24, 2007
Susan Garnsey, Psychology, University of Illinois at Urbana-ChampaignThe Event-Related Optical Signal (Eros): A New Neuroimaging Tool for Language Processing Research
May 14, 2007
Lisa Pearl, Linguistics, University of Maryland
May 2, 2007
Michael Wagner, Linguistics, Cornell UniversityEncoding and Retrieving Syntax with Prosody
April 26, 2007
Frank Keller, HRC, University of EdinburghProbabilistic Models of Adaptation in Human Parsing
April 18, 2007
Roger Levy, Linguistics, UCSDExpectations, locality, and competition in syntactic comprehension
April 12, 2007
Philip Hofmeister, Linguistics, Stanford University
April 6, 2007
Nick Cassimatis, Computer Science, RPIA Cognitive Substrate for Human-Level Intelligence
February 21, 2007
Suzanne Gahl, University of ChicagoLinguistic Knowledge is Probabilistic: Evidence from Pronunciation
November 3, 2003
Jenny Saffran, Department of Psychology, University of Wisconsin MadisonStatistical Learning: What Goes In, and What Comes Out
May 28, 2003
John Kingston, Department of Linguistics, University of MassachusettsFrom Ears to Categories: Intermediate Steps in Speech Recognition.
May 5, 2003
Sheila Blumstein, Department of Cognitive and Linguistic Sciences, Brown UniversityThe Mapping of Sound Structure to the Lexicon: Evidence from Normal Subjects and Aphasic patients.
March 19, 2003
Elsi Kaiser, Department of Linguistics, University of PennsylvaniaInterpreting and Anticipating Reference in Discourse.
March 17, 2003
Harlan Harris, Department of Linguistics, University of Illinois, Urbana-ChampaignThe Horror: Speech Errors and Phonological Production Models.
February 7, 2003
Craige Roberst, Department of Linguistics, Ohio State UniversityRelating Attention to Intention of Information Structure
January 31, 2003
Craige Roberts, Department of Linguistics, Ohio State UniversityPresupposition: The Interaction of Conventional and Conversational Implicature.
January 28, 2003
Craige Roberts, Department of Lingustics, Ohio State UniversityInformation Structure in Discourse: A Basic Pragmatic Framework.
September 25, 2002
Gary Marcus, Department of Psychology, New York UniversityPlasticity and Nativism: Towards a Resolution of an Apparent Paradox.
June 18, 2002
Mike Harm, Carnegie-Mellon UniversityHow Do Readers Compute Word Meanings? Insights From the Triangle Model.
May 21, 2002
Tom Bever, Department of Linguistics , University of ArizonaWhat Language Processing Tells Us About Cognitive Science.
May 20, 2002
Tom Bever, Department of Linguistics, University of ArizonaAmerican Landscape Painting: Aesthetics, The Golden Mean and Depth Perception.
April 22, 2002
Asu Asudeh, Department of Linguistics, Stanford UniversityResource Logic
April 19, 2002
Michael Tarr, Cognitive and Linguistic Sciences, Brown UniversityIt's Pat - Sexing Faces Using Only Red and Green.
April 11, 2002
Matt Dye, Centre for Deaf Studies, University of Bristol, United KingdomTo Sign or Not To Sign: Studies of Deaf Cognition in British Signers.
April 1, 2002
Gianluca Sorto, Department of Lingustics, University of California at Los AngelesPossessives in Context
March 28, 2002
Franklin Chang, Department of Psychology, University of Illinois at Urbana-ChampaignSymbolically Speaking.
March 25, 2002
Duane Watson, Department of Brian & Cognitive Sciences, Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyUnderstanding Intonational Phrasing
March 4, 2002
Jennifer Venditti, Department of Linguistics, Ohio State UniversityAnother Look at Accented Pronouns: Evidence from Eye-tracking
February 26, 2002
Todd Haskell, Department of Psychology, University of Southern CaliforniaThe Role of Distributional Information in Speech Production: The Case of Subject-Verb Agreement.
January 26, 2002
Gary S. Dell, Beckman Institute, University of Illinois, Urbana-ChampaignLexical Access and Serial Order in Language Production: A Test of Freuds Continuity Thesis.
November 7, 2001
Maryellen McDonald, Department of Psychology, University of Wisconsin, MadisonConstraint Satisfaction Processes in Language Production
October 31, 2001
J. Kathryn Bock, Beckman Institute, University of Illinois, Urbana-ChampaignClock Talk
April 25, 2001
Paul Luce, Department of Psychology, State University of New York, BuffaloUnderstanding Spoken Words: Activation, Competition and Temporary Memory in Spoken Word Perception.
April 2, 2001
Paul Smolensky, Department of Cognitive Science, Johns Hopkins UniversityOptimality in Linguistic Cognition
April 25, 2000
Jennifer Arnold, Department of Psychology, University of PennsylvaniaHe vs. She: The Use of Gender in On-line Pronoun Comprehension
April 13, 2000
Michael Walsh Dickley, Department of Linguistics , Northwestern UniversityThe Processing of Temporal Relations in Discourse
March 24, 2000
Jason Eisner, Department of Computer Science, University of RochesterDoing OT in a Straitjacket
March 1, 2000
Kenneth N. Wexler, Department of Brain and Cognitive Sciences, Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyVery Early Parameter Setting in the Computational System of Language, Varriablity in Development Across Languages, Maturation versus Learning, Impaired Development, and the Potential for a Genetics of Language
January 17, 2000
Kita Sotaro, Max Planck Institute for PsycholinguisticsWhat Gesture Can Tell Us About the Process of Verbalization of Spatial Information
September 17, 1999
David Poeppel, Department of Linguistics, University of Maryland - College Parkwo Ideas About Timing in Hearing and Speech.
May 3, 1999
Bruce P. Hayes, Department of Linguistics, University of California at Los AngelesBurnt and Splang: Some Issues in Morphological Learning Theory
April 14, 1999
Carlota S. Smith, Department of Lingustics, University of Texas - AustinThe Navajo Prolongative and Lexical Structure
March 7, 1999
Gert Webelhuth, Department Of Lingusitics, University of North Carolina - Chapel HillSurface Cues for Pragmatic Inferences as Motivation for the Evolution of Surface Syntax
February 25, 1999
John W. Moore, Department of Linguistics, University of California at San DiegoJudgment Types, Causatives, and S-Selection
February 23, 1999
Harry van der Hulst, Department of Linguistics, Leiden UniversityModality-free Phonology
December 18, 1998
Bryan Gick, Haskins Laboratories, University of ConnecticutArticulatory Correlates of Ambisyllabicity in English Glides and Liquids
September 19, 1997
Jason Stanley, Department of Philosophy , Cornell UniversityNecessity, A Priority, and What Is Said
April 25, 1997
Sarah (Sally) Thomason, Program in Linguistics, University of MichiganContact-induced Language Change and Contact-language Genesis
April 22, 1997
Ellen M Kaisse, Department of Linguistics, University of WashingtonGlides, Vowels, and Ghost Consonants in Argentinian Spanish
March 28, 1997
Myrna Schwartz, Moss Rehabilitation Research InstituteWhen a Dog is a Cat and a Rug is a Fug: Picture Naming Errors in Aphasic and Non-aphasic Speakers
November 22, 1996
Barbara J Grosz, Department of Computer Science, Harvard UniversityModeling Collaboration for Human-computer Communication
October 30, 1996
Peter W Jusczyk, Department of Psychology, Johns Hopkins UniversityWhat Infants Remember About Utterances They Hear
October 18, 1996
Zoltan Szabo, Department of Philosophy, Cornell UniversityThe What and Why of Compositionality
September 27, 1996, Graduiertenkollegs Integriertes Linguistik-Studium
Graham Katz, University of TuebingenStates, Events, Time, Tense and Other Monsters
April 26, 1996
Gary F Marcus, Department of Psychology, University of Massachusetts - AmherstSymbols and Simple Recurrent Networks in Language and Cognition
April 19, 1996
J Kathryn Bock, Department of Psychology, University of Illinois - Urbana-ChampaignStructural Repetition as Implicit Learning
March 29, 1996
Dan Jurafsky, Department of Linguistics, University of Colorado - BoulderA Probabilistic Model of Lexical and Syntactic Access and Disambiguation
December 8, 1995
Jennifer Saul, Department of Philosophy, University of SheffieldThe Problem with Attitudes
November 17, 1995
Mark E. Richard, Department of Philosophy, Tufts UniversityAnalysis, Synonymy, and Sense
September 15, 1995
Yuki Kuroda, Department of Linguistics, University of California at San DiegoTheoretical Issues in Syntax
May 26, 1995
Gary S Dell, Beckman Institute, University of Illinois - Urbana-ChampaignThe Past, Present and Future in Language Production
April 28, 1995
Tim Stowell, Department of Linguistics, University of California at Los AngelesThe Phrase Structure of Quantifier Scope
April 12, 1995
David Dowty, Department of Linguistics, Ohio State UniversityBirds, Bees, and Semantic Theory
March 3, 1995
Itziar Laka, Department of Linguistics, University of RochesterCase in Human Grammar
February 10, 1995
Peter Lasersohn, Department of Linguistics, University of RochesterVerbal Plurality and Conjunction
February 3, 1995
Kai von Fintel, Department of Linguistics, Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyA Minimal Theory of Adverbial Quantification
December 16, 1994
Chris Barker, Department of Psychology, University of RochesterEpisodic -ee in English: An Argument That Thematic Relations Can Actively Constrain New Word Formation
December 9, 1994
Kathy Eberhard, Department of Psychology, University of RochesterThe Marked Effect of Number on the Production of Subject-verb Agreement
December 2, 1994
David Braun, Department of Philosophy, University of RochesterThe Many Meanings of Demonstratives
November 4, 1994
Michael K. Tanenhaus, Department of Psychology, University of RochesterUsing Eye-movements to Study Spoken Language Comprehension in Visual Contexts
October 25, 1994
Greg Carlson, Department of Linguistics, University of RochesterWhat Are Thematic Roles?
October 21, 1994
James F Allen, Department of Computer Science, University of RochesterThe TRAINS Project
October 14, 1994
Elissa L Newport, Department of Psychology, University of RochesterCreolization and Some Thoughts About Learning
September 30, 1994
Karen Petronio, Department of Psychology, University of RochesterWh-Questions and Related Constructions in ASL
September 23, 1994
Whitney Tabor, Department of Psychology, University of RochesterDistributional Intimations of Grammatical Reclassification