[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Sesquipedalian #18
the SESQUIPEDALIAN Volume VI, No. 18
\-/-\-/-\-/-\-/-\-/-\-/-\-/-\-/-\-/-\-/-\-/-\-/-\-/-\-/-\-/-\-/-\-/-\-/
Hawaii becomes US Territory (1900) February 22, 1995
THE NERD WHO ROMANCED MY COMPUTER
Most people who have computers don't understand them. That's OK; most
people who have washing machines don't understand them, either. If
your washing machine breaks, you call the washing machine repairman.
He's in the book.
But if your computer breaks, whom do you call? There is no
infrastructure of computer repairpeople who make housecalls. Instead
you have to schlep your precious machine into the shop and try to
explain what's the matter. "It just kind of freezes," you say. "It
cheeses?" says the man behind the counter. English is not his first
language, or even his second.
"I have to reboot, and I lose data". "Boot! Boot!" he says, and
laughs wildly. Then he makes a telephone call. Then he walks away.
There is a more satisfying way to get your computer fixed, although
it's also fraught with peril. You can call your local nerd. Maybe
it's the kid up the street, or the woman you met at a party who RAMmed
and ROMmed you to death, or a freelance programmer you know from work.
Money is never involved. Usually some elaborate form of barter is
proposed; the reality of the exchange is often problematic. "If I
ever get to be president, I'll give you can unconditional pardon," you
say. "Smoking!" the nerd replies. The nerd drives an easy bargain,
because nerds actually like to fix things. You are providing them
with recreation and the satisfaction of being competent. You are also
providing them with pizza, snack chips, and caffeine-laced
beverages--this is important.
Then the dialog begins. Not the dialogue between you and the nerd;
the dialogue between the nerd and your computer. You are merely a
bystander. Often, it's like being the only child of a dysfunctional
marriage.
The nerd says, "OK, let's see what you've got. Come on. Now this
should --- wait a minute. Wait a minute! What are you doing to me?
That can't be! Brain-dead! OK, OK, OK, this should work. OK ---
what? Oh yeah, right, fatal error. Right".
At this point, like a timorous child, you ask, "Fatal error? Is that
bad?" "Happens all the time with this stupid system. We'll find a
hack," he says.
It is a relief to know that in the computer world, "fatal" has come to
mean "briefly uncomfortable".
The nerd leans back in his chair. You realize, suddenly, that he is
deeply satisfied. This is actually amusing for him; this rage at the
machine is a sign of pleasure and love.
He plunges back into the system, losing all sense of your presence in
the room. He grunts and moans; the machine pings and grinds. "Don't
do this to me, don't do this to me," he keeps repeating, like a lover
coaxing a suicidal partner off a ledge. You have the feeling you
should not be watching, and you leave. The nerd doesn't even notice.
He comes out of the room finally, fat and sleepy in the afterglow.
"Wrote a little code," he says mildly, the same way Caligula might
have said, "We had a little party." He downs the last of his soda and
disappears into the night.
You go into your study and stare at your machine. You know it loves
another more than you. You decide to live with it anyway.
[John Carroll]
-\-/-\ LOOK WHO'S TALKING \-/-\-
-- Our folks at the BLS: Tracy Holloway King presented 'Licensing
Negative Pronominals in Georgian.' Later, Rob Malouf presented 'A
Constructional Approach to English Verbal Gerunds.'
-- Penny Eckert and John Rickford both gave papers at the American
Association for the Advancement of Science conference on February 12,
at the session of "Language Standards and Linguistics" organized by
Geoffrey Nunberg, in Baltimore. John's paper was called 'The
Systematicity (and Beauty) of the Vernacular."
-\-/-\ LINGUISTICS COLLOQUIUM \-/-\-
PLEASE NOTE ROOM CHANGE!
Stanford Linguistics Department Colloquium
Friday, Feb. 23, 3:30 pm.
******** CORDURA 100 ********
Jane Grimshaw
Rutgers University
'Optimizing lexical choice: expletives and opaque clitics as
cases of minimal violation'
The core of Optimality Theory (Prince and Smolensky 1993) resides
in the hypothesis that constraints are universal, potentially
conflicting, and ranked. Constraints can be violated in well-formed
sentences. Where two constraints conflict on a given input it is the
ranking of the constraints that determines which of the available
options is grammatical. Grammars are nothing more than a ranking of
the set of universal constraints. Within this general theoretical
framework, this talk offers an analysis of several cases of apparently
odd lexical choices. Why does English "choose" to have an auxiliary
"do" and an expletive "it"? Why do the Romance clitic combinations
show unexpected forms?
First, I will show that the distribution of the English auxiliary
"do" can be understood quite precisely in terms of constraint
conflict. The occurrence of "do" violates a constraint of
Full-Interpretation, because "do" has no semantic analysis. The verb
thus occurs only when a higher ranked constraint, such as
Obligatory-Heads, is satisfied by its presence and violated in its
absence. "do" is thus possible only when necessary. From this
perspective it is not a lexical accident that English "has" a
semantically empty auxiliary. Rather it is a consequence of the
grammar of the language, i.e. the ranking of the constraints of UG,
which forces the regular verb "do" to appear, but without its meaning.
The hypothesis is that "do" minimally violates Full-Interpretation:
any other verb would violate it more, having a more highly specified
semantics which is unparsed, or unanalyzed, when the verb is
meaningless. Every language with the (relevant) constraint rankings
must have "do", no language with crucially different rankings can have
it. The appearance of empty "do" is far from being a language
particular lexical fact.
A similar point holds for other expletive elements. Based on
joint work with Vieri Samek-Lodovici, I will argue that the appearance
of the expletive "it" in English has the same analysis, fundamentally.
English ranks Full-Interpretation below the constraint(s) requiring a
filled subject position. Hence the grammar of English prefers using a
nominal without its meaning to leaving the subject position unfilled.
Italian, with a different constraint ranking, makes the opposite
choice. But this is not a fact about the lexicons of English and
Italian, it is a fact about their grammars. Here again, the
hypothesis is that "it" rather than some other nominal element occurs
because it represents minimal violation: stripping the meaningful
pronoun "it" of its semantics is a lesser violation than stripping any
other nominal of the language.
In order to explore this idea further, and achieve a more
principled view of the way optimization affects lexical choice, I will
extend the basic idea to the "opaque" clitics in Romance (Bonet, NLLT
1995). These are cases where the clitic pronoun occurring in a
sequence of clitics is not the one to be expected on the basis of the
clitic pronouns as they occur in isolation. I will argue that an
optimality theoretic account can explain some of the fundamental
properties of this system. The basic idea is that there is a
constraint against adjacent occurrences of identical forms (*XX).
Whether the identity at issue is phonological, morphological, or both,
is an issue to be discussed. This constraint conflicts with
faithfulness constraints, which require the clitic which best analyzes
(is most faithful to) the input to be selected. When *XX dominates,
an opaque clitic must occur.
An example can be found in Italian, where the impersonal subject
clitic pronoun is "si", but this is also the 3rd person reflexive.
When both occur in a single sentence, instead of "si si" we find "ci
si", where the impersonal subject is not realized as it would be in
isolation. The hypothesis is, then, that the perfect clitic, namely
"si", is not available in this situation, because of the effects of
*XX. The clitic which does occur represents the best the language can
do in the situation. The chosen clitic involves minimal violation of
the morphological faithfulness constraints. Constraint re-ranking
explains the existence of considerable cross-dialectal and
cross-linguistic variation in this system.
In all of these cases, if the argument is correct, the actual
choice of a lexical item is determined by the grammar of the language.
In all of these cases, the lexical item that occurs is the one that
minimally violates the regulating constraints: Full-Interpretation for
"do" and "it" and the faithfulness constraints in the case of the
opaque clitics. This proposal, in which lexical choice is
systematically optimized, cannot be instantiated without a
well-defined theory of optimality.
--------------
Reception follows.
For directions and a complete list of colloquia, see
http://www-linguistics.stanford.edu/~kessler/colloq/
-\-/-\ CALL FOR PAPERS \-/-\-
-- 5th INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON THEORETICAL ISSUES IN SIGN LANGUAGE
RESEARCH (September 19-22, 1996, Universite du Quebec a Montreal
(UQAM)). The Fifth International Conference on Theoretical Issues in
Sign Language Research will be held September 19 to 22, 1996. The
conference is co-sponsored by McGill University and Universite du
Quebec a Montreal (UQAM); all meetings will take place at UQAM.
Abstracts are invited on any aspect of research and theory about sign
language including, for example, linguistic structure, language
acquisition, bilingualism, psycholinguistic and neuropsychological
processing, gesture/sign relations, language evolution and contact,
the social context of sign, and research methodology (including
transcription and coding systems, and computer-based data management
and networking). Presentations may be made in any of the three
official languages of the conference: ASL, LSQ and English. Abstracts
may be submitted in French or English. Presentation modes will be
research symposia, plenary session papers, posters, and special
interest workshops. (Preference will be given to symposia and poster
submissions.) Research symposia will be 2 hours and consist of 3 or 4
research papers on a given topic followed by a discussion paper and
general discussion. Organizers of symposia should submit a 150-word
abstract summarizing the topic and goals of the symposium along with a
250-word abstract for each research paper. Plenary session papers
will be 20 minutes with 10 minutes for discussion and poster sessions
will be 2 hours. Paper and poster authors should submit a 250-word
abstract. Workshop sessions will be 90 minutes and geared toward a
special interest topic. Workshop organizers should submit a 250-word
abstract stating the workshop topic, goals, intended audience, and
method (e.g., discussion, hands-on, etc.). Submissions will be
accepted by mail or e-mail (e-mail submissions are encouraged; no fax
submissions will be accepted). Because submissions will be considered
anonymously, each submission must begin with author and address
information separate from the abstract. If submitting by email,
please adhere to the following format:
Title of presentation:
Author(s) and affiliation(s):
Postal address:
Telephone and fax number(s):
E-mail address:
(3 blank lines)
Title of presentation:
Research area:
Presentation mode: (symposium, plenary session paper, poster or workshop)
Abstract:
If submitting by regular mail, please include the first block
(title/author/address information) on a separate cover sheet and the
second block (title, research area and presentation mode) on the
abstract sheet itself. For each submission, mail 5 copies of title and
abstract and 1 copy of the cover sheet to:
TISLR '96
McGill University
1226 Pine Avenue West
Montreal, Quebec
H3G 1A8 CANADA
Send all e-mail submissions to: cxcc@musica.mcgill.ca
All submissions must be received by 1 May 1996
The program will be announced 3 June 1996
Accepted papers must be submitted by 16 August 1996
-- (PREFERABLY) NON-LEXICAL SEMANTICS: The conference will be hosted
by the University of Paris 7 (France), and will take place in June
20-22, 1996 (Note the change of date in from the first call). There
will be three one hour talks by invited speakers (G. Carlson, J.
Higginbotham, E.L. Keenan) and the rest of the talks will be
contributed papers chosen by the program committee on selection
basis. Submissions of abstracts (in English or in French) for
30-minute contributed talks (with 10 additional minutes for
discussion) on any topic in the semantic analysis of natural
languages, with strong preference for non-lexical semantics, are
welcome. Authors should submit 5 copies of (so called "anonymous")
abstracts, no more than two pages (but not significantly less than 2
pages) long. Data allowing us to identify and contact the author (or
authors) should be given separately. E-mail submissions will be
accepted (only when in LaTex or Word). In this case authors shoud send
a title page with authors' name, etc. in addition to the anonymous two
page abstract. Abstract deadline: April 8, 96. Send abstract to
Conference de Semantique
c/o R. Zuber
Universite Paris 7
UFR LINGUISTIQUE, Case 7003
2 Place Jussieu
75251 Paris Cedex 05
France
The e-mail address to which the abstracts should be sent:
rz@ccr.jussieu.fr. This is also the e-mail address for inquiries.
-- NEW JOURNAL: In May 1997 Cambridge University Press will be
publishing the first issue of a new journal entitled 'English Language
and Linguistics.' The journal is edited by Bas Aarts of University
College London and Richard Hogg and David Denison of the University of
Manchester. Associate editors are Valerie Adams of UCL (Reviews) and
Douglas Biber of Northern Arizona University (North America). There
is a distinguished international Editorial Board. ENGLISH LANGUAGE
AND LINGUISTICS, published twice a year, is an international journal
which focuses on the description of the English language within the
framework of contemporary linguistics. The journal is concerned
equally with the synchronic and the diachronic aspects of English
language studies and will publish articles of the highest quality
which make a substantial contribution to our understanding of the
structure and development of the English language and which are
informed by a knowledge and appreciation of linguistic theory.
ENGLISH LANGUAGE AND LINGUISTICS will carry articles and short
discussion papers or squibs on all core aspects of English from its
beginnings to the present day, including syntax, morphology,
phonology, semantics, pragmatics, corpus linguistics and lexis. There
will also be a major review section including from time to time
articles that give an overview of current research in particular
specialist areas. From time to time an issue will be devoted to a
special topic, when a guest editor will be invited to commission
articles from leading specialists in the field. A number of papers
have been commissioned, and we invite contributions and inquiries.
The stylesheet for contributors will be available shortly.
The journal address is:
English Language and Linguistics
c/o Department of English Language and Literature
University College London
Gower Street
London WC1E 6BT
U.K.
E-mail addresses
for editorial queries: ell@ucl.ac.uk
for subscription queries: journals_marketing@cup.cam.ac.uk
Information about the journal will also be found on the Cambridge
University Press WWW server. A home page for the journal is in
preearation:
URL in Europe http://www.cup.cam.ac.uk/
URL in North America http://www.cup.org/
-\-/-\ TRUE LINGUISTICS \-/-\-
-- A Yorkshire man, who's wife had recently died, commissioned a
headstone with the biblical text "She Was Thine" to grace the grave.
On returning a couple of weeks later the man was somewhat dismayed to
see that the mason had got the inscription wrong, and it read "She Was
Thin".
"You've forgotten the E.", he informed the mason, who was
horrified and apologised profusely and promised that it would be
rectified immediatelly and would be ready in two days.
When the man returned to review the correction the inscription
was seen to read, "Ee, She Was Thin."
[Radio 4 'Quote, Unquote'. 11 May 95]
-\-/-\ JOB ANNOUNCEMENTS \-/-\-
(REDUNDANCY NOTICE: For fuller listings of these and other jobs, don't
forget to check the Jobs binder in the Greenberg Room, and the file
'jobslist.txt' on the CSLI directory /user/linguistics.)
-- UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND (COLLEGE PARK): The University of Maryland
at College Park, the flagship campus of the University of Maryland,
invites applications and nominations for he position of Director of
the Maryland English Institute (MEI). MEI is a self-support unit
within the College of Arts and Humanities, providing English language
testing, training and evaluation for the campus' non-native
population, including those provisionally admitted to the University
and international teaching assistants. In addition, MEI acts as a
resource center on matters of ESL policy, teaching and testing; it
also runs an intensive English program for prospective,
non-matriculated students and several contract programs outside the
University. Candidates should have an interest in participating in
the College research initiative in second language teaching. Some
relevant administrative experience is required; at least 3 years is
preferred. The successful candidate will be expected to demonstrate a
commitment to fostering excellence in all of MEI's activities,
including teaching, faculty professional development, curriculum and
assessment development, initiatives in securing outside contacts and
funding, and research on second language learning and teaching. A
terminal degree, preferably a Ph.D., is highly desirable. Applicants
should send a letter of interest, a curriculum vitae and a sample of
published work to
Processor David Lightfoot
MEI Search, c/o College of Arts and Humanities
Francis Scott Key Hall
University of Maryland
College Park, MD 20742-7311
Applicants should arrange to have three letters of reference sent. For
best consideration, applications should arrive by 1 March 1996. EOE/AA
(REDUNDANCY NOTICE: For fuller listings of these and other jobs, don't
forget to check the Jobs binder in the Greenberg Room, and the file
'jobslist.txt' on the CSLI directory /user/linguistics.)
-\-/-\ INSTA-PRIZE \-/-\-
-- FROM THE PEANUT GALLERY: In the following list of letters, there is
a hidden tongue twister. The tongue twister can be found by deleting
one "f" one "i" and one "t". It does not necessarily begin at the
beginning, rather, the list should be read as if it wraps around:
TFITSFITSFITST
SITFITSITSFEEI
TIFI
NB there are actually two solutions.
-- Solution to last week's puzzle: 'When I think over what I have
said, I envy dumb people.'
/-\-/-\-/-\-/-\-/-\-/-\-/-\-/-\-/-\-/-\-/-\-/-\-/-\-/-\-/-\-/-\-/-\-/-\
-\-/-\ CONSERVE DISK SPACE \-/-\-
So you may delete your copy after you've read it (or better yet,
before you've read it), the Sesquipedalian Weekly Herald is stored
online at Stanford (in directory /user/linguistics/Sesquip/), and at
Berkeley (in the directory /usr/pub.), or on the Linguistics
Department home page (http://www-linguistics.stanford.edu/). The most
current issue of the Herald can be found by typing 'help quip'.
Neither Stanford University nor the Linguistics Department, nor any of
their employees, makes any warranty, whatsoever, implied, or assumes
any legal liability or responsibility regarding any information,
disclosed, in this publication, or represents that its use would not
infringe privately owned rights. No specific reference constitutes or
implies endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by Stanford
University or the Linguistics Department, or their employees. Any
similarity to actual linguists, living or dead, is purely
coincidental. The views and opinions expressed herein do not
necessarily reflect those of Stanford University or the Linguistics
Department, or their employees, and shall not be used for advertising
or product endorsement purposes.
This line intentionally left blank
\-/-\-/-\-/-\-/-\-/-\-/-\-/-\-/-\-/-\-/-\-/-\-/-\-/-\-/-\-/-\-/-\-/-\-/