Fred Landman – författare

Indefinites and the Type of Sets explores a new theory of indefinite noun phrase interpretation and definiteness effects.

Provides an introduction to aspects of the semantics of noun phrases, as well as comparing alternate theories. Explores a new theory of indefinite noun phrase interpretation and definiteness effects. Written accessibly by one of the world’s most prominent formal semanticists. Useful for students and scholars in formal semantics as well as the neighboring fields of syntax, pragmatics, and the philosophy of language.

Formalization plays an important role in semantics. Doing semantics and following the literature requires considerable technical sophistica­ tion and acquaintance with quite advanced mathematical techniques and structures. But semantics isn't mathematics. These techniques and structures are tools that help us build semantic theories. Our real aim is to understand semantic phenomena and we need the technique to make our understanding of these phenomena precise. The problems in semantics are most often too hard and slippery, to completely trust our informal understanding of them. This should not be taken as an attack on informal reasoning in semantics. On the contrary, in my view, very often the essential insight in a diagnosis of what is going on in a certain semantic phenomenon takes place at the informal level. It is very easy, however, to be misled into thinking that a certain informal insight provides a satisfying analysis of a certain problem; it will often turn out that there is a fundamental unclarity about what the informal insight actually is. Formalization helps to sharpen those insights and put them to the test.

Formalization plays an important role in semantics. Doing semantics and following the literature requires considerable technical sophistica­ tion and acquaintance with quite advanced mathematical techniques and structures. But semantics isn't mathematics. These techniques and structures are tools that help us build semantic theories. Our real aim is to understand semantic phenomena and we need the technique to make our understanding of these phenomena precise. The problems in semantics are most often too hard and slippery, to completely trust our informal understanding of them. This should not be taken as an attack on informal reasoning in semantics. On the contrary, in my view, very often the essential insight in a diagnosis of what is going on in a certain semantic phenomenon takes place at the informal level. It is very easy, however, to be misled into thinking that a certain informal insight provides a satisfying analysis of a certain problem; it will often turn out that there is a fundamental unclarity about what the informal insight actually is. Formalization helps to sharpen those insights and put them to the test.

JERUSALEM LECTURES In 1992, I was a Lady Davis Fellow in the English Department at the Hebrew Univer­ sity of Jerusalem. In the context of this, Edit Doron asked me to present a series of weekly evening lectures. The idea was that I would be talking about my own current research on plurality in an event based theory, without the restraints that a nonnal seminar fonnat would im­ pose: i.e. the idea was that I would actually get to the part where I would talk about my own work. At the same time, Edit added, it would be nice if, rather than just presupposing or presenting a neo-Davidsonian framework to develop my analysis of plurality, I could provide a more general setting of the problems by discussing in some depth the archi­ tecture of event arguments and thematic roles. In particular, Terry Parsons' book, Par­ sons 1990, had appeared relatively recently, and there was real interest among the audience in discussing Parsons' arguments for events and roles.

Indefinites and the Type of Sets explores a new theory of indefinite noun phrase interpretation and definiteness effects. Provides an introduction to aspects of the semantics of noun phrases, as well as comparing alternate theories.Explores a new theory of indefinite noun phrase interpretation and definiteness effects.Written accessibly by one of the world’s most prominent formal semanticists.Useful for students and scholars in formal semantics as well as the neighboring fields of syntax, pragmatics, and the philosophy of language.

Indefinites and the Type of Sets explores a new theory of indefinite noun phrase interpretation and definiteness effects. Provides an introduction to aspects of the semantics of noun phrases, as well as comparing alternate theories.Explores a new theory of indefinite noun phrase interpretation and definiteness effects.Written accessibly by one of the world’s most prominent formal semanticists.Useful for students and scholars in formal semantics as well as the neighboring fields of syntax, pragmatics, and the philosophy of language.

Iceberg semantics is a new framework of Boolean semantics for mass nouns and count nouns in which the interpretation of a noun phrase rises up from a generating base and floats with its base on its Boolean part set, like an iceberg. The framework is shown to preserve the attractive features of classical Boolean semantics for count nouns; the book argues that Iceberg semantics forms a much better framework for studying mass nouns than the classical theory does.  Iceberg semantics uses its notion of base to develop a semantic theory of the differences between mass nouns and count nouns and between different types of mass nouns, in particular between prototypical mass nouns (here called mess mass nouns) like water and mud versus object mass nouns (here called neat mass nouns) like poultry and pottery. The book shows in detail how and why neat mass nouns pattern semantically both with mess mass nouns and with count nouns.  Iceberg semantics is a compositional theory and in Iceberg semantics the semantic distinctions defined apply to noun phrases of any complexity. The book studies in depth the semantics of classifier noun phrases (like three glasses of wine) and measure noun phrases (like three liters of wine). The classical wisdom is that classifier interpretations are count.  Recent literature has argued compellingly that measure interpretations are mass. The book shows that both connections follow from the basic architecture of Iceberg semantics.Audience:  Scholars and students in linguistics - in particular semantics, pragmatics, computational linguistics and syntax – and neighbouring disciplines like logic, philosophy of language, and cognitive science.

Iceberg semantics is a new framework of Boolean semantics for mass nouns and count nouns in which the interpretation of a noun phrase rises up from a generating base and floats with its base on its Boolean part set, like an iceberg. The framework is shown to preserve the attractive features of classical Boolean semantics for count nouns; the book argues that Iceberg semantics forms a much better framework for studying mass nouns than the classical theory does.  Iceberg semantics uses its notion of base to develop a semantic theory of the differences between mass nouns and count nouns and between different types of mass nouns, in particular between prototypical mass nouns (here called mess mass nouns) like water and mud versus object mass nouns (here called neat mass nouns) like poultry and pottery. The book shows in detail how and why neat mass nouns pattern semantically both with mess mass nouns and with count nouns.  Iceberg semantics is a compositional theory and in Iceberg semantics the semantic distinctions defined apply to noun phrases of any complexity. The book studies in depth the semantics of classifier noun phrases (like three glasses of wine) and measure noun phrases (like three liters of wine). The classical wisdom is that classifier interpretations are count.  Recent literature has argued compellingly that measure interpretations are mass. The book shows that both connections follow from the basic architecture of Iceberg semantics.Audience:  Scholars and students in linguistics - in particular semantics, pragmatics, computational linguistics and syntax – and neighbouring disciplines like logic, philosophy of language, and cognitive science.

Iceberg semantics is a new framework of Boolean semantics for mass nouns and count nouns in which the interpretation of a noun phrase rises up from a generating base and floats with its base on its Boolean part set, like an iceberg. The framework is shown to preserve the attractive features of classical Boolean semantics for count nouns; the book argues that Iceberg semantics forms a much better framework for studying mass nouns than the classical theory does.  Iceberg semantics uses its notion of base to develop a semantic theory of the differences between mass nouns and count nouns and between different types of mass nouns, in particular between prototypical mass nouns (here called mess mass nouns) like water and mud versus object mass nouns (here called neat mass nouns) like poultry and pottery. The book shows in detail how and why neat mass nouns pattern semantically both with mess mass nouns and with count nouns.  Iceberg semantics is a compositional theory and in Iceberg semantics the semantic distinctions defined apply to noun phrases of any complexity. The book studies in depth the semantics of classifier noun phrases (like three glasses of wine) and measure noun phrases (like three liters of wine). The classical wisdom is that classifier interpretations are count.  Recent literature has argued compellingly that measure interpretations are mass. The book shows that both connections follow from the basic architecture of Iceberg semantics.Audience:  Scholars and students in linguistics - in particular semantics, pragmatics, computational linguistics and syntax – and neighbouring disciplines like logic, philosophy of language, and cognitive science.

Formalization plays an important role in semantics. Doing semantics and following the literature requires considerable technical sophistica­ tion and acquaintance with quite advanced mathematical techniques and structures. But semantics isn''t mathematics. These techniques and structures are tools that help us build semantic theories. Our real aim is to understand semantic phenomena and we need the technique to make our understanding of these phenomena precise. The problems in semantics are most often too hard and slippery, to completely trust our informal understanding of them. This should not be taken as an attack on informal reasoning in semantics. On the contrary, in my view, very often the essential insight in a diagnosis of what is going on in a certain semantic phenomenon takes place at the informal level. It is very easy, however, to be misled into thinking that a certain informal insight provides a satisfying analysis of a certain problem; it will often turn out that there is a fundamental unclarity about what the informal insight actually is. Formalization helps to sharpen those insights and put them to the test.

JERUSALEM LECTURES In 1992, I was a Lady Davis Fellow in the English Department at the Hebrew Univer­ sity of Jerusalem. In the context of this, Edit Doron asked me to present a series of weekly evening lectures. The idea was that I would be talking about my own current research on plurality in an event based theory, without the restraints that a nonnal seminar fonnat would im­ pose: i.e. the idea was that I would actually get to the part where I would talk about my own work. At the same time, Edit added, it would be nice if, rather than just presupposing or presenting a neo-Davidsonian framework to develop my analysis of plurality, I could provide a more general setting of the problems by discussing in some depth the archi­ tecture of event arguments and thematic roles. In particular, Terry Parsons'' book, Par­ sons 1990, had appeared relatively recently, and there was real interest among the audience in discussing Parsons'' arguments for events and roles.