Henriette de Swart – författare

This book investigates the morphosyntactic, semantic, and pragmatic properties of language, and the interactions between them, from the perspective of Optimality Theory. It integrates optimization processes into the formal and functional study of grammar, interpreting optimization as the result of conflicting, violable ranked constraints. Unlike previous work on the topic, this book also takes into account the question of directionality of grammar. A model of grammar in which optimization processes interact bidirectionally allows both language generation-the process of selecting the optimal form of a given meaning-and language interpretation-the process of optimal interpretation of a given form-to be taken into account. Chapters in this volume explore the consequences of both symmetric (unidirectional) and asymmetric (bidirectional) versions of Optimality Theory, investigating the syntax-semantics interface, first language acquisition, and sequential bilingual grammars. The volume presents cutting edge research in Optimality-Theoretic syntax and semantics, as well as demonstrating how optimization processes as modelled in this formalism serve as a viable approach for linguists and scholars in related fields.

This book investigates the morphosyntactic, semantic, and pragmatic properties of language, and the interactions between them, from the perspective of Optimality Theory. It integrates optimization processes into the formal and functional study of grammar, interpreting optimization as the result of conflicting, violable ranked constraints.Unlike previous work on the topic, this book also takes into account the question of directionality of grammar. A model of grammar in which optimization processes interact bidirectionally allows both language generation-the process of selecting the optimal form of a given meaning-and language interpretation-the process of optimal interpretation of a given form-to be taken into account. Chapters in this volume explore the consequences of both symmetric (unidirectional) and asymmetric (bidirectional) versions of Optimality Theory, investigating the syntax-semantics interface, first language acquisition, and sequential bilingual grammars. The volume presents cutting edge research in Optimality-Theoretic syntax and semantics, as well as demonstrating how optimization processes as modelled in this formalism serve as a viable approach for linguists and scholars in related fields.

This book investigates the morphosyntactic, semantic, and pragmatic properties of language, and the interactions between them, from the perspective of Optimality Theory. It integrates optimization processes into the formal and functional study of grammar, interpreting optimization as the result of conflicting, violable ranked constraints.Unlike previous work on the topic, this book also takes into account the question of directionality of grammar. A model of grammar in which optimization processes interact bidirectionally allows both language generation-the process of selecting the optimal form of a given meaning-and language interpretation-the process of optimal interpretation of a given form-to be taken into account. Chapters in this volume explore the consequences of both symmetric (unidirectional) and asymmetric (bidirectional) versions of Optimality Theory, investigating the syntax-semantics interface, first language acquisition, and sequential bilingual grammars. The volume presents cutting edge research in Optimality-Theoretic syntax and semantics, as well as demonstrating how optimization processes as modelled in this formalism serve as a viable approach for linguists and scholars in related fields.

The aim of this book is two-fold: to offer a retrospective view on the past thirty years of research on aspectuality and temporality as well as to develop new perspectives on the future development of the field. Articles contain overviews of the development of the field and/or present the state of the art of current research, suggesting new and upcoming lines of research. An important theme throughout the book is typological variation, and the relevance of empirical data for theory formation.Together the articles in the book take a wide crosslinguistic scope including aspectual analyses of English, and two varieties of English: African American English and Colloquial Singapore English, Italian, French, Bulgarian, Czech, Mandarin Chinese, West-Greenlandic, Wakashan languages, and Nakh-Daghestanian languages.Audience: Scholars and students of aspectuality in semantics and at the syntax-semantics interface.

The aim of this book is two-fold: to offer a retrospective view on the past thirty years of research on aspectuality and temporality as well as to develop new perspectives on the future development of the field. Articles contain overviews of the development of the field and/or present the state of the art of current research, suggesting new and upcoming lines of research. An important theme throughout the book is typological variation, and the relevance of empirical data for theory formation.Together the articles in the book take a wide crosslinguistic scope including aspectual analyses of English, and two varieties of English: African American English and Colloquial Singapore English, Italian, French, Bulgarian, Czech, Mandarin Chinese, West-Greenlandic, Wakashan languages, and Nakh-Daghestanian languages.Audience: Scholars and students of aspectuality in semantics and at the syntax-semantics interface.

t his book applies recently developed tools in strong and weak bidirectional op- mality theory (ot ) as well as an evolutionary modeling of ot in a bidirectional setting to the empirical domain of negation across a wide range of languages. I have long been intrigued by the patterns of semantic variation we find in natural l- guage, and negation has always been one of the topics I was fascinated by. In the past, I have proposed analyses of language-specific observations about not...until in English (de swart 1996), Dutch negative polarity items (n PIs) occurring outside the c-command domain of the licensor (de swart 1998b), the interaction of negation and aspect in French (de swart and Molendijk 1999), scope ambiguities with negative quantifiers in g ermanic (de swart 2000), and negative concord in r omance (de swart and sag 2002). a lthough I felt my proposals were contributing to a better understanding of the phenomena under consideration, they did not lead to an explanatory theory of cross-linguistic variation in the area of negation. Meanwhile, the discussion of semantic universals and cross-linguistic variation in meaning assumed more imp- tance in the literature (cf. von Fintel and Matthewson 2008), which made it all the more urgent to develop such a theory.o ther proposals came along in the literature, exploiting syntactic and lexical notions of variation, and making claims about u- versal grammar and typological generalizations.

t his book applies recently developed tools in strong and weak bidirectional op- mality theory (ot ) as well as an evolutionary modeling of ot in a bidirectional setting to the empirical domain of negation across a wide range of languages. I have long been intrigued by the patterns of semantic variation we find in natural l- guage, and negation has always been one of the topics I was fascinated by. In the past, I have proposed analyses of language-specific observations about not...until in English (de swart 1996), Dutch negative polarity items (n PIs) occurring outside the c-command domain of the licensor (de swart 1998b), the interaction of negation and aspect in French (de swart and Molendijk 1999), scope ambiguities with negative quantifiers in g ermanic (de swart 2000), and negative concord in r omance (de swart and sag 2002). a lthough I felt my proposals were contributing to a better understanding of the phenomena under consideration, they did not lead to an explanatory theory of cross-linguistic variation in the area of negation. Meanwhile, the discussion of semantic universals and cross-linguistic variation in meaning assumed more imp- tance in the literature (cf. von Fintel and Matthewson 2008), which made it all the more urgent to develop such a theory.o ther proposals came along in the literature, exploiting syntactic and lexical notions of variation, and making claims about u- versal grammar and typological generalizations.