Description. The interface between syntax and word meaning is one of the most important issues in contemporary grammatical theory.  This course will approach the interface from both sides, beginning with the ancient puzzle of what a word means.  We will learn about polysemy, vagueness, coercion, semantic (thematic) roles, psychological approaches to concepts and word meaning, prototypes, lexical decomposition, conceptual structure, constructionism, lexicalism, diathesis alternations, and theories of the mapping from the lexicon to the syntax.  

Prerequisites:  Syntax I and II; Semantics I is recommended (can be taken concurrently)

Requirements.  Basis for grading indicated by percentages (plus/minus grades will be assigned for the final grade).

1. Class discussion (10%).  Questions, comments, discussion.  Very important part of a seminar!   
2. Occasional homework exercises (25%).
3. Presentation of one optional or obligatory reading (10%). Plan for 20 to 30 minutes; prepare a handout.
4. Informally propose a term paper topic, by email or in person.  Due Oct. 8.
5. Term Paper, written proposal (5%)  One to three pages (double spaced), with at least 3 references.  Due Oct. 15.
6. Term Paper, draft (10%).  Due Nov. 19.
7. Term Paper (30%).  Around 10-15 pages; at least 10 references.  Due Dec. 11.
8. Presentation of your term paper (10%).  These will be scheduled during the last few weeks of the semester.

Textbooks
•    Levin, Beth, and M. Rappaport-Hovav. 2005. Argument Realization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.  (Not ordered at Coop Bookstore; please order a copy, e.g. from Amazon.com)

•    All other readings available through Blackboard (http://courses.utexas.edu)

Students with disabilities may request appropriate academic accommodations from the Division of Diversity and Community Engagement, Services for Students with Disabilities, 471-6259.
Outline

I. Word meaning I: polysemy, homophony, generality, and vagueness

For Tues., Sept. 1, read:
•    SLI Ch. 1 ‘The place of word meaning in generative syntax’
•    SLI Ch. 2 ‘Polysemy’
•    Apresjan, J. D. 1974. Regular Polysemy. Linguistics 142: 5-32.

(Optional: Cruse, D. A. (1995), 'Polysemy and related phenomena from a cognitive linguistic viewpoint', in P. Saint-Dizier and E. Viegas (eds.), Computational Lexical Semantics (Cambridge University Press), 33–49.)

II. Psychological approaches: Concepts, prototypes, exemplars

Ravin, Yael and Claudia Leacock 2000, ‘Polysemy: an overview.’ In Ravin, Y. and Leacock, C. (2000), Polysemy: Theoretical and Computational Approaches (Oxford University Press).

Murphy, Gregory L. 2002. The Big Book of Concepts. Cambridge: MIT Press:
•    Ch. 2 ‘Typicality and the Classical View of Categories’, in (Murphy 2002)
•    Ch. 3 ‘Theories’, in (Murphy 2002)
•    Ch. 11 ‘Word Meaning’, in (Murphy 2002)

III. Argument realization

Levin, B., and M. Rappaport-Hovav. 2005. Argument Realization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Ch. 8 ‘Word meaning’, from Chierchia, G. and S. McConnell-Ginet. 2000. Meaning and grammar: an introduction to semantics: MIT Press Cambridge, MA, USA.

Other readings to be announced.

IV. Causative alternations

Haspelmath, Martin (1993), 'More on the typology of inchoative/causative verb alternations', Causatives and transitivity (Amsterdam: John Benjamins), 87-120.
Wechsler, Stephen 2007.  A diachronic account of English deverbal nominals.  Proceedings of the 26th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics, UC Berkeley, April 27, 2007.
Coppock, Elizabeth 2008. ‘The Causative Alternation’.  Unpublished manuscript.
Wechsler, Stephen 2008. ‘Causative Alternations.’ Unpublished manuscript.

Other readings to be announced.