6-7. Sept 2012

6. Sept 9:00-18:00

7. Sept 9:00-15:00

The meeting will be held in Paris on the two days preceding Sinn und Bedeutung. We were able to get a room through the help of Pascal Amsili and Lucia Tovena at Paris Diderot in the 13e arrondissement.

Université Paris Diderot, UFR de Linguistique, 175, rue du Chevaleret, 75013 Paris room 4C92 4th floor, “plateau” C

Closest metro station: Chevaleret, line 6.

See the following weblink for nore information (in French) on the venue and how to get there:

http://www.liafa.univ-paris-diderot.fr/web9/acces/acces_fr.php

Many thanks to Lucia Tovena (local organizer)

For members, we reimburse the travel costs to Paris and back.
We reimburse hotel costs for 3 nights:

• the 5th,
• the 6th
• and the 7th of September.

There is a price limit per night which is 100€.
If you book above this, please note that the university of Göttingen may not refund anything above 100€ per night. Typically if the difference is small, they may not object, however.

Each participant should book on his/her own.
We suggest booking in the region Place d'Italie/Les Gobelins, since that is also near the SuB site.
If you find a suitable hotel, please share the suggestion here.

Radek: I booked a room at the Neptune hotel (15, rue Godefroy, 13. Place d'Italie, Paris, 75013)
Edgar: same
Malte: same

Université Paris Diderot, UFR de Linguistique, 175, rue du Chevaleret, 75013 Paris room 4C92 4th floor, “plateau” C

Google map: http://goo.gl/maps/QZwR

Sept 6.

9 - 12 Invited talks + Discussion
12- 14 Lunch break
14- 18 Thematic Slot 1: Grammar and Discourse Structure: From Accent to Focus to Questions?

19- Dinner. suggestion: http://petitmarguery.com/fr/restaurant.html

Sept 7.

9- 12 Thematic Slot 2: Local Information Structure
12-14 Lunch break
14-15 Floris Roelofsen: Assertions and Polar Questions: the default case and beyond
15-19 Paris per pedes tour

In the second network meeting on Questions in Discourse we would like to shed more light on the relation between questions and information structure by taking a closer look at the relation between accenting/focus realization (A) and the information-structural category of focus (F=, on the one hand, and the relation between focus and the current question/question under discussion (Q) as a discourse-structuring device, on the other:

(1) A – F | F – Q

The first question to be addressed is whether the hypothesis in (2) holds in light of the empirical facts – both old and new:

(2) There is a 1:1-correlation between A and F and Q in that the nuclear pitch accent always marks the focus of the utterance and focus always indicates the current question under discussion.

Of particular relevance are apparent mismatches between A, F, and Q, which fall into two subclasses:

 i.          Unfocused accents: Instances of pitch accents that do not appear to relate directly to a question under discussion.
 ii.         Unaccented focus: Instances of question-indicating focus that are not marked by accent.

The second question to be addressed is how to integrate certain problematic instances of focus marking in embedded environments (not at-issue appositives, conditionals) into a discourse framework that is based on questions.

We will deal with each question in a separate discussion round with the following preliminary working titles:

• Grammar & Discourse Structure: From accent to Focus to Questions?
• Local Information Structure: Focus in Conditionals and Appositives

Each discussion round will be in charge of some volunteer member of the network. The discussion round will consist of a general introduction, followed by individual contributions on empirical observations and theoretical considerations (discourse modelling), followed by a general discussion.

Rooth’s talk aims at bringing together Alternative Semantics and the phonology of focus. Using two binary features: F and WH, he distinguishes two types of focus: wh-focus [+F, +WH] and common focus [+F, -WH]. He showed on the basis of data from English, Chinese and Japanese, that semantic scope and phonological scope co-vary. Based on the compositional system of Shimoyama (2006) and Beck (2006), Rooth introduced a new recursive system for the projection of alternatives. In the new system, focus marking is replaced by four local operators: 01 (project alternatives from the right child), 10 (project alternatives from the left child), 11(project alternatives from both) and 00 (don’t project alternatives). Using a phonological constraint, the assignment of phonological prominence and the semantic derivation are done at the same time. The ~ operator terminates the upward projection and hence marks the scope and antecedent of contrast.