Congratulations to John Rickford, who is now officially the President of the Linguistic Society of America!
Archive for the ‘Faculty’ Category
Dan Lassiter will present “Adjectival vagueness in a Bayesian Model of Interpretation” at UCSD’s Cognitive Science 200 speaker series on Friday 1/23, and also at a UCLA Linguistics colloquium the following Friday.
Research on bias against speakers of African American Vernacular English in the American justice system, conducted by John Rickford and Sharese King, was featured in the most recent issue of the Stanford News Report. Read about their work here!
Dan was featured in the most recent LSA Member Spotlight, sharing his thoughts on the field of linguistics, exciting applications of computational linguistics, and the services provided by the LSA. Read it here!
In recent weeks, Dan’s work on the language of food has also earned him
- a Mother Jones article – complete with mouthwatering photos of Taco Bell’s latest foodlike creations,
- a mention in the New York Times,
- and a UCSD Computer Science & Engineering Colloquium invitation, where he presented “Extracting Social Meaning from Language: The Computational Linguistics of Food and the Speard of Innovation”. You can even watch a recording of the talk here.
Boris Harizanov will talk about his work on the syntax/phonology interface at P-interest today at noon in the Greenberg room.
Diagnosing phonological movement: Infixation in Chamorro
Syntactic movement relations can be established on the basis of reconstruction effects, whereby a syntactic object (e.g., a phrase) occurs in one position with respect to some criteria (e.g., surface position) but in one or more other positions with respect to other criteria (e.g., thematic interpretation, binding). Work on phenomena such as clitic noninitiality and infixation reveals that it might be possible to construe these phenomena as involving movement relations at the level of phonological/prosodic structure (e.g., Prosodic Inversion). If so, does phonological movement give rise to reconstruction effects, like its syntactic counterpart? I provide evidence from infixation in Chamorro that a morphophonological object can occur in more than one position with respect to different phonological/prosodic criteria. Specifically, morphemes that are infixes on the surface in this language also behave like prefixes with respect to a certain phonological alternation (umlaut). A key piece of evidence involves an opaque interaction between infixation and reduplication in Chamorro, which leads to an analysis of infixation in the language as movement of an underlying prefix to its infixal surface position.