MUSKENS

Language
NATURAL LANGUAGE SEMANTICS FOR LOGICIANS AND COMPUTER SCIENTISTS

Introductory course

REINHARD MUSKENS

Department of Linguistics, Tilburg University

Second week
r.a.muskens@kub.nl

Course description

The concept of meaning in ordinary language can be understood much in the same way as it is understood in the case of logical languages and the semantics of (say) English can be approximated by defining a logic that behaves sufficiently like a fragment of that language. This idea, which stems from Richard Montague, has consequences for the way the interaction of syntax and semantics in natural language is described and makes us pose the important question of natural language ontology: what kind of models do we need for an adequate model theory of English and what kind of denotations should sentences and texts have in those models? We'll consider arguments based on empirical evidence to the effect that these denotations should be partial and that they should be dynamic and we'll define various precise fragments of English and provide them with partial and dynamic semantics. The course is geared towards students with a solid background in logic but presupposes no previous knowledge of linguistics. The logics we shall employ will be fairly close to classical type logic and can be grasped without much effort. This set-up will allow us to proceed at a relatively fast pace and arrive at a discussion about the possibilities, limitations and challenges of the paradigm without much hindrance of technical overhead.

The course will present in a compact and highly streamlined way at least:

all material that is usually covered in courses on Montague Semantics (Gamut II, Dowty, Wall and Peters);
the core of a version of Situation Semantics;
the core of Discourse Representation Theory.

Most introductions to semantics are intended for the logically uninitiated and have to go over a lot of elementary technical material in much detail. Such courses usually bore the technically more mature students to death. This course goes the other way, assumes familiarity with formal techniques, but puts much emphasis on the need to adapt theories in the light of empirical evidence.

Prerequisites
None

Literature
No specific recommendation

HOME PROGRAMME CONTACT REGISTRATION

Language	NATURAL LANGUAGE SEMANTICS FOR LOGICIANS AND COMPUTER SCIENTISTS
Introductory course	REINHARD MUSKENS Department of Linguistics, Tilburg University
Second week	r.a.muskens@kub.nl
Course description	The concept of meaning in ordinary language can be understood much in the same way as it is understood in the case of logical languages and the semantics of (say) English can be approximated by defining a logic that behaves sufficiently like a fragment of that language. This idea, which stems from Richard Montague, has consequences for the way the interaction of syntax and semantics in natural language is described and makes us pose the important question of natural language ontology: what kind of models do we need for an adequate model theory of English and what kind of denotations should sentences and texts have in those models? We'll consider arguments based on empirical evidence to the effect that these denotations should be partial and that they should be dynamic and we'll define various precise fragments of English and provide them with partial and dynamic semantics. The course is geared towards students with a solid background in logic but presupposes no previous knowledge of linguistics. The logics we shall employ will be fairly close to classical type logic and can be grasped without much effort. This set-up will allow us to proceed at a relatively fast pace and arrive at a discussion about the possibilities, limitations and challenges of the paradigm without much hindrance of technical overhead. The course will present in a compact and highly streamlined way at least: all material that is usually covered in courses on Montague Semantics (Gamut II, Dowty, Wall and Peters); the core of a version of Situation Semantics; the core of Discourse Representation Theory. Most introductions to semantics are intended for the logically uninitiated and have to go over a lot of elementary technical material in much detail. Such courses usually bore the technically more mature students to death. This course goes the other way, assumes familiarity with formal techniques, but puts much emphasis on the need to adapt theories in the light of empirical evidence.
Prerequisites	None
Literature	No specific recommendation