Indexical predicates

We discuss the challenge to truth-conditional semantics presented by apparent shifts in extension of predicates such as ‘red’. We propose an explicit indexical semantics for ‘red’ and argue that our account is preferable to the alternatives on conceptual and empirical grounds.

Interface vulnerability and knowledge of the subjunctive/indicative distinction with negated epistemic predicates in L2 Spanish.

Much recent research in SLA is guided by the hypothesis of L2 interface vulnerability (see Sorace 2005). This study contributes to this general project by examining the acquisition of two classes of subjunctive complement clauses in L2 Spanish: subjunctive complements of volitional predicates (purely syntactic) and subjunctive vs. indicative complements with negated epistemic matrix predicates, where the mood distinction is discourse dependent (thus involving the syntax-discourse interface). We provide an analysis of the volitional subjunctive in English and Spanish, suggesting that English learners of L2 Spanish need to access the functional projection Mood P and an uninterpretable modal feature on the Force head available to them from their formal English register grammar, and simultaneously must unacquire the structure of English for-to clauses. For negated epistemic predicates, our analysis maintains that they need to revalue the modal feature on the Force head from uninterpretable to interpretable, within the L2 grammar.With others (e.g. Borgonovo & Prévost 2003; Borgonovo, Bruhn de Garavito & Prévost 2005) and in line with Sorace's (2000, 2003, 2005) notion of interface vulnerability, we maintain that the latter case is more difficult for L2 learners, which is borne out in the data we present. However, the data also show that the indicative/subjunctive distinction with negated epistemics can be acquired by advanced stages of acquisition, questioning the notion of obligatory residual optionality for all properties which require the integration of syntactic and discourse information.

Individual differences and the role of the L1 in L2 processing: an ERP investigation

This study used ERP (event-related potentials) to examine both the role of the L1 and the role of individual differences in the processing of agreement violations. Theories of L2 acquisition differ with regard to whether or not native-like acquisition of L2 features is possible (Schwartz and Sprouse, 1994, 1996; Tsimpli and Mastropavlou, 2007), and the results of previous ERP studies are inconsistent when it comes to whether or not native-like processing is observed in response to L2 agreement violations (e.g., Sabourin, 2003; Tokowicz and MacWhinney, 2005). Furthermore, studies of learners in early stages of L2 acquisition have found variability in the emergence of native-like responses (e.g., McLaughlin et al., 2010; Tanner et al., 2009), but sources of variability have not been investigated. The current study examines responses to gender and number agreement violations in English-speaking learners of Spanish (n=24). Stimuli targeted agreement in three conditions: subject-verb agreement (el barco flota/*flotan), which is similar in Spanish and English; number agreement on adjectival predicates (la isla rocosa/*rocosas), a context in which agreement is not instantiated in English; and gender agreement on adjectival predicates (la isla rocosa/*rocoso), which is unique to Spanish. Grammaticality judgments and ERP responses were also tested for correlations with aptitude scores on the Modern Languages Aptitude Test (MLAT; Carroll and Sapon, 1959) and the Raven Advanced Progressive Matrices (Raven, 1965). Results are in line with theories that claim native-like processing is acquirable, since learners demonstrated similar ERP responses to a control group of native Spanish-speakers (n=8) with regard to all three agreement types. Additionally, the MLAT (but not the Raven) was significantly correlated with sensitivity to number violations, both in terms of grammaticality judgments and ERP amplitudes, indicating a role for verbal but not nonverbal aptitude in L2 processing.

Being and goodness

The old scholastic principle of the "convertibility" of being and goodness strikes nearly all moderns as either barely comprehensible or plain false. "Convertible" is a term of art meaning "interchangeable" in respect of predication, where the predicates can be exchanged salva veritate albeit not salva sensu: their referents are, as the maxim goes, really the same albeit conceptually different. The principle seems, at first blush, absurd. Did the scholastics literally mean that every being is good? Is that supposed to include a cancer, a malaria parasite, an earthquake that kills millions? If every being is good, then no being is bad—but how can that be? To the contemporary philosophical mind, such bafflement is understandable. It derives from the systematic dismantling of the great scholastic edifice that took place over half a millennium. With the loss of the basic concepts out of which that edifice was built, the space created by those concepts faded out of existence as well. The convertibility principle, like virtually all the other scholastic principles (not all, since some do survive and thrive in analytic philosophy), could not persist in a post-scholastic space wholly alien to it.

A semantic solution to the problem with aesthetic testimony

There is something peculiar about aesthetic testimony. It seems more difficult to gain knowledge of aesthetic properties based solely upon testimony than it is in the case of other types of property. In this paper, I argue that we can provide an adequate explanation at the level of the semantics of aesthetic language, without defending any substantive thesis in epistemology or about aesthetic value/judgement. If aesthetic predicates are given a non-invariantist semantics, we can explain the supposed peculiar difficulty with aesthetic testimony.