An intriguing headline (subheadline, really) I noticed in yesterday's Guardian:
(1) "Men's tennis completes its most successful season despite losing in the NCAA Division II tournament."
It's a wild scopal resolution problem, I think. You can't conclude a season despite losing in a tournament. The loss in the tournament is the event that causes the season to end. I think you could say something like "Florida completed its season despite winning the NCAA basketball tournament", but that's questionable to me. And there are certainly cases where "concluding a season despite losing" can happen:
(2) "College of Charleston completed their season despite losing in the Southern Conference Championship."
Where, had they won the championship game they could have entered the season-ending tournament, and given their showing the conference tournament, one might have expected them to be selected for the season-ending tournament, thereby continuing their season.
But in (1), the despite clause doesn't make sense modifying "completes its most successful season"
- unless we read it as modifying "most successful season". Surely this sentence is relatively fine, though:
(3) "It was our most successful season, despite losing in the tournament."
Is this a general fact, that despite clauses can modify either the VP or NP? These sentences seem to support NP-modification by despite:
(4a) Bill ate a satisfying meal despite eating day-old pizza.
(4b) Carl satisfied his obligation to the mobsters, despite only smashing a couple storefront windows.
(4c) Davida finished her paper despite typing it on a computer.
(4d) Zillah pruned the topiary despite using dull clippers.
But this still strikes me as a bit odd.
Friday, May 18, 2007
Thursday, April 19, 2007
Doncha Wanna Do Good?
In my post-breakfast trek from my room back to the sink to clean off the plate that formerly hosted my peanut-butter-and-granola toast, I passed by a small blue pamphlet lying discarded on the floor. It's one of my roommate's textbook accompaniments, and I personally think it's an affront to the purchaser of the textbook.
I haven't looked inside of the pamphlet, because it's still in its shrink wrap, but it comes with some sort of math or science textbook that is exceedingly thick and costly. Its title (and basically the only thing on the cover at all) is "Doncha Wanna Do Good?" Inside, I think, it contains a bunch of tips, tricks, and shortcuts to do the math or science problems more quickly. but here are my problems with it:
1. Tone
If there's anything I hate, it's when advertising attempts to take on the tone of your friend. Like those commercials where they try so hard to create a natural conversation where one person does nothing but endorse a single product with unwavering resolve.
A: Hey Bob, how's it goin'?
B: Great, ever since I started drinking Triphoxyline brand dietary supplement!
A: What's Triphoxyline brand dietary supplement?
B: Glad you asked! I don't know how Triphoxyline brand dietary supplement works, but it's got 14 antioxidants, 23 grams of protein, and a great taste!
A: [chuckling, reaching for B's glass of Tri-] Hey, let me try some!
B: [also chuckling, pulling the glass to his chest] Get your own! It's available at most grocers, in the soup aisle. Also at drugstores.
So anyway, come on. You're a textbook. You're not supposed to sound like a friend with a hangover trying to convince me to come to a study group. ("No, Tom, I think I'll watch Lost tonight instead of studying." "C'mon, man, doncha wanna do good?" "Oh, good point. Forget the Others.") And, not that I generally care, but it's "well". Please don't dumb yourself down when you talk to me.
2. Presupposition
My second objection is the presupposition in the title question. It implies that if I do not purchase this overpriced accompaniment, I do not want to do "good". (Perhaps if I don't buy it, I want to do well.) Furthermore, it implicates that I am not actually capable of doing good without the supplement. Frankly, J. Wiley and Sons, I think I am capable of doing good, thank you, and I would argue that you, as publishers, are likely far less equipped to do good in this class than I am. So yes, I wanna do good, which is why I'll read the textbook and study my notes and do good on my own, despite your unfair implicature. Jerks.
3. Proliferation
Now let's suppose that the information contained in "Doncha Wanna Do Good?" actually would significantly increase my chances of doing good in this class. I've already shelled out over $100 for your textbook. You couldn't put this Holy Grail of information into the textbook? If it's really the key to doing good, why should I even get the textbook? I could save like $80 right there.
4. Pamphlets
I am inherently distrustful of pamphlets.
So, in summary, J. Wiley and Sons, I don't like you.
I haven't looked inside of the pamphlet, because it's still in its shrink wrap, but it comes with some sort of math or science textbook that is exceedingly thick and costly. Its title (and basically the only thing on the cover at all) is "Doncha Wanna Do Good?" Inside, I think, it contains a bunch of tips, tricks, and shortcuts to do the math or science problems more quickly. but here are my problems with it:
1. Tone
If there's anything I hate, it's when advertising attempts to take on the tone of your friend. Like those commercials where they try so hard to create a natural conversation where one person does nothing but endorse a single product with unwavering resolve.
A: Hey Bob, how's it goin'?
B: Great, ever since I started drinking Triphoxyline brand dietary supplement!
A: What's Triphoxyline brand dietary supplement?
B: Glad you asked! I don't know how Triphoxyline brand dietary supplement works, but it's got 14 antioxidants, 23 grams of protein, and a great taste!
A: [chuckling, reaching for B's glass of Tri-] Hey, let me try some!
B: [also chuckling, pulling the glass to his chest] Get your own! It's available at most grocers, in the soup aisle. Also at drugstores.
So anyway, come on. You're a textbook. You're not supposed to sound like a friend with a hangover trying to convince me to come to a study group. ("No, Tom, I think I'll watch Lost tonight instead of studying." "C'mon, man, doncha wanna do good?" "Oh, good point. Forget the Others.") And, not that I generally care, but it's "well". Please don't dumb yourself down when you talk to me.
2. Presupposition
My second objection is the presupposition in the title question. It implies that if I do not purchase this overpriced accompaniment, I do not want to do "good". (Perhaps if I don't buy it, I want to do well.) Furthermore, it implicates that I am not actually capable of doing good without the supplement. Frankly, J. Wiley and Sons, I think I am capable of doing good, thank you, and I would argue that you, as publishers, are likely far less equipped to do good in this class than I am. So yes, I wanna do good, which is why I'll read the textbook and study my notes and do good on my own, despite your unfair implicature. Jerks.
3. Proliferation
Now let's suppose that the information contained in "Doncha Wanna Do Good?" actually would significantly increase my chances of doing good in this class. I've already shelled out over $100 for your textbook. You couldn't put this Holy Grail of information into the textbook? If it's really the key to doing good, why should I even get the textbook? I could save like $80 right there.
4. Pamphlets
I am inherently distrustful of pamphlets.
So, in summary, J. Wiley and Sons, I don't like you.
Tuesday, March 20, 2007
Gesture and Intonation: brothers!
I just wanted to post a link to a very cool dissertation concerning specifics about the relationship between gesture and intonation. I feel like at some point we've been discussing these two things, and this seems pretty well done (from the small part I've read so far):
http://www9.georgetown.edu/faculty/loehrd/pubs_files/Loehr04.pdf
Cool Stuff!
http://www9.georgetown.edu/faculty/loehrd/pubs_files/Loehr04.pdf
Cool Stuff!
Monday, March 19, 2007
More than just a cool stencil
Our blog shares its name with a remarkable branch of cognitive science!
"Distributed Cognition," to quote the eponymous Wikipedia article, proposes that "human knowledge and cognition are not confined to the individual." In contrast to the widespread focus on the performance of the individual mind, DC understands cognition as a social practice.
And here's the real quietus -- knowledge is not even confined to the collective cognition of human participants. Tools, like this blog, can be repositories of cognition with which we all interact.
I don't know about you, but I am wiping the froth from my mouth already.
One of the fertile minds that hath sired this attractive baby (if you'll allow me some intellectual favoritism, which is quite un-DCish) is that of none other than UCSD's own Edwin Hutchins. A mighty fortress is our alma mater.
To where our distributed cognition takes us, friends.
Grant
"Distributed Cognition," to quote the eponymous Wikipedia article, proposes that "human knowledge and cognition are not confined to the individual." In contrast to the widespread focus on the performance of the individual mind, DC understands cognition as a social practice.
And here's the real quietus -- knowledge is not even confined to the collective cognition of human participants. Tools, like this blog, can be repositories of cognition with which we all interact.
I don't know about you, but I am wiping the froth from my mouth already.
One of the fertile minds that hath sired this attractive baby (if you'll allow me some intellectual favoritism, which is quite un-DCish) is that of none other than UCSD's own Edwin Hutchins. A mighty fortress is our alma mater.
To where our distributed cognition takes us, friends.
Grant
Thursday, March 15, 2007
inceptum
Hey guys... just thought I'd take a break from reviewing the McCarthy article and claim this URL. If Grant wants to host the blog, that it totally cool... but I thought in case that doesn't work this would be easy.
The goal of this blog (wherever it is/whatever it is called):
to have a place where we can comment on linguistics... problems with what we've been studying, things that would be cool to study, things we're unclear about, thing that seem wrong, experiments that need (to be) run
The idea is that 5 minds are better than one. Also, Gabe's hopes of establishing a "school of thought" could be realized, and maybe we could contribute to bringing a little more sense to this field full of very brilliant and very stupid ideas :-)
Also, if we do it on blogspot, all you need to edit the blog is a google account.
The goal of this blog (wherever it is/whatever it is called):
to have a place where we can comment on linguistics... problems with what we've been studying, things that would be cool to study, things we're unclear about, thing that seem wrong, experiments that need (to be) run
The idea is that 5 minds are better than one. Also, Gabe's hopes of establishing a "school of thought" could be realized, and maybe we could contribute to bringing a little more sense to this field full of very brilliant and very stupid ideas :-)
Also, if we do it on blogspot, all you need to edit the blog is a google account.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)