academic skills for linguists - home.uni-leipzig.de · consecutively in order for the audience and...

Academic Skills for LinguistsAll about talks

Anke [email protected]

Universitat Leipzig, Institut fur Linguistik

May, 14, 2018

1 / 45

Inhaltsverzeichnis

1 The formal aspects of talksNotesExamples

2 The structure of talksAbstractIntroduction

Main partDiscussionConclusionTips und examplesAppendix

3 Giving a talk

2 / 45

Inhaltsverzeichnis




3 Giving a talk

3 / 45

Inhaltsverzeichnis




3 Giving a talk

4 / 45

The formal aspect of talks: title pageThese information should be present on the handout or the slides:

Title of the talkName of the researcher(s)Affiliation (University, department)E-MailDate of the talk (day, month, year)Context of the talk (e.g. Name of the seminar or the conference)

Notes for presentations:The information should be on a separate title page

Notes for handouts:The information can appear in a header on every page or just in thebeginning of the handout (depending on the amount of information).

Notes for presentations and handouts:The most important piece of information is the title of the talk. It shouldbe highlighted (e.g. centered, bold face, bigger font).The name of the researcher(s) involved in the project (not just thepresenters) should appear near the title.

5 / 45

The formal aspect of talks: handout

pages/slides should be numbered consecutivelypage breaks should increase (not decrease) the readabilityall the cited references should appear in the bibliographyThe content of the talk should be structured into sections andsubsections (Rule of thumb: Rather too much structure than toolittle structure)Sections, examples, tables, figures, etc. should be numberedconsecutively in order for the audience and the presenter to refer tothemThe font should be professional and easy to read.In general, the content should be neatly arranged (no long bits oftext, no shear accumulation of figures, examples withoutexplanations). The talk should be understandable without handoutand vice versa.

6 / 45

Inhaltsverzeichnis




3 Giving a talk

7 / 45

Example title page presentation

a � � � � a � � � a � � � � � � � � � � � � � �

Universitat Leipzig, Institut fur Linguistik

20.04.2015

1 / 45

8 / 45

Example title page handout

W � � � � � � � � W � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � .2014

Villa Salmi, Arezzo

On Variation in and across languages:Case Matching Effects with Free Relatives and Parasitic Gaps in German and Polish

Anke Assmann

Universität Leipzig

!"#$ %%& !!�(!)*+#),-).$/#

1 Introduction

9 / 45

Talk 1

35. Jahrestagung der DGfS, Universität Potsdam

AG 6: Interaction of syntactic primitives

13-15 March 2013

!"

"

Dative as mixed Case: Agree meets m-case

Artemis Alexiadou, Elena Anagnostopoulou & Christina Sevdali

Universität Stuttgart, University of Crete, and University of Ulster

[email protected], [email protected], [email protected]

"

1. Introduction: The diversity of datives

a. Dative as inherent Case (e.g. Russian, Pesetsky & Torrego to appear):

Idiosyncratic; retained through the derivation and syntactically inactive, i.e.

incapable of undergoing (EPP-driven) movement to Spec,TP. 1

b. Dative as quirky Case (e.g. Icelandic): Idiosyncratic; retained through the

derivation but syntactically active, i.e. capable of undergoing (EPP-driven)

movement to Spec,TP.

c. Dative as a structural case (e.g. Ancient Greek). In certain languages, dative

arguments enter case alternations qualifying as having structural case.

d. Dative as a mixed case. Dative has a double status (structural or inherent),

across languages, or even within one language (Harley 1995 for Japanese, Webelhut

1995, Fanselow 2000 for German).

In this paper, we provide evidence based on Case alternations in passives and middles in favor

of view (d). Cross-linguistically, we find three types of languages:

(i) Uniform languages where dative is never structural Case, and dative-nominative

alternations never take place (e.g. Modern Greek, Russian). We will not exemplify these here.

(ii) Mixed languages where dative qualifies as structural in ditransitives and as

inherent case in monotransitives (e.g. Standard German).

(iii) Uniform languages in which alternations happen both in ditransitives and in

monotransitives (e.g. dialects of German, Ancient Greek, Japanese, Icelandic).

• But: in languages of type (ii) and (iii) NOT all datives alternate.

Building on Rezac’s (2008) theory of opacity vs. transparency of theta-related Case to Agree,

combined with a (modified) theory of Case alternations in terms of m(orphological)-case

(Marantz 1991), we propose that

(i) dative arguments are PPs, unlike accusatives which are DPs.

""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""1 Sometimes, the terms ‘inherent’ and ‘lexical’ dative are used interchangeably. As convincingly argued for by

Woolford (2006), however, inherent and lexical Cases are distinct and are subject to different licensing

conditions: inherent Case is thematically licensed while lexical Case is idiosyncratically determined. In this

paper, we group them together because they behave in a similar manner morpho-syntactically.

"

2

"

(ii) Being complements of P, dative DPs are often invisible to an outside probe, Voice

or T, for Agree.

(iii) Under certain conditions, however, they become visible:

• we propose that PPs become transparent when P incorporates into a higher verbal

head, thus lifting the phase-hood of P (as proposed in Anagnostopoulou & Sevdali 2012

for Ancient Greek); see den Dikken 2007, Gallego 2005, 2010, Gallego, and Uriagereka

2006, Wurmbrand, Alexiadou & Anagnostopoulou 2012 for a discussion on how

movement of certain heads extends the phase to the higher projection.

• P-incorporation will be an important tool in understanding why some languages

(namely German dialects and Dutch) use special auxiliaries when datives become

nominatives in passives.

(iv) The actual distribution of m-cases (dative, accusative, nominative) in actives,

middles, and passives of languages with alternating datives is determined at the PF

component, subject to the case-realization disjunctive hierarchy proposed by Marantz (1991).

• A dative argument entering Agree qualifies as having ‘dependent case’ in the sense of

Marantz (1991) and not as having “lexically governed case”. Being dependent cases,

datives become nominative whenever the structural conditions for dependent case are

not met.

2. Dative-Nominative alternations across languages

2.1 Languages where datives become nominatives in passives in both monotransitives and

ditransitives

2.1.1 Ancient Greek2

In Ancient Greek, datives alternate in both passives of ditransitives and in monotransitives

(see Conti 1998 for extensive discussion of monotransitives; see Anagnostopoulou & Sevdali

2010, 2012 where the data presented below come from):

Monotransitives:

(1) a. Athe:naioi epibouleuousin he:min Active

Athenians-NOM betray-3 sg-pres-act us--DAT

‘The Athenians are betraying us’

b. He:meis hup’ Athe:naio:n epibouleuometha Passive

We-NOM by Athenians-gen betray-1 pl-pres-pass

‘We are betrayed by the Athenians’ (Thucydides, Historia I: 82.1)

""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""2 Interestingly, Greek underwent a transition from a system with a fully structural dative and genitive Case (in

Classical Greek) to a system with a fully inherent/lexical genitive Case (in Modern Greek). Both changes took

place in Medieval Greek (Lavidas 2007: 192), the period where the transition from a structural to an inherent

dative Case system was completed. Even though the exact stages of this transition from a structural to an

inherent Case system have not been documented in detail, one could imagine an intermediate stage where dative

is uniformly structural in some dialects (resembling Luxemburg German, see below) while it has a mixed status

in others (resembling Standard German, see below).

10 / 45

Talk 2

Workshop “Interaction of syntactic primitives”

35th annual conference of the DGfS

University of Potsdam

13. - 15. März 2013

What small clause (sub)extraction in Russian

reveals about the properties of merge

Leah S Bauke

Johann-Wolfgang-Goethe-Universität

Frankfurt am Main

0 Introduction

Assumption in Chomsky (2004: 117 et passim)

Merge is the only structure building operation in narrow syntax. It is unconstrained and it

forms bigger syntactic objects (SO) from smaller SOs.

! - First-Merge ! Numeration/Lexicon

! - structure building in the lexicon?

! - Merge forms unordered sets

! - symmetric and asymmetric SOs emerge (cf. Kayne 1994; Moro 2000)

! - a SO that is available for Merge bears an EF

(1a)! ! ! ! ! (1b)! ! ! ! ! (1c) 3 3 3

! X! Y! ! ! ! X! YP! ! ! ! XP! YP

In this talk I focus on small clause (sub)extraction in Russian. I provide an analysis in terms of

merge. This analysis provides evidence for (2):

(2)! a.! Specifiers do not exist

! b. ! Small clause (sub)extraction in Russian is determined by the properties of merge

! c. ! Small clauses are asymmetric objects !

! d.! Merge allows for the relevant distinctions between different types of small

! ! clauses

Leah S. Bauke 1/12

2 The data

In Russian bare copular small clauses (SCs) the present tense copula is a covert element, the past

tense copula is overt, though:

(3)! Prezident ! S"A ! ! lider ! ! svobodnyx! nacij! !

! President.nom!USA.gen! leader.nom! free.gen.pl! nation.gen.pl

! ‘The president of the US is the leader of the free nations’.

(4)! Prezident ! S"A ! ! byl! [SCPrezident ! S"A ! liderom

! President.nom!USA.gen! was! ! ! ! leader.inst

! svobodnyx! nacij]

! free.gen.pl! nation.gen.pl

! ‘The president of the US was the leader of the free nations’

Full extraction of both SC constituents is possible:

(5)! a.! Kto! ! kem! ! byl ! kto! ! kem?

! ! Who.nom! what.inst! was

! ! ‘Who was what?’

! b.! *Kto! ! kto?

! ! Who.nom! who.nom

A digression (cf. Bo#kovi$ 2002):

(6)! a.! *"ta ! #ta! uslovljava? ! ! ! ! ! (Serbo Croatian)

! ! What! what ! conditions

! b.! Ko! #ta! kupuje? ! ! ! ! ! (Serbo Croatian)

! ! Who! what ! bought

! ! ‘Who bought what?’

! c.! *Ko ! kupuje! #ta? ! ! ! ! ! ! (Serbo Croatian)

! ! who! bought! what

! d.! "ta ! #ta! uslovljava! #ta! ! ! ! (Serbo Croatian)

! ! What! ! conditions! what

! ! ‘What conditions what?’

Leah S. Bauke 2/12

11 / 45

Talk 3

� ��

✁✁✂✄ ☎✆✝✞✝✆✂

� ��

� ��

◮ ✟✠✄✝✆✡☛✄☞✁✠ ✌✝✄✍✝✝✠ ✎✆✡✞✞✡✄☞☛✡✏ ✑✆☞✞☞✄☞✒✝✂ ✂✓✁✔✏✕ ✠✁✄

◮ ✖✓✝

◮ ✗✘✁✂✂☞✌✏✙ ✂☞✞☞✏✡✆ ✑✓✝✠✁✞✝✠✡ ✆✝✎✡✆✕☞✠✎ ✂✙✠✄✡✚✛✂✝✞✡✠✄☞☛✂

� ��

◮ ✜✢✣ ✤✥✦✧★✩✤✪ ✫✣ ✬✤ ✭✮✪✯✰✪✪✤✭ ✱✤✲✤✳

◮ ✴✵✶✷✸ ✹✺✻✼✽✾✿ ❀✴✹✺✼❁

◮ ❂❃

◮ ❄❅✫✤✲✦✯✫✮✣❅ ✦★★✤✦✲✪ ✫✣ ✬✤ ✩✮✧✮✫✤✭ ✫✣

◮ ✴✹✺✼❆ ✹✺ ❇✶❈ ❉✽✾✿ ✾❊ ✾❋ ❇●❈❋✶✾❈❉ ✶❋ ❍✵✶❉❋ ❋■● ❏✻❏✽❑✶❉✵❉ ❀▲✵❇ ▼

◮ ❂❃

12 / 45

Inhaltsverzeichnis




3 Giving a talk

13 / 45

The structure of talks

1 Abstract2 Introduction3 Main part (Data, background, analysis)4 Discussion (open questions, criticism, new research questions

etc.)5 Conclusion

14 / 45

Inhaltsverzeichnis




3 Giving a talk

15 / 45

AbstractIn the beginning of a talk, you should have a short summary of the talk, a.k.a.an abstract.

Content:The main claim of the talka few short remarks that explain the claim and sum up the mostimportant points

Notes:The entire abstract should obey the Gricean maximes, especially the oneabout quantity!The ideal length of the claim is one sentence.The claim should be highlighted (e.g. in a box, centered, bold face, etc.).The time for presenting the abstracts should be around 1-2 minutes, i.e.half a page in the handout or one slide in a presentation.The abstract should be adapted for the audience and the context of thetalk.

16 / 45

Examples abstract

DGfS Workshop

Interaction of syntactic primitives 13-15 March 2013

Object clitic movement feeds subject doubling An anti-intervention effect in Dutch dialects

Jeroen van Craenenbroeck Marjo van Koppen

CRISSP/HUB/KUL & Uil-OTS/Utrecht [email protected] [email protected]

MAIN THEORETICAL CLAIMS

• Phases are not absolute (‘once a phase always a phase’)

• The phasehood of Finº can be voided if it acquires unvalued features during the derivation

• Object clitic movement into the left periphery bleeds the phasehood of FinP and feeds subject clitic doubling

CENTRAL DATA

• Subject clitic doubling with coordinations in Dutch dialects

• Anti-intervention effects with object clitics OUTLINE OF THE TALK 1. Data 2. Theoretical background: two types of doubling

2.1. A classification of dialect Dutch subject pronouns 2.2. Doubling as movement: the big-DP analysis 2.3. Doubling as agreement: doubling with coordinated subjects

3. Analysis 3.1. Core of the analysis 3.2. Doubling via agreement: anti-intervention 3.3. Doubling via movement: no anti-intervention

4. Comp-agreement vs. clitic doubling 5. Conclusion

17 / 45

Examples abstract

D � � � � � � � � � � � Interaction of Syntactic PrimitivesUniversity of Leipzig WS at DGfS 35, [email protected] March 14, 2013

Opaque interaction of Merge and Agree:on two types of Internal Merge

✬

✫

✩

✪

Claim: Opacity effects show that internal Merge (IM) must be split into IM trig-gered by edge features and IM triggered by non-edge features. Empirical evi-dence: When both types of IM are triggered by the same head H, they apply atdifferent points in the derivation. This becomes visible once they interact withAgree: In some languages, non-edge feature-driven IM feeds/bleeds Agree initi-ated by H, whereas IM triggered by edge features counter-feeds/counter-bleedsAgree. Analysis: Operation-inducing features are ordered on H: One type of IMapplies before and the other after Agree. This analysis presupposes a strictlyderivational syntax in which the timing of operations plays an important role.

The present analysis has the following implications:

• Agree not only needs to be ordered wrt. Merge; a more fine-grained approach isneeded that distinguishes between different types of (internal) Merge.

• Extrinsic ordering of operation-inducing features is needed after all: None of theprinciples that have been proposed in the literature to determine rule ordering(e.g. the Cyclic Principle) captures the cross-linguistic variation.

• Intermediate movement steps are triggered by designated features (edge features).

• Movement to SpecC uses SpecT as an intermediate landing site.

18 / 45

Examples abstract

H�� eoretical Primitives in Syntax March 2013

A Hybrid Approach to Agreement Typology: MP+OT

Ellen Woolford

University of Massachusetts

Question: Is agreement done in syntax or at PF/morphological spell out?

Answer: Both syntax and PF (including prosody and phonology)

play a role in determining agreement patterns

In Syntax: Agreement and pronominal clitics are generated

and linked to the argument they cross-reference.

Agreement A head probes an argument, licenses case on that argument,

and receives agreement feature values from that argument

(following standard MP assumptions e.g. Chomsky 2000).

Pronominal Clitics - two types in syntax (following Marantz 1988)

peripheral or phrasal clitics

pass diagnostics for free clitics at PF e.g. Romance clitics

head clitics pass diagnostics for affixes at PF

(Noyer 2001:757 “the clitic/affix distinction is …phonological”)

assumption (not crucial):

Under the standard MP view that move=copy + merge

a clitic is a partial copy of an argument, which is then merged higher

as in any movement. Clitics are adjoined in syntax.

PF determines whether to spell out one or both ends of the chain.

At PF/Morphological Spell Out:

linearization of clitics

morpheme insertion

-choice of which morpheme to insert

-determination of whether to insert a morpheme at all

These PF decisions can be influenced by PF factors such as

prosodic structure/alignment constraints (e.g. McCarthy and Prince 1993, Selkirk 2011)

person alignment

available clitic docking sites

Claim: Many of the more complex agreement patterns involve PF factors.

19 / 45

Abstract: Last Tips

In principle, you can have more than one claim in a talk. Butdon’t overdo it.The claim does not have to be the first sentence in a talk.Sometimes it’s helpful to introduce the topic first.Keep in mind that the average listener wants to know as fastas possible what the talk is about. You should satisfy theirneeds quite fast.It is helpful to repeat the claim throughout the talk again andagain.

20 / 45

Inhaltsverzeichnis




3 Giving a talk

21 / 45

Introduction

The introduction contains the research question, i.e. theintroduction to the problem to be solved.

Elements of the introduction:Explaining terminologyDataBackground (literature, etc.)

Especially the introductio should be adapted for the audience sincethe background of the audience might vary. If you’re in doubt, youshould prepare a little more. Keep the following question in mind:Can I myself understand my talk?

22 / 45

Inhaltsverzeichnis




3 Giving a talk

23 / 45

Main part

The main part can vary quite a bit, depending on the topic. In anycase, an answer to the research question is presented. So, here youpresent your own research, e.g. your analysis. You should show howyou got to the claim from the beginning.

Elements of the main part:analysesexperimentsstatistical testsempirical patterns and generalizationscomparison of your own research results and the results ofothers

24 / 45

Inhaltsverzeichnis




3 Giving a talk

25 / 45

Discussion

In this part, you scrutinize the main part: Why do you have thisanswer to the research question? You, more or less, discuss possiblequestions of the audience.

Elements of the discussion:Questions and problems raised by your own analysis, ideallywith an ida how to solve themfurther empirical phenomena that are covered by your analysis(providing further evidence)possible new research questionsthe bigger picture:

What do the results mean theoretically, empirically?What do the results mean for the topic of the conference?

26 / 45

Inhaltsverzeichnis




3 Giving a talk

27 / 45

Conclusion

The conclusion provides another summary of the talk, repeatingthe main points. The rule of thumb here is to have 1-2 sentencesper section. This helps the listener to recall the talk and rememberthe results.

The conclusion should be similar to the abstract in being conciseand not taking to much time.

28 / 45

Inhaltsverzeichnis




3 Giving a talk

29 / 45

Last tipsfor the structure

The structure above is just a general guideline. The concretestructure depends on the topic.Not every part above has to correspond to exactly one section.Quite often, the abstract and the introduction are connected.As for the titles of the sections, they should describe the content ofthe section. Avoid too many puns.Interim conclusions can be helpful for the memory of the audience.The structure of the talk more or less corresponds to the structureof the future paper. That means that preparing a good talk can easethe process of writing a paper.

30 / 45

Examples of a structure

Marjo van Koppen

[email protected] [email protected]

OUTLINE OF THE TALK 1. Data 2. Theoretical background: two types of doubling

2.1. A classification of dialect Dutch subject pronouns 2.2. Doubling as movement: the big-DP analysis 2.3. Doubling as agreement: doubling with coordinated subjects

3. Analysis 3.1. Core of the analysis 3.2. Doubling via agreement: anti-intervention 3.3. Doubling via movement: no anti-intervention

4. Comp-agreement vs. clitic doubling 5. Conclusion

31 / 45

Examples of a structureD � � � � � � � � � � � � Empirical Implications Big Picture Conclusion

O � � � � �

1 A Theory-Neutral Definition of Adjuncts� � � � � � � � � � � � � � �

C � ! � � � ! � " � � � � � � � � � � # � � � � � �

2 Empirical Implications� � ! � $ � � � � � � � % C

P ! � � � � � & ' �

3 The Big Picture: Structure & Information FlowC ( � � � ! � � � � � � ! ( � � � ) ' � ! � � ( � �

� � � � � � � � A * � � P ! � � � ( + , ! � � � ( -

4 Conclusion

32 / 45

Examples of a structureIdee der truben Outputreprasentationen

FallstudienTrubheit vs. Sympathie und OO-Treue

Appendix: Das (trube) verruckte Labyrinth

I � � � � �

1 Idee der truben Outputreprasentationen

2 FallstudienF � � � � � � � � � � � � � � angung im LugandaF � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � F � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �

3 Trubheit vs. Sympathie und OO-TreueT � ubheit vs. Sympathie (McCarthy 1999)T � ubheit vs. OO-Treue (Burzio 1994, Benua 1997)

4 Appendix: Das (trube) verruckte Labyrinth

3 / 61

33 / 45

Inhaltsverzeichnis




3 Giving a talk

34 / 45

Appendix

An appendix is optional and a good to talk about things that arenot central to the talk, but still interesting enough. It can also helpto stay in time during the talk: If you don’t have a lot of time, youdon’t talk about the appendix; if you do have time, you talk aboutit.

Points for the appendix:experiments, statisticsmore empirical evidence, datasolution to further questions

35 / 45

Inhaltsverzeichnis




3 Giving a talk

36 / 45

Practice your talk

It helps a lot to practice your talk at least once to check ...how much time you need (maybe you have to shorten yourtalk or add something)how understandable the talk is (Are the transitions clear? Canpeople understand what I wnat to say?)

It is also helpful for most people to prepare formulations to notwaste time finding the right words.

37 / 45

Right position

In the beginning you have to decide whether you want to sit orstand?As long as you are not physically impaired, it is useful to stand(most of the time) because ...

you raise above the audienceyou are seen by everyoneyou automatically get more attentionyou are more flexible (using the board, making gestures, etc.)

But stay natural and comfortable. This increases your confidence.

38 / 45

Volume

You need to get a feeling for the right volume. Both being tooquiet and being too loud can be strenuous for the audience. Buttoo loud is still better than too quiet. Adapt the loudness of yourvoice to the room and the number of people. The bigger the roomor the higher the number of people, the louder you have to speak.Don’t be afraid to use a microphone, if you are rather quiet innature. But don’t scream at it.

39 / 45

Articulation

Try to be articulate. As for giving talks in English, if English is notyour native language, practice to reduce your native accent.(Unfortunately, this takes years of practice.)

40 / 45

Inflection

Important things should be highlighted with your voice as well. Avivacious inflection can make a talk much more intense. Try to usepauses after mentioning something important. Try to turn up thevolume of your voice if something is important. Use gestures forimportant things.

41 / 45

Speed

Never talk too fast. A talk is marathon, rather than a sprint. Givethe audience a chance to digest the information (or at leastswallow it).

42 / 45

General tips for giving talks

Don’t be boring!If you are excited about your topic, your audience will be excited as well.Be clear!Rephrase things with your own words; avoid long, complicated sentences,illustrate difficult definitions with examples and empathize with your audience.Be brief!Don’t get lost in the details, hold onto the guiding thread of your talk. Giving atalk is a bit like making a commercial for a product (unfortunately).Concentrate on the product.Be natural!Never just read your talk (like a bedtime story). Your way of presenting shouldsuit your character. Keep eye contact with your audience. (Maybe you shouldtry to practice in front of a mirror.)Give the talk you have prepared!If there is little time, it is tempting to skip sections. This skipping, however,creates a hecticness with you and your audience and makes the talk less clear.Things that are not super relevant should be part of the appendix.

43 / 45

The 7 mortal sins ...

... of presenting:1 Having no abstract2 Having no eye contact3 Skipping parts of your handout4 Talking too fast5 Talking too long6 Speaking uninflectedly7 Loosing the common thread

44 / 45

Conclusion

Stick to the formal guidelines for talks (title page, structure,bibliography, etc.)!Give the talk that satisfies your audience’s curiosity!Keep your audience awake by giving a clear, understandableand vivacious talk!

45 / 45

academic skills for linguists - home.uni-leipzig.de · consecutively in order for the audience and...

Documents