Professor E: So , yeah , I think that 's that 's a good point , th th that the date , the , uh , a lot of the this is interacting with , uh , people in Italy but also definitely the people in Leipzig and the the b the combination of the biology and the Leipzig connection might be interesting to these guys , yeah . OK . OK . Anyway ! Enough of that , let 's talk about your thesis proposal .
Grad C: Yeah , if somebody has something to say .
Professor E: Yep .
Grad F: You might want to , uh , double - check the spellings of the authors ' names on your references , you had a few , uh , misspells in your slides , there . Like I believe you had " Jackendorf " .
Professor E: Um .
Grad F: Uh , unless there 's a person called " Jackendorf " ,
Grad A: On that one ?
Professor E: No , no , no .
Grad F: yeah . But that 's the only thing I noticed in there .
Grad A: In the presentation ?
Grad F: In the presentation .
Grad A: I 'll probably I c might have I 'll probably have comments for you separately , not important . Anyway .
Grad C: Oh , in the presentation here .
Grad A: Yeah , that 's what he was talking about .
Grad F: Yeah .
Grad C: I was ac actually worried about bibtex . Uh . No , that 's quite possible . That 's copy and paste from something .
Professor E: So I did note i i it looks like the , uh , metaphor didn't get in yet .
Grad C: Uh , it did , there is a reference to Srini Professor E: Well , s reference is one thing , the question is is there any place Oh , did you put in something about ,
Grad A: Metonymy and metaphor here , right ?
Professor E: uh , the individual , we 'd talked about putting in something about people had , uh Oh yeah , OK . Good . I see where you have it . So the top of the second of pa page two you have a sentence .
Grad C: Mm - hmm .
Professor E: But , what I meant is , I think even before you give this , to Wahlster , uh , you should , unless you put it in the text , and I don't think it 's there yet , about we talked about is the , um , scalability that you get by , um , combining the constructions with the general construal mechanism . Is that in there ?
Grad C: Yeah , mmm . Um .
Professor E: Uh , OK , so where where is it , cuz I 'll have to take a look .
Grad C: Um , but I I did not focus on that aspect but , um Ehhh , um , it 's just underneath , uh , um , that reference to metaphor . So it 's the last paragraph before two . So on page two , um , the main focus Professor E: Uh , OK . Yeah .
Grad C: But that 's really Grad A: That 's not about that , is it ?
Grad C: Yeah .
Professor E: No , it it it s says it but it doesn't say it doesn't it d it d
Grad C: Why .
Professor E: yeah , it doesn't give the punch line .
Grad C: Mm - hmm .
Professor E: Cuz let me tell the gang what I think the punch line is , because it 's actually important , which is , that , the constructions , that , uh , Nancy and Keith and friends are doing , uh , are , in a way , quite general but cover only base cases . And to make them apply to metaphorical cases and metonymic cases and all those things , requires this additional mechanism , of construal . And the punch line is , he claimed , that if you do this right , you can get essentially orthogonality , that if you introduce a new construction at at the base level , it should com uh , interact with all the metonymies and metaphors so that all of the projections of it also should work .
Grad F: Mm - hmm .
Professor E: And , similarly , if you introduce a new metaphor , it should then uh , compose with all of the constructions .
Grad F: Mm - hmm . Yeah .
Professor E: And it to the extent that that 's true then then it 's a big win over anything that exists .
Grad D: So does that mean instead of having tons and tons of rules in your context - free grammar you just have these base constructs and then a general mechanism for coercing them .
Grad F: Yeah .
Professor E: Mm - hmm . So that , you know , for example , uh , in the metaphor case , that you have a kind of direct idea of a source , path , and goal and any metaphorical one and abstract goals and all that sort of stuff {comment} you can do the same grammar .
Grad D: Mmm .
Professor E: And it is the same grammar . But , um , the trick is that the the way the construction 's written it requires that the object of the preposition for example be a container . Well , " trouble " isn't a container , but it gets constr construed as a c container .
Grad D: Right .
Professor E: Et cetera . So that 's that 's where this , um ,
Grad D: So with construal you don't have to have a construction for every possible thing that can fill the rule .
Professor E: Right . So 's it 's it it 's a very big deal , i i in this framework , and the thesis proposal as it stands doesn't , um , I don't think , say that as clearly as it could .
Grad C: No , it doesn't say it at all . No . Even though  One could argue what if there are basic cases , even . I mean , it seems like nothing is context - free .
Professor E: Oh , nothing is context - free , but there are basic cases . That is , um , there are physical containers , there are physical paths , there you know , et cetera .
Grad C: But " walked into the cafe and ordered a drink , " and " walked into the cafe and broke his nose , " that 's sort of Professor E: Oh , it doesn't mean that they 're unambiguous .
Grad C: Mmm . Yeah .
Professor E: I mean , a cafe can be construed as a container , or it can be construed you know as as a obstacle ,
Grad F: Uh - huh .
Professor E: or as some physical object . So there are multiple construals . And in fact that 's part of what has to be done . This is why there 's this interaction between the analysis and the construal .
Grad C: Mm - hmm . Yep .
Professor E: The b the the double arrow .
Grad C: Yep .
Professor E: So , uh , yeah , I mean , it doesn't magically make ambiguity go away .
Grad C: No .
Professor E: But it does say that , uh , if you walked into the cafe and broke your nose , then you are construing the cafe as an obstacle .
Grad C: Mm - hmm .
Professor E: And if that 's not consistent with other things , then you 've gotta reject that reading .
Grad C: Yep .
Grad D: You con you conditioned me with your first sentence , and so I thought , " Why would he walk into the cafe and then somehow break his nose ? " uh , oh , uh Grad F: He slipped on the wet floor .
Professor E: Right .
Grad C: You don't find that usage , uh uh , I checked for it in the Brown national corpus .
Professor E: Yeah .
Grad C: The " walk into it " never really means , w as in walked smack Professor E: But " run into " does .
Grad C: Yeah , but , y y if you find " walked smacked into the cafe " or " slammed into the wall " Professor E: Yeah , no , but " run into " does .
Grad C: Mm - hmm .
Professor E: Because you will find " run into , " uh ,
Grad D: Cars run into telephone poles all the time .
Professor E: well , or " into the cafe " for that m
Grad C: Right .
Professor E: you know " His car ran into the cafe . "
Grad C: Yeah . Or you can run into an old friend , or run .
Professor E: Well , you can " run into " in that sense too .
Grad A: Yeah , " run into " might even be more impact sense than , you know , container sense .
Professor E: But , uh , Right .
Grad F: Depends .
Professor E: But Like , " run into an old friend " , it probably needs its own construction . I mean , uh , you know , George would have I 'm sure some exa complicated ex reason why it really was an instance of something else
Grad A: Mm - hmm . Mm - hmm .
Professor E: and maybe it is , but , um , there are idioms and my guess is that 's one of them , but , um I don't know .
Grad A: All contact . I mean , there there 's contact that doesn't social contact , whatever . I mean .
Professor E: Uh .
Grad F: Sudden surprising contact ,
Professor E: Yeah , but it 's it 's it 's it 's Right . i Yeah , it 's more Grad F: right ?
Grad A: Forceful .
Grad F: But of course , no , i i I mean it has a life of its own . It 's sort of partially inspired by the spatial Professor E: Well , this is this motivated but yeah Grad F: Yeah .
Professor E: oh yeah , mo for sure , motivated , but then you can't parse on motivated .
Grad F: Yeah . Yeah . Right .
Professor E: Uh ,
Grad A: Too bad .
Grad D: You should get a T - shirt that says that .
Professor E: OK .
Grad A: There 's there 's lots of things you could make T - shirts out of , but , uh , this has gotten I mean wh We don't need the words to that .
Grad C: Pro - probably not your marks in the kitchen , today .
Grad A: What ? Oh , no no no no no no no no no , we 're not going there .
Grad C: Not not your marks .
Grad A: OK .
Professor E: OK , so , um ,
Grad F: In other news .
Professor E: anything else you want to ask us about the thesis proposal , you got Grad C: Well ,
Professor E: We could look at a particular thing and give you feedback on it .
Grad C: Well there actually the i what would have been really nice is to find an example for all of this , uh , from our domain . So maybe if we w if we can make one up now , that would be c incredibly helpful .
Grad A: So , w where it should illustrate
Professor E: OK .
Grad A: uh wh when you say all this , do you mean , like , I don't know , the related work stuff ,
Grad C: How Grad A: as well as , mappings ?
Grad C: w Well we have , for example , a canonical use of something
Professor E: Right right r
Grad C: and y it 's , you know , we have some constructions and then it 's construed as something , and then we we may get the same constructions with a metaphorical use that 's also relevant to the to the domain .
Professor E: OK , f let 's let 's suppose you use " in " and " on " . I mean , that 's what you started with .
Grad C: Mm - hmm .
Professor E: So " in the bus " and " on the bus , " um , that 's actually a little tricky in English because to some extent they 're synonyms . OK .
Grad C: I had two hours w with George on this , so it ,
Professor E: OK , what did he say .
Grad A: Did you ?
Grad C: um Um .
Grad A: Join the club .
Professor E: Right . Oh , h that 's Grad C: " On the bus " is a m is a metaphorical metonymy that relates some meta path metaphorically and you 're on on that path and th w I mean it 's he there 's a platform notion ,
Professor E: Yeah , I I believe all that , it 's just Grad C: right ? " he 's on the standing on the bus waving to me . "
Professor E: Yeah .
Grad C: But th the regular as we speak " J Johno was on the bus to New York , "
Professor E: Yeah . Yeah .
Grad C: um , uh , he 's that 's , uh , what did I call it here , the transportation schema , something ,
Professor E: Yeah .
Grad C: where you can be on the first flight , on the second flight ,
Professor E: Yeah .
Grad C: and you can be , you know , on the wagon .
Professor E: Right . So so that that may or may not be what you what you want to do . I mean you could do something much simpler
Grad C: Yeah .
Professor E: like " under the bus , " or something , where Grad C: But it 's it 's unfortunately , this is not really something a tourist would ever say . So .
Professor E: Well , unless he was repairing it or something ,
Grad C: Yeah .
Professor E: but yeah .
Grad C: But um .
Professor E: Uh , but OK .
Grad C: So in terms of the this Grad A: I see .
Grad C: We had we had initially we 'd started discussing the " out of film . "
Professor E: Right .
Grad C: And there 's a lot of " out of " analysis , so , um ,
Professor E: Right .
Grad C: could we capture that with a different construal of Grad A: Yeah , it 's a little it 's , uh we 've thought about it before , uh t uh to use the examples in other papers , and it 's it 's a little complicated . Cuz you 're like , it 's a state of there 's resource ,
Grad F: Out of out of film , in particular .
Grad A: right , and like , what is film ,
Grad F: Yeah .
Grad A: the state you know . You 're out of the state of having film , right ? and somehow film is standing for the re the resour the state of having some resource is just labeled as that resource .
Grad F: It 's Grad A: I mean .
Grad F: yeah , I mean ,
Grad A: It 's a little bit Grad F: but and plus the fact that there 's also s I mean , can you say , like , " The film ran out " you know , or , maybe you could say something like " The film is out "
Grad A: Yeah , is film the trajector ?
Grad F: so like the the film went away from where it should be , namely with you , or something , right ? You know . The the film the film is gone , right ? Um , I never really knew what was going on , I mean I I find it sort of a little bit farfetched to say that that " I 'm out of film " means that I have left the state of having film or something like that ,
Grad A: It 's weird . That Grad F: but .
Grad A: Or , " having " is also , um , associated with location ,
Professor E: Uh .
Grad A: right ?
Grad F: Yeah . Yeah .
Grad A: so if the film left , you know state is being near film .
Grad C: So running running out of something is different from being out of somewhere .
Professor E: Or being out of something as , uh as well . So " running out of it " definitely has a process aspect to it .
Grad A: Mm - hmm . But that 's from run , yeah .
Professor E: So ,
Grad F: Mm - hmm .
Professor E: b that 's OK ,
Grad A: Yeah .
Professor E: I mean b but the difference
Grad C: Is the d the final state of running out of something is being out of it .
Professor E: is Grad A: Yeah . So th
Professor E: Right .
Grad F: Yeah . You got there .
Grad A: That part is fine .
Grad F: You got to out of it .
Professor E: Yeah .
Grad F: Yeah .
Professor E: But , uh Grad F: Hmm !
Professor E: Yeah , so so nob so no one has in in of the , uh , professional linguists ,
Grad A: Uh .
Professor E: they haven't there was this whole thesis on " out of " .
Grad A: There was ? Who ?
Professor E: Well , there I thought or there was a paper on it .
Grad F: Out .
Professor E: Huh ?
Grad F: There was one on on " out " or " out of " ?
Professor E: There was a Well , it may be just " out " . Yeah .
Grad F: OK .
Professor E: I think there was " over " but there was also a paper on " out " .
Grad F: Yeah , Lind - Susan Lindner ,
Grad A: Oh , yeah , you 're right . Yeah .
Professor E: Or something .
Grad F: right ? The the " the syrup spread out " ?
Professor E: Yeah , and all that sort of stuff .
Grad F: That kind of thing ?
Grad A: Yeah . And undoubtably there 's been reams of work about it in cognitive linguistics ,
Professor E: OK . But anyway . We 're not gonna do that between now and next week .
Grad A: but . Yeah .
Grad C: Yeah .
Professor E: OK . So , um Grad A: It 's not one of the y it 's more straightforward ones forward ones to defend , so you probably don't want to use it for the purposes Grad C: Mm - hmm .
Professor E: Right .
Grad A: th these are you 're addressing like , computational linguists ,
Professor E: OK .
Grad A: right . Or are you ?
Grad C: There 's gonna be four computational linguists ,
Grad A: OK . But more emphasis on the computational ? Or emphasis on the linguist ?
Grad C: computer it 's More there 's going to be the just four computational linguists , by coincidence , but the rest is , whatever , biocomputing people and physicists .
Grad A: Oh , OK .
Professor E: No no no , but not for your talk . I 'm - we 're worrying about the th the thes
Grad C: Oh , the thesis !
Grad A: Oh , I meant this ,
Professor E: it 's just for one guy .
Grad C: That 's that 's computa should be very computational ,
Grad A: you know , like OK . So I would try to I would stay away from one that involves weird construal stuff .
Grad C: and , uh , someth
Professor E: Yeah .
Grad F: Yeah .
Professor E: Right .
Grad A: You know , it 's an obvious one Grad F: Totally weird stuff .
Grad C: I mean the the old bakery example might be nice ,
Grad A: but , uh Grad C: " Is there a bakery around here " . So if you c we really just construe it as a Grad F: Yeah .
Grad A: Around ?
Grad C: No , it 's the bakery itself Grad A: Oh .
Grad C: is it a building ? uh , that you want to go to ? or is it something to eat that you want to buy ?
Grad A: Oh , oh yeah . Yeah , we 've thought about that . Right . Right .
Grad C: And then Grad A: Nnn . No . What ? " Bakery " can't be something you 're gonna eat .
Professor E: No , no . The question is d do you wanna do you wanna construe do you wanna constr - strue
Grad F: Sh
Grad D: It 's a speech - act .
Professor E: r Exactly . It 's because do you wanna c do you want to view the bakery as a p a place that that i for example , if y
Grad A: Yeah . Where you can get baked goods .
Professor E: Well th well , that 's one . You want to buy something . But the other is , uh , yo you might have smelled a smell and are just curious about whether there 'd be a bakery in the neighborhood , or ,
Grad F: Mm - hmm .
Professor E: um , pfff you know , you wonder how people here make their living , and there 're all sorts of reasons why you might be asking about the existence of a bakery
Grad F: Yeah .
Professor E: that doesn't mean , " I want to buy some baked goods . "
Grad A: OK .
Professor E: But um , those are interesting examples but it 's not clear that they 're mainly construal examples .
Grad A: So it 's a lot of pragmatics , there , that
Grad F: Yeah .
Grad C: Mmm .
Professor E: There 's all sorts of stuff going on .
Grad A: might be beyond what you want to do .
Professor E: So let 's so let 's think about this from the point of view of construal . So let 's first do a So the metonymy thing is probably the easiest and a and actually the Though , the one you have isn't quite Grad A: You mean the s You mean " the steak wants to pay " ?
Professor E: N no not that one , that 's that 's a the sort of background . This is the t uh , page five .
Grad D: About Plato and the book ?
Grad A: Oh .