Robert Henderson

with Scott AnderBois and Adrian Brasoveanu. To appear in the proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung 16
Most investigations of quantifier scope are concerned with the range of possible scopes for sentences with multiple quantifiers. Instead, this study examines the actual scopes, i.e., the pragmatics of quantifier scope disambiguation. The three main findings of our investigation are as follows. First, we confirmed the results in the previous literature that linear order and grammatical function have an effect on scope-taking preferences. Second, we discovered that lexical effects on scoping preferences are at least as important as linear order or grammatical function. Third, the relational aspect of these lexical effects, i.e., the lexical realizations of the other quantifiers in the sentence, is also important. The present investigation opens the way towards a broader research program of identifying scoping-behavior patterns that should ultimately enable us to group quantifiers into classes depending on the type of scopal behavior they exhibit. Identifying such classes could provide an empirical basis for semantic theories that assign different kinds of semantic representations to these classes and / or for psycholinguistic theories that hypothesize different processing strategies for different classes.

to appear in NLLT.
This article develops an analysis of a pair of morphological alternations in K'ichee' (Mayan) that are conditioned at the right edge of intonational phrase boundaries. I propose a syntax-prosody mapping algorithm that derives intonational phrase boundaries from the surface syntax, and then argue that each alternation can be understood in terms of output optimization. The important fact is that a prominence peak is always rightmost in the intonational phrase, and so the morphological alternations occur in order to ensure an optimal host for this prominence peak. Finally, I consider the wider implications of the analysis for the architecture of the syntax-phonology interface, especially as it concerns late-insertion theories of morphology.

To appear in NLLT. With R. BennettUspanteko (Guatemala; ~2000 speakers) is an endangered K'ichean-branch Mayan language. It is unique among the K'ichean languages in that, along with obligatory right-edge stress, Uspanteko has innovated a system of contrastive pitch accent. Word-level accent in Uspanteko is of theoretical interest for several reasons. First, it has a mixed accentual system with both stress and lexical pitch accent. Second, lexical pitch has striking effects on prosodic and segmental structure, interacting with stress shift, vowel length, vowel quality, and two deletion processes. Third, pitch accent is closely tied to morphology (especially possessive marking) even though the location of morphologically-derived tone is entirely a matter of surface phonology. Fourth, interactions between tone and vowel length provide evidence for lexical strata within the accentual system of Uspanteko. In this paper we develop a novel analysis of Uspanteko accent, using data drawn from previous research as well as our own recent fieldwork. We propose that the location of pitch accent and stress in Uspanteko can be straightforwardly captured under three assumptions: (i) Uspanteko words contain a single right-aligned iamb; (ii) pitch accent must dock to the head of a foot; and (iii) pitch accent cannot dock to a word-final mora. These assumptions account for default word-final stress, as well as penultimate stress in [CVCV] words bearing pitch accent, which we treat as an iambic-trochaic foot form reversal. Interactions between prosody and segmental structure in Uspanteko are analyzed as the result of further constraints on foot shape, stress assignment, and tone non-finality. A surprising finding of this paper is that there is robust evidence for foot structure in Uspanteko, despite the fact that accent in Uspanteko could easily be described in non-metrical terms. Finally, we model accentual cophonologies in Uspanteko using partially-ordered prosodic constraints.

coauthored with Jessica Coon. In "Representing Language: Essays in Honor of Judith Aissen"
This paper examines binding puzzles in two Mayan languages and proposes an analysis which unifies two otherwise different-looking constructions: the Chol applicative and the K’ichee’ agent focus (AF). In both the Chol applicative and the K’ichee’ AF, subjects are banned from binding object possessors. That is, the equivalents of English Maria bought her own tortillas or It was Juan who burned his own foot are impossible in the relevant constructions (though they are possible under a reading in which the subject and object’s possessor are not coreferential). We propose that in both types of construction, binding of the object’s possessor by the subject is blocked by an intervening v head. In the Chol (low) applicative, this is the head added to introduce the applied argument. In the K’ichee’ AF, this is the head needed to introduce the subject; we may think of this as a type of high applicative. In this paper we show that the similar binding restrictions in these two different languages are easily accounted for under a theory which ties the availability of binding to locality with domains defined by v heads, such as the minimal pronoun approach of Kratzer (2009).

in the proceedings of SALT 21
This paper builds an account of a new scope puzzle that arises through the interaction of two lesser-studied constructions, dependent indefinites and verbal pluractionality. The result is a new account of dependent indefinites that correctly predicts their grammaticality with pluractionals by recognizing two ways of establishing the co- variation they require: (i) true distributive quantifiers, and (ii) pluractional operators that structure thematic dependencies. The core insight is that both routes, while compositionally different, lead to similar output structures, which is what dependent indefinites constrain. Along the way we produce the first detailed description and analysis of these phenomena in Kaqchikel (Mayan).

In the proceedings of WCCFL 28.
Note: I no longer believe that the analysis presented in this short paper is the best treatment of the data. I'm currently working on a longer manuscript that extends and improves on this work. Please email me for a current draft.
Based on the previously unnoticed contrast between standard counterfactuals and the non-canonical counterfactual construction “if not for P, Q (hereafter NC, for “Not” Counterfactuals), this paper argues for the emerging proposal that two distinct routes to counterfactuality are available in natural language (see e.g., Schulz 2007): (i) global revision of a belief state, and (ii) local revision of a world. Schulz’s (2007) observation is that the classic epistemic inferences are precisely those that disappear under local update in a causal model, allowing for a treatment of the ontic-epistemic distinction in counterfactuals as an ambiguity between local and global belief revision. We show that NCs systematically reject epistemic readings, supporting the position that different ways of evaluating the antecedent permit different types of counterfactual inferences, where NCs only allow local revision due to their distinct morphology. The core proposal is that models for interpreting counterfactuals must be enriched with causal laws, and that the antecedents of NCs make local changes to a world to remove a fact contributed by the antecedent, potentially violating the model’s causal structure. This accounts for the fact that NCs systematically reject non-causal epistemic inferences, while otherwise retaining their paraphrasability with standard counterfactuals.

with Scott AnderBois and Adrian Brasoveanu. In the proceedings of SALT 20.
This paper’s goal is to provide systematic evidence from anaphora, presupposition and ellipsis that appositive meaning, e.g. as contributed by the relative appositive in (1) below, and at-issue meaning, contributed by the main clause in (1), have to be integrated into a single, incrementally evolving semantic representation. While previous literature has provided partial arguments to this effect (Nouwen 2007 for anaphora, Amaral et al 2007 for both anaphora and presupposition), the systematic nature of this evidence – in particular, the evidence from ellipsis we will introduce – has been previously unnoticed. (1) John, who nearly killed a woman with his car, visited HER in the hospital. We propose an analysis of these phenomena that integrates the dynamic account of anaphora and ellipsis as discourse reference to individuals and properties (respectively) with an account of at-issue meaning as a proposal to update the input Context Set (CS, see Stalnaker 1978)and of appositive meaning as an actual update of the CS that is not up for negotiation.

with Adrian Brasoveanu. In the proceedings of SALT 19 The main goal of the paper is to argue that distributive quantificational dependencies in natural language can be established in two different ways: (i) by encapsulating quantification into functions storing quantificational dependencies as a whole, needed to account for one by one-based distributive sentences like The boys recited "The Raven" one by one -- and (ii) by decomposing quantification in such a way that each n-tuple of quantificationally dependent entities is individually stored in a variable assignment and quantifiers are interpreted relative to the entire set of variables assignments that stores quantificational dependencies in this pointwise, assignment-wise manner needed to account for each-based distributive sentences like The boys each recited a different poem.

Note: I'm preparing a longer version of this work with corpus data to go along with the elicited data in the paper.
This paper presents new data from Kaqchikel (Mayan) showing a split in the case and agreement systems. Though Kaqchikel has ergative absolutive alignment, animate subjects force plural verbal agreement, while animate objects do not. These data present the only case in Kaqchikel where subjects pattern together morphologically to the exclusion of objects, but moreover, they fulfill a typological pattern where case-agreement mismatches only produce languages with ergative alignment and accusative agreement. This paper builds an analysis of these facts in Lexical Decomposition Grammar (Joppen and Wunderlich, 1995; Wunderlich, 1997) and argues that such case and agreement splits can be understood in terms of phi-feature faithfulness relativized to the highest argument, which is independently needed. We then show how such constraints interact with the animacy hierarchy (Smith-Stark, 1974) to yield gradient levels of faithfulness to phi-features as a function of animacy and argument position, producing the attested distribution of plural morphology in Kaqchikel. Finally, we consider how well an analysis in terms of phi-feature faithfulness extends to other instances of case-agreement mismatches.