BEGIN:VCALENDAR PRODID:-//Grails iCalendar plugin//NONSGML Grails iCalendar plugin//EN VERSION:2.0 CALSCALE:GREGORIAN METHOD:PUBLISH BEGIN:VEVENT DTSTAMP:20260311T130112Z DTSTART;TZID=Australia/Melbourne:20241018T140000 DTEND;TZID=Australia/Melbourne:20241018T153000 SUMMARY:Explaining vague language UID:20260314T122705Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@fe80:0:0:0:d4cf:baff:fea2:9582%3 TZID:Australia/Melbourne LOCATION:Monash Clayton Campus\, Melbourne\, Australia\, 3800 DESCRIPTION:

Join Zoom meeting:

\n

https://monash.zoom.us/j/88062345198?pwd=R1lUUGtSOXUwdTJydVlPODB3czdSUT09 \;

\n

Meeting ID: 880 6234 5198

\n

Passcode: 484858

\n

Abstract:

\n

Why is language vague? Vagueness may be explained and rationalized if
it can be shown that vague language is more useful to speaker and
hearer than precise language. In a well-known paper\, Bart Lipman
proposed a game-theoretic account of vagueness in terms of mixed
strategy that leads to a puzzle: vagueness cannot be strictly better
than precision at equilibrium. More recently\, we have put forward a
Bayesian account of vagueness establishing that using vague words can
sometimes be strictly more informative than using precise words (Egré\;\,
Spector\, Mortier\, Verheyen 2023). This paper proposes to compare both
results and to explain why they are not in contradiction. Lipman's
definition of vagueness relies exclusively on a property of signaling
strategies\, without making any assumptions about the lexicon\, whereas
our account involves a layer of semantic content. We argue that the
semantic account of vagueness is needed\, and more adequate and
explanatory of vagueness.

ORGANIZER;CN=Sandra Leonie Field: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT END:VCALENDAR