Context is a key component in a variety of phenomena that have been used to argue pro and con various versions of contextualism\, including \;unsaturated predicates\, domain selection\, metonymy\, knowledge attributions\, ethical judgements\, and gradable adjectives. More recently there has been significant interest in phenomena involving overt discussion between interlocutors\, for instance with respect to personal taste predicates and epistemic modals. These debates have mostly taken place at some remove from work in the semantics and pragmatics of dialogue\, where theories such as SDRT\, KoS\, and PTT provide detailed\, formal notions of conversational context (typically explicated in terms of coupled information states of the interlocutors)\, discussion\, and metacommunicative interaction. All this grounded in evidence from conversational corpora such as the British National Corpus\, Switchboard\, Trains etc. \;This one day workshop seeks to bridge this divide.
\nProgramme\n \;\n10-11 Robin Cooper (Gothenburg University) \;Judgement\, truth and probability: taste\, (dis)agreement\, and compromise\n \;\ncoffee\n \;\n11:20-12:10 Iné\;s Crespo and Raquel Ferná\;ndez \;(University of Amsterdam) Disagreement\, meaning\, and affect\n \;\n12:10-13 Isidora Stojanovic (Institute Jean Nicod\, ENS) Disagreement and retraction in dialogue\n \;\nLunch\n \;\n14-14:50 Stanley Peters (Stanford University) Context\, Co-text\, and Environment in Conversation\n \;\n14:50-15:40 Staffan Larsson (Gothenburg University) Contextualism and semantic coordination\n \;\ncoffee\n \;\n16-16:50 Jonathan Ginzburg (Universite Paris-Diderot) Minimalism v. Contextualism: a dialogical evaluation\n \;\n \;\n \;\nAttendance is free\, but please email \;