Abstract: Polar questions like ‘May I go to the park or to the beach?’ give rise to inferences similar to Free Choice Permission. The Yes answer to these questions corresponds to the permission to freely choose between going to the park and going to the beach. No corresponds to Dual Prohibition, i.e., prohibition to go to either place. I empirically tested these intuitions. I will indicate how the collected data can allow us to establish the source of these inferences and compare the findings to predictions made by current theories of Free Choice extended with question semantics. The collected data poses a challenge to the semantic and scalar approaches to free choice and supports non-scalar pragmatics as a uniform solution to the free choice puzzle.
Poster presentation. The poster is avaliable here: Poster
Abstract: Polar questions like “May I go to the park or to the beach?” seem to give rise to Free Choice-like inferences. The “yes” answer to such question seem to correspond to the permission to freely choose between going to the park and going to the beach. Similarly, the answer “No” seem to correspond to Dual Prohibition, i.e., prohibition to go to either place. We conducted an experiment to empirically test whether these intuitions are true. In the talk I will indicate how the collected data can allow to establish the source of these inferences. Moreover, I will compare the results to the predictions of the current theories of Free Choice extended with question semantics.
Abstract: This paper’s main focus lies on the compositional semantics of clause-embedding predicates, i.e. verbs or verb-like expressions that represent a relationship between a subject and a proposition. It provides an improved characterisation of the selectional behaviour of the classes of responsive and anti-rogative predicates in terms of their semantic properties. I propose refinements of the hypotheses by Uegaki and Sudo (2019) and Roelofsen and Uegaki(2021), that are falsified by empirical data. My new proposals are that all non-veridical and positively preferential predicates are anti-rogative and that all responsive predicates are either Q-to-P or P-to-Q distributive. The latter hypothesis can be alternatively formulated as: “sentences with corresponding interrogative and declarative complements embedded under the same predicate are always related by entailment.
Teaching Assistant for Logic and Conversation in the Master of Logic (Main instructor: Floris Roelofsen)
Teaching Assistant for Philosophical Logic in the Master of Logic (Main instructor: Sander Beckers)
Teaching Assistant for Logic and Computation: Introduction to Logic in the Minor Logic and Computation (Main instructor: Maria Aloni)
Teaching Assistant for Game Theory in the Master of Logic (Main instructor: Ulle Endriss)
If you want to learn more about my work or want to chat about our common academic intersts feel free to email me at:
You can also find me in my office at the ILLC room F1.11 or at Oude Turfmarkt 141-143
My full given name is Tomasz which is pronounced roughly as Thomash [/ˈtɔ.maʂ/] with the focus on the first syllable.
However I rarely use that name outside of offical documents. You can call me Tom or Tomek, but Tomasz is also fine :).
If you want to email me in Polish (or any other language) feel free to skip all the ususal honorifics and just call me by my first name.