This study delves into the intricate process of reanalysis, wherein linguistic expressions undergo grammatical or semantic changes, or sometimes both. The primary objective of this study is to explore the theoretical aspects surrounding historical changes of this nature. To facilitate a comprehensive understanding of the topic, we provide a formal description of reanalysis as an analytical tool. Our formal description allows for the differentiation of various change scenarios, enabling us to identify distinct types of shifts from one analysis to another. This approach not only focuses on what has been reanalyzed, be it the morphology, syntax or the semantics, but also emphasizes the interplay between all three linguistic modules (Form, Grammar, and Meaning) and their relationships. This holistic perspective enables a systematic examination of the significance of what remains constant at both points in time during the reanalysis process. The key insight arising from this analysis leads us to propose and substantiate the Early Semantic Stability Hypothesis. This hypothesis posits that the truth-conditional semantics of the original proposition remain unchanged throughout reanalysis, either in all contexts or in specific "bridging contexts" where the reanalysis occurs. To demonstrate these phenomena, we present a compelling test case, focusing on the development of the counterfactual conditional marker ʾilmale in Hebrew and Aramaic. Through a detailed examination of the syntactic and semantic reanalyses it underwent, we observe the emergence of unique semantic features. By adopting a formal semantic perspective, we address fundamental questions such as the level of ambiguity required for reanalysis to take place, the potential existence of universal constraints on reanalysis, and potential motivations driving these linguistic changes. This investigation provides valuable insights into the intricate mechanisms at play during reanalysis and contributes to the broader understanding of linguistic evolution and development.

This paper delves into the semantics of the reciprocal construction recognized in the literature as "verbal" or "lexical" reciprocals. A common assumption is that predicates of this construction inherently encode a symmetric meaning, often marked morphologically in many languages. This paper advocates for a crucial distinction between two types of predicates: rec-predicates (e.g., the Hebrew verb hitnašek 'kiss') - a class of predicates that do not inherently denote symmetry but carry an underspecified meaning, so that in specific defined contexts, they can induce a symmetric reading. In contrast, sym-predicates (e.g., the Hebrew attribute zehe 'be identical') - this class of predicates inherently encodes symmetric relations. Drawing upon Winter’s (2002) typology of verbs, it is posited that rec-predicates are dyadic, taking two atoms as their arguments, while sym-predicates are monadic, with a single argument denoting a set. The analysis in this paper adopts Bar-Asher Siegal’s (2020) methodology for identifying strategies expressing reciprocity and is substantiated with a survey of the various syntactic structures in which the relevant predicates manifest, along with their diverse interpretations. The paper critically examines previous analyses of these predicates, scrutinizing both empirical and theoretical challenges encountered by these analyses. With a specific focus on verbal strategies for expressing reciprocity in Hebrew, the study, informed by the shared characteristics identified in previous research, suggests that the conclusions drawn for Hebrew may be applicable to other languages as well.

Under progressive marking, telic predicates can describe events that fail to reach culmination. Prominent accounts of this so-called "imperfective paradox" tie the effect to the modal accessibility of culmination, intensionalizing the progressive operator so that it instantiates qualifying (culminated) eventualities across a set of alternatives to the evaluation world. This approach faces a number of empirical challenges, including the acceptability of progressives of unlikely or locally out-of-reach events. This paper proposes a new approach, on which telic progressives are instead sensitive to (mereological) structure inherited from an event type associated with telic predicate P. An event type constitutes a formal causal model (e.g., Pearl 2000) in which P's culmination condition C occurs as a dependent or caused variable.  The model provides a set of causal pathways for realizing C, each of which comprises a set of jointly sufficient causal conditions for C, and also establishes (sets of) conditions which preclude C. On this approach, the progress of an actual token P-eventuality can be measured with respect to the event type. A reference time situation s satisfies PROG(P) just in case it is a plausible cross-section of an incomplete causal pathway in P: s must verify some but not all the conditions in a causal pathway for C, and fail to verify a sufficient set of conditions for non-culmination.

The chapter reports on the results of an experimental study that examined register variation in the writing of adult Russian Heritage speakers residing in Israel, specifically exploring such characteristics of formal writing as average sentence length, average word length, nominalizations, Latin origin vocabulary, and subordinate and coordinated clauses. The study compared the written production of the heritage speakers to that of Russian-dominant speakers residing in Israel. The findings indicate that, similarly to Russian-dominant speakers, heritage speakers of Russian distinguish between formal and informal written registers, but also exhibit some divergences. The authors then explored how reading practices and access to Russian language instruction in Israeli schools impacted the ability of heritage writers to employ the identified elements in formal writing. The chapter concludes with a discussion of possible pedagogical approaches to teaching register variation in the heritage language classroom.

This book explores relationships and maps out intersections between discussions on causation in three scientific disciplines: linguistics, philosophy, and psychology. The book is organized in five thematic parts, investigating connections between philosophical and linguistic studies of causation; presenting novel methodologies for studying the representation of causation; tackling central issues in syntactic and semantic representation of causal relations; and introducing recent advances in philosophical thinking on causation.

Beyond its thematic organization, readers will find several recurring topics throughout this book, such as the attempt to reduce causality to other non-causal terms; causal pluralism vs. one all-encompassing account for causation; causal relations pertaining to the mental as opposed to the physical realm, and more.

This collection also lays the foundation for questioning whether it is possible to evaluate available philosophical approaches to causation against the variety of linguistic phenomena ranging across diverse lexical and grammatical items, such as bound morphemes, prepositions, connectives, and verbs. Above all, it lays the groundwork for considering whether the fruits of the psychological-cognitive study of the perception of causal relations may contribute to linguistic and philosophical studies, and whether insights from linguistics can benefit the other two disciplines.