A Canadian Perspective on the Subjective Component of the Bipartite Test for “Persecution”: Time for Re-evaluation

Canadian decision makers refer so regularly to the bipartite nature of the test for persecution in refugee claims that one rarely gives the matter a second thought. After all, the Supreme Court of Canada in Ward clearly affirmed that a refugee claimant must subjectively fear persecution, and this fear must be well-founded in an objective sense. In this article, the authors focus on the meaning and validity of the subjective aspect of the bipartite test. It is especially appropriate to do so at this time, given the introduction of the term “person in need of protection” in section 97 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, and recent Federal Court decisions holding that the subjective fear is not a requirement in section 97 cases. Looking at the issue of subjective fear from historical, psychological, and legal perspectives, the authors argue: (a) that the drafters of the UN Convention never intended claimants to be “subjectively afraid” in order to qualify for protection; (b) determining an asylum seeker’s state of mind presents a minefield of potential problems for decision makers; and (c) given the new IRPA provisions dealing with persons in need of protection, the question is not whether there is a bipartite test for determining well-founded fear, but whether, indeed, there ought to be such a test.Les décisionnaires Canadiens font si souvent allusion au caractère bipartite du test de la persécution dans les cas de revendications du statut de réfugié que l’on ne s’arrête presque jamais pour reconsidérer la chose. Après tout, n’est-il pas vrai que la Cour suprême du Canada a affirmé très clairement, dans le cas de Ward, qu’un revendicateur doit avoir une crainte subjective de la persécution, et que cette crainte doit être bien-fondée de façon objective? Dans cet article, les auteurs se penchent sur le sens à donner à l’aspect subjectif du test bipartite et à sa validité. Il est tout spécialement pertinent de poser ces questions dans les circonstances présentes, étant donné que le terme « personne à protéger » a été inclus à l’article 97 de la Loi sur l’immigration et la protection des réfugiés, et au vu des décisions récentes de la Cour fédérale déclarant que la peur subjective n’est pas une condition requise dans les cas visés par l’article 97. Examinant la question de la peur subjective du point de vue historique, psychologique et légal, les auteurs soutiennent que : (a) les auteurs de la Convention des Nations Unies n’avaient jamais voulu dire que les revendicateurs devaient « avoir une crainte subjective » pour être qualifiés pour la protection ; (b) essayer de déterminer l’état d’esprit d’un demandeur du droit d’asile est un exercice truffé d’embûches pour les décisionnaires ; et (c) vu les dispositions récentes de la LIPR concernant les personnes ayant un besoin de protection, la vraie question n’est pas de savoir s’il existe un test bipartite pour déterminer la peur bien-fondée, mais plutôt si un tel testdoit existe

Partitive accomplishments across languages

DFGPeer Reviewe

Dancing monkeys in Serbian and Korean - exhaustivity requirements on distributive share markers

In some languages, distributive markers/quantifiers can attach to the argument that is being distributed (the distributive share), as opposed to the restrictor of the sentence (the distributive key). Researchers agree that distributive share markers can also distribute over events (and not only individuals), but disagree as to what these markers are semantically – universal distributive quantifiers or event plurality (pluractional) markers. In this paper, we experimentally probe spatial event distribution. On a universal quantification account, exhaustive distribution over a spatial distributive key is enforced, while on the pluractional analysis there is no such requirement. We carried out two picture verification experiments to test exhaustivity requirements in intransitive sentences with distributive share markers from two typologically different languages: the Serbian marker 'po' and the Korean marker -'ssik'. We found evidence for an exhaustivity requirement over pluralities of non-atomic individuals (groups), but not over designated spatial locations. We interpret these findings as evidence that the semantics of (spatial) event distribution with distributive share markers involves a (spatial) distributive key. Specifically, 'po/-ssik' have a universal quantificational force (with a meaning akin to 'per' ('each')) establishing a distributive relation between individual events and elements of the spatial distributive key. Plural individuals made salient in the visual input can serve to divide up the spatial key into chunks of space that have to be exhausted

Exhaustivity and homogeneity effects with distributive-share markers:Experimental evidence from Serbian po

There are two competing approaches to the semantics of distributive-share markers: they are either universal distributive quantifiers over events or are merely event-plurality markers. To address this debate, we present new conclusions based on novel experiments with Serbian transitive sentences in which the distributive-share marker po was attached to the direct object. The first two experiments investigated exhaustivity effects in transitive sentences with po, while the third experiment probed homogeneity effects across three types of negative transitive sentences: with po marking the object, with the distributive-key quantifier svaki (‘every’) in subject position, and with neither. If po is a universal quantifier, then it should enforce exhaustive distribution over a distributive key and remove homogeneity effects in negative sentences with a definite subject. If instead po is an event-plurality marker with no universal quantificational force, then it should neither enforce exhaustive distribution nor remove homogeneity effects in negative sentences with a definite subject. We conclude that there are two populations of Serbian speakers with systematic patterns of interpretation: one population interprets po as a universal quantifier and one population interprets po as an event-plurality marker. We conjecture that this population split might reflect an ongoing diachronic change in the semantic import of the distributive-share marker po

"Liz can buy a croissant or donut. That’s both together, right?" Distinguishing target Free Choice from non-target Modal Conjunction in Child French

Several acquisition studies have reported that children draw free choice inferences at adult-like rates from modal disjunctive statements. This study explores an alternative explanation for children’s seemingly adult-like behavior: modal conjunction, which shares verifying and falsifying conditions with free choice. However, existing experimental setups were not able to distinguish the two. With our novel design, we were able to set apart modal conjunctive interpreters from genuine free choice interpreters, using a new type of condition: a mutually exclusive context. The results revealed that free choice inferences are not so early acquired as previously thought. In contrast to the earlier studies, only half of the children between 4 and 6 were genuine adult-like free choice interpreters. The other children either show the basic inclusive interpretation of disjunction, or, as hypothesized, a modal conjunctive interpretation