From dr.elwinransom at gmail.com Tue Nov 11 17:29:03 2008 From: dr.elwinransom at gmail.com (Stephen Douglas) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 12:29:03 -0500 Subject: Armenian verbs Message-ID: Greetings, all. I'm trying to trace the fate of the Indo-European athematic verbs and reduplicating verbs into Classical Armenian. If anyone has a quick summary or a resource to recommend, I'd appreciate it. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- _______________________________________________ Histling-l mailing list Histling-l at mailman.rice.edu https://mailman.rice.edu/mailman/listinfo/histling-l From trinidad.guzman.gonzalez at unileon.es Tue Nov 11 19:58:12 2008 From: trinidad.guzman.gonzalez at unileon.es (trinidad.guzman.gonzalez at unileon.es) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 20:58:12 +0100 Subject: Publication announcement Message-ID: Dear colleagues: We are pleased to announce that SELIM 14 is already available in hardcopy and will be available online in due time. Please find detailed table of contents below. Selim publishes articles, notes, reviews, book notes and other scientific papers that contribute to the advancement of Mediaeval English Studies and Comparative Medieval Studies. Contributions for issue number 15 are already welcome. Originals submitted for possible publication will be subject to peer reviewing, and should not have been sent to other journals or means of publications. Contributions are to be sent to the Editors (selim at web.uniovi.es). Please find Stylesheet and other relevant information in http://www.uniovi.es/SELIM/. SELIM (Journal of the Spanish Society for Mediaeval English Language and Literature) Issue nº 14 (2007) Universidad de Oviedo & SELIM Edited by T. Guzmán & S.G. Fdez-Corugedo Table of Contents: ARTICLES Michiko Ogura (Chiba University): The Paris Psalter and the Metres of Boethius: are they formulaic as Anglo-Saxon verses? Isabel de la Cruz Cabanillas (University of Alcalá de Henares): Semantic Primes in Old English: a preliminary study of descriptors. Clara Molina & Manuela Romano (Autonomous University of Madrid): Old texts in new vessels: teaching and learning HEL online. Laura Esteban Segura & Nadia Obegi Gallardo (University of Málaga): Absolute constructions in the Old English Gospels: a case-study. Nils-Lennart Johannesson (Stockholm University): Icc hafe don swa summ þu badd: an anatomy of the Preface to the Ormulum. Anna Hebda (Adam Mickiewicz University): On the excrescent Middle English p. María Beatriz Hernández Pérez (University of La Laguna): Both human and divine: the conflict between confession and gossip in The Book of Margery Kempe. Tamara Pérez Fernández & Ana Sáez Hidalgo (University of Valladolid): ‘A man textueel’: scribal readings and interpretations of Troilus and Criseyde through the glosses in manuscript British Library Harley 2392. Keith Williamson (University of Edinburgh): A Latin–Older Scots glossary in Edinburgh University Library MS 205. NOTES Andrew Breeze (University of Navarre): Herebarde in Ancrene Riwle. REVIEWS & NOTICES Tom Shippey (Saint Louis University): Álvarez-Faedo, María José (ed.) 2007: Avalon Revisited: Reworkings Of The Arthurian Myth. Judit Martínez Magaz (University of León): North, Richard & Allard, Joe (eds.) 2007: Beowulf and Other Stories. A New Introduction to Old English, Old Icelandic and Anglo-Norman Literatures. Agnieszka Pysz (Adam Mickiewicz University): Suárez-Gómez, Cristina 2006: Relativization in Early English (950–1250): the Position of Relative Clauses. Kind regards, Trinidad Guzmán & Santiago González _______________________________________________ Histling-l mailing list Histling-l at mailman.rice.edu https://mailman.rice.edu/mailman/listinfo/histling-l From Gunther.DeVogelaer at UGent.be Thu Nov 13 11:33:50 2008 From: Gunther.DeVogelaer at UGent.be (Gunther De Vogelaer) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2008 12:33:50 +0100 Subject: CFP Workshop on 'gender marking' (at ICHL 19) Message-ID: Workshop on 'The diachrony of gender marking' at ICHL 19 (Nijmegen, August 10-15, 2009) Despite several decades of research, our understanding of grammatical gender systems is still relatively poor in comparison to other parts of grammar. The present workshop aims at taking stock of current developments in the field. The workshop on gender will address questions including, but not restricted to, the following: - Patterns of change in gender systems: can we find any regularity in changes that gender systems can undergo? And to what extent can we derive answers from such patterns with regard to more fundamental questions such as the quest for triggers in gender change (deflection, language contact), the function of grammatical gender, or the structure of gender systems? - Loss or renewal of grammatical gender: in Indo-European languages, most ongoing changes concern the loss of aspects of the gender system, such as the decrease of the number of genders or the loss of gender agreement from parts of the grammar (although there are exceptions, such as the emergence of a 'neo-neuter' in varieties of Italian (Haase 2000). Are there language families where the reverse is observed, i.e. frequent changes towards more genders or towards more gender agreement? In addition, to what extent do these innovations match alleged universal pathways such as the one proposed by Greenberg (1978). - The global distribution of grammatical gender: it appears that gender systems are quite widespread in the world, but not universal (cf. the WALS). Are there any linguistic properties that facilitate or inhibit the presence of grammatical gender? And how can such correlations be explained? - Grammatical gender and theories of language change: recent data, e.g. from Dutch, have shown substantial differences in the way grammatical gender is acquired in L1 and L2. Hence data on gender change can be shed some light over the ongoing debate on the role of L1 vs. L2 speakers in language change. Conveners: Gunther De Vogelaer (Flemish Research Foundation / Ghent) Mark Janse (Ghent) Keynote speakers: Alexandra Aikhenvald (La Trobe) Brian Joseph (Ohio State) Peter Siemund (Hamburg) Abstracts: The workshop is part of the ICHL-19 conference, which takes place 10-15 August 2009, at the Radboud University Nijmegen (the Netherlands). Abstracts should be submitted via the ICHL-19 website: http://www.ru.nl/cls/ichl19/. Deadline is 10 January 2009. More information: please contact gunther.devogelaer at ugent.be or mark.janse at ugent.be -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- _______________________________________________ Histling-l mailing list Histling-l at mailman.rice.edu https://mailman.rice.edu/mailman/listinfo/histling-l From Patrick.McConvell at aiatsis.gov.au Fri Nov 14 22:28:06 2008 From: Patrick.McConvell at aiatsis.gov.au (Patrick McConvell) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2008 09:28:06 +1100 Subject: Kinship workshop at ICHL Message-ID: ICHL 2009: Call for papers for Kinship workshop This is a call for preliminary expressions of interest in presenting a paper at the workshop detailed below, to be held as part of the XIXth International Conference on Historical Linguistics, 10-15 August 2009, Radboud University Nijmegen, Centre for Language Studies Language in Time and Space. The conference URL is: http://www.ru.nl/cls/ichl19/ Please send your name and affiliation and a short indication of your area or interest and/or the topic of a possible paper in the Kinship workshop to Patrick.mcconvell at anu.edu.au. This is simply so that the workshop organizers can get an idea of who might be contributing, and so that we can keep those who have been in touch informed of any developments. In due course there will be a formal abstract submission process through the conference website but that is not implemented yet. Kinship terminologies: change and reconstruction Conveners: Patrick McConvell (Australian National University) and Jeff Marck (Cairo) E-mail: Patrick.mcconvell at anu.edu.au Study of kinship terminologies and systems has been one of the major joint endeavours of comparative linguistics and the social sciences, especially anthropology. Reconstruction of prehistoric systems has shed light on the form of the societies of proto-language speakers and the changes leading to present-day societies. In turn the systematic study of the typology of, and constraints on, kinship systems in anthropology has assisted linguists in their reconstruction work. While kinship, particularly diachronic kinship, has become unfashionable in anthropology in the last 20-30 years, it is now experiencing a renaissance, with new publications appearing often drawing on linguistic evidence. There is also significant interest in history in documented kinship changes in Europe and elsewhere, and this provides a more detailed source about transitions in meanings and their motivations which can aid in reconstruction. We are calling for papers on examples of reconstruction of proto-terminologies in families and sub-groups; change in morphology, semantics and usage, and borrowing of terms, whether based on prehistoric reconstructions or written sources. Papers on theoretical and methodological issues, especially addressing the interdisciplinary nature of this field, are also welcome. -------------- next part -------------- _______________________________________________ Histling-l mailing list Histling-l at mailman.rice.edu https://mailman.rice.edu/mailman/listinfo/histling-l From Thomas.Smitherman at uib.no Sat Nov 15 11:50:39 2008 From: Thomas.Smitherman at uib.no (Thomas Smitherman) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2008 12:50:39 +0100 Subject: Second Call for Papers: Reconstructing Alignment Systems Message-ID: *******SECOND CALL FOR PAPERS********* Workshop: Reconstructing Alignment Systems 14-15 May, 2009 University of Bergen, Norway Invited Speakers: Alice Harris (Stony Brook University) Geoffrey Haig (University of Kiel) Abstract Submission Deadline: 15 December, 2008 Workshop URL: http://ling.uib.no/IECASTP/Workshop3.htm Address Abstract to: Thomas.Smitherman at uib.no The aim of this workshop is to gather researchers working on alignment systems in an historical perspective, in order to brainstorm on how alignment systems can be reconstructed for earlier stages of a language or a language family. We welcome abstracts on well-studied language families like Indo-European, abstracts on oral languages without a recorded history, and everything in between, aiming to highlight different kinds of reconstruction problems. We also welcome papers on changes in alignment systems, papers addressing the issue of how different theoretical frameworks can contribute to reconstruction, as well as papers concerned with the more general implications of alignment changes for diachronic typology. Please send a one page abstract in pdf format to Thomas Smitherman (Thomas.Smitherman at uib.no) no later than December 1st. Notification of acceptance will besent out on December 15th. The workshop is hosted by the University of Bergen and the research team of the project, Indo-European Case and Argument Structure from a Typological Perspective (IECASTP): http://ling.uib.no/IECASTP/index.htm Location: University of Bergen Vilvite Bergen Vitensenter AS (Auditorium) Thormøhlengate 51 5006 Bergen _______________________________________________ Histling-l mailing list Histling-l at mailman.rice.edu https://mailman.rice.edu/mailman/listinfo/histling-l From ilja.serzants at uib.no Wed Nov 19 12:00:50 2008 From: ilja.serzants at uib.no (Ilja Serzants) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2008 13:00:50 +0100 Subject: 2nd CALL FOR PAPERS. Workshop: The origin of non-canonical subject marking in Indo-European Message-ID: SECOND CALL FOR PAPERS WORKSHOP: THE ORIGIN OF NON-CANONICAL SUBJECT MARKING IN INDO-EUROPEAN The research team of the project ?Indo-European Case and Argument Structure from a Typological Perspective? (IECASTP) (http://ling.uib.no/IECASTP[1]) is organizing a workshop at the XIXth International Conference on Historical Linguistics (10-15 August 2009, Nijmegen, http://www.ru.nl/cls/ichl19/[2]), devoted on the origin of non-canonical subject marking in Indo-European. The URL of the workshop is: http://ling.uib.no/IECASTP/Workshop5.htm[3] Invited speaker: Leonid Kulikov (University of Leiden) Please send a 300-word abstract in pdf format to Ilja Serzants (Ilja.Serzants at uib.no) no later than January 10th. Notification of acceptance will be sent out no later than January 25th. The abstract also has to be submitted through the main conference website at the same time. DESCRIPTION Several of the Modern Indo-European languages that have maintained morphological case exhibit structures where the subject(-like) argument is not canonically case marked. These are found amongst the Modern Germanic languages, Modern Russian, the Modern Baltic languages and the Modern Indo-Aryan languages, to mention some. It is traditionally assumed in the literature that these have developed from objects to subjects (see, for instance, Hewson and Bubenik 2006), hence the case marking. Recently, however, it has been argued for Germanic that oblique subjects in the modern languages were syntactic subjects already in Old Germanic (Eythórsson and Barðdal 2005). This raises the question whether these non-canonically case-marked subject(-like) arguments were objects in Proto-Germanic or Proto-Indo-European, or whether they may have been syntactic subjects all along, given an assumption of the alignment system in Proto-Indo-European being a Fluid-S system (cf. Barðdal and Eythórsson 2008). It is, moreover, possible that the case marking patterns of different predicate types have different origins in Indo-European. The aim of this workshop is therefore to gather researchers who work on case marking in Indo-European, and case marking in general, to a forum where the more general topic of the origin of this non-canonical case marking can be discussed. By doing that, we hope to shed light on this important issue within case marking and alignment, historical linguistics, and Indo-European studies. LOCATION: Radboud University Nijmegen, Centre for Language Studies/Language in Time and Space Please check the website of the host conference for issues like registration, conference fee, social program, etc. http://www.ru.nl/cls/ichl19/[4]) -- Ilja Serzants PhD Research Student Department of Linguistic, Literary and Aesthetic Studies University of Bergen P.O. box 7805 NO-5020 Bergen Norway Links: ------ [1] http://ling.uib.no/IECASTP [2] http://www.ru.nl/cls/ichl19/ [3] http://ling.uib.no/IECASTP/Workshop5.htm [4] http://www.ru.nl/cls/ichl19/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- SECOND CALL FOR PAPERS WORKSHOP: THE ORIGIN OF NON-CANONICAL SUBJECT MARKING IN INDO-EUROPEAN The research team of the project ?Indo-European Case and Argument Structure from a Typological Perspective? (IECASTP) (http://ling.uib.no/IECASTP) is organizing a workshop at the XIXth International Conference on Historical Linguistics (10-15 August 2009, Nijmegen, http://www.ru.nl/cls/ichl19/), devoted on the origin of non-canonical subject marking in Indo-European. The URL of the workshop is: http://ling.uib.no/IECASTP/Workshop5.htm Invited speaker: Leonid Kulikov (University of Leiden) Please send a 300-word abstract in pdf format to Ilja Serzants (Ilja.Serzants at uib.no) no later than January 10th. Notification of acceptance will be sent out no later than January 25th. The abstract also has to be submitted through the main conference website at the same time. DESCRIPTION Several of the Modern Indo-European languages that have maintained morphological case exhibit structures where the subject(-like) argument is not canonically case marked. These are found amongst the Modern Germanic languages, Modern Russian, the Modern Baltic languages and the Modern Indo-Aryan languages, to mention some. It is traditionally assumed in the literature that these have developed from objects to subjects (see, for instance, Hewson and Bubenik 2006), hence the case marking. Recently, however, it has been argued for Germanic that oblique subjects in the modern languages were syntactic subjects already in Old Germanic (Eythórsson and Barðdal 2005). This raises the question whether these non-canonically case-marked subject(-like) arguments were objects in Proto-Germanic or Proto-Indo-European, or whether they may have been syntactic subjects all along, given an assumption of the alignment system in Proto-Indo-European being a Fluid-S system (cf. Barðdal and Eythórsson 2008). It is, moreover, possible that the case marking patterns of different predicate types have different origins in Indo-European. The aim of this workshop is therefore to gather researchers who work on case marking in Indo-European, and case marking in general, to a forum where the more general topic of the origin of this non-canonical case marking can be discussed. By doing that, we hope to shed light on this important issue within case marking and alignment, historical linguistics, and Indo-European studies. LOCATION: Radboud University Nijmegen, Centre for Language Studies/Language in Time and Space Please check the website of the host conference for issues like registration, conference fee, social program, etc. http://www.ru.nl/cls/ichl19/) -- Ilja Serzants PhD Research Student Department of Linguistic, Literary and Aesthetic Studies University of Bergen P.O. box 7805 NO-5020 Bergen Norway -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- _______________________________________________ Histling-l mailing list Histling-l at mailman.rice.edu https://mailman.rice.edu/mailman/listinfo/histling-l From wmb1001 at cam.ac.uk Wed Nov 19 12:21:11 2008 From: wmb1001 at cam.ac.uk (Professor Wendy Bennett) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2008 12:21:11 +0000 Subject: (no subject) Message-ID: Please could you post the following call for papers on histling? Many thanks Wendy Ayres-Bennett ================================ Colloque « Bon Usage et Variation Sociolinguistique : Perspectives diachroniques et traditions nationales » Murray Edwards College, Université de Cambridge, 16-18 juillet 2009 Appel à communications Parmi les champs de réflexions les plus caractéristiques de l'histoire de l'activité grammaticale en France, on trouve le souci de déterminer, parmi toutes les variantes, le « bon usage ». Cette notion de « bon usage », aujourd'hui chargée de connotations archaïques et élitistes, est souvent perçue comme un ensemble de prescriptions normatives correspondant à un modèle socioculturel. Dans ce colloque, parmi les problématiques propres à ouvrir le débat : × Nous souhaiterions nous interroger sur l'évolution de la notion de « bon usage » : Quels sont les facteurs qui ont influencés la conception du « bon usage » ? A quels enjeux socioculturels cette tradition correspond-elle ? Pour élaborer le « bon usage », de Tory à Vaugelas et ses successeurs, les grammairiens et les remarqueurs se sont appuyés sur l'observation de productions diverses : littérature, textes non littéraires, communication orale. Un problème typique est celui de la délimitation sociale et géographique des locuteurs pouvant représenter le « bon usage ». Selon la période, l'appartenance religieuse, l'importance accordée à l'écrit et l'oral les modèles ont beaucoup variés et se sont déplacés notamment de l'idéal savant au Palais ou à la Cour. La période prise en compte ira du XVIe siècle - pendant lequel circule l'idée de « correction de langage » - au XXIe siècle. × Nous souhaiterions également nous interroger sur le caractère prescriptif des ouvrages sur le « bon usage » : l'élaboration du « bon usage » se fonde-t-elle toujours sur une réduction des variantes ? En 1689, le remarqueur N. Andry de Boisregard écrivait « c'est un défaut ordinaire à nos Grammairiens de s'imaginer que dés qu'une chose se dit de deux façons, il faut condamner l'une pour autoriser l'autre. Pourquoy ne pourront-elles pas estre toutes deux bonnes ? ». Si Vaugelas, dans ses Remarques sur la langue Françoise (1647), s'appuyait souvent sur un modèle prescriptif il y a également des observations dans lesquelles il adopte une position plutôt « sociolinguistique ». Il reconnaissait la valeur relative des différents usages et présentait une analyse nuancée selon laquelle les usages sont plus ou moins bons selon le contexte, le registre, le style × Suite à cette question nous voudrions examiner dans quelle mesure les textes qui prescrivent le « bon usage » nous fournissent des données précieuses sur la variation sociolinguistique, surtout pour les périodes antérieures. En utilisant par exemple des formules telles que « Ne dites pas X » ou « X est une faute » ces textes nous renseignent-ils sur les usages régionaux, populaires ? Dans quelle mesure constituent-ils des sources intéressantes pour l'étude du français « non-standard », objet difficile à décrire pour les périodes où nous manquons d'enquêtes ? D'autre part, pour les époques où nous n'avons pas d'enregistrements, les observations sur les mediums d'expressions donnent-elles des témoignages utiles pour la description de l'oral ? × Comment cette tradition évolue-t-elle aujourd'hui ? Le Bon Usage de Grevisse s'inscrit-il dans une filiation ? Nous aimerions considérer les influences directes et indirectes entre les différents textes qui s'appuient sur le « bon usage ». Dans quelle mesure Grevisse, décrit dans une des préfaces comme « le Vaugelas du 20e siècle », suit-il les traces des remarqueurs ? A quel point les différentes traditions nationales s'entre-influencent-elles ? × Nous proposons donc d'élargir le champ à d'autres traditions nationales pour essayer de dégager des spécificités de cette notion dans d'autres langues. Si notre réflexion commence par la tradition française et surtout par la tradition des remarqueurs nous voudrions situer les textes français en nous interrogeant sur les manifestations de la tradition du « bon usage » dans d'autres pays européens. A quel point est-il possible d'identifier des notions communes qui unifient toutes les traditions ? A quel point les grammaires du « bon usage » s'adaptent-elles au contexte national particulier ? Organisation du colloque : Ce colloque se fait dans le cadre du projet 'Observations on the French language', subventionné par la Arts and Humanities Research Council de la Grande-Bretagne. Les organisatrices sont Wendy Ayres-Bennett et Magali Seijido, Université de Cambridge. Comité scientifique : Wendy Ayres-Bennett, Université de Cambridge Philippe Caron, Université de Poitiers Jean-Marie Fournier, Université de Paris III Douglas Kibbee, Université d'Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Francine Mazière, Université Paris XIII Gilles Siouffi, Université Paul Valéry Montpellier III Conférenciers invités : Sylvie Archaimbault (Directrice du laboratoire d'histoire des théories linguistiques UMR 7597 - CNRS/Université Paris-Diderot) : sur la tradition russe Ingrid Tieken-Boon van Ostade (Universiteit Leiden): sur la tradition anglaise Nicola McLelland (University of Nottingham): sur la tradition allemande Danielle Trudeau (San José State University): auteur du livre, Les Inventeurs du bon usage 1529-1647), Minuit 1992. Modalités : Les communications pourront se faire en français et en anglais. Les propositions de communication, qui ne doivent pas contenir plus de 350 mots, sont à envoyer avant le 15 janvier par document attaché à l'adresse électronique suivante : ms693 at cam.ac.uk. Une réponse sera donnée avant le 28 février 2009. Des informations sur le logement, le programme et les frais d'inscription seront mises sur le site web du colloque : http://www.mml.cam.ac.uk/french/observations/conference.html. Pour tout renseignement supplémentaire, contacter Magali Seijido: ms693 at cam.ac.uk ========================================================= Good usage and sociolinguistic variation: Diachronic perspectives and national traditions Murray Edwards College, University of Cambridge, 16-18 July 2009 Call for papers One of the most typical and recurrent themes in the history of linguistic thought in France is the desire to identify 'good usage'. This notion of 'good usage' - which today carries elitist, indeed even archaic, connotations - is often considered to consist of a collection of normative prescriptions which reflect a particular socio-cultural model. In this conference we wish to explore this question from a number of different angles: × How did the notion of 'good usage' emerge and evolve? What factors have helped shape our conception of 'good usage'? How does it relate to different socio-cultural factors? In elaborating good usage grammarians and remarqueurs, from Tory to Vaugelas and his successors, have relied on observing different types of usage, whether literary, non-literary or oral. A typical problem is that of the choice of the social and geographical origin of the speakers selected to represent 'good usage'. According to the period, the relative importance attributed to written or spoken usages and socio-cultural features, whether religious or political, models of good usage have varied greatly and have relied variously on educated usage, the usage of the law courts or the King's court. The conference will focus on the period from the 16th century - period of the production of the first grammars of French - to the present day. × We also wish to consider the extent to which works on 'good usage' are prescriptive: does the elaboration of 'good usage' always imply the reduction of variants? In 1689 the remarqueur Andry de Boisregard wrote: 'it is a common mistake amongst grammarians to imagine that as soon as something can be said in two different ways, we have to condemn one in order to authorize the other. Why can't they both be acceptable?'. If Vaugelas in his Remarques sur la langue Françoise (1647) often relied on a prescriptive model, at times he adopted a stance which is more 'sociolinguisitic' in orientation. In other words, he recognized the relative value of different usages and presented a nuanced analysis according to which different usages are more or less acceptable according to the context, register, style, etc. × Following on from this, we would like to examine the extent to which texts which prescribe 'good usage' provide us with valuable information about sociolinguistic variation, especially for earlier periods in the history of the language. How far do these texts furnish us with information about regional and popular usages when they use expressions such as 'Don't say X ' or 'X is incorrect'? Do they constitute valuable sources for the study of 'non-standard' language, something which is often difficult to describe for periods for which no sociolinguistic surveys are available? When these texts refer to differences between written and spoken usages can we use them to build up a picture of spoken language for those periods for which no recordings are available? × How is this tradition developing today? Is Grevisse's famous work, Le Bon Usage, typical of a certain genre? We should like to consider the direct and indirect influences between the different texts which make reference to 'good usage'. To what extent does Grevisse, described in one of the Prefaces to his work as 'the 20th-century Vaugelas', follow in the footsteps of the remarqueurs? To what extent do the different national traditions influence each other? × We are therefore proposing to open up the discussion to include consideration of other national traditions in order to look at the different interpretations of this notion in relation to different languages. If our reflections on the topic began with the French tradition and particularly with the tradition of the remarqueurs, we would like to contextualize this discussion by considering the tradition of 'good usage' in other European countries. To what extent is it possible to identify common features which unite all the traditions? To what extent do 'good usage' grammarians adapt their discussion and analysis to the particular national context? Conference organization: This conference is taking place under the auspices of the AHRC funded project 'Observations on the French language' (Art and Humanities Research Council of Great Britain). The organizers are Wendy Ayres-Bennett and Magali Seijido, University of Cambridge. Organizing committee: Wendy Ayres-Bennett, University of Cambridge Philippe Caron, Université de Poitiers Jean-Marie Fournier, Université de Paris III Douglas Kibbee, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Francine Mazière, Université Paris XIII Gilles Siouffi, Université Paul Valéry Montpellier III Invited speakers: Sylvie Archaimbault (Directrice du laboratoire d'histoire des théories linguistiques UMR 7597 - CNRS/Université Paris-Diderot) : on the Russian tradition Ingrid Tieken-Boon van Ostade (Universiteit Leiden): on the English tradition Nicola McLelland (University of Nottingham): on the German tradition Danielle Trudeau (San José State University): author of Les Inventeurs du bon usage (1529-1647), Minuit 1992. Practical information: Papers may be given in French or English. Abstracts of papers, which should not exceed 350 words in length, should be sent by e-mail attachment by 15 January 2009 to the following address: ms693 at cam.ac.uk. Colleagues will be informed whether their paper has been accepted by 28 February 2009 at the latest. Practical details of the conference venue, accommodation and programme will be posted on the conference website in due course: http://www.mml.cam.ac.uk/french/observations/conference.html For any further information please contact Magali Seijido: ms693 at cam.ac.uk _______________________________________________ Histling-l mailing list Histling-l at mailman.rice.edu https://mailman.rice.edu/mailman/listinfo/histling-l From Nino.Amiridze at let.uu.nl Sat Nov 29 10:29:28 2008 From: Nino.Amiridze at let.uu.nl (Amiridze, Nino) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2008 11:29:28 +0100 Subject: CONF.-Language Contact and Change: Multiple and Bimodal Bilingual Minorities, Tartu 2009 Message-ID: [Apologies for multiple posting] Language Contact and Change: Multiple and Bimodal Bilingual Minorities Date: May 28, 2009 Location: Tartu, Estonia Workshop at the International Conference on Minority Languages XII (ICML 2009) Website: http://www.dipfilmod-suf.unifi.it/CMpro-v-p-236.html Contact: tartulcc at gmail.com The workshop aims at exploring the language contact and language change phenomena that characterize multiple linguistic minorities. It focuses on but is not confined to signed, Uralic and Caucasian languages. On the one hand, we intend to explore the situation of bimodal bilingualism. Data from changes in multi-modal bilingual contexts can lead to new insights into bilingualism, the typology and structure of languages, and language change and contact in general. Research into bimodal bilingualism can draw upon several methods and approaches developed for studying the bilingualism of other minority languages, and vice versa. On the other hand, we know that it is difficult to reach the bilingual individuals and communities that are deaf and belong to several linguistic minorities. Therefore, we approach the bimodal target via individual studies on minority languages. More specifically, we concentrate on the issue of language change in contact in the context of a typologically wide range of minority languages. We are looking for answers to questions such as the following: - How do deaf children of (hearing) parents belonging to linguistic minorities (e.g., Nganasan) communicate with the Deaf communities in their country and with their own parents? - How does their language change? - How can we test the change in the structure of the languages in contact in a uniform way? - What are the factors that influence the developments? - Can we work towards a typology? Invited keynote speakers: Csilla Bartha (hearing) (Eötvös Loránd University, Budapest): The situation of the Deaf and national minorities in Hungary; Östen Dahl (hearing) (Stockholm University): Contact induced changes in tense and aspect systems; Tatiana Davidenko (Deaf) (Moscow Centre for Deaf Studies and Bilingual Education): Sign Language Diversity in Post-Soviet Countries; Anna Komarova (hearing) (Moscow Centre for Deaf Studies and Bilingual Education): Development of Bilingual Education of the Deaf in Post-Soviet Countries; Gaurav Mathur (Deaf) (Gallaudet University): The relationship between agreement and finiteness in sign languages; Johanna Mesch (Deaf) (Stockholm University): Variations in tactile signing - the case of one-handed conversation; Helle Metslang (hearing) (University of Tartu): Changes in Finnish and Estonian tense and aspect; Christian Rathmann (Deaf) (Hamburg University): Minority Communities within German Deaf Community; Don Stilo (hearing) (Max Planck Institute, Leipzig): Introduction to an Atlas of the Araxes-Iran Linguistic Area. Check for updates, our interdisciplinary areas, and more research questions at http://www.dipfilmod-suf.unifi.it/CMpro-v-p-236.html Submission (deadline January 15, 2009, notification January 31, 2009). Abstracts (in English, maximum 2 pages, including data and references) have to be submitted electronically as portable document format (.pdf) or Microsoft Word (.doc) files via the EasyChair conference management system (https://www.easychair.org/login.cgi?conf=lcc09). If you do not have an EasyChair account, click on the button "I have no EasyChair Account" on that page and follow the instructions. When you receive a password, you can enter the site and upload your abstract. Organizers: Nino Amiridze, Utrecht University (The Netherlands) Östen Dahl, University of Stockholm (Sweden) Anne Tamm, University of Florence (Italy) and Institute for the Estonian Language (Estonia) Manana Topadze, University of Pavia (Italy) Inge Zwitserlood, Radboud University Nijmegen (The Netherlands) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- _______________________________________________ Histling-l mailing list Histling-l at mailman.rice.edu https://mailman.rice.edu/mailman/listinfo/histling-l From dr.elwinransom at gmail.com Tue Nov 11 17:29:03 2008 From: dr.elwinransom at gmail.com (Stephen Douglas) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 12:29:03 -0500 Subject: Armenian verbs Message-ID: Greetings, all. I'm trying to trace the fate of the Indo-European athematic verbs and reduplicating verbs into Classical Armenian. If anyone has a quick summary or a resource to recommend, I'd appreciate it. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- _______________________________________________ Histling-l mailing list Histling-l at mailman.rice.edu https://mailman.rice.edu/mailman/listinfo/histling-l From trinidad.guzman.gonzalez at unileon.es Tue Nov 11 19:58:12 2008 From: trinidad.guzman.gonzalez at unileon.es (trinidad.guzman.gonzalez at unileon.es) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 20:58:12 +0100 Subject: Publication announcement Message-ID: Dear colleagues: We are pleased to announce that SELIM 14 is already available in hardcopy and will be available online in due time. Please find detailed table of contents below. Selim publishes articles, notes, reviews, book notes and other scientific papers that contribute to the advancement of Mediaeval English Studies and Comparative Medieval Studies. Contributions for issue number 15 are already welcome. Originals submitted for possible publication will be subject to peer reviewing, and should not have been sent to other journals or means of publications. Contributions are to be sent to the Editors (selim at web.uniovi.es). Please find Stylesheet and other relevant information in http://www.uniovi.es/SELIM/. SELIM (Journal of the Spanish Society for Mediaeval English Language and Literature) Issue n? 14 (2007) Universidad de Oviedo & SELIM Edited by T. Guzm?n & S.G. Fdez-Corugedo Table of Contents: ARTICLES Michiko Ogura (Chiba University): The Paris Psalter and the Metres of Boethius: are they formulaic as Anglo-Saxon verses? Isabel de la Cruz Cabanillas (University of Alcal? de Henares): Semantic Primes in Old English: a preliminary study of descriptors. Clara Molina & Manuela Romano (Autonomous University of Madrid): Old texts in new vessels: teaching and learning HEL online. Laura Esteban Segura & Nadia Obegi Gallardo (University of M?laga): Absolute constructions in the Old English Gospels: a case-study. Nils-Lennart Johannesson (Stockholm University): Icc hafe don swa summ ?u badd: an anatomy of the Preface to the Ormulum. Anna Hebda (Adam Mickiewicz University): On the excrescent Middle English p. Mar?a Beatriz Hern?ndez P?rez (University of La Laguna): Both human and divine: the conflict between confession and gossip in The Book of Margery Kempe. Tamara P?rez Fern?ndez & Ana S?ez Hidalgo (University of Valladolid): ?A man textueel?: scribal readings and interpretations of Troilus and Criseyde through the glosses in manuscript British Library Harley 2392. Keith Williamson (University of Edinburgh): A Latin?Older Scots glossary in Edinburgh University Library MS 205. NOTES Andrew Breeze (University of Navarre): Herebarde in Ancrene Riwle. REVIEWS & NOTICES Tom Shippey (Saint Louis University): ?lvarez-Faedo, Mar?a Jos? (ed.) 2007: Avalon Revisited: Reworkings Of The Arthurian Myth. Judit Mart?nez Magaz (University of Le?n): North, Richard & Allard, Joe (eds.) 2007: Beowulf and Other Stories. A New Introduction to Old English, Old Icelandic and Anglo-Norman Literatures. Agnieszka Pysz (Adam Mickiewicz University): Su?rez-G?mez, Cristina 2006: Relativization in Early English (950?1250): the Position of Relative Clauses. Kind regards, Trinidad Guzm?n & Santiago Gonz?lez _______________________________________________ Histling-l mailing list Histling-l at mailman.rice.edu https://mailman.rice.edu/mailman/listinfo/histling-l From Gunther.DeVogelaer at UGent.be Thu Nov 13 11:33:50 2008 From: Gunther.DeVogelaer at UGent.be (Gunther De Vogelaer) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2008 12:33:50 +0100 Subject: CFP Workshop on 'gender marking' (at ICHL 19) Message-ID: Workshop on 'The diachrony of gender marking' at ICHL 19 (Nijmegen, August 10-15, 2009) Despite several decades of research, our understanding of grammatical gender systems is still relatively poor in comparison to other parts of grammar. The present workshop aims at taking stock of current developments in the field. The workshop on gender will address questions including, but not restricted to, the following: - Patterns of change in gender systems: can we find any regularity in changes that gender systems can undergo? And to what extent can we derive answers from such patterns with regard to more fundamental questions such as the quest for triggers in gender change (deflection, language contact), the function of grammatical gender, or the structure of gender systems? - Loss or renewal of grammatical gender: in Indo-European languages, most ongoing changes concern the loss of aspects of the gender system, such as the decrease of the number of genders or the loss of gender agreement from parts of the grammar (although there are exceptions, such as the emergence of a 'neo-neuter' in varieties of Italian (Haase 2000). Are there language families where the reverse is observed, i.e. frequent changes towards more genders or towards more gender agreement? In addition, to what extent do these innovations match alleged universal pathways such as the one proposed by Greenberg (1978). - The global distribution of grammatical gender: it appears that gender systems are quite widespread in the world, but not universal (cf. the WALS). Are there any linguistic properties that facilitate or inhibit the presence of grammatical gender? And how can such correlations be explained? - Grammatical gender and theories of language change: recent data, e.g. from Dutch, have shown substantial differences in the way grammatical gender is acquired in L1 and L2. Hence data on gender change can be shed some light over the ongoing debate on the role of L1 vs. L2 speakers in language change. Conveners: Gunther De Vogelaer (Flemish Research Foundation / Ghent) Mark Janse (Ghent) Keynote speakers: Alexandra Aikhenvald (La Trobe) Brian Joseph (Ohio State) Peter Siemund (Hamburg) Abstracts: The workshop is part of the ICHL-19 conference, which takes place 10-15 August 2009, at the Radboud University Nijmegen (the Netherlands). Abstracts should be submitted via the ICHL-19 website: http://www.ru.nl/cls/ichl19/. Deadline is 10 January 2009. More information: please contact gunther.devogelaer at ugent.be or mark.janse at ugent.be -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- _______________________________________________ Histling-l mailing list Histling-l at mailman.rice.edu https://mailman.rice.edu/mailman/listinfo/histling-l From Patrick.McConvell at aiatsis.gov.au Fri Nov 14 22:28:06 2008 From: Patrick.McConvell at aiatsis.gov.au (Patrick McConvell) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2008 09:28:06 +1100 Subject: Kinship workshop at ICHL Message-ID: ICHL 2009: Call for papers for Kinship workshop This is a call for preliminary expressions of interest in presenting a paper at the workshop detailed below, to be held as part of the XIXth International Conference on Historical Linguistics, 10-15 August 2009, Radboud University Nijmegen, Centre for Language Studies Language in Time and Space. The conference URL is: http://www.ru.nl/cls/ichl19/ Please send your name and affiliation and a short indication of your area or interest and/or the topic of a possible paper in the Kinship workshop to Patrick.mcconvell at anu.edu.au. This is simply so that the workshop organizers can get an idea of who might be contributing, and so that we can keep those who have been in touch informed of any developments. In due course there will be a formal abstract submission process through the conference website but that is not implemented yet. Kinship terminologies: change and reconstruction Conveners: Patrick McConvell (Australian National University) and Jeff Marck (Cairo) E-mail: Patrick.mcconvell at anu.edu.au Study of kinship terminologies and systems has been one of the major joint endeavours of comparative linguistics and the social sciences, especially anthropology. Reconstruction of prehistoric systems has shed light on the form of the societies of proto-language speakers and the changes leading to present-day societies. In turn the systematic study of the typology of, and constraints on, kinship systems in anthropology has assisted linguists in their reconstruction work. While kinship, particularly diachronic kinship, has become unfashionable in anthropology in the last 20-30 years, it is now experiencing a renaissance, with new publications appearing often drawing on linguistic evidence. There is also significant interest in history in documented kinship changes in Europe and elsewhere, and this provides a more detailed source about transitions in meanings and their motivations which can aid in reconstruction. We are calling for papers on examples of reconstruction of proto-terminologies in families and sub-groups; change in morphology, semantics and usage, and borrowing of terms, whether based on prehistoric reconstructions or written sources. Papers on theoretical and methodological issues, especially addressing the interdisciplinary nature of this field, are also welcome. -------------- next part -------------- _______________________________________________ Histling-l mailing list Histling-l at mailman.rice.edu https://mailman.rice.edu/mailman/listinfo/histling-l From Thomas.Smitherman at uib.no Sat Nov 15 11:50:39 2008 From: Thomas.Smitherman at uib.no (Thomas Smitherman) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2008 12:50:39 +0100 Subject: Second Call for Papers: Reconstructing Alignment Systems Message-ID: *******SECOND CALL FOR PAPERS********* Workshop: Reconstructing Alignment Systems 14-15 May, 2009 University of Bergen, Norway Invited Speakers: Alice Harris (Stony Brook University) Geoffrey Haig (University of Kiel) Abstract Submission Deadline: 15 December, 2008 Workshop URL: http://ling.uib.no/IECASTP/Workshop3.htm Address Abstract to: Thomas.Smitherman at uib.no The aim of this workshop is to gather researchers working on alignment systems in an historical perspective, in order to brainstorm on how alignment systems can be reconstructed for earlier stages of a language or a language family. We welcome abstracts on well-studied language families like Indo-European, abstracts on oral languages without a recorded history, and everything in between, aiming to highlight different kinds of reconstruction problems. We also welcome papers on changes in alignment systems, papers addressing the issue of how different theoretical frameworks can contribute to reconstruction, as well as papers concerned with the more general implications of alignment changes for diachronic typology. Please send a one page abstract in pdf format to Thomas Smitherman (Thomas.Smitherman at uib.no) no later than December 1st. Notification of acceptance will besent out on December 15th. The workshop is hosted by the University of Bergen and the research team of the project, Indo-European Case and Argument Structure from a Typological Perspective (IECASTP): http://ling.uib.no/IECASTP/index.htm Location: University of Bergen Vilvite Bergen Vitensenter AS (Auditorium) Thorm?hlengate 51 5006 Bergen _______________________________________________ Histling-l mailing list Histling-l at mailman.rice.edu https://mailman.rice.edu/mailman/listinfo/histling-l From ilja.serzants at uib.no Wed Nov 19 12:00:50 2008 From: ilja.serzants at uib.no (Ilja Serzants) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2008 13:00:50 +0100 Subject: 2nd CALL FOR PAPERS. Workshop: The origin of non-canonical subject marking in Indo-European Message-ID: SECOND CALL FOR PAPERS WORKSHOP: THE ORIGIN OF NON-CANONICAL SUBJECT MARKING IN INDO-EUROPEAN The research team of the project ?Indo-European Case and Argument Structure from a Typological Perspective? (IECASTP) (http://ling.uib.no/IECASTP[1]) is organizing a workshop at the XIXth International Conference on Historical Linguistics (10-15 August 2009, Nijmegen, http://www.ru.nl/cls/ichl19/[2]), devoted on the origin of non-canonical subject marking in Indo-European. The URL of the workshop is: http://ling.uib.no/IECASTP/Workshop5.htm[3] Invited speaker: Leonid Kulikov (University of Leiden) Please send a 300-word abstract in pdf format to Ilja Serzants (Ilja.Serzants at uib.no) no later than January 10th. Notification of acceptance will be sent out no later than January 25th. The abstract also has to be submitted through the main conference website at the same time. DESCRIPTION Several of the Modern Indo-European languages that have maintained morphological case exhibit structures where the subject(-like) argument is not canonically case marked. These are found amongst the Modern Germanic languages, Modern Russian, the Modern Baltic languages and the Modern Indo-Aryan languages, to mention some. It is traditionally assumed in the literature that these have developed from objects to subjects (see, for instance, Hewson and Bubenik 2006), hence the case marking. Recently, however, it has been argued for Germanic that oblique subjects in the modern languages were syntactic subjects already in Old Germanic (Eyth?rsson and Bar?dal 2005). This raises the question whether these non-canonically case-marked subject(-like) arguments were objects in Proto-Germanic or Proto-Indo-European, or whether they may have been syntactic subjects all along, given an assumption of the alignment system in Proto-Indo-European being a Fluid-S system (cf. Bar?dal and Eyth?rsson 2008). It is, moreover, possible that the case marking patterns of different predicate types have different origins in Indo-European. The aim of this workshop is therefore to gather researchers who work on case marking in Indo-European, and case marking in general, to a forum where the more general topic of the origin of this non-canonical case marking can be discussed. By doing that, we hope to shed light on this important issue within case marking and alignment, historical linguistics, and Indo-European studies. LOCATION: Radboud University Nijmegen, Centre for Language Studies/Language in Time and Space Please check the website of the host conference for issues like registration, conference fee, social program, etc. http://www.ru.nl/cls/ichl19/[4]) -- Ilja Serzants PhD Research Student Department of Linguistic, Literary and Aesthetic Studies University of Bergen P.O. box 7805 NO-5020 Bergen Norway Links: ------ [1] http://ling.uib.no/IECASTP [2] http://www.ru.nl/cls/ichl19/ [3] http://ling.uib.no/IECASTP/Workshop5.htm [4] http://www.ru.nl/cls/ichl19/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- SECOND CALL FOR PAPERS WORKSHOP: THE ORIGIN OF NON-CANONICAL SUBJECT MARKING IN INDO-EUROPEAN The research team of the project ?Indo-European Case and Argument Structure from a Typological Perspective? (IECASTP) (http://ling.uib.no/IECASTP) is organizing a workshop at the XIXth International Conference on Historical Linguistics (10-15 August 2009, Nijmegen, http://www.ru.nl/cls/ichl19/), devoted on the origin of non-canonical subject marking in Indo-European. The URL of the workshop is: http://ling.uib.no/IECASTP/Workshop5.htm Invited speaker: Leonid Kulikov (University of Leiden) Please send a 300-word abstract in pdf format to Ilja Serzants (Ilja.Serzants at uib.no) no later than January 10th. Notification of acceptance will be sent out no later than January 25th. The abstract also has to be submitted through the main conference website at the same time. DESCRIPTION Several of the Modern Indo-European languages that have maintained morphological case exhibit structures where the subject(-like) argument is not canonically case marked. These are found amongst the Modern Germanic languages, Modern Russian, the Modern Baltic languages and the Modern Indo-Aryan languages, to mention some. It is traditionally assumed in the literature that these have developed from objects to subjects (see, for instance, Hewson and Bubenik 2006), hence the case marking. Recently, however, it has been argued for Germanic that oblique subjects in the modern languages were syntactic subjects already in Old Germanic (Eyth?rsson and Bar?dal 2005). This raises the question whether these non-canonically case-marked subject(-like) arguments were objects in Proto-Germanic or Proto-Indo-European, or whether they may have been syntactic subjects all along, given an assumption of the alignment system in Proto-Indo-European being a Fluid-S system (cf. Bar?dal and Eyth?rsson 2008). It is, moreover, possible that the case marking patterns of different predicate types have different origins in Indo-European. The aim of this workshop is therefore to gather researchers who work on case marking in Indo-European, and case marking in general, to a forum where the more general topic of the origin of this non-canonical case marking can be discussed. By doing that, we hope to shed light on this important issue within case marking and alignment, historical linguistics, and Indo-European studies. LOCATION: Radboud University Nijmegen, Centre for Language Studies/Language in Time and Space Please check the website of the host conference for issues like registration, conference fee, social program, etc. http://www.ru.nl/cls/ichl19/) -- Ilja Serzants PhD Research Student Department of Linguistic, Literary and Aesthetic Studies University of Bergen P.O. box 7805 NO-5020 Bergen Norway -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- _______________________________________________ Histling-l mailing list Histling-l at mailman.rice.edu https://mailman.rice.edu/mailman/listinfo/histling-l From wmb1001 at cam.ac.uk Wed Nov 19 12:21:11 2008 From: wmb1001 at cam.ac.uk (Professor Wendy Bennett) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2008 12:21:11 +0000 Subject: (no subject) Message-ID: Please could you post the following call for papers on histling? Many thanks Wendy Ayres-Bennett ================================ Colloque ? Bon Usage et Variation Sociolinguistique : Perspectives diachroniques et traditions nationales ? Murray Edwards College, Universit? de Cambridge, 16-18 juillet 2009 Appel ? communications Parmi les champs de r?flexions les plus caract?ristiques de l'histoire de l'activit? grammaticale en France, on trouve le souci de d?terminer, parmi toutes les variantes, le ? bon usage ?. Cette notion de ? bon usage ?, aujourd'hui charg?e de connotations archa?ques et ?litistes, est souvent per?ue comme un ensemble de prescriptions normatives correspondant ? un mod?le socioculturel. Dans ce colloque, parmi les probl?matiques propres ? ouvrir le d?bat : ? Nous souhaiterions nous interroger sur l'?volution de la notion de ? bon usage ? : Quels sont les facteurs qui ont influenc?s la conception du ? bon usage ? ? A quels enjeux socioculturels cette tradition correspond-elle ? Pour ?laborer le ? bon usage ?, de Tory ? Vaugelas et ses successeurs, les grammairiens et les remarqueurs se sont appuy?s sur l'observation de productions diverses : litt?rature, textes non litt?raires, communication orale. Un probl?me typique est celui de la d?limitation sociale et g?ographique des locuteurs pouvant repr?senter le ? bon usage ?. Selon la p?riode, l'appartenance religieuse, l'importance accord?e ? l'?crit et l'oral les mod?les ont beaucoup vari?s et se sont d?plac?s notamment de l'id?al savant au Palais ou ? la Cour. La p?riode prise en compte ira du XVIe si?cle - pendant lequel circule l'id?e de ? correction de langage ? - au XXIe si?cle. ? Nous souhaiterions ?galement nous interroger sur le caract?re prescriptif des ouvrages sur le ? bon usage ? : l'?laboration du ? bon usage ? se fonde-t-elle toujours sur une r?duction des variantes ? En 1689, le remarqueur N. Andry de Boisregard ?crivait ? c'est un d?faut ordinaire ? nos Grammairiens de s'imaginer que d?s qu'une chose se dit de deux fa?ons, il faut condamner l'une pour autoriser l'autre. Pourquoy ne pourront-elles pas estre toutes deux bonnes ? ?. Si Vaugelas, dans ses Remarques sur la langue Fran?oise (1647), s'appuyait souvent sur un mod?le prescriptif il y a ?galement des observations dans lesquelles il adopte une position plut?t ? sociolinguistique ?. Il reconnaissait la valeur relative des diff?rents usages et pr?sentait une analyse nuanc?e selon laquelle les usages sont plus ou moins bons selon le contexte, le registre, le style ? Suite ? cette question nous voudrions examiner dans quelle mesure les textes qui prescrivent le ? bon usage ? nous fournissent des donn?es pr?cieuses sur la variation sociolinguistique, surtout pour les p?riodes ant?rieures. En utilisant par exemple des formules telles que ? Ne dites pas X ? ou ? X est une faute ? ces textes nous renseignent-ils sur les usages r?gionaux, populaires ? Dans quelle mesure constituent-ils des sources int?ressantes pour l'?tude du fran?ais ? non-standard ?, objet difficile ? d?crire pour les p?riodes o? nous manquons d'enqu?tes ? D'autre part, pour les ?poques o? nous n'avons pas d'enregistrements, les observations sur les mediums d'expressions donnent-elles des t?moignages utiles pour la description de l'oral ? ? Comment cette tradition ?volue-t-elle aujourd'hui ? Le Bon Usage de Grevisse s'inscrit-il dans une filiation ? Nous aimerions consid?rer les influences directes et indirectes entre les diff?rents textes qui s'appuient sur le ? bon usage ?. Dans quelle mesure Grevisse, d?crit dans une des pr?faces comme ? le Vaugelas du 20e si?cle ?, suit-il les traces des remarqueurs ? A quel point les diff?rentes traditions nationales s'entre-influencent-elles ? ? Nous proposons donc d'?largir le champ ? d'autres traditions nationales pour essayer de d?gager des sp?cificit?s de cette notion dans d'autres langues. Si notre r?flexion commence par la tradition fran?aise et surtout par la tradition des remarqueurs nous voudrions situer les textes fran?ais en nous interrogeant sur les manifestations de la tradition du ? bon usage ? dans d'autres pays europ?ens. A quel point est-il possible d'identifier des notions communes qui unifient toutes les traditions ? A quel point les grammaires du ? bon usage ? s'adaptent-elles au contexte national particulier ? Organisation du colloque : Ce colloque se fait dans le cadre du projet 'Observations on the French language', subventionn? par la Arts and Humanities Research Council de la Grande-Bretagne. Les organisatrices sont Wendy Ayres-Bennett et Magali Seijido, Universit? de Cambridge. Comit? scientifique : Wendy Ayres-Bennett, Universit? de Cambridge Philippe Caron, Universit? de Poitiers Jean-Marie Fournier, Universit? de Paris III Douglas Kibbee, Universit? d'Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Francine Mazi?re, Universit? Paris XIII Gilles Siouffi, Universit? Paul Val?ry Montpellier III Conf?renciers invit?s : Sylvie Archaimbault (Directrice du laboratoire d'histoire des th?ories linguistiques UMR 7597 - CNRS/Universit? Paris-Diderot) : sur la tradition russe Ingrid Tieken-Boon van Ostade (Universiteit Leiden): sur la tradition anglaise Nicola McLelland (University of Nottingham): sur la tradition allemande Danielle Trudeau (San Jos? State University): auteur du livre, Les Inventeurs du bon usage 1529-1647), Minuit 1992. Modalit?s : Les communications pourront se faire en fran?ais et en anglais. Les propositions de communication, qui ne doivent pas contenir plus de 350 mots, sont ? envoyer avant le 15 janvier par document attach? ? l'adresse ?lectronique suivante : ms693 at cam.ac.uk. Une r?ponse sera donn?e avant le 28 f?vrier 2009. Des informations sur le logement, le programme et les frais d'inscription seront mises sur le site web du colloque : http://www.mml.cam.ac.uk/french/observations/conference.html. Pour tout renseignement suppl?mentaire, contacter Magali Seijido: ms693 at cam.ac.uk ========================================================= Good usage and sociolinguistic variation: Diachronic perspectives and national traditions Murray Edwards College, University of Cambridge, 16-18 July 2009 Call for papers One of the most typical and recurrent themes in the history of linguistic thought in France is the desire to identify 'good usage'. This notion of 'good usage' - which today carries elitist, indeed even archaic, connotations - is often considered to consist of a collection of normative prescriptions which reflect a particular socio-cultural model. In this conference we wish to explore this question from a number of different angles: ? How did the notion of 'good usage' emerge and evolve? What factors have helped shape our conception of 'good usage'? How does it relate to different socio-cultural factors? In elaborating good usage grammarians and remarqueurs, from Tory to Vaugelas and his successors, have relied on observing different types of usage, whether literary, non-literary or oral. A typical problem is that of the choice of the social and geographical origin of the speakers selected to represent 'good usage'. According to the period, the relative importance attributed to written or spoken usages and socio-cultural features, whether religious or political, models of good usage have varied greatly and have relied variously on educated usage, the usage of the law courts or the King's court. The conference will focus on the period from the 16th century - period of the production of the first grammars of French - to the present day. ? We also wish to consider the extent to which works on 'good usage' are prescriptive: does the elaboration of 'good usage' always imply the reduction of variants? In 1689 the remarqueur Andry de Boisregard wrote: 'it is a common mistake amongst grammarians to imagine that as soon as something can be said in two different ways, we have to condemn one in order to authorize the other. Why can't they both be acceptable?'. If Vaugelas in his Remarques sur la langue Fran?oise (1647) often relied on a prescriptive model, at times he adopted a stance which is more 'sociolinguisitic' in orientation. In other words, he recognized the relative value of different usages and presented a nuanced analysis according to which different usages are more or less acceptable according to the context, register, style, etc. ? Following on from this, we would like to examine the extent to which texts which prescribe 'good usage' provide us with valuable information about sociolinguistic variation, especially for earlier periods in the history of the language. How far do these texts furnish us with information about regional and popular usages when they use expressions such as 'Don't say X ' or 'X is incorrect'? Do they constitute valuable sources for the study of 'non-standard' language, something which is often difficult to describe for periods for which no sociolinguistic surveys are available? When these texts refer to differences between written and spoken usages can we use them to build up a picture of spoken language for those periods for which no recordings are available? ? How is this tradition developing today? Is Grevisse's famous work, Le Bon Usage, typical of a certain genre? We should like to consider the direct and indirect influences between the different texts which make reference to 'good usage'. To what extent does Grevisse, described in one of the Prefaces to his work as 'the 20th-century Vaugelas', follow in the footsteps of the remarqueurs? To what extent do the different national traditions influence each other? ? We are therefore proposing to open up the discussion to include consideration of other national traditions in order to look at the different interpretations of this notion in relation to different languages. If our reflections on the topic began with the French tradition and particularly with the tradition of the remarqueurs, we would like to contextualize this discussion by considering the tradition of 'good usage' in other European countries. To what extent is it possible to identify common features which unite all the traditions? To what extent do 'good usage' grammarians adapt their discussion and analysis to the particular national context? Conference organization: This conference is taking place under the auspices of the AHRC funded project 'Observations on the French language' (Art and Humanities Research Council of Great Britain). The organizers are Wendy Ayres-Bennett and Magali Seijido, University of Cambridge. Organizing committee: Wendy Ayres-Bennett, University of Cambridge Philippe Caron, Universit? de Poitiers Jean-Marie Fournier, Universit? de Paris III Douglas Kibbee, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Francine Mazi?re, Universit? Paris XIII Gilles Siouffi, Universit? Paul Val?ry Montpellier III Invited speakers: Sylvie Archaimbault (Directrice du laboratoire d'histoire des th?ories linguistiques UMR 7597 - CNRS/Universit? Paris-Diderot) : on the Russian tradition Ingrid Tieken-Boon van Ostade (Universiteit Leiden): on the English tradition Nicola McLelland (University of Nottingham): on the German tradition Danielle Trudeau (San Jos? State University): author of Les Inventeurs du bon usage (1529-1647), Minuit 1992. Practical information: Papers may be given in French or English. Abstracts of papers, which should not exceed 350 words in length, should be sent by e-mail attachment by 15 January 2009 to the following address: ms693 at cam.ac.uk. Colleagues will be informed whether their paper has been accepted by 28 February 2009 at the latest. Practical details of the conference venue, accommodation and programme will be posted on the conference website in due course: http://www.mml.cam.ac.uk/french/observations/conference.html For any further information please contact Magali Seijido: ms693 at cam.ac.uk _______________________________________________ Histling-l mailing list Histling-l at mailman.rice.edu https://mailman.rice.edu/mailman/listinfo/histling-l From Nino.Amiridze at let.uu.nl Sat Nov 29 10:29:28 2008 From: Nino.Amiridze at let.uu.nl (Amiridze, Nino) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2008 11:29:28 +0100 Subject: CONF.-Language Contact and Change: Multiple and Bimodal Bilingual Minorities, Tartu 2009 Message-ID: [Apologies for multiple posting] Language Contact and Change: Multiple and Bimodal Bilingual Minorities Date: May 28, 2009 Location: Tartu, Estonia Workshop at the International Conference on Minority Languages XII (ICML 2009) Website: http://www.dipfilmod-suf.unifi.it/CMpro-v-p-236.html Contact: tartulcc at gmail.com The workshop aims at exploring the language contact and language change phenomena that characterize multiple linguistic minorities. It focuses on but is not confined to signed, Uralic and Caucasian languages. On the one hand, we intend to explore the situation of bimodal bilingualism. Data from changes in multi-modal bilingual contexts can lead to new insights into bilingualism, the typology and structure of languages, and language change and contact in general. Research into bimodal bilingualism can draw upon several methods and approaches developed for studying the bilingualism of other minority languages, and vice versa. On the other hand, we know that it is difficult to reach the bilingual individuals and communities that are deaf and belong to several linguistic minorities. Therefore, we approach the bimodal target via individual studies on minority languages. More specifically, we concentrate on the issue of language change in contact in the context of a typologically wide range of minority languages. We are looking for answers to questions such as the following: - How do deaf children of (hearing) parents belonging to linguistic minorities (e.g., Nganasan) communicate with the Deaf communities in their country and with their own parents? - How does their language change? - How can we test the change in the structure of the languages in contact in a uniform way? - What are the factors that influence the developments? - Can we work towards a typology? Invited keynote speakers: Csilla Bartha (hearing) (E?tv?s Lor?nd University, Budapest): The situation of the Deaf and national minorities in Hungary; ?sten Dahl (hearing) (Stockholm University): Contact induced changes in tense and aspect systems; Tatiana Davidenko (Deaf) (Moscow Centre for Deaf Studies and Bilingual Education): Sign Language Diversity in Post-Soviet Countries; Anna Komarova (hearing) (Moscow Centre for Deaf Studies and Bilingual Education): Development of Bilingual Education of the Deaf in Post-Soviet Countries; Gaurav Mathur (Deaf) (Gallaudet University): The relationship between agreement and finiteness in sign languages; Johanna Mesch (Deaf) (Stockholm University): Variations in tactile signing - the case of one-handed conversation; Helle Metslang (hearing) (University of Tartu): Changes in Finnish and Estonian tense and aspect; Christian Rathmann (Deaf) (Hamburg University): Minority Communities within German Deaf Community; Don Stilo (hearing) (Max Planck Institute, Leipzig): Introduction to an Atlas of the Araxes-Iran Linguistic Area. Check for updates, our interdisciplinary areas, and more research questions at http://www.dipfilmod-suf.unifi.it/CMpro-v-p-236.html Submission (deadline January 15, 2009, notification January 31, 2009). Abstracts (in English, maximum 2 pages, including data and references) have to be submitted electronically as portable document format (.pdf) or Microsoft Word (.doc) files via the EasyChair conference management system (https://www.easychair.org/login.cgi?conf=lcc09). If you do not have an EasyChair account, click on the button "I have no EasyChair Account" on that page and follow the instructions. When you receive a password, you can enter the site and upload your abstract. Organizers: Nino Amiridze, Utrecht University (The Netherlands) ?sten Dahl, University of Stockholm (Sweden) Anne Tamm, University of Florence (Italy) and Institute for the Estonian Language (Estonia) Manana Topadze, University of Pavia (Italy) Inge Zwitserlood, Radboud University Nijmegen (The Netherlands) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- _______________________________________________ Histling-l mailing list Histling-l at mailman.rice.edu https://mailman.rice.edu/mailman/listinfo/histling-l