[Lingtyp] correction: 2nd CfP Inheritance hierarchies in morphology

[erik.vangijn at uzh.ch]

Dear all, 

A correction on the 2nd CfP posted earlier today. There was a mistake concerning the deadline for abstracts, which is September 13th. For completeness sake: the corrected call (and apologies).

Rik

Call for papers

Inheritance hierarchies in morphology

10-11 November 2015

Universität Zürich

Keynote speakers: Geert Booij (Universiteit Leiden) and Dunstan Brown (University of York)

 
Inheritance hierarchies or inheritance networks are an important ingredient of a number of contemporary morphological theories, such as Construction Morphology (Booij 2010), Network Morphology (Brown & Hippisley 2012), and Word Grammar (Hudson 2006). Such an approach contrasts with rule-based morphological models such as Distributed Morphology (Halle & Marantz 1993)  Inheritance networks have been invoked to yield new perspectives on long-standing issues in morphology like productivity and regularity (Brown in press), holistic morphological typology (Brown 2010), multi-word units (Booij 2010).  However, much remains to be explored concerning the precise nature and architecture of these inheritance hierarchies. For instance, hierarchies of different types have been proposed (e.g. lexical class hierarchies, ontological hierarchies, syntactic hierarchies, and morphological hierarchies, but it is not clear what the restrictions (if any) on an inventory of hierarchies are or how the different hierarchies relate to or interact with each other.
The workshop will bring together linguists from several backgrounds to explore these and other questions related to inheritance networks in morphology. Questions we would like to address include (but are not limited to):
 
·         What level of abstractness is defendable or feasible in a hierarchical lexicon?

·         To what extent are different (types of) hierarchies comparable?

·         Is there psycholinguistic evidence for inheritance hierarchies?

·         Can inheritance hierarchies shed new light on diachronic processes?

·         In what way do inheritance-based approaches change our perspective on paradigmatic relations, both in word formation and in inflection?

·         Rule-based versus inheritance-based approaches: do we need a hierarchical lexicon?



Applicants are invited to send in an abstract of 1 page maximum before 13 September, 2015 to igm at ds.uzh.ch. Notification of acceptance will be given on September 30th.

If you have any questions, please contact us at the above address.

Anja Hasse, Per Baumann, Florian Sommer, Rik van Gijn, Patrick Mächler, Tania Paciaroni, Claudia Schmid (IG Morphologie, Universität Zürich)

The support of the PhD Program Linguistics of the University of Zurich is gratefully acknowledged.

 

References

Booij, Geert (2010). Construction Morphology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Brown, Dunstan (2010). “Morphological Typology”. In: Handbook of Linguistic Typology. Ed. by Jae Jung Song. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 487–503.
– (forthc.). “Defaults and overrides in morphological description”. In: The Cambridge Handbook of Morphology. Ed. by Andrew Hippisley and Gregory Stump. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Brown, Dunstan and Andrew Hippisley (2012). Network Morphology: A defaults-based theory of word structure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Halle, Morris and Alec Marantz (1993). “Distributed morphology and the pieces of inflection”. In: The view from building 20: essays in linguistics in honor of Sylvain Bromberger. Ed. by Kenneth Hale and Samuel J. Keyser. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press, pp. 111–176.
Hudson, Richard (2006). Language networks: The new Word Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lingtyp/attachments/20150827/99034349/attachment.htm>