21.3471, Calls: Historical Ling, Syntax, Pragmatics, Germanic, Slavic/Germany

Tue Aug 31 13:53:20 UTC 2010

LINGUIST List: Vol-21-3471. Tue Aug 31 2010. ISSN: 1068 - 4875.

Subject: 21.3471, Calls: Historical Ling, Syntax, Pragmatics, Germanic, Slavic/Germany

Moderators: Anthony Aristar, Eastern Michigan U <aristar at linguistlist.org>
            Helen Aristar-Dry, Eastern Michigan U <hdry at linguistlist.org>
Reviews: Monica Macaulay, U of Wisconsin-Madison  
Eric Raimy, U of Wisconsin-Madison  
Joseph Salmons, U of Wisconsin-Madison  
Anja Wanner, U of Wisconsin-Madison  
       <reviews at linguistlist.org> 

Homepage: http://linguistlist.org/

The LINGUIST List is funded by Eastern Michigan University, 
and donations from subscribers and publishers.

Editor for this issue: Di Wdzenczny <di at linguistlist.org>

LINGUIST is pleased to announce the launch of an exciting new feature:  
Easy Abstracts! Easy Abs is a free abstract submission and review facility 
designed to help conference organizers and reviewers accept and process 
abstracts online.  Just go to: http://www.linguistlist.org/confcustom, 
and begin your conference customization process today! With Easy Abstracts, 
submission and review will be as easy as 1-2-3!


Date: 30-Aug-2010
From: Augustin Speyer < speyer at staff.uni-marburg.de >
Subject: The German Middle Field: Comparative and Diachronic

-------------------------Message 1 ---------------------------------- 
Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2010 09:51:29
From: Augustin Speyer [speyer at staff.uni-marburg.de]
Subject: The German Middle Field: Comparative and Diachronic

E-mail this message to a friend:

Full Title: The German Middle Field: Comparative and Diachronic 

Date: 23-Feb-2011 - 25-Feb-2011
Location: Goettingen, Germany 
Contact Person: Augustin Speyer
Meeting Email: speyer at staff.uni-marburg.de

Linguistic Field(s): Historical Linguistics; Pragmatics; Syntax 

Language Family(ies): Germanic; Slavic Subgroup 

Call Deadline: 06-Sep-2010 

Meeting Description:

This workshop is part of the 33rd Annual Meeting of the Deutsche 
Gesellschaft für Sprachwissenschaft (DGfS). Organizers: Kristine Bentzen 
(Tromsø), Roland Hinterhölzl (HU Berlin/Venice), Augustin Speyer 
(Marburg), Luka Szucsich (HU Berlin). 

We will focus on pragmatically/semantically triggered word order variation 
(WOV) in the middle field (MF) in German (= scrambling) from a 
comparative and diachronic perspective, addressing the issue of how 
scrambling in German is similar to and different from related phenomena in 
other languages. 

In this respect, some of the most urgent questions are the following:

According to Haider & Rosengren (1998), scrambling should be restricted to 
OV-languages with verb-class specific base orders.

A) What is the nature of word order variation in Slavic and Scandinavian 
languages, which are generally analysed as VO-languages?

In Mainland Scandinavian, object shift is dependent on verb movement, 
restricting WOV to the postverbal field. Yiddish, which has preserved mixed 
OV/VO word orders, allows for WOV only in the preverbal field.

B) What triggers object shift? Which factors decide whether object shift is 
restricted to pronouns as in Mainland Scandinavian or may also target full 
DPs as in Icelandic?

C) Do the Slavic languages show WOV only in the preverbal field or also in 
the postverbal field? Is word order freedom in Slavic similar to word order 
freedom in German or is it of a different nature?

D) Is there a connection between the side of WOV and the head 
complement parameter or which other factors, including prosody could be 
held responsible for this property?

Like in modern Yiddish, in OHG and OE (languages with mixed OV/VO 
order) discourse-given constituents moved to the top of the MF. Except for 
OE (cf. Pintzuk & Taylor 2006), little is known about how indefinite NPs 
quantificational phrases are ordered with respect to each other and with 
respect to the verb in older Germanic.

E) Are indefinite pronouns and indefinite NPs placed differently in OHG as
definites are?

In modern German genitive objects and dative objects of Acc-Dat-verbs may 
not be scrambled.

F) How behave genitive objects in OHG and MHG? How do the different 
case arguments in Slavic fit in? 

G) Is there a connection between scrambling of NPs and the aspect type of 
the verb in Slavic as there is a connection between scrambling and the 
(in)definiteness of argument NPs in German?

Invited speakers include Hubert Haider (Salzburg) and Helmut Weiß 

Call For Papers

Invited speakers are Maia Andréasson (Göteborg), Hubert Haider 
(Salzburg), Natalie Slioussar (Utrecht/St. Petersburg) and Helmut Weiß 

Abstract Length: 1 page incl. references, plus one page for graphs, if 
Abstract Format: anonymous, prf or doc (not docx)
Notification of Acceptance: Sept. 20, 2010

LINGUIST List: Vol-21-3471	


More information about the Linguist mailing list