27.3355, Calls: Historical Ling, Morphology/USA

[The LINGUIST List via LINGUIST]

LINGUIST List: Vol-27-3355. Tue Aug 23 2016. ISSN: 1069 - 4875.

Subject: 27.3355, Calls: Historical Ling, Morphology/USA

Moderators: linguist at linguistlist.org (Damir Cavar, Malgorzata E. Cavar)
Reviews: reviews at linguistlist.org (Anthony Aristar, Helen Aristar-Dry,
                                   Robert Coté, Michael Czerniakowski)
Homepage: http://linguistlist.org

*****************    LINGUIST List Support    *****************
                       Fund Drive 2016
                   25 years of LINGUIST List!
Please support the LL editors and operation with a donation at:
           http://funddrive.linguistlist.org/donate/

Editor for this issue: Kenneth Steimel <ken at linguistlist.org>
================================================================


Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2016 14:55:33
From: Canaan Breiss [cbreiss at ucla.edu]
Subject: Paradigm Leveling

 
Full Title: Paradigm Leveling 

Date: 03-Aug-2017 - 03-Aug-2017
Location: San Antonio, Texas, USA 
Contact Person: Canaan Breiss
Meeting Email: cbreiss at ucla.edu
Web Site: http://ichl23.utsa.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/Workshop-Paradigm-leveling.pdf 

Linguistic Field(s): Historical Linguistics; Morphology 

Meeting Description:

Paradigm leveling (also known as intraparadigmatic analogy), typically defined
as the reduction or removal of allomorphic alternation in an inflectional
paradigm (e.g., Zadok and Bat-el 2015), is one of the most prominent forms of
morphological change, as witnessed by the pervasive role that it has played in
the history of the Indo-European languages, for instance (Wheeler 1887, Paul
1920, Kuryłowicz 1945–1949, Schindler 1974, Strunk 1991, Fertig 2013). This
phenomenon raises fundamental questions about the organization of the lexicon,
the actuation of linguistic change, and the nature of the language faculty
itself. So it is no surprise that it continues to engender debate (Wetzels
1984, Prasada and Pinker 1993, Slioussar and Kholodilova 2013). Below we
outline the main threads of recent scholarship, as well as highlight aspects
that we think deserve more consideration. 

A central issue in the study of paradigm leveling is its cause. Many scholars
posit principles of uniform stem exponence (e.g., Humboldt’s Universal,
Output-Output Correspondence, Uniform Exponence) that eliminate allomorphy in
inflectional paradigms so as to achieve the alleged ideal of “one form, one
meaning” (Kenstowicz 1996, Benua 1997, McCarthy 1998, Steriade 2000, McCarthy
2005). By contrast, Garrett (2008) argues that leveling is in effect a type of
extension: what looks like the reduction of alternation within a paradigm is
in fact the extension of a pattern that already exists elsewhere in the
grammar (cf. Hill 2007). This analysis not only challenges long-held views of
paradigm uniformity, but also prompts new questions as to why speakers extend
patterns to new domains of a language. 

One aspect of this debate that has not received enough attention is the
phenomenon of partial leveling, according to which allomorphy in a paradigm is
reduced but not removed. Prima facie it appears to undermine the idea of
paradigm uniformity as an independent force of language change, since it
suggests that leveling is not an all-or-nothing phenomenon. But partial
leveling may in fact be a misnomer: it is possible that such cases are better
explained without reference to leveling. 

The second crucial component to the debate on paradigm uniformity is how we
are to account for the direction of leveling. Many have argued that privileged
forms of one stripe or another can be used to account for leveling (Wurzel
1984, 1987, 1990, 1998; Albright 2002a, 2002b, 2005, 2008, 2009, 2010; Bybee
2006, 2015). Whether such privileged forms can reliably be expected to form
pivots for analogical change is still an open question, however. It also
remains unclear exactly how the privileged form (or forms) should be
identified, in particular whether we should rely on markedness, frequency, or
some other property. The recent infusion of information-theoretic measures
into the study of morphology has the potential to provide new insights into
this issue (e.g., Bane 2008, Ackerman and Malouf 2009, 2013, Blevins 2013,
Milizia 2013, 2015).


Call for Papers:

Abstracts should be a maximum of two pages in length, including references,
and should be submitted via the conference Easy Chair link
(https://easychair.org/conferences/?conf=ichl23).  (If you have problems using
Easy Chair, please contact us at ichl23 at utsa.edu.) Authors may present a
maximum of two papers at ICHL23, whether single-authored or co-authored.
Please note that abstracts submitted for this workshop but not accepted there
will be automatically considered for inclusion in the general session.

Deadline for submission on Easy Chair:  December 1, 2016.
Notifications of acceptance will be sent by February 15, 2017.
Conference registration opens December 1, 2016




------------------------------------------------------------------------------

*****************    LINGUIST List Support    *****************
                       Fund Drive 2016
Please support the LL editors and operation with a donation at:
            http://funddrive.linguistlist.org/donate/

        Thank you very much for your support of LINGUIST!
 


----------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-27-3355	
----------------------------------------------------------
Visit LL's Multitree project for over 1000 trees dynamically generated
from scholarly hypotheses about language relationships:
          http://multitree.org/