27.71, Calls: Historical Ling, Morphology, Semantics, Syntax, Typology/Italy

[The LINGUIST List via LINGUIST]

LINGUIST List: Vol-27-71. Tue Jan 05 2016. ISSN: 1069 - 4875.

Subject: 27.71, Calls: Historical Ling, Morphology, Semantics, Syntax, Typology/Italy

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

*****************    LINGUIST List Support    *****************
                   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: Ashley Parker <ashley at linguistlist.org>
================================================================


Date: Tue, 05 Jan 2016 11:28:40
From: Alessandro Zucchi [alessandro.zucchi at unimi.it]
Subject: Italian Linguistic Society - Workshop on Subordination

 
Full Title: Italian Linguistic Society - Workshop on Subordination 
Short Title: SLI - Subordination 

Date: 22-Sep-2016 - 24-Sep-2016
Location: Milan, Italy 
Contact Person: Carlo Geraci
Meeting Email: carlo.geraci76 at gmail.com
Web Site: http://sites.google.com/site/ijnsignlanguagegroup/home/events/sli-2016-workshop 

Linguistic Field(s): Historical Linguistics; Morphology; Semantics; Syntax; Typology 

Call Deadline: 20-Feb-2016 

Meeting Description:

The study of subordination raised the interest of researchers in several disciplines of linguistics. Within the typological and functionalist framework, Cristofaro (2003) and Dixon & Aikhenvald (2006) illustrate the various strategies of subordination and complementation. In formal linguistics, Adger (2013) and Cecchetto and Donati (2015) focussed on the contrast between the structural notion of complement and adjunct within the domain of clausal modification in the DP. In historical linguistics, Kiparsky (1995) argues that proto-indoeuropean does not have sentential embedding, while Davison (2009) claims that Sanskrit does not have subordination. In sign language, complement clauses do not appear in argument position (Geraci, Cecchetto & Zucchi 2008, Geraci & Aristodemo, in press). More generally, in these languages the absence of manual signs marking syntactic subordination and the difficulty of a clear categorization of the non-manual components make particularly hard the identifi
 cation of specific subordination markers (Pfau & Steinbach in press). Finally, recent controversial findings in Amazonian languages like Pirahã raised the issue of whether genuine subordination is present in those languages (Everett 2005 and Nevins, Pesetsky & Rodrigues 2009).

Call for Papers: 

We invite contributions on the topic of subordination in spoken and/or sign languages. All approaches are welcome (descriptives, formal, comparative or experimental).

Abstracts (2 pages max.) should be sent to: ijnsignlanguagegroup at gmail.com.
Abstract template available at: 
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B0CEc-MQUZnoVDdacHJzMEJQWEk/view




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

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


----------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-27-71	
----------------------------------------------------------
Visit LL's Multitree project for over 1000 trees dynamically generated
from scholarly hypotheses about language relationships:
          http://multitree.org/