30.2433, Calls: Morphology, Syntax/Belgium

[The LINGUIST List]

LINGUIST List: Vol-30-2433. Wed Jun 12 2019. ISSN: 1069 - 4875.

Subject: 30.2433, Calls: Morphology, Syntax/Belgium

Moderator: Malgorzata E. Cavar (linguist at linguistlist.org)
Student Moderator: Jeremy Coburn
Managing Editor: Becca Morris
Team: Helen Aristar-Dry, Everett Green, Sarah Robinson, Peace Han, Nils Hjortnaes, Yiwen Zhang, Julian Dietrich
Jobs: jobs at linguistlist.org | Conferences: callconf at linguistlist.org | Pubs: pubs at linguistlist.org

Homepage: http://linguistlist.org

Please support the LL editors and operation with a donation at:
           https://funddrive.linguistlist.org/donate/

Editor for this issue: Everett Green <everett at linguistlist.org>
================================================================


Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2019 22:42:31
From: Jeroen van Craenenbroeck [jeroen.vancraenenbroeck at kuleuven.be]
Subject: Suppletion, Allomorphy, and Syncretism

 
Full Title: Suppletion, Allomorphy, and Syncretism 
Short Title: BCGL 12 

Date: 16-Dec-2019 - 17-Dec-2019
Location: Brussels, Belgium 
Contact Person: Jeroen van Craenenbroeck
Meeting Email: bcgl12 at crissp.be
Web Site: http://www.crissp.be/bcgl-12-suppletion-allomorphy-and-syncretism/ 

Linguistic Field(s): Morphology; Syntax 

Call Deadline: 15-Sep-2019 

Meeting Description:

CRISSP is proud to present the twelfth installment of the Brussels Conference
on Generative Linguistics (BCGL), devoted to suppletion, allomorphy, and
syncretism.


Call for Papers:

Suppletion is a form of morphological irregularity whereby a change in a
grammatical category triggers a change in word form, with a different
(suppletive) root substituting for the normal one (e.g. in the past tense of
go, the irregular form went replaces the regular goed). Allomorphy is (in a
certain sense) the mirror image of suppletion, namely a change in the form of
an affix that is triggered by the presence of a particular type of root (e.g
with the root ox the irregular plural morpheme -en replaces the regular form
-s). Both suppletion and allomorphy raise the question of how to get the
correct distribution of forms: how to pair the correct root with the correct
allomorph, and how to correctly restrict the occurrence of the suppletive
roots. If all lexical insertion is done at terminal nodes, then suppletion and
allomorphy point to some 'action at a distance': a head α influences the
realisation of another head β (e.g. the V and the T node in the case of
go+PST, the N and the Num node in the case of ox+PL). This raises the question
of locality: how far apart can α and β be? A range of different views has been
proposed in the literature, such as the claim that α and β are local if no
overt node intervenes (Embick, 2010; Calabrese, 2015), or if they form a span
(Abels & Muriungi, 2008; Svenonius, 2016; Merchant, 2015; Haugen & Siddiqi,
2016), among many other proposals.

Syncretism is the identity of forms across different (but related) grammatical
categories (e.g. the pronoun you is both 2SG and 2PL). Syncretism is widely
believed to be informative about the un- derlying grammatical system, across a
variety of approaches, whether typological (Haspelmath, 2003), formal (Caha,
2009; Bobaljik & Sauerland, 2013), or paradigm-based (McCreight & Chvany,
1991; Plank, 1991; Johnston, 1996; Wiese, 2008).

We welcome contributions addressing suppletion, allomorphy, and/or syncretism
in various formal models (Distributed Morphology, the Exo-Skeletal Model,
Minimalist Morphology, Nanosyntax, etc.). Possible topics include, but are not
limited to, the following:

- What is the mechanism by which roots and affixes select one other? How are
different classes of roots selecting different allomorphs represented in the
lexicon? Can root size determine the selection of the allomorph (Caha et al.,
2019)?
- What is the boundary (if any) between suppletion and phonological
readjustment of a root ,e.g. in the pair give-gave (Halle & Marantz, 1993;
Embick & Marantz, 2008; Borer, 2003, 2013)?
- Is root suppletion restricted to the functional part of the vocabulary, as
claimed in Marantz (1997), or does it apply more broadly, as claimed by Haugen
& Siddiqi (2013); Harley (2014) (but see Borer 2014)?
- Is there a prefix/suffix asymmetry in allomorphy, and if so, why (Moskal,
2013a)?
- Are there ways to derive *ABA patterns that do not rely on strict
containment, as suggested in
Bobaljik & Sauerland (2018); Caha (2017b)?
- Which approach to deriving syncretism yields the best results, the one in
terms of underspecification (i.e. the Subset Principle; Halle 1997), or the
one in terms of overspecification (the Superset Principle; Starke 2009), or
perhaps other types of approaches (e.g. McCreight & Chvany 1991)?
- What are the locality conditions governing suppletion, allomorphy, and
syncretism?

Invited Speakers:

- Heidi Harley (U of Tucson, Arizona) 
- Hagit Borer (QMUL, London)
- Michal Starke (Masaryk U, Brno)

The full call for papers and submission link can be found at: 
http://www.crissp.be/bcgl-12-suppletion-allomorphy-and-syncretism/call-for-pap
ers/




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

***************************    LINGUIST List Support    ***************************
 The 2019 Fund Drive is under way! Please visit https://funddrive.linguistlist.org
  to find out how to donate and check how your university, country or discipline
     ranks in the fund drive challenges. Or go directly to the donation site:
               https://iufoundation.fundly.com/the-linguist-list-2019

                        Let's make this a short fund drive!
                Please feel free to share the link to our campaign:
                    https://funddrive.linguistlist.org/donate/
 


----------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-30-2433	
----------------------------------------------------------