[Lingtyp] CfP WS at SLE2017 "Exploring Other Patterns: Loan Verb Accommodation"

[Nino Amiridze]

(Apologies for cross-posting)



*Exploring Other Patterns: Loan Verb Accommodation*
Literature on verb borrowing distinguishes four major strategies of loan
verb accommodation (Wohlgemuth 2009): direct insertion, indirect insertion,
light verb strategy and paradigm insertion. Direct insertion means adapting
a form from the donor language into the recipient language without any
morphological modification:

(1) German
download-en
download-INF
''to download''

Indirect insertion implies a morphological modification tool, usually a
verbalizer:

(2) Modern Greek
tsek-ar-i
check-VBLZ-3SG
''(It) checks.''

Light verb strategy is the use of a native inflected light verb in
combination with a borrowed item:

(3) Korlai Portuguese
tray hedze
try do
''try''

Paradigm insertion is a rare case of borrowing of an entire paradigm, like
finite verbal paradigm borrowing from Russian in the mixed language Mednyi
Aleut (Thomason 1997).

A handful of verb borrowings, however, could not be assigned to one of the
four main accommodation strategies described by (Wohlgemuth 2009). They
were included by the author in a residual category ''other patterns'' and
were not further differentiated in the statistical analyses.

In this workshop we will be looking at the possible accommodation
techniques that do not represent either of the four strategies of loan verb
accommodation and, hence, would be classified as the ''other patterns''
category in the loan verb typology. The goal is to collect, analyze,
compare, and, possibly, classify the corresponding data from different
languages.

A relevant example is the use of a preverb as an accommodation strategy in
Georgian. Namely, preverb da- gets used with English loans as roots of
Georgian verb forms:

(4) Georgian
a. da-v-a-shear-eb.
PV-S1.SG-PRV-share-TS
''I will share it.''

Obviously, the use of a preverb in (4) is an example of borrowing that is
neither a paradigm insertion nor a light verb strategy. It is not a direct
insertion either, because the corresponding native Georgian verb forms
are associated with a different preverb (4 vs. 5). The loan roots are not
inserted directly into the verb frame consisting of native morphemes
(including preverb) but require the selection of a specific preverb – da-:

(5) Georgian
*da-v-a-ziar-eb / ga-v-a-ziar-eb.
PV-S1.SG-PRV-share-TS PV-S1.SG-PRV-share-TS
''I will share it.''

Note that the use of the preverb in (4) is not an indirect insertion, but
an indispensable part of the verb frame expressing tense and aspect.

The preverb da- occupies a special place among Georgian preverbs. By form,
they are simple and complex. The complex ones are formed via adding the
element mo- to the simple ones, to refer to the speaker-oriented movement.
The da- is different by lacking its complex counterpart (damo-) in Modern
Georgian. By form, one can consider the preverb to be impoverished. By
function, it became more grammaticalized, as it acquired an extra
grammatical function of expressing distributivity, unlike other preverbs
(Shanidze 1973).

For loan verb accommodation, Georgian uses a morpheme, which has no place
in the typology of loan verb accommodation strategies, which is a genuine
part of a verb frame and is highly grammaticalized. It is interesting to
find out whether and what types of loan verb accommodation strategies are
used cross-linguistically that do not fall into the four main categories of
the typology of loan verb accommodation strategies.

We invite submissions of abstracts for 20+10 min presentations to the email
address below, which should also include contact details (name,
affiliation, and email address). If approved, the workshop will form part
of the 50th Annual Meeting of the Societas Linguistica Europea (SLE) in
Zürich, 10–13 September 2017.

When describing the loan verb accommodation technique(s), characteristic to
the language(s) of your expertise, please make sure to argue why it does
not fit into the main four accommodation strategies described in
(Wohlgemuth 2009). Ideally the contributions for the workshop should
reflect on the form as well as function of the loan verb accommodation
technique, its etymology and grammaticalization status.


*Important Dates:*

1 November 2016: Deadline for submission of max. 300-word abstracts to the
workshop organizer at nino.amiridze at gmail.com
25 November 2016: Notification of initial acceptance and submission of the
workshop proposal to SLE.
25 December 2016: Notification of acceptance of workshop proposals from SLE
organizers to workshop organizers.
15 January 2017: Submission of full abstracts (500 words, excluding
references), taking into account any feedback from the initial submission,
for review by the organizers and SLE.
31 March 2017: Notification of acceptance of individual workshop
contributions.
10–13 September 2017: SLE conference.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lingtyp/attachments/20161007/e8e2bdec/attachment.htm>