[Lingtyp] Lingtyp Digest, Vol 134, Issue 2
Alonso Vasquez
alonsovasquez at ucsb.edu
Tue Nov 4 19:24:56 UTC 2025
*Alonso Vásquez Aguilar, Ph.D.*
El mar, 4 de nov de 2025, 8:01 a.m., <
lingtyp-request at listserv.linguistlist.org> escribió:
> Send Lingtyp mailing list submissions to
> lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> https://listserv.linguistlist.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> lingtyp-request at listserv.linguistlist.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> lingtyp-owner at listserv.linguistlist.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Lingtyp digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. about Survival International (Pier Marco Bertinetto)
> 2. Re: about Survival International (Jesse Gates)
> 3. Call for Papers: FASAL-16 (Manetta, Emily)
> 4. Re: Partial pro-drop (Cat Butz)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2025 16:59:59 +0100
> From: Pier Marco Bertinetto <piermarco.bertinetto at sns.it>
> To: "list, typology" <lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>
> Subject: [Lingtyp] about Survival International
> Message-ID:
> <
> CABoVV5_7a8A2R+3jyq_+Y19R7nb8pJAmjOSUHCZw5U_HaNka_Q at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Dear All,
> with permission from Johan (van der Auwera, of course), I would like to
> send the following message:
>
> Survival International, an Indigenous rights charity I follow, just
> launched a new campaign to support uncontacted Indigenous peoples all over
> the world. 95% of uncontacted peoples are threatened by extractive
> industries. I have sent an email pressuring industry standards bodies to
> include their rights into their charters. If you can, please do it too:
>
> https://svlint.org/actnow
> The typologists community looks like the right target for this initiative
> to spread.
> Best regards
> Pier Marco Bertinetto
>
>
> --
>
> =========================================================
> |||| Pier Marco Bertinetto
> ------ professore emerito
> /////// Scuola Normale Superiore
> ------- p.za dei Cavalieri 7
> /////// I-56126 PISA
> ------- phone: +39 050 509111
> ///////
> ------- HOME
> /////// via Matteotti 197
> ------- I-55049 Viareggio LU
> /////// phone: +39 0584 597206
> ------- cell.: +39 368 3830251
> ===============================================================
> editor of "Italian Journal of Linguistics"
> webpage <https://www.ae-info.org/ae/Member/Bertinetto_Pier>
> ===============================================================
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lingtyp/attachments/20251103/f84107b0/attachment-0001.htm
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2025 07:35:12 +0800
> From: Jesse Gates <stauskad at gmail.com>
> To: Pier Marco Bertinetto <piermarco.bertinetto at sns.it>
> Cc: typology list <lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>
> Subject: Re: [Lingtyp] about Survival International
> Message-ID: <EE7A7F8E-07F7-414C-B588-ABC97FC74304 at gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lingtyp/attachments/20251104/6103d59b/attachment-0001.htm
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2025 19:13:48 +0000
> From: "Manetta, Emily" <EMANETTA at mailbox.sc.edu>
> To: "lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org"
> <lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>
> Subject: [Lingtyp] Call for Papers: FASAL-16
> Message-ID:
> <
> CH2PR19MB35735F737B0226BBC203FBF8E1C7A at CH2PR19MB3573.namprd19.prod.outlook.com
> >
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> Call for Papers
>
> Formal Approaches to South Asian Languages 16
>
>
> Date: 10-Apr-2026 - 11-Apr-2026 (in person); April 18 (online)
> Location: Columbia, South Carolina, USA
> Contact: FASAL-16
> Contact Email: fasal16usc at gmail.com<mailto:fasal16usc at gmail.com>
> Meeting URL: https://sites.google.com/view/fasal16/home
>
> Submission Deadline: 05-Jan-2026
>
> Formal Approaches to South Asian Languages 16 (FASAL 16) will be hosted by
> the Linguistics Program at the University of South Carolina.
>
> FASAL reaches out to all researchers that do high-quality linguistic study
> of any South Asian language adopting a wide range of methodologies. We
> welcome submissions on under-researched and/or endangered South Asian
> languages in areas including, but not limited to phonetics, phonology,
> morphology, syntax, semantics, pragmatics, computational linguistics,
> psycholinguistics, and historical linguistics. We particularly encourage
> submissions from researchers located in South Asia.
>
> In the interest of including as many colleagues from around the world as
> possible, this year FASAL will have both an in-person component on April
> 10-11, 2026 at the USC campus in Columbia, SC and a fully online component
> on April 18, 2026. Researchers submitting abstracts should indicate for
> which component(s) they are would like to be considered.
>
> Mini-workshop:
> This year FASAL will feature a special mini-workshop focused on the
> prosody-syntax interface. Recent work both within and outside South Asian
> languages has productively addressed interface phenomena such as focus and
> phrasal prominence, question intonation, ellipsis, and word order. We
> welcome research advancing these or any other topics of relevance to
> prosody-syntax connections in any South Asian language.
>
> Submission Site: https://easyabs.linguistlist.org/conference/FASAL-16/
>
> Invited Speakers:
> Troy Messick (Rutgers)
> Diti Bhadra (University of Minnesota)
>
>
> --
> Emily Manetta, PhD (she/her)
> Professor of Linguistics
> Director, Program in Linguistics
> University of South Carolina
>
> 616 HOB - 1620 College Street - Columbia SC - 29208
> emanetta at mailbox.sc.edu<mailto:emanetta at mailbox.sc.edu>
> https://sites.google.com/view/emilymanetta/home
>
>
>
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lingtyp/attachments/20251103/f1973221/attachment-0001.htm
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2025 12:34:32 +0100
> From: Cat Butz <Cat.Butz at hhu.de>
> To: Hartmut Haberland <hartmut at ruc.dk>
> Cc: Juergen Bohnemeyer <jb77 at buffalo.edu>, volker.gast at uni-jena.de,
> Sebastian Nordhoff <sebastian.nordhoff at glottotopia.de>, Greville
> Corbett <g.corbett at surrey.ac.uk>,
> lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
> Subject: Re: [Lingtyp] Partial pro-drop
> Message-ID: <7884dfa9182a8301feb91162ef2232da at hhu.de>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
>
> Thank you, Volker, for pointing that out.
>
> To talk more about Japanese pronouns (can't speak on any other languages
> of the area in this regard): In polite contexts, second person pronouns
> aren't simply dropped, but typically replaced by the addressee's name.
>
> I'm also going to throw in at this point that many of the most rude
> second person pronouns in contemporary Japanese famously have evolved
> from those that used to be the most respectful. Spanish "usted" also
> comes to my mind in this context, so this "negative drift" doesn't seem
> to be uncommon.
>
> I'm going to tag out of this discussion now, but it's been very
> interesting. Second person pronoun sociolinguistics are definitely
> pretty complex.
>
> Warmest,
> ---
> Cat Butz (she)
> HHU D?sseldorf
> General Linguistics
>
>
> Am 31/10/2025 21:48, schrieb Hartmut Haberland:
> > Grev Corbett and I had an off-list thread of discussion which I attach
> > here (with his consent).
> >
> > The disrespect thread of argument is intriguing, but there are a few
> > remaining questions. I wonder how formality/informality on the one
> > hand and politeness/rudeness on the other are related (I wish we could
> > get rid of the terminological misfoster ?(im)politeness?).
> > Rudeness seems to imply or at least to prefer informality while
> > formality does not necessarily imply politeness or respect. But then
> > you have cases like German _gef?lligst_ lit. ?pleasingly? which
> > started as a politeness marker (?s?il vous plait?) and is now
> > clearly a rudeness marker (as in the equivalent of ?could you take
> > your bloody feet off the seat?, said by a train conductor). The
> > Danish [+V] address form _De_ has been said now only to be used
> > towards the former (now abdicated) Queen (but not her son, now the
> > King), much older people than oneself, very expensive shops and
> > especially letters of complaint. The latter means that a politeness
> > marker can become a distance marker and in the next step a rudeness
> > marker.
> >
> > Hartmut
> >
> > Fra: Lingtyp <lingtyp-bounces at listserv.linguistlist.org> P? vegne af
> > Juergen Bohnemeyer via Lingtyp
> > Sendt: 31. oktober 2025 16:45
> > Til: volker.gast at uni-jena.de; Sebastian Nordhoff
> > <sebastian.nordhoff at glottotopia.de>; Cat Butz <Cat.Butz at hhu.de>
> > Cc: lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
> > Emne: Re: [Lingtyp] Partial pro-drop
> >
> > Dear all ? (i) I love this thread! (ii) My hypothesis regarding the
> > confrontational effect is that it might be first and foremost
> > register-based. I think these sentences with elided addressee pronouns
> > are super colloquial. Colloquial can mean blunt (due to the nexus b/w
> > formality and respect), and thus confrontational, but can also index
> > intimacy, as in Volker?s examples.
> >
> > (iii) Also worth considering: In Japanese, Korean, and many languages
> > of the SEA area, SAP pronouns are (as is well-known) conventionally
> > avoided for politeness reasons. So we seem to get the inverse
> > distribution of what we?ve been talking about in German. This,
> > however, seems to be a function of the very act of address creating a
> > greater danger of face loss (for both interlocutors) in these cultures
> > than it does in German culture.
> >
> > (iv) Sebastian?s examples made me think of a superficially similar
> > construction in English, a type of tag question in which an addressee
> > pronoun is omitted from the main clause but is included in the tag.
> > I?m not quite sure whether the main verb should be finite, as in
> > (1), or non-finite, as in (2) - I think both forms are possible?
> >
> > * Went to the library, did you?
> >
> > * Go to the library, did you?
> >
> > Tags are of course also often used confrontationally, although in
> > (1)-(2), the effect may be merely a mild sense of skepticism on the
> > part of the speaker.
> >
> > Best ? Juergen
> >
> > Juergen Bohnemeyer (He/Him)
> > Professor, Department of Linguistics
> > University at Buffalo
> >
> > Office: 642 Baldy Hall, UB North Campus
> > Mailing address: 609 Baldy Hall, Buffalo, NY 14260
> > Phone: (716) 645 0127
> > Fax: (716) 645 3825
> > Email: jb77 at buffalo.edu
> > Web: http://www.acsu.buffalo.edu/~jb77/ [1]
> >
> > Office hours Tu/Th 3:30-4:30pm in 642 Baldy or via Zoom (Meeting ID
> > 585 520 2411; Passcode Hoorheh)
> >
> > There?s A Crack In Everything - That?s How The Light Gets In
> > (Leonard Cohen)
> >
> > --
> >
> > From: Lingtyp <lingtyp-bounces at listserv.linguistlist.org> on behalf of
> > Volker Gast via Lingtyp <lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>
> > Date: Friday, October 31, 2025 at 10:28
> > To: Sebastian Nordhoff <sebastian.nordhoff at glottotopia.de>, Cat Butz
> > <Cat.Butz at hhu.de>
> > Cc: lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
> > <lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>
> > Subject: Re: [Lingtyp] Partial pro-drop
> >
> > Hi both,
> >
> > There's some literature on "Vorfeldellipse", "pronoun zapping" etc. in
> > German, e.g. by N. Fries, P. Auer and A. W?llstein. I don't think
> > that they go into the pragmatic or sociolinguistic details though.
> >
> > The "disrespect hypothesis" can't be quite right, as it's quite common
> > and even conventional to say things like
> >
> > "Bist'n Schatz" 'You're a treasure'
> >
> > or
> >
> > "Bist doch mein bester Freund." 'You're my best friend after all.'
> >
> > I rather suspect a frequency effect. That could be material for an
> > interesting corpus study. (P. Auer notices that pronoun ellipsis seems
> > to be ruled out with plural pronouns of the 1st or 2nd person.)
> >
> > Best,
> > Volker
> >
> > Sent from MailDroid [2]
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Cat Butz via Lingtyp <lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>
> > To: Sebastian Nordhoff <sebastian.nordhoff at glottotopia.de>
> > Cc: lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
> > Sent: Fri, 31 Oct 2025 12:38
> > Subject: Re: [Lingtyp] Partial pro-drop
> >
> > I think this is getting a lot closer to the core now. Dropping a 2nd
> > person pronoun probably carries disrespectful semantics, which is why
> > it's associated with confrontation. One more example that came to my
> > mind is "Kannst gehen.", which doesn't necessarily express
> > confrontation, but certainly not respect either. Same for dropping the
> > honorific "Sie" (even though this is morphosyntactically 3rd person,
> > it
> > just keeps getting more interesting), with some kind of laconic army
> > general saying something like "K?nnen abtreten." to dismiss a
> > low-ranking soldier.
> >
> > ---
> > Cat Butz (she)
> > HHU D?sseldorf
> > General Linguistics
> >
> > Am 30/10/2025 17:06 [3], schrieb Sebastian Nordhoff via Lingtyp:
> >> On 10/30/25 15:30 [4], Cat Butz via Lingtyp wrote:
> >>> I was just doing some German introspection and first had similar
> >>> thoughts about pro-drop only being acceptable in the 1st and 3rd
> >>> person, but then remembered a scene from like 15 [5] years ago
> > where we
> >>> were once harassed by two young dudes and someone in our group
> >>> unfortunately let herself get dragged into an argument with them.
> > (CW:
> >>> antisemitism) At one point one of them then attempted to insult her
> >>> with the phrase "Bist ne J?din, Mann".
> >>>
> >>> Also, for some reason, 2nd person pro-drop in German seems to be
> >>> acceptable in presumptive contexts and when followed by an
> >>> interrogative interjection (?): "Hast wohl Angst, h??", "Wart
> > gestern
> >>> anscheinend zu lange weg, was?" etc. etc.
> >>
> >> Dear all,
> >> I think there is some confrontational subtext if the second person
> >> pronoun is dropped, which I cannot fully pin down. It also works
> >> without presumption and interrogation
> >>
> >> (1) Kommst zu sp?t und willst dann noch Kaffee!
> >> come.2PL too late and want.2SG then still coffee
> >> 'You arrive late and then you (even dare) want coffee!'
> >>
> >> This could also explain the encounter you mention above. Funnily
> >> enough, the second clause has to be present, without it the
> > utterance
> >> makes no sense.
> >>
> >> Best
> >> Sebastian
> >>
> >>>
> >>> Pretty interesting actually. Let me know if you need glossing for
> > the
> >>> examples.
> >>>
> >>> Warmest,
> >>> ---
> >>> Cat Butz (she)
> >>> HHU D?sseldorf
> >>> General Linguistics
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Am 30/10/2025 10:29 [6], schrieb Hartmut Haberland via Lingtyp:
> >>>> There is a little studied, but admittedly marginal, phenomenon in
> >>>> German which could be considered pro-drop (but see a few remarks
> > in
> >>>> Haberland and Heltoft 1992 [7]). Consider this question?answer
> > pair:
> >>>>
> >>>> Was macht Claudia? ? isst eine Pizza.
> >>>>
> >>>> (literally: What is Claudia doing? ? is eating a pizza.)
> >>>>
> >>>> Now for me, this works perfectly also without a first person
> > subject:
> >>>>
> >>>> Was machst du? ? esse eine Pizza.
> >>>>
> >>>> but not without a second person subject:
> >>>>
> >>>> Was mache ich? ? isst eine Pizza.
> >>>>
> >>>> Now one could say that this is because of the syncretism between
> > 2nd
> >>>> and 3rd person present indicative singular forms of verbs with
> > stems
> >>>> ending in [s], [z] or [?] (as _essen_ (as well as _mixen_),
> > _lessen_
> >>>> and _mischen_), which have _-t_ rather than _-st_ in the 2nd
> > person
> >>>> singular (for phonetic reasons).
> >>>>
> >>>> But even for verbs with stems not ending in sibilants [s], [z] or
> >>>> [?], an omitted 2nd person subject sounds at least doubtful to
> > me:
> >>>>
> >>>> Wo bin ich? */?? bist in der K?che.
> >>>>
> >>>> (Where am I? Are in the kitchen.)
> >>>>
> >>>> Here there is no syncretism in the verb that could block the
> > omission
> >>>> of the subject.
> >>>>
> >>>> Even in the plural:
> >>>>
> >>>> Wo sind wir? */? ? seid in der K?che.
> >>>>
> >>>> A possible explanation is that the reason could be the awkwardness
> > of
> >>>> the question in the first place: people normally know where they
> > are,
> >>>> what they are eating etc. and do not normally have to ask somebody
> >>>> else to tell them. So here the explanation would be pragmatics,
> > not
> >>>> phonetics.
> >>>>
> >>>> Hartmut Haberland
> >>>>
> >>>> Hartmut Haberland and Lars Heltoft 1992 [7]. Universals,
> > explanations and
> >>>> pragmatics. In: Michel Kefer and Johan van der Auwera, eds.
> > _Grammar
> >>>> and meaning._ Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 17-26 [8]
> >>>>
> >>>> Fra: Lingtyp <lingtyp-bounces at listserv.linguistlist.org> P? vegne
> > af
> >>>> Omri Amiraz via Lingtyp
> >>>> Sendt: 30 [4]. oktober 2025 09 [9]:24 [10]
> >>>> Til: Mira Ariel <mariel at tauex.tau.ac.il>; Juergen Bohnemeyer
> >>>> <jb77 at buffalo.edu>
> >>>> Cc: lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
> >>>> Emne: Re: [Lingtyp] Partial pro-drop
> >>>>
> >>>> Dear Juergen and Mira,
> >>>>
> >>>> It is certainly true that SAPs tend to be more accessible.
> > However,
> >>>> we?re approaching this from a variationist perspective, focusing
> > on
> >>>> speakers? choices in contexts where the referent is already
> >>>> accessible, rather than across all clause types. In that sense,
> > the
> >>>> alternation we?re interested in is essentially between
> > independent
> >>>> pronouns and zero (possibly in combination with verbal subject
> >>>> marking).
> >>>>
> >>>> I?m not sure that information structure alone can account for
> > the
> >>>> obligatory use of subject pronouns in these cases. For instance,
> > in
> >>>> Hebrew past tense clauses, the independent pronoun does not add
> > any
> >>>> information beyond what is already encoded by verbal agreement. So
> > I
> >>>> don?t really understand why it is used, except in cases of focus
> > or
> >>>> contrast, as Juergen mentioned.
> >>>>
> >>>> I also agree that ambiguity avoidance might not be the main
> > factor,
> >>>> though it may play a role in particular contexts and perhaps
> > motivate
> >>>> broader developments.
> >>>>
> >>>> Many thanks again for the references!
> >>>>
> >>>> Best,
> >>>> Omri
> >>>>
> >>>> On Thu, Oct 30 [4], 2025 [11] at 4:59 [12]?AM Mira Ariel
> > <mariel at tauex.tau.ac.il>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> Hi Omri,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> * I agree with Juergen. Since SAPs tend to be more accessible
> >>>>> their coding is shorter (High accessibility > shorter referential
> >>>>> forms). This is why they are more often either 0 marked or else
> >>>>> their pronouns are cliticized, sometimes leading to the rise of
> >>>>> agreement markers for 1st/2nd persons only on the verb. This
> >>>>> explains the findings for Hebrew, I suggested. See:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 1998 [13]. Three grammaticalization paths for the development of
> > person
> >>>>> verbal agreement in Hebrew. In: Discourse and cognition: Bridging
> >>>>> the gap, edited by J.-P. Koenig. CSLI Publications
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 2000 [14]. The development of person agreement markers: From
> > pronouns to
> >>>>> higher accessibility markers. In: Usage-based models of language,
> >>>>> edited by M. Barlow and S. Kemmer
> >>>>>
> >>>>> * In my experience, avoiding ambiguity is not a very strong
> >>>>> motivation for language change, because context does miracles.
> > Maybe
> >>>>> not in the case of I versus you versus 3rd person?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> * There is no reason to think that a single factor explains all
> >>>>> 0/pronoun alternations in all languages.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Best,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Mira (Ariel)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> From: Lingtyp <lingtyp-bounces at listserv.linguistlist.org> On
> > Behalf
> >>>>> Of Juergen Bohnemeyer via Lingtyp
> >>>>> Sent: Wednesday, October 29 [6], 2025 10 [15]:04 [16] PM
> >>>>> To: Omri Amiraz <Omri.Amiraz at mail.huji.ac.il>;
> >>>>> lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
> >>>>> Subject: Re: [Lingtyp] Partial pro-drop
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Dear Omri et al. ? I might look at this from a slightly
> > different
> >>>>> perspective. Suppose you change the question as follows:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> ?Among indexes in pro-drop languages (i.e., languages in which
> >>>>> co-nominals are syntactically optional), indexes of which person
> > are
> >>>>> more/less frequently accompanied by a co-nominal??
> >>>>>
> >>>>> If you put it like that, it seems rather obvious to me that the
> >>>>> answer is that SAP indexes are less frequently accompanied by
> >>>>> co-nominals. Why? Because SAPs are inherently maximally
> > accessible,
> >>>>> whereas non-SAPs may or may not be accessible - a significant
> >>>>> percentage of them is even indefinite.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Plus, in many languages (or so it seems to me), there aren?t
> > even
> >>>>> great choices for nominals to accompany SAP indexes. One might
> > use
> >>>>> independent pronouns, but only in contexts in which this makes
> >>>>> sense, such as for contrastive topics and under focus.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I can?t think of a good reference for this off the top of my
> > head.
> >>>>> Not too many authors have looked at argument realization in
> > strictly
> >>>>> head-marking languages, and those that have, like Bohnemeyer &
> > Tilbe
> >>>>> (2021 [17]), didn?t break down results by person. Sorry.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Best ? Juergen
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Bohnemeyer, J. & T. J. Tilbe. (2021 [17]). Argument realization
> > and
> >>>>> discourse status in Yucatec, a purely head-marking language.
> >>>>> _Amerindia_ 43 [18]: 249-289 [19].
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Juergen Bohnemeyer (He/Him)
> >>>>> Professor, Department of Linguistics
> >>>>> University at Buffalo
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Office: 642 [20] Baldy Hall, UB North Campus
> >>>>> Mailing address: 609 [21] Baldy Hall, Buffalo, NY 14260 [22]
> >>>>> Phone: (716) 645 0127 [23]
> >>>>> Fax: (716) 645 3825 [24]
> >>>>> Email: jb77 at buffalo.edu
> >>>>> Web: http://www.acsu.buffalo.edu/~jb77/ [1]
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Office hours Tu/Th 3:30-4 [25]:30 [4]pm in 642 [20] Baldy or via
> > Zoom (Meeting ID
> >>>>> 585 520 2411 [26]; Passcode Hoorheh)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> There?s A Crack In Everything - That?s How The Light Gets In
> >>>>> (Leonard Cohen)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> -- From: Lingtyp <lingtyp-bounces at listserv.linguistlist.org> on
> >>>>> behalf
> >>>>> of Omri Amiraz via Lingtyp <lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>
> >>>>> Date: Wednesday, October 29 [6], 2025 [11] at 11 [27]:38 [28]
> >>>>> To: lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
> >>>>> <lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>
> >>>>> Subject: [Lingtyp] Partial pro-drop
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Dear colleagues,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> We are conducting a study on the inverse correlation between the
> >>>>> frequency of pro-drop (omission of the subject argument) and
> >>>>> syncretism in verbal subject-marking paradigms.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> We are particularly interested in partial pro-drop languages,
> > where
> >>>>> subject omission is restricted to certain persons or other
> >>>>> grammatical conditions. For example, in Hebrew, pro-drop is
> > fairly
> >>>>> common in the past tense for first and second person, but
> > relatively
> >>>>> rare for third person. This is puzzling, since the past-tense
> >>>>> paradigm in Hebrew shows no syncretism, so it is unclear why the
> >>>>> third-person pronoun cannot generally be omitted as well.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> We would greatly appreciate your input on the following points:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 1. Are you aware of other languages that exhibit partial
> > pro-drop?
> >>>>> We are currently aware of Hebrew, Finnish, Yiddish, Brazilian
> >>>>> Portuguese, and Russian. This might point to an areal phenomenon,
> > so
> >>>>> examples from other areas would be especially valuable.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 2. In the languages you are familiar with, does third person
> > indeed
> >>>>> tend to be the least likely to allow pro-drop?
> >>>>> If so, are you aware of any proposed explanations for this
> >>>>> asymmetry?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Many thanks in advance for your insights,
> >>>>> Yiming and Omri
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Links:
> >>>> ------
> >>>> [1] http://www.acsu.buffalo.edu/~jb77/
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> Lingtyp mailing list
> >>>> Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
> >>>> https://listserv.linguistlist.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp
> > [29]
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> Lingtyp mailing list
> >>> Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
> >>> https://listserv.linguistlist.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Lingtyp mailing list
> >> Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
> >> https://listserv.linguistlist.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp
> > _______________________________________________
> > Lingtyp mailing list
> > Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
> > https://listserv.linguistlist.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp
> >
> > Links:
> > ------
> > [1] http://www.acsu.buffalo.edu/~jb77/
> > [2] https://goo.gl/ODgwBb
> > [3] tel:06
> > [4] tel:30
> > [5] tel:15
> > [6] tel:29
> > [7] tel:1992
> > [8] tel:1726
> > [9] tel:202509
> > [10] tel:24
> > [11] tel:2025
> > [12] tel:59
> > [13] tel:1998
> > [14] tel:2000
> > [15] tel:202510
> > [16] tel:04
> > [17] tel:2021
> > [18] tel:43
> > [19] tel:249289
> > [20] tel:642
> > [21] tel:609
> > [22] tel:14260
> > [23] tel:7166450127
> > [24] tel:7166453825
> > [25] tel:304
> > [26] tel:5855202411
> > [27] tel:11
> > [28] tel:38
> > [29] https://listserv.linguistlist.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Subject: Digest Footer
>
> _______________________________________________
> Lingtyp mailing list
> Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
> https://listserv.linguistlist.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of Lingtyp Digest, Vol 134, Issue 2
> ***************************************
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lingtyp/attachments/20251104/bee0743c/attachment.htm>
More information about the Lingtyp
mailing list