29.3841, Confs: Historical Linguistics/Italy

Fri Oct 5 03:44:47 UTC 2018

LINGUIST List: Vol-29-3841. Thu Oct 04 2018. ISSN: 1069 - 4875.

Subject: 29.3841, Confs: Historical Linguistics/Italy

Moderator: linguist at linguistlist.org (Malgorzata E. Cavar)
Reviews: reviews at linguistlist.org (Helen Aristar-Dry, Robert Coté)
Homepage: https://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: Thu, 04 Oct 2018 23:43:22
From: Chiara Fedriani [chiara.fedriani at unige.it]
Subject: International Workshop on the Diachrony of Ditransitives

International Workshop on the Diachrony of Ditransitives 

Date: 29-Nov-2018 - 30-Nov-2018 
Location: Vercelli, Italy 
Contact: Maria Napoli Chiara Fedriani 
Contact Email: maria.napoli at uniupo.it; chiara.fedriani at unige.it 

Linguistic Field(s): Historical Linguistics 

Meeting Description: 

Ditransitives are typically described as verbs with three arguments that
encode the transfer of a Theme from an Agent to a Recipient: canonical
ditransitives are, for instance, those denoting an event of possessive
transfer (e.g., to give) or mental transfer (e.g., to teach). From a syntactic
point of view, the two object arguments, Theme and Recipient, are expressed
through different types of constructions across languages, which have been
described also in terms of alignment patterns in typological perspective (cf.,
e.g., Dryer 1986, Siewierska 2003, Malchukov, Haspelmath & Comrie 2010,
Haspelmath 2011). 

While a huge amount of literature exists on ditransitives from a synchronic
point of view and within different theoretical frameworks, diachronic issues
related to these verbs have been not so widely investigated (in spite of many
valuable contributions, such as, e.g., Bardddal 2007, de Cuypere 2015, Geleyn
2016 on Germanic). 

Therefore, this workshop aims to explore ditransitives and the constructions
to which they give rise across languages looking specifically at their
behaviour and evolution over time, in order to shed light on the diachronic
changes involving these verbs. The possible research questions that this topic
raises include the following: 

(i) In which directions ditransitives change from a semantic and syntactic
point of view. In other words, is it possible to identify general
developmental directions followed mostly by ditransitive verbs across
languages?
(ii) To what extent diachronic variation in argument realization is reflected
in the synchronic syntax of ditransitives.
(iii) How we may model the emergence and disappearance of ditransitive
constructions in a given language (for instance, with regard to the so called
double object construction).
(iv) Which factors play a major role in determining alignment types and
alternations with ditransitives over time. 
(v) Whether we may identify common diachronic paths in the substitution of
morphological cases with prepositional strategies in the syntax of
ditransitives.
(vi) How the semantic characteristics of specific classes of ditransitives
influence their diachrony. For instance, which sub-categories of
ditransitives, if any, are more prone to diachronic change, and along which
paths of development? 

Invited speakers:

Timothy Colleman (Ghent University) 
Michele Prandi (University of Genoa)

Selected bibliography:

Bardddal J. 2007. The Semantic and Lexical Range of the Ditransitive
Construction in the History of (North) Germanic. In Functions of Language
14/1: 9-30.
Colleman T. & B. de Clerck. 2011. Constructional semantics on the move: on
semantic specialization in the English double object construction. In
Cognitive Linguistics 22/1: 183-209.
de Cuypere L. 2015. The Old English to-dative construction. In English
Language and Linguistics 19/1: 1-26.
Dryer M.S. 1986. Primary Objects, Secondary Objects, and Antidative. In
Language 62/4: 808-845. 
Geleyn T. 2016. Syntactic variation and diachrony. The case of the Dutch
dative alternation. In Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory 13/1: 65-96.
Haspelmath M. 2011. On S, A, P, T, and R as comparative concepts for alignment
typology. In Linguistic Typology 15/3: 535-567.
Malchukov A., Haspelmath M. & B. Comrie. 2010. Ditransitive constructions: a
typological overview. In A. Malchukov, M. Haspelmath & B. Comrie (eds.),
Studies in Ditransitive Constructions. A Comparative Handbook, 1-64. Berlin:
Mouton de Gruyter. 
Siewierska A. 2003. Person agreement and the determination of alignment. In
Transactions of the Philological Society 101/2: 339-370.

Program:

Thursday 29/11/2018

14:00-14:30: 
Opening Session

14:30-15:30:
Timothy Colleman (Ghent University), The early stages of the dative
alternation in Dutch vs. English

15:30-16:00: 
Cristiano Broccias & Enrico Torre (University of Genoa), Revisiting the
history of the English dative alternation: An account based on attraction and
differentiation

16:00-16:30: Coffee break

16:30-17:00:
Eva Zehentner (University of York), Binary choices versus complex networks:
the history of the English dative alternation

17:00-17:30:
Evi Van Damme, Ludovic De Cuypere & Klaas Willems (University of Ghent), The
ditransitive alternation in the history of German: the case of verkaufen
(‘sell’) 

17:30-18:00:
Fredrik Valdeson (Stockholm University), The double object construction and
its prepositional paraphrases in Late Modern Swedish 

Friday 30/11/2018

9:00-10:00:
Michele Prandi (University of Genoa), Roles and grammatical relations in
synchrony and diachrony: the case of indirect object

10:00-10:30:
Anna Giacalone Ramat (University of Pavia), Passives of ditransitives 

10:30-11:00:
Maria Napoli (University of Eastern Piedmont), Old Italian ditransitive
constructions: between alternation and change

11:00-11:30: Coffee break

11:30-12:00:
Marina Benedetti (University of Foreigners of Siena), Ditransitive ‘teach’ and
the status of the Theme argument: Greek didáskō as a case study 

12:00-12:30:
Carla Bruno (University of Foreigners of Siena), Not just arguments. On
gr. dídōmi and the theme-recipient relation in its ditransitive structures 

12:30-13:00:
Katarzyna Sowka-Pietraszewska (University of Wrocław), Ditransitive verbs of
possession change in early Polish

13:00-14:00: Lunch 

14:00-14:30:
Chantal Melis & Sergio Ibáñez Cerda (Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México),
On the development of Spanish impersonal ‘give’ in experiential constructions 

14:30-15:00:
Alberto Arceri (University of Turin), On “giving the modal inference invited”:
Some remarks on modal 'give' constructions, with special reference to
Latin dare + PP and Galician dar +PP 

15:00-15:30:
Chiara Fedriani (University of Genoa), The spread of the ad + Accusative
construction from Early to Late Latin: identifying semantic paths in the
domain of ditransitives

15:30: Conclusions

More info at https://ditransitives.uniupo.it/home

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

*****************    LINGUIST List Support    *****************
Please support the LL editors and operation with a donation at:

              The IU Foundation Crowd Funding site:
       https://iufoundation.fundly.com/the-linguist-list

               The LINGUIST List FundDrive Page:
            https://funddrive.linguistlist.org/donate/

----------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-29-3841	
----------------------------------------------------------