30.3580, Calls: Morphology, Syntax, Typology/Romania

[The LINGUIST List]

LINGUIST List: Vol-30-3580. Sat Sep 21 2019. ISSN: 1069 - 4875.

Subject: 30.3580, Calls: Morphology, Syntax, Typology/Romania

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: Sat, 21 Sep 2019 03:22:37
From: Fernando Zúñiga [fernando.zuniga at isw.unibe.ch]
Subject: Neglected Functions of Applicative Morphology

 
Full Title: Neglected Functions of Applicative Morphology 

Date: 27-Aug-2020 - 28-Aug-2020
Location: Bucharest, Romania 
Contact Person: Sara Pacchiarotti
Meeting Email: fernando.zuniga at isw.unibe.ch

Linguistic Field(s): Morphology; Syntax; Typology 

Call Deadline: 20-Oct-2019 

Meeting Description:

According to most definitions, canonical or prototypical applicatives have
minimally the following features: (i) they are optional (i.e. verb roots/stems
without an applicative can appear in a construction with an oblique/adjunct,
but this peripheral participant can alternatively be expressed as a core
argument if the verb root/stem combines with an applicative); (ii) they
increase the syntactic valence of the verb root/stem with which they combine;
and (iii) they introduce a semantically “peripheral” participant, e.g.
Beneficiary, Instrument, Possessor, Location, etc. 

In this workshop, we do not take features (i)-(iii) of applicative morphology
to be defining, canonical, or prototypical. Instead, our definition of
APPLICATIVE is: any derivational morphology occurring on a verb root/stem
which has amongst its functions the introduction of a non-Actor semantic
argument into a main clause. This non-Actor is usually mapped onto an APPLIED
PHRASE. This term, coined by Denis Creissels, refers to any morphosyntactic
entity introduced and/or semantically/pragmatically manipulated by the
applicative without any specifications about its syntactic category and
argumenthood status.

We are especially interested in the following seldom-described functions of
applicative morphology. Studies on additional little known or unknown
functions not listed below are also most welcome contributions:

Syntax-related:

– applicative morphology is the only (or one of) the morphosyntactic means to
introduce a General Location (e.g. in the house, in the room, at the sea,
etc.) into a main clause (as in Northwest Caucasian and Bantu).
– applicative morphology introduces an applied phrase which is syntactically
an adjunct/oblique or “registers” the occurrence of the adjunct/oblique in the
clause (as in Mayan, Oto-Manguean, Bantu, and Austronesian).
– applicative morphology is valence-increasing with some verbs but
valence-neutral or even valence-decreasing with others (as in Mapudungun and
Tswana), i.e. applicative morphology has become fossilized and has lost its
original functions.

Non-syntax-related:

– applicative morphology can be used to narrow-focus a syntactic non-core
argument like a Location, an Instrument, etc. (as in Bantu, Mayan, Otomanguean
and Arawak).
– applicative morphology does not introduce an applied phrase. Instead, it can
change the meaning of the whole event described by the construction in which
applicative morphology appears compared to the meaning of the event described
by the same construction without an applicative (as in Nilotic, e.g. Maasai). 
– applicative morphology does not introduce an applied phrase. Instead, it can
add meaning nuances to the meaning of the verb root, such as completeness,
repetition, thoroughness, excess, “in vain”, etc. (as in Bantu, Austronesian,
and some branches of Indoeuropean).

Other possible topics:

– the semantic and/or pragmatic features/usage contexts of optional
applicative constructions (see above) vs. the counterpart construction in
which a verb root without an applicative combines with an oblique 
– the occurrence of applicative morphology on the verb in subordinate clauses
(as in Bantu) 
– the occurrence of applicative morphology on the verb in wh-questions (as in
Bantu)
– the genesis and evolution of applicative morphology as a way to explain the
(dis)appearance of their non-canonical functions.


Call for Papers:

Deadlines:
Please send a 300-word abstract (including examples but excluding references)
to the convenors by October 20, 2019. We will notify you of acceptance, and
will submit the workshop program to the SLE scientific committee, by November
20, 2019.

Convenors:
Sara Pacchiarotti, Ghent University (sara.pacchiarotti at ugent.be)
Fernando Zúñiga, University of Bern (fernando.zuniga at isw.unibe.ch)




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

***************************    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-30-3580	
----------------------------------------------------------