Comparative Grammar workshop

[John Boyle]

It looks like we are talking about three different types of end
products, ranging from short term to mid-term to long range.  The
first item is an idea of what we want to look at with quite a bit of
specifics (this would be something of an itinerary of the workshop
itself).  This would be something to take to the field this summer to
gather data or to comb through our respective data stacks and pull
forth relevant examples.  The second would be the development of a
Siouan field worker's guide of useful things to elicit and look for
in any given language (this could be something a little more tangible
and possibly spiral bound).  The third would be something that is
actually published, possibly in conjunction with the Comparative
Siouan Dictionary.  Something like a Comparative Siouan Grammar
(maybe give ourselves a two year time table after the initial
workshop).  I would suggest three sections: the first being one of
short sketches (written by individuals working on those languages -
something akin to Rood and Taylor 2000); the second could possibly be
a reconstruction of the the respective sub-branches (for instance,
Randy and I could do a sketch of Proto-Missouri Valley.  Other
sections could include the other sub-families); and the third and
final section a sketch of what proto-Siouan was like (that is - what
can we reconstruct).  Does this sound like a worthwhile and feasible
project?

Regarding a date, how would the end of September work for people?

John Boyle


>On Thu, 23 Jun 2005, John Boyle wrote:
>>  I agree with Bob.  This kind of workshop would be very valuable for
>>  those of us preparing to write descriptive grammars (as well as those
>>  of us who are interested in historical and comparative linguistics).
>
>This has elements of a notion that Bob has put forward before.  I think
>the expression used was something like "an elicitation guide" or
>"suggestions for Siouanists doing fieldwork."  I remember contributing
>some fairly informal notes to something for Louanna Furbee.  The idea was
>to list verbs that tended to be irregular and might be overlooked, suggest
>what personal forms might not be predictable from others, etc.  To some
>extent, of course, we use Boas & Deloria in that light, though this is
>more because it is so detailed on morphology than because Dakota prepares
>you for everything you might find in the area of Siouan morphology or
>phonology.  Of course, Boas & Deloria isn't much help with syntax and
>Dakota phonology.
>
>I don't think there's much long term point to this sort of meeting if it
>doesn't lead to some sort of publication.  Langacker's volume on
>Uto-Aztecan is a sort of prolegomena to a series of Uto-Aztecan grammars.
>I don't know what the series was ultimately like.
>
>>  Although I think it is important to look at how the languages work
>>  syntactically as well.  Here I mean things like, how do adverbs work?
>>  Does the language allow movement for topic or focus constructions?
>>  How do the languages do coordination? etc.
>
>I agree that syntax would be an important part of this.
>
>If people want to meet in Boulder that's fine with me, not to mention very
>convenient.  I'd be willing to help with local arrangements.