* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
LINGUIST List logo Eastern Michigan University Wayne State University *
* People & Organizations * Jobs * Calls & Conferences * Publications * Language Resources * Text & Computer Tools * Teaching & Learning * Mailing Lists * Search *
* *
LINGUIST List 21.4295

Thu Oct 28 2010

Calls: Historical Linguistics, Syntax/Spain

Editor for this issue: Di Wdzenczny <dilinguistlist.org>

LINGUIST is pleased to announce the launch of an exciting new feature: Easy Abstracts! Easy Abs is a free abstract submission and review facility designed to help conference organizers and reviewers accept and process abstracts online. Just go to: http://www.linguistlist.org/confcustom, and begin your conference customization process today! With Easy Abstracts, submission and review will be as easy as 1-2-3!
        1.     Jenneke van der Wal , Come and Go Off the Beaten Grammaticalisation Path

Message 1: Come and Go Off the Beaten Grammaticalisation Path
Date: 26-Oct-2010
From: Jenneke van der Wal <jenneke.van.der.walafricamuseum.be>
Subject: Come and Go Off the Beaten Grammaticalisation Path
E-mail this message to a friend

Full Title: Come and Go Off the Beaten Grammaticalisation Path

Date: 08-Sep-2011 - 11-Sep-2011
Location: LogroƱo (La Rioja), Spain
Contact Person: Jenneke van der Wal
Meeting Email: jenneke.van.der.walafricamuseum.be

Linguistic Field(s): Historical Linguistics; Syntax

Call Deadline: 12-Nov-2010

Meeting Description:

Workshop organisers:
Maud Devos
Jenneke van der Wal

It is often presented as a well-known fact that the deictic motion verbs
'come' and 'go' develop into tense-aspect markers, expressing e.g. anterior,
andative or future. However, the lexical semantics and pragmatics of verbs
like 'come' and 'go' are not identical cross-linguistically, as remarked by
Wilkins and Hill (1995). Moreover, recent studies show that the grammatical
functions to which they develop are much more diverse than just tense-
aspect markers. The Bantu language Shangaci exemplifies both the lexical
diversity of 'go' and its development to a function other than tense-aspect.
In Shangaci, there are two verbs that can be translated as 'to go'. For one
verb the motion is inherently salient, whereas the other focuses on the goal.
Only the latter has grammaticalised to become an inflectional prefix that
expresses verb focus (Devos and Van der Wal 2010). This shows that the
lexical semantics of 'come' and 'go' cannot be taken for granted and that the
grammaticalisation paths can be fairly unusual.

We intend to organise a workshop focussing on the lesser known targets
of 'come' and 'go' verbs, taking into account the lexical semantics that form
the input to grammaticalisation. The questions we would like to discuss
include, but are not limited to, the following:

1. Which different uses do 'come' and 'go' verbs have? What is the range
of targets in grammaticalisation that have 'come' and 'go' verbs as their
source? Apart from tense-aspect markers (see e.g. Bybee et al. 1994,
Bybee and Dahl 1989, Heine and Kuteva 2002), 'come' and 'go' verbs can
also develop functions as discourse connectors (Ebert 2003), textual
connectivity (Bourdin 2008), and subjectivity and social deixis (Nicolle

2. How do the discourse-related uses of grammaticalised 'come' and 'go'
verbs fit into the cline propositional > textual > expressive, which is usually
associated with discourse markers (Traugott 1995, Brinton 1996)?

3. In how far is the grammaticalisation path, and hence the target,
determined and/or constrained by the original meaning of 'come' or 'go'?
That is, can we account for the various developments by reference to their
persistent original lexical semantics (Hopper 1991)?

4. In which respects do various expressions for 'come' and for 'go' differ,
within a language as well as cross-linguistically? Factors associated with
motion verbs include SOURCE, GOAL, PATH, and MANNER (Talmy 1975),
but further research can show whether these are the only relevant
properties and also whether there are properties related to all 'come' and
'go' verbs. Botne (2005) shows for Ndali that the relative saliency of these
components should also be taken into account, and Wilkins and Hill (1995)
demonstrate that 'come' and 'go' verbs are not universally deictic.

The aim of the workshop is thus to bring together linguists working on
typologically different languages to broaden our view on the semantics as
well as the formal and functional developments of these motion verbs;
aspects that are too often assumed to be known or standard.

Call For Papers

We invite potential participants to send a provisional title and a short
abstract (100-200 words) before 12 November 2010. Please send the e-
mail expressing your interest in the workshop to Jenneke van der Wal
(jenneke.van.der.walafricamuseum.be) and Maud Devos

We need to submit the workshop proposal by the 15th of November to the
SLE Scientific Committee for evaluation. If the workshop proposal is
accepted, full abstracts will have to be submitted by 15 January 2011.
Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue

Page Updated: 28-Oct-2010

Supported in part by the National Science Foundation       About LINGUIST    |   Contact Us       ILIT Logo
While the LINGUIST List makes every effort to ensure the linguistic relevance of sites listed on its pages, it cannot vouch for their contents.