* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
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 24.5234

Mon Dec 16 2013

Calls: Syntax, Morphology, Semantics/UK

Editor for this issue: Bryn Hauk <brynlinguistlist.org>

Date: 16-Dec-2013
From: Norman Yeo <yorkagreement2014gmail.com>
Subject: Agreement 2014: Defining and Mapping Agreement
E-mail this message to a friend

Full Title: Agreement 2014: Defining and Mapping Agreement

Date: 31-Jul-2014 - 31-Jul-2014
Location: York, UK, United Kingdom
Contact Person: Norman Yeo
Meeting Email: < click here to access email >
Web Site: http://www.york.ac.uk/language/research/projects/ctia/agreement2014/

Linguistic Field(s): Morphology; Semantics; Syntax

Call Deadline: 15-Mar-2014

Meeting Description:

Conference URL: http://www.york.ac.uk/language/research/projects/ctia/agreement2014/

Invited Speakers:

Greville Corbett (Surrey)
Jürg Fleischer (Marburg)

Agreement, in its simplest form, can be described as a situation where information associated with a 'controller' element also appears on another 'target' element. In many languages, agreement is pervasive, so much so that each of the major syntactic frameworks requires a way of dealing with it, either as a primitive operation such as Agree (as in Minimalism), or in terms of agreement, concord or index features (as in LFG and HPSG). However, despite extensive research, many aspects of agreement still remain deeply puzzling.

Call for Papers:

Agreement 2014: Defining and mapping agreement
King's Manor, York, UK
31 July 2013

Abstracts:

Abstracts should be no more than two A4 pages, in a size 12 Times font with one inch (2.54 cm) margins all around, including examples and references. Abstract submissions should be made through EasyAbs.

Presentations:

Presentations will be 20 minutes in length with 10 minutes for questions and discussion.

This workshop is devoted to a cross-disciplinary exploration of the agreement phenomenon, and the extent to which agreement may be defined in any given theory, as well as the ways in which agreement is expressed at the interfaces and/or mapped onto linguistic typologies. The workshop is not restricted to any particular theory or framework, and is open to any analysis that is firmly grounded in empirical data, which seeks to analyse agreement in morphology, syntax, semantics or its interfaces. Abstract submissions pertaining, but not limited, to the following questions are welcome:

1) What counts or does not count as agreement, e.g. agreement vs. concord, syntactic vs. semantic agreement etc.?

2) What can we learn from diachronic approaches to agreement in comparison with synchronic approaches?

3) What benefits or challenges do different methods of studying agreement present, e.g. fieldwork, corpus methods?

4) What is the nature of cross-linguistic variation of agreement, e.g. richness of agreement morphology, domains of agreement, syncretism etc.?

5) How can typologies of agreement be expressed, e.g. using a multidimensional approach such as 'Canonical Agreement' (Corbett 2002, Brown, Chumakina & Corbett 2012) as opposed to categorical approaches?

6) What role does morphology play in agreement and what types of frameworks are best suited to expressing this? What are the benefits of inferential-realizational frameworks (Stump 2001, Brown & Hippisley 2012) compared with e.g. Distributed Morphology (Halle & Marantz 1993, 1994)?

Contact Information:

Norman Yeo
yorkagreement2014gmail.com

Abstract Submission Information:

Abstracts can be submitted from 9 December 2013 until 15 March 2013 at the following URL: http://linguistlist.org/confcustom/agreement2014.



Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue



Page Updated: 16-Dec-2013

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.