LINGUIST List 27.1637

Thu Apr 07 2016

Calls: Gen Ling, Hist Ling, Syntax, Typology/Germany

Editor for this issue: Amanda Foster <>

Date: 06-Apr-2016
From: Lukasz Jedrzejowski <>
Subject: The Internal and External Syntax of Adverbial Clauses. Theoretical Implications and Consequences.
E-mail this message to a friend

Full Title: The Internal and External Syntax of Adverbial Clauses. Theoretical Implications and Consequences.

Date: 21-Jul-2016 - 23-Jul-2016
Location: Zentrum für Allgemeine Sprachwissenschaft, Berlin, Germany
Contact Person: Lukasz Jedrzejowski
Meeting Email: < click here to access email >

Linguistic Field(s): General Linguistics; Historical Linguistics; Linguistic Theories; Syntax; Typology

Call Deadline: 16-May-2016

Meeting Description:

The last two decades have seen a renewed interest in adverbial clauses and their syntactic properties, resulting in a mass of new empirical findings. These findings show that adverbial clauses are much more heterogeneous than previously recognized. As for their internal syntax, they differ with respect to the possibility to feature main clause phenomena (e.g. Haegeman 2006, 2010a, Coniglio 2011, Frey 2012) and the obligatory presence of clause internal A`-movement (Geis 1970, Larson 1990). Regarding their external properties, they can occupy various positions within the clause, each option correlating with interpretative differences and possible differences regarding the choice of the complementizer. And some adverbial clauses show signs of a relative clause structure, most prominently temporal clauses (Demirdache & Uribe-Etxebarria 2004, Geis 1970) and conditional clauses (Bhatt & Pancheva 2006, Haegeman 2010b). The aim of this workshop is to bring together recent research on the structural properties of adverbial clause and to explore their consequences for the syntax of clauses and sentences in general.

Some adverbial clauses show clear signs for a relative clause structure (Bhatt & Pancheva 2006, Demirdache & Uribe-Etxebarria 2004, Geis 1970, Haegeman 2010b). There is also a diachronic relationship between adverbial and relative clauses (Axel-Tober 2012). On the other hand, there also exist adverbial clauses that do not show signs of a relative clause structure (Geis 1970, Larson 1990). The question is therefore how similar adverbial clauses are to each other and what the consequences of these differences are for their structure. Do the differences indicate that there are internal structural differences among the various types of adverbial clauses? Or do these differences result from external properties, such as their integration into the host clause? Moreover, a relative clause analysis has also been proposed for complement clauses (Arsenijevic 2009), in particular for complements to factive predicates (Aboh 2005, Krapova 2010). We would like to investigate the (dis)similarities between adverbial clauses and other clause types with respect to both their internal and external syntax, and whether dependent clauses may be uniformly analyzed as relative clauses (Caponigro & Polinsky 2011).

Keynote speakers:

Katrin Axel-Tober, Universität Tübingen (confirmed)
Richard K. Larson, Stony Brook University (to be confirmed)

All queries should be sent to:


Werner Frey (Zentrum für Allgemeine Sprachwissenschaft, Berlin)
Lukasz Jedrzejowski (Universität Potsdam)
Andreas Pankau (Freie Universität Berlin)

Call for Abstracts:

Abstracts are invited for talks dealing with comparative, diachronic, typological, and in particular, theoretical aspects of adverbial clauses. Experimental studies having consequences for linguistic theory are welcome as well. We encourage submissions integrating new case studies and theoretical approaches.

Topics for the workshop include, but are not limited to, the following issues:

- Structural position: Recent diachronic studies, in particular on verb second languages, have shown that the position of the adverbial clause with respect to the matrix verb plays a decisive role in determining to what extent the adverbial clause is integrated into the host clause (Axel 2002, Axel & Wöllstein 2009, König & van der Auwera 1989). Here, we would like to pursue the issue of different merge positions of adverbial clauses with regard to the host clause and its particular constituents. What is the base position of adverbial clauses? If they are moved, what triggers their movement to a higher structural position? Are there any striking cross-linguistic restrictions on the movement of adverbial clauses resulting from their internal syntax?

- Internal external syntax (mis-)match: Standardly in the cartographic approach it has been assumed that less integrated adverbial clauses do have a richer internal structure than integrated ones, especially regarding the left periphery, the reason being for example that less integrated clauses do allow root phenomena, which are supposed to need local syntactic licensing. Are other accounts conceivable? Is there a strict correspondence between the external syntax and the internal makeup of the clause or could there exist independence? Do basic differences between the internal properties of adverbial clauses always lead us to expect basic differences in their external behavior?

- Root phenomena: Hooper and Thompson (1973) have observed that root phenomena can occur not only in main clauses but also in a restricted set of embedded clauses, in particular in nonrestrictive/nonpresupposed contexts (for a recent overview of embedded root phenomena see Heycock 2006). In this connection, we would like to address the questions what root phenomena are supposed to be and what role they play in determining the status of adverbial clauses. What kinds of root phenomena are attested from a comparative perspective and in older stages of languages? To what extent is their (in)compatibility with particular types of adverbial clauses attributed to the internal syntax of the clause structure?

Each talk selected for presentation will be allotted 30 minutes followed by 15 minutes of discussion. Submissions are limited to one individual and one joint abstract per author. Abstracts should be submitted via EasyChair at the following link:

Formatting guidelines:

Abstracts should be in PDF format, with all non-standard fonts embedded. Abstracts should not exceed 2 pages, including data and references (11 pt font minimum, single spacing, 1 inch/2.5 cm margins on all sides). Abstracts should be anonymous.

Notification of acceptance: 6 June 2016

Page Updated: 07-Apr-2016