DOCSLIB.ORG

Societas Linguistica Europaea 2010 Vilnius University 2-5 September

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Societas Linguistica Europaea 2010 Vilnius University 2-5 September Societas Linguistica Europaea 2010 Vilnius University 2-5 September 2010 Book of abstracts (L-Z) The more specific, the less evidential? On sense-related adverbs in English and their treatment in a database of ‘Evidential markers in European Languages’. Lampert, Günther (Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz). Compared to the vast literature on epistemic modality in English, research on potential evidential markers has been scarce, the focus being mainly on adverbs that interface with epistemic modality, such as apparently , evidently, obviously, clearly (cf. Simon-Vandenbergen & Aijmer 2007) or on verbs of appearance (cf. Gisborne & Holmes 2007, Aijmer 2009). As to the ‘evidential’ adverbs mentioned, they all have vision as their home domain, but, as historical evidence clearly shows, the reference to vision has been bleached out, though to different degrees. Of the five perceptual senses (seeing, hearing, touching, tasting, smelling), the auditory and the tactile senses are not so readily used as lexical evidential in English, and the gustatory and olfactory senses are not tapped at all (in accord to what is the case in most languages). Thus, the class of English de-adjectival adverbs referring to the respective senses ( audibly, tangibly, palpably, gustatorily, olfactorily, but, interestingly, also visibly ) are generally not used as evidentials. As evidence obtained from large corpora (BNC, COCA) reveals, these adverbs are comparatively infrequent or even non-attested, and if used at all, only so as manner or degree adverbs, mostly adjacent to verbs that likewise relate to the sense in question ( sigh, sniff, mumble, breathe audibly, for instance). Though very occasional functional extensions into the domain of evidentiality can be observed in large corpora and especially on the Web, a bleaching of their specific perceptual reference does not obtain; correspondingly, in their syntax, a position at the periphery of clauses is not found, and they are only occasionally used parenthetically in medial position with a concomitant widening of scope. A general widening of scope, which is observable for prototypical evidential adverbs, does also not obtain. Thus, in general, there are no signs for evidential lexicalization (in the sense of Wiemer 2008, to appear). From a cognitive semantics point of view (cf. Talmy, n.d.), a first descriptive generalization is predictable: it is indeed not coincidental that there is little overlap between inferential evidentiality and other sensory modalities apart from vision —human beings are, at least in western cultures, first and foremost visual beings. What is more intriguing, though, and meriting closer inspection, is the finding that sense-denoting expressions obviously reject their potential functionalization as evidential markers. This is line with a general observation that also pertains to hearsay markers (see Author/Co-Author, to appear): the more specific the values for the relevant parameters of evidentiality in the envisaged database are (like source, mode and evidence in the immediate context), the less likely is the tendency for lexical items to become re-categorized as ‘true’ evidential markers (in contradistinction to very ‘unspecific’ prototypical markers such as seem or it is said ). The paper will discuss the consequences that such observations may have for the compilation of a comprehensive database of evidential markers in European languages. References Aijmer, Karin (2009): “ Seem and evidentiality.” Functions of Language 16.1, 63-88. Author, Co-Author (to appear), “Where does evidentiality reside? Notes on alleged (limiting) cases: seem and be like. Gisborne, Nicholas & Holmes, Jasper (2007): A history of evidential verbs of appearance, in: English Language and Linguistics 11.1, 1-29. Simon-Vandenbergen, Anne-Marie & Karin Aijmer (2007), The Semantic Field of Modal Certainty. A Corpus-Based Study of English Adverbs. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Talmy, Leonard (not dated), “Relating Language to Other Cognitive Systems.” http://linguistics.buffalo.edu/people/faculty/talmy/talmyweb/Handouts/relating4.pdf Wiemer, Björn (2008): Lexikalische Markierungen evidenzieller Funktionen: zur Theoriebildung und empirischen Erforschung im Slavischen, in: Wiemer, Björn & Plungian, V. A. (eds.), Lexikalische Evidenzialitätsmarker im Slavischen. München: Sagner, 5-49. (=Wiener Slawistischer Almanach. Sonderband 72). Wiemer, Björn (to appear): Evidentialität aus kognitiver Sicht [Preprint]. English Quotatives and/or/vs. Reportatives in the Euro-Evid Database? Lampert, Martina (Johannes Gutenberg-Universität, Mainz). Elaborating on and exemplifying the suggestions on criteria to delineate evidentiality and its subfunctions forwarded in Co- author & Author (to appear), this paper is meant to probe into a set of linguistic representations from report(at)ive evidentiality. The test cases, quotative be like , say and reportative is said to , it is said , for different (structural and distributional) reasons, pose problems for the database: The canonical reporting verb say , though obligatorily specifying both the source and the mode of evidence (Squartini 2008) is probably excluded for want of lexicalization (Wiemer 2008), while be like , a newcomer to the quotative system in English largely sharing say ’s semantics and discourse functions (cf. Author, forthcoming), would be included on just this criterion. is said to and it is said , in contrast, are seldom called into question as members of lexical evidentiality, though they regularly lack reference to a source of evidence (in the immediate context). While say and be like are found to owe their (potential) evidential function to an argumentative context, not necessarily within a proposition of clausal scope (see Author, forthcoming), it is said is predominantly used parenthetically with a concomitant widening of scope, and is said to is syntactically integrated, disallowing a position at the periphery of clauses. 125 SLE 2010. Vilnius University. 2 - 5 September 2010 From this perspective, it remains to be determined whether the functionality of a conceptual domain should be constrained by criteria like lexicalization or by a specific reading of ‘propositional scope.’ The paper’s focus will thus be on the treatment of report(at)ives and quotatives in the database, with special reference to evidential subfunction layer 2rep and potential further differentiations in layer 3: While the structure of the database prescribes inclusion by a candidate’s default meaning (layer 1), the associated components activated in specific contexts count only as secondary criteria for category membership. A current study by Author (on be like ) provides ample evidence that to ignore the context will result in a skewed account for candidate members of evidentiality, since the discourse context may well provide a criterial parameter for inclusion in the category: Quotatives, specifying both the source and the mode of evidence called on for whether speakers present a quote as the legitimate source of evidence for their assertion in a specific discourse context, would then also meet Wiemer’s (2008) ‘justification’ requirement. This paper, then, will, on the basis of corpus data, submit an initial suggestion as to how and where such contextual effects may be treated in the database. As a first result, a general tendency appears to be feasible: The more specific the values for relevant parameters of evidentiality in the items analyzed are (indicating both source and mode of evidence) and the more systematically the evidence surfaces in the immediate context, the less likely a lexical marker will be included as a member of evidentiality as proposed in the framework of Euro-Evid. Whether or not this is a desirable, or the desired, consequence may be subject to discussion at the conference. References : Co-Author & Author (to appear), Where does evidentiality reside? Notes on alleged (limiting) cases: seem and be like .” Author (forthcoming): ‘Predicting’ ( Be ) Like ’s Domain(s) of Reference: Evidence and Emotion, in: Author (ed.): Be Like— Newcomer to the Quotative System in English: Dimensions of Meaning and Use . Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. Author & Sophie-Thérèse Seita (forthcoming), Revisiting the Semantics of Be Like, in: Author (ed.): Be Like—Newcomer to the Quotative System in English: Dimensions of Meaning and Use . Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. Squartini, Mario (2008): Lexical vs. grammatical evidentiality in French and Italian, in: Linguistics 46.5, 917-947. Wiemer, Björn (2008): Lexikalische Markierungen evidenzieller Funktionen: zur Theoriebildung und empirischen Erforschung im Slavischen, in: Wiemer, Björn & Plungian, V. A. (eds.), Lexikalische Evidenzialitätsmarker im Slavischen . München: Sagner, 5-49. (=Wiener Slawistischer Almanach. Sonderband 72). Non-canonical case marking in diachrony and the role of voice: evidence from Greek. Lavidas, Nikolaos (Aristotle University of Thessaloniki). The aim of this paper is to examine the role that voice plays in non-canonical case marking in a diachronic perspective. Non- canonically case marked subjects have been assumed to be the result of a development from syntactic objects to subjects (Hewson and Bubenik 2006), or to be syntactic subjects already in Proto-Indo-European (Eythórsson and Barðdal 2005; Barðdal and Eythórsson 2009). Diachronic data from the Greek language show a link between the development of voice and some tendencies in subject marking. Of special interest is the frequent marking
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Evolution of Voiceless Vowels in Two Finnic Varieties of Ingria
    Natalia Kuznetsova [email protected] Daria Sidorkevitch [email protected] Institute for Linguistic Studies, Russian Academy of Sciences The rise and fall of voiceless vowels across Finnic varieties To date, no languages are known where a phonological contrast of voiced and voiceless vowels is incontrovertibly established, though it might exist in a handful of languages (Jakobson, Waugh 1987: 138–139; Ladefoged, Maddieson 1996: 315; Gordon 1998; Blevins 2004: 199–201). Voiceless vowels are typically very short and are usually ultimately lost, a fact that partly explains their typological rarity (Blevins 2004: 199). The vowel inventories of Finnic languages have not been previously famous for containing voiceless vowels. However, our recent field research has proven their existence in at least two Finnic varieties of Russia: the Lower Luga dialect of the Ingrian language in the vicinity of St. Petersburg and a mixed Ingrian/Finnish dialect of Western Siberia. Both dialects are severely endangered, each with less than 100 speakers remaining. They are also very much understudied, especially the Siberian variety. The latter is spoken by an ethnic group whose ancestors were expelled to the Omsk region of Western Siberia in 1803-1804 from exactly the area where the former variety has been traditionally spoken along with the local Ingrian Finnish dialects. At present, there is a unique opportunity to compare these extremely closely related dialects that have existed separately since 1804. While early research by Mägiste (1925: 82, 85) and Ariste (1965, 1969: 173) mentions voiceless vowels in Lower Luga Ingrian, they have been now attested in the Siberian variety for the first time.
    [Show full text]
  • Angol-Magyar Nyelvészeti Szakszótár
    PORKOLÁB - FEKETE ANGOL- MAGYAR NYELVÉSZETI SZAKSZÓTÁR SZERZŐI KIADÁS, PÉCS 2021 Porkoláb Ádám - Fekete Tamás Angol-magyar nyelvészeti szakszótár Szerzői kiadás Pécs, 2021 Összeállították, szerkesztették és tördelték: Porkoláb Ádám Fekete Tamás Borítóterv: Porkoláb Ádám A tördelés LaTeX rendszer szerint, az Overleaf online tördelőrendszerével készült. A felhasznált sablon Vel ([email protected]) munkája. https://www.latextemplates.com/template/dictionary A szótárhoz nyújtott segítő szándékú megjegyzéseket, hibajelentéseket, javaslatokat, illetve felajánlásokat a szótár hagyományos, nyomdai úton történő előállítására vonatkozóan az [email protected] illetve a [email protected] e-mail címekre várjuk. Köszönjük szépen! 1. kiadás Szerzői, elektronikus kiadás ISBN 978-615-01-1075-2 El˝oszóaz els˝okiadáshoz Üdvözöljük az Olvasót! Magyar nyelven már az érdekl˝od˝oközönség hozzáférhet német–magyar, orosz–magyar nyelvészeti szakszótárakhoz, ám a modern id˝ok tudományos világnyelvéhez, az angolhoz még nem készült nyelvészeti célú szak- szótár. Ennek a több évtizedes hiánynak a leküzdésére vállalkoztunk. A nyelvtudo- mány rohamos fejl˝odéseés differenciálódása tovább sürgette, hogy elkészítsük az els˝omagyar-angol és angol-magyar nyelvészeti szakszótárakat. Jelen kötetben a kétnyelv˝unyelvészeti szakszótárunk angol-magyar részét veheti kezébe az Olvasó. Tervünk azonban nem el˝odöknélküli vállalkozás: tudomásunk szerint két nyelvészeti csoport kísérelt meg a miénkhez hasonló angol-magyar nyelvészeti szakszótárat létrehozni. Az els˝opróbálkozás
    [Show full text]
  • A New Resource for Finnic Languages: the Outcomes of the Ingrian Documentation Project
    FEDOR ROZHANSKIY University of Tartu & Institute for Linguistic Studies RAS ELENA MARKUS University of Tartu & Institute of Linguistics RAS A new resource for Finnic languages: The outcomes of the Ingrian documentation project Abstract The report introduces a new digital resource on minor Finnic languages. This resource is the main outcome of the project “Documentation of Ingrian: collecting and analyzing fieldwork data and digitizing legacy materials” carried out by Fedor Rozhanskiy and Elena Markus at the University of Tartu in 2011–2013. The collected materials cover several minor Finnic languages with a special focus on varieties spoken in Western Ingria: the Soikkola, Lower Luga, and Heva dialects of Ingrian, the Lower Luga varieties of Votic, and Ingrian Finnish. The re­ source contains (a) legacy recordings of different genres made by previous researchers in 1968–2012; (b) new audio and video materials recorded mostly in 2011–2013 by the project partici­ pants; (c) transcriptions and translations into Russian and English synchronized with sound and video using the ELAN software. Altogether the resource presents 510 hours of audio recordings, 21 hours of video recordings, and 15 hours of ELAN annota­ tions. All media files in the resource are provided with detailed metadata specifying the place and time of the recording, sociolin­ guistic data about the speaker, the contents of the recording, and the access rights. The resource is available on the websites of the Endangered Languages Archive (London, UK) and the Archive of Estonian Dialects and Kindred Languages of the University of Tartu (Estonia). Multi lingual Finnic. Language contact and change. 303–326.
    [Show full text]
  • Elena Markus (Tartu), Fedor Rozhanskiy (Moscow) The
    Elena Markus (Tartu), Fedor Rozhanskiy (Moscow) The development of a mixed language in the multilingual environment 1 (evidence from the Kukkuzi dialect) The Lower Luga area in the Leningrad region of Russia presents a vivid example of multilingualism. It is inhabited by speakers of three cognate Finnic languages: Votic, Ingrian, and Ingrian Finnish. This specific multilingual environment gives rise to a whole range of interesting phenomena, one of which is contact or mixed languages. A famous example of this kind is the Kukkuzi dialect, which was traditionally classified as a dialect of Votic. In fact, many scholars argued this affiliation and treated Kukkuzi as a mixed Votic-Ingrian language ([Suhonen 1985], [Муслимов 2005]). Although the Kukkuzi dialect was claimed extinct in some publications ([Adler 1966]), we were lucky to collect some modern Kukkuzi data. The analysis presented in this paper is based on a specially elaborated questionnaire (150 sentences) that was offered to the speakers of different Finnic dialects for translation from Russian into their native language. Using this questionnaire we compared data from the Lower Luga Votic, the Kukkuzi dialect, the Lower Luga Ingrian, and the Soikkola Ingrian. Also, we used published materials (first of all [Ariste 1968], [Vadja keele sõnaraamat 1990-2010]) to include data from the extinct Central Votic. The five Finnic dialects were analyzed using 40 binary features, divided into three approximately equal groups: phonetic, grammatical, and lexical. The results of the comparison gave the following distribution of features among the dialects: (Group1) Features that are present in both Ingrian dialects and the Kukkuzi dialect, but absent from the Votic dialects.
    [Show full text]
  • Inhalt Des 35. Bandes
    INHALT DES 35. BANDES ORIGINALIA Blokland, Rogier: Borrowability of pronouns: evidence from Uralic .. 1 Fenyvesi, Anna: Hungarian Minorities in Romania, Slovakia and Serbia: Schoolchildren’s Attitudes to their Languages (minority vs. majority languages vs. EFL) and Teaching these Languages in School ............ 35 Keevallik, Leelo: Pragmatics of the Estonian heritage speakers in Sweden 55 Markus, Elena – Rozhanskiy, Fedor: Votic or Ingrian: new evidence on the Kukkuzi variety ............................................................................... 77 Tamm, Anne: Partitive objects and the partitive evidential marker -vat in Estonian express incomplete evidence .............................................. 97 Venken, Sarah: The Afterlife of ‘The Seven Brothers’. Traces of Aleksis Kivi’s Seitsemän Veljestä in Finnish culture ...................................... 141 DISKUSSION UND KRITIK Hasselblatt, Cornelius: Rezension Ulrike Kahrs, Monika Schötschel: Literatursoziologische Entwicklungen bei Wolgafinnen und Permiern (1985-2008). Hamburg: Verlag Dr. Kovač 2011. 261 Seiten (Poetica. Schriften zur Literaturwissenschaft 113) ........................................ 167 ESSAY Laakso, Johanna: Language contact in space and time: Perspectives and pitfalls in diachronic contact linguistics ............................................ 173 BERICHTE, MITTEILUNGEN, NACHRICHTEN Bentlin, Mirkko: „Finnische Sprache und Literatur im europäischem Kontext – Historische Perspektiven und aktuelle Herausforderungen“, Greifswald, 6. – 7.10.2011 ............................................................
    [Show full text]
  • (ESTONIAN, FINNISH, INGRIAN, VOTIC) Sound Symbolism Of
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Journals from University of Tartu ESUKA – JEFUL 2015, 6–1: 55–74 SOUND SYMBOLISM OF EXPRESSIVE VERBS IN FINNIC LANGUAGES (ESTONIAN, FINNISH, INGRIAN, VOTIC) Sound symbolism of expressive verbs in Finnic languages Heinike Heinsoo and Eva Saar University of Tartu Heinike Heinsoo, Eva Saar Abstract. This article will study language, using the contrastive-descriptive method, as a phonetic imitation of the world around us, and will concentrate on the verb vocabu- lary, based on sound imitation and natural sound imitation, characteristic of the Finnic languages spoken in the region of the Gulf of Finland, i.e. Estonian, Finnish, Ingrian and Votic, with a special focus on verbs expressing sounds produced by inanimate sound generators/sources. The investigation clarifi es the differences between expressive verbs and general vocabulary in terms of phonetic composition, and describes derivation patterns of expressive verbs. In comparisons of the four related languages, the theory of sound symbolism has not been confi rmed. It is almost impossible to fi nd identical expressive lexemes (stems) carrying the same (collocative) meaning in all four closely related languages. Keywords: Finnic languages, expressiveness, sound symbolism, verb derivation DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.12697/jeful.2015.6.1.04 1. Introduction: onomatopoetic words, imitatives, expressive words Finnic languages are extremely rich in onomatopoetic-descriptive vocabulary, and closely related languages resort to similar devices to form such words (phonetic composition differs from the standard vocab- ulary, verb stem model). Traditionally, onomatopoetic-descriptive words are divided into two categories: onomatopoetic words and descriptive words (ISK: 178).
    [Show full text]
  • Multilingual Finnic. Language Contact and Change
    UH Uralica 14 Helsingiensia14 Multilingual Finnic This volume gathers together articles dealing with Finnic mi- nority languages and language contacts. The first part presents topics focusing on phonology, morphology, morphosyntax, Multilingual Finnic syntax as well as lexical relations. The second part of the book Language contact and change consists of non-peer-reviewed reports on archived and digital Finnic minority language materials as well as two field trip re- ports to Finnic-speaking or formerly Finnic-speaking areas. This collection is based on the work carried out during the project “Language change in multilingual Finnic”, funded by the Kone Foundation. Most articles are based on presentations given at a symposium organized at the XII International Congress for Finno-Ugric Studies in Oulu in August 2015. Language contact and change ISBN 978-952-7262-16-0 (print) EDITED BY ISBN 978-952-7262-17-7 (online) SOFIA BJÖRKLÖF & ISSN 1797-3945 SANTRA JANTUNEN UH Uralica 14 Helsingiensia14 Multilingual Finnic This volume gathers together articles dealing with Finnic mi- nority languages and language contacts. The first part presents topics focusing on phonology, morphology, morphosyntax, Multilingual Finnic syntax as well as lexical relations. The second part of the book Language contact and change consists of non-peer-reviewed reports on archived and digital MULTI LINGUAL FINNIC Finnic minority language materials as well as two field trip re- ports to Finnic-speaking or formerly Finnic-speaking areas. This collection is based on the work carried out during the project “Language change in multilingual Finnic”, funded by the Kone Foundation. Most articles are based on presentations given at a symposium organized at the XII International Congress for Finno-Ugric Studies in Oulu in August 2015.
    [Show full text]
  • Download Icml Xiv Programme
    INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON MINORITY LANGUAGES XIV 11-14 SEPTEMBER 2013 GRAZ, AUSTRIA United Nations Cultural Organization treff punkt sprachen Plurilingualism Research Unit Karl-Franzens-University Graz Heinrichstraße 26/II 8010 Graz ©by the authors e Plurilingualism Research Unit of treff punkt sprachen at the University of Graz welcomes you to the INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON MINORITY LANGUAGES XIV 11-14 SEPTEMBER 2013 GRAZ, AUSTRIA CONTENTS Overview 8 Programme 10 Key notes 22 Colloquia 26 Individual Papers 52 ORGANISERS treff punkt sprachen Plurilingualism Research Unit pluriling.uni-graz.at [spiːk] Sprache, Identität, Kultur spik.uni-graz.at Pavel Haus - Pavlova hiša Pavel Haus Artikel-VII-Kulturverein ür Steiermark Pavlova Hiša www.pavelhaus.at THANKS We would like to thank the following for their kind support of the 14th International Conference of Minority Languages: the Vice-Rector for Research and Junior Researchers’ Promotion of the University of Graz Prof. Dr. Peter Scherrer, the Offi ce of International Relations of the University of Graz and the Austrian UNESCO Commission. 6 ICML XIV Foreword DOMINATED LANGUAGES IN THE 21ST CENTURY Although linguistic plurality and its socio-political stratifi cation or outline in dominant and dominated languages is subject to constant and accelerating change due to global migration, the general perception of minorities - at least in Europe - is still based on strangely romantic folkloristic notions of the 19th century, namely as rural, conservative, immobile relics of another (archaic) culture with another language. is admi edly point- ed defi nition, which implicitly also refl ects the European nation state ideology, negates all socio-political and socio-cultural developments of the last decades.
    [Show full text]
  • Congressus Duodecimus Internationalis Fenno-Ugristarum, Oulu 2015
    Congressus Duodecimus Internationalis Fenno-Ugristarum, Oulu 2015 Plenary Papers Edited by Harri Mantila Kaisa Leinonen Sisko Brunni Santeri Palviainen Jari Sivonen University of Oulu, 2015 Oulun yliopisto, 2015 Photographs: © Oulun kaupunki, Oulun yliopisto ISBN: 978-952-62-1071-1 Juvenes Print Preface The current volume contains the plenary papers of the XII Congress for Finno- Ugric Studies, held in Oulu, Finland in August 17–21, 2015. The congress did not have a specific theme, but the seven plenum papers represent all the traditional branches of Finno-Ugric scholarship: linguistics, culture and literature, archaeology, and cultural anthropology. In this volume, the papers are presented in alphabetical order. The volume is available in the Internet as well on the conference webpage. The congress had approximately 380 participants from 21 countries, and altogether 276 presentations were given. The Congress for Finno-Ugric Studies, Congressus Internationalis Fenno-Ugristarum, has been organized every five years since 1960, and in Finland it has formerly been held in Helsinki, Turku, and Jyväskylä. In accordance with other international congresses of today, the section papers are not published by the organizing institution, although this has been the practice in the previous Finno-Ugric congresses. In addition to the plenary sessions and sections, there were also 19 symposia in the congress, and many of them will produce their own publications. All abstracts are nevertheless published in the Book of Abstracts, available on the conference webpage. Harri Mantila President of XII Congress for Finno-Ugric Studies Contents Preface 3 Contents 5 Language endangerment and endangered Uralic languages 7 Lyle Campbell and Bryn Hauk, with Panu Hallamaa The Finno-Ugric message.
    [Show full text]
  • Book of Abstracts
    43 rd Annual Meeting of the Societas Linguistica Europaea Book of Abstracts Vilnius University Vilnius, Lithuania 2 - 5 September 2010 SOCIETAS LINGUISTICA EUROPAEA President: Hubert Cuyckens (Leuven), Vice-President: Pier Marco Bertinetto (Pisa), President-Elect: Ruth Wodak (Lancaster/Wien), Secretary/Treasurer: Dik Bakker (Amsterdam/Lancaster)), Editor FL : Teresa Fanego (Santiago de Compostela), Editor FLH : Hans-Henrich Hock (Urbana-Champaign) up to volume 30; Nikolaus Ritt (Wien): interim- editor. Executive Committee: (the above plus) Marianne Kilani-Schoch (Lausanne), Isabella Buniyatova (Kiew), Mario Squartini (Torino), Anna Siewierska (Lancaster), Andreas Musolff (Durham), Heli Tissari (Helsinki). Conference Manager: Bert Cornillie (Leuven - Research Foundation Flanders) SLE 2010 LOCAL ORGANIZING COMMITTEE – VILNIUS UNIVERSITY Aurelija Usoniene (Chair), Jolanta Sinkuniene (Secretary), Antanas Smetona, Birute Ryvityte, Vytautas Kardelis, Erika Jasionyte, Jurgis Pakerys SLE 2010 SCIENTIFIC COMMITTEE Teresa Fanego (Santiago de Compostela, Chair), Werner Abraham (Wien/München), Alexander Adelaar (Melbourne), Karin Aijmer (Göthenburg), Alexandra Y. Aikhenvald (J. Cook, Cairns), Sjef Barbiers (Meertens Instituut), Ineta Dabasinskiene (Kaunas), Jean-Marc Dewaele (London), Gabriele Diewald (Hannover), Ursula Doleschal (Wien), Anna Duszak (Warsaw), Dirk Geeraerts (Leuven), Maria del Pilar Garcia Mayo (Vitoria), Volker Gast (Jena), Kleanthes K. Grohmann (Nicosia), Youssef Haddad (Florida), Bernd Heine (Köln), Eva Hajicová (Prague), Axel
    [Show full text]
  • Dialectal Variation in Votic: Jõgõperä Vs
    ESUKA – JEFUL 2015, 6–1: 23–39 DIALECTAL VARIATION IN VOTIC: JÕGÕPERÄ VS. LUUDITSA Dialectal variation in Votic Fedor Rozhanskiy and Elena Markus University of Tartu and Institute of Linguistics of Russian Academy of Sciences Fedor Rozhanskiy, Elena Markus Abstract. This paper provides a comparison of two varieties of the Votic language. Based on fi eld materials collected between 2001 and 2012 from the last speakers of Votic, we compiled a list of the most important phonetic and grammatical features that distinguish between Jõgõperä and Luuditsa varieties. The ten features are: the degree of apocope, the initial h, merging of allative and adessive cases, secondary geminates, illative singular forms, genitive and partitive plural markers, imperfect forms, the active participle marker, conditional markers, and negative pronominal forms. The analysis has shown that many differences can be explained by the infl uence of the neighbour- ing Ingrian language. There are more contact induced changes in the Luuditsa variety, which is probably the result of more intensive contacts with the Ingrian population in this village. The contemporary Luuditsa variety is a vivid example demonstrating that language change in the Lower Luga area was driven by convergent developments in no lesser degree than by divergent processes. Keywords: Votic, dialectal variation, language contacts, phonetics, morphology DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.12697/jeful.2015.6.1.02 1. Introduction Although the Votic language can hardly be characterised as poorly described, there is rather little data on Votic dialectology. Traditionally, Votic was divided into four dialects: Krevin, Eastern Votic, Western Votic and Kukkuzi Votic (Adler and Leppik 1990: 60), however, this classification was questioned by contemporary researchers.
    [Show full text]
  • Factors Influencing Conservatism and Purism in Languages of Northern Europe (Nordic, Baltic, Finnic)
    Studia Linguistica Universitatis Iagellonicae Cracoviensis 131 (2014): 395–419 doi:10.4467/20834624SL.14.022.2729 www.ejournals.eu/Studia-Linguistica IWONA PIECHNIK Jagiellonian University in Krakow [email protected] FACTORS INFLUENCING CONSERVATISM AND PURISM IN LANGUAGES OF NORTHERN EUROPE (NORDIC, BALTIC, FINNIC) Keywords: conservatism, purism, change, rate, evolution, Nordic, Germanic, Baltic, Finnic Abstract This paper shows common extralinguistic factors influencing conservatism and purism in languages of Northern Europe (Nordic, Baltic, Finnic). Users’ motivation, environ- ment, culture, history and conscious policy are the keys to understand some tendencies in the slower rate of change of these languages. This article is based on my studies about the rate of changes in languages (Piech- nik 2014) in order to further develop some questions that have arisen from those deliberations, with the main focus on languages in Northern Europe. It demonstrates that the fast erosion or archaic character of languages has not been taking place much due to geographical and chronological factors or intralinguistic reasons, but mainly due to other extralinguistic factors. It turns out that languages of Northern Europe are more conservative than the southern ones. However, some of them have been evolving faster, while others more slowly. I have decided to look at this phenomenon more closely in this study,1 focusing on two hallmarks in languages of this northern area: conservatism and purism, which always go hand in hand. I will try to show their roots, actual state and prospects for the future. My considerations 1 I am very grateful to two anonymous reviewers who gave me precious remarks and comments.
    [Show full text]