LINGUIST List 9.1208

Tue Sep 1 1998

Calls: Asian/African Langs, GLOW'99

Editor for this issue: Martin Jacobsen <>

Please do not use abbreviations or acronyms for your conference unless you explain them in your text. Many people outside your area of specialization will not recognize them. Also, if you are posting a second call for the same event, please keep the message short. Thank you for your cooperation.


  1. Vadim B. Kassevitch, 5th Intl Conf on Asian/African Langs
  2. glow99, GLOW'99

Message 1: 5th Intl Conf on Asian/African Langs

Date: Mon, 31 Aug 98 21:29:35 +0400
From: Vadim B. Kassevitch <>
Subject: 5th Intl Conf on Asian/African Langs


 First circular

 The University of St. Petersburg and The Institute for Asian and
African Studies (Moscow State University) are pleased to announce that
the 5th International Conference *THE LANGUAGES OF FAR EAST, SOUTHEAST
ASIA AND WEST AFRICA* will be held in St. Petersburg on September
7-11, 1999. The conference site is the University of St. Petersburg,
Dept of Oriental Studies (11, Universitetskaja nab., 199034,
St. Petersburg, Russia).
 Building on the success of its predecessors (Moscow 1991, 1993,
1995, 1997), this conference aims to encourage a spirit of dialogue
between students of Far East/Southeast Asia and of West Africa. The
conference offers a unique opportunity for its participants to
exchange views on the languages whose structures share so many
features, despite the genetic or areal unrelatedness.


A Special Session will be held, devoted to theoretical frameworks for
the analysis of isolating languages. It has been revealed more than
once in the course of discussions at previous LESEAWA conferences that
we badly need a common metalanguage in terms of which a coherent
analyses of the languages of FE, SEA, and WA would be most
efficient. We are certainly far from an intention to develop an
esoteric metalanguage. On the contrary, our ultimate goal is to
eventually enrich the common stock of theoretical notions, where
analyses of both "more traditional" and "less traditional" languages
would be fully commensurable. Most of currently used linguistic models
are not properly equipped to give a student of FE, SEA, and WA
languages reliable analytic tools, even where such fundamental
linguistic objects as the phoneme, parts of speech, clause, etc. are

 Invited speakers are to be announced.

 Working languages will be English and Russian.

 Applications and abstracts (ca. 100 words) should be submitted to:
Prof. Dr. Rudolph Yanson, Chair, Dept of China, SEA, and Korea,
Univ. of St. Petersburg <>, fax (812) 3287861,
phone (812) 3213767 (home)

All submissions are subject to refereeing by the Program Committee.

E-mail submissions are strongly encouraged.

Deadline for response to the 1st circular is March 10, 1999.
Notifications of acceptance will be mailed out before May 1999.

Registration fee is USD 60. The registration fee includes the volume
of conference proceedings, coffee-breakes, lunch (please specify if
you require a vegetarian or vegan option), cultural program, etc.

Organizing Committee:

Rudolph Yanson (chair)
Marc Kaploun (vice-chair) Fax (095) 203-3647
Alexandre Storozhuk (secretary)
Angelina Gerasimova
Aleksey Vasiljev

Program Committee:

Vadim Kassevitch (chair) <>
Artemy Karapetianz (vice-chair)
Victor Vinogradov (vice-chair)
Mikhail Rumjantsev
Rudolf Yanson
Andrey Zhukov
Nikolay Dobronravin
Alexandre Ogloblin
Sergey Yakhontov

- - 
Prof. Dr. Vadim B. Kassevitch (Univ. of St. Petersburg)
P.O.Box 14, St. Petersburg, 191025, Russia
Phone (7-812) 314-6123 (home), Fax (7-812) 2181346 (office)

Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue

Message 2: GLOW'99

Date: Tue, 1 Sep 98 10:48:08 +0000
From: glow99 <>
Subject: GLOW'99


The GLOW 99 colloquium will be organized by the Research Center for
General Linguistics (ZAS) in Berlin from 29th to 31st March 1999. The
conference will then continue in Potsdam on 1st April with parallel
workshops organized by the Potsdam University and LOT (Netherlands
Graduate School of Linguistics).

Themes of the Conference
Main colloquium: Universals
Phonetics in Phonology
Sources for Universals
Technical Aspects of Movement 


The search for universals has always been at the center of interest in
generative linguistics. Fundamental claims about universal properties
of language are what we build into the very architecture of the theory
of UG: primitives (features etc.), combinatorial operations (Merge),
the operation 'Move', interfaces with extralinguistic systems (LF,
PF), etc. Alongside such formal universals, we also seek substantive
universals in inventories, markedness patterns, feature hierarchies
etc. Such facts may reflect properties of UG itself or derive from
extralinguistic sources. Recent growth in crosslinguistic study opens
new opportunities for extending the empirical base, confirming or
challenging old generalizations and establishing new ones. At the same
time, recent theoretical developments in both phonology and syntax
lead to important questions concerning the formal and/or substantive
nature of universals in language, and the quest for the exact sources
of variation between languages.

In phonology, universals have typically been assumed to exist in many
different subcomponents, e.g. features, prosodic constituents. Only in
recent years, with the emergence of output-based evaluation systems,
has the focus of interest in universals shifted to the study of
constraints and their interaction. Hence new questions arise: are all
constraints universal in the sense that they are constitutive of
grammar? Should we conceive of constraints as being exhaustive and
ordered? Are there universals that constraint orderings have to obey?
Are there different domains (i.e. lexical and postlexical level) where
constraints apply? Are there language-specific constraints?

Syntactic theory in the early 80's assumed principles common to all
languages to interact with various types of 'macro-parameters': one
deep property from which several other properties derive
(e.g. pro-drop parameter). Later, variation was attributed to
'micro-parameters'. Now, with the emergence of Minimalism and
Optimality, basic issues like what constitutes a universal principle /
constraint, and what constitutes a parameter, need to be re-addressed.
Is there a universal inventory of functional heads/features? As to the
autonomy of, or the division of labour between syntax and morphology:
is parametrized variation confined to inflectional systems? Is
syntactic variation restricted to the choice of overt or zero
realization of a given feature? If all movement takes place in a
single cycle, does variation reduce to the presence of affixes or the
lack thereof? Are there universal constraints in morpho-syntax?
Moreover, in recent years it has been argued that thematic relations
are features. What are their characteristics? Do these have a
universal inventory? Could they be parametrized? Many
typological-descriptive generalizations await theoretical integration
- e.g. Greenbergian 'universals' of word order patterns,
cross-categorial harmony effects, etc. In this respect, Kayne's
proposal for a universal ordering merely shifts the burden from phrase
structure to movement . A guiding heuristic of generative grammar has
been that parsimonious (redundancy-free) theories are to be preferred;
but Minimalism goes further in suggesting that economy is built into
UG itself. To what extent can the hypothesis that UG principles
instantiate notions of economy be upheld?

In studying UG, we take the external systems with which it interfaces
to be invariant in linguistically significant senses across
individuals and languages. Thus we posit universal interpretation
mechanisms (and uniformity across languages at LF), 'universal
phonetics' (invariant articulatory / perceptual mechanisms), a
universal parser, etc.; so that variation is confined to grammars, in
particular phonology/morphology and&nbsp; aspects of the lexicon. Yet
properties of external systems may have far-reaching consequences for
our view of UG. As we learn more about them, universals attributed to
UG may have to be reassigned. What if UG-compatible grammars determine
languages that cannot exist because they are unuseable (unparseable;
unlearnable; etc)? Are there universal patterns in the acquisition
process, in parsing strategies, etc., that can be brought to bear?

The colloquium will consist of 20 talks of 45 minutes each plus
discussion. Abstracts may not exceed 2 pages with at least a 1 inch
margin on all four sides and should employ a font not smaller than 12
pt. They should be sent anonymously in tenfold, accompanied by a
camera-ready original with the author's name, address and affiliation

GLOW Selection Committee
c/o Artemis Alexiadou
Zentrum fr Allgemeine Sprachwissenschaft, Typologie 
und Universalienforschung
Jgerstr. 10/11, 10117 Berlin
phone: +49-30-20192404/1
fax: +49-30-20192402



Recent developments in syntax and phonology such as the Minimalist
Program or Optimality Theory have led to new insights into the
structure of the human linguistic capacity. In the context of such
theoretical developments, the conviction has grown that recourse to
innate properties of language cannot be the only explanation for the
existence of certain generalizations of formal linguistic
structure. The idea of the workshop "Sources for Universals" is to
bring together researchers from various fields inside and outside of
syntax and phonology in order to identify possible sources for formal
universals of natural language.

Such possible sources could come from the following domains,
 semantic universals
 consideration of processing difficulty
 considerations of laws of historical development for languages
 considersations of constraints on language acquisition 
 biological constraints in the sense of a "Universal Grammar"
 constraints inherent in the computational mechanisms serving language,

This list is not meant to be exhaustive. Contributions which link
formal universals as discussed in recent grammatical models to any of
such sources are particularly welcomed.


Filler-Gap dependencies (FGD) belong to the most intriguing properties
of natural language grammatical theories have to deal with. Finding
the right approach continues to be a matter of no little controversy.

Capturing the core properties of FGDs, concepts of strictest
c-command, which require fillers and their gaps to be immediately
attached to the same projection line, arguably possess a high amount
of naturalness or simplicity. This type of constraint is directly
reflected by Linear Indexed Grammars and has been implemented in the
minimalist extension condition on structure building. (Attempts to
derive the c-command relation from the minimalist operation Merge take
this strategy even further.) Yet, head-movement configurations,
analyzed as adjunction in the principles and parameters variant of
generative grammar, seem to require weaker versions of c-command, such
that the adjoined head 'inherits' the c-command domain of the head
adjoined to. It is an open question, whether there are alternatives
that do not - one way or the other - employ similar auxiliary devices.

As is well known, FGD-patterns (nested/crossed) have consequences for
the generative power of the grammars describing them. It is not
properly understood, however, which devices of which systems capture
less orderly patterns best. Systems using slash-categories or similar
techniques seem to run into considerable difficulty
here. Feature-lists integrated into a checking theory of movement may
be considered one of various alternatives.

Most recently, the minimalist adoption of the "Copy Theory of
Movement" opened up another array of related issues. How, for example,
do checking resources get eliminated if each step leading to
elimination is preceded by a step of copying these resources? Are
copies of NP/WH-moved constituents assumed to retain properties of
empty anaphors and syntactic variables respectively, or has any
reference to empty categories (e.g. ECP) and their potential link to
Binding Theory become undefined? If the latter, could this change be
motivated by complexity results concerning the powerful device of free
indexation, as employed by GB Binding Theory? Indeed, a general ban
on the use of indices has been accompanying the "Copy Theory of
Movement". This calls for a demonstration how chains, the standard
"legitimate LF-objects", which in alternative versions of syntax are
supposed to fully supplant movement, get handled without such devices.
Primary properties to be defined on chains of copies, for example,
would be PF-realizability as well as the distinction between operator,
variable, and descriptive content status at LF (nontrivial
consequences for the analyses of QR and ACD being directly implied).

Alternatively, it would be helpful to be able to appreciate how far
any worked-out proposals deviate from structure-sharing techniques as
used in HPSG/LFG (a.o.), index percolation devices from variants of
Indexed Grammar, and other structure generating systems like Tree
Adjoining Grammar or Categorial Grammar. This workshop invites
submissions of papers shedding light on the above questions from both
technical/formal and linguistic angles.

Abstracts for both workshops are invited for 45 minute presentations
(plus 15 minutes dicussion). They should not exceed one page/500
words. Please send five anonymous copies plus a camera ready original
(with author's name, address, and affiliation) to the address
specified below. Speakers will be partially reimbursed for their
expenses on the scale that applies to the colloquium.

GLOW Workshops
c/o Matthias Schlesewsky
Institut fuer Linguistik
Universitt Potsdam
Postfach 60 15 53
D 14415 Potsdam
phone: x49-331-977-2016
fax: x49-331-977-2761

Invited speakers: Edward Flemming, Donca Steriade
Organizers: Carlos Gussenhoven, Ren Kager

The workshop is broadly concerned with the relevance of articulatory
and perceptual facts for phonological theory. More specifically, it
intends to focus on such questions as the extent to which functional
factors determine phonological grammars, the status of the distinction
between phonological representation and phonetic implementation, the
issue of multiple (articulation-based as well as perception-based)
phonological representations, and the universality and `groundedness'
of phonological constraints.

The workshop will consist of approximately 7 talks of 45 minutes each,
followed by 15 minutes of discussion. Abstracts may not exceed one
page with at least a 1 inch margin on all four sides and should employ
a font no smaller than 12 pt. They should be sent anonymously in
threefold, accompanied by a camera-ready original with the author's
name, address and affiliation, to

 GLOW Phonology Workshop
 c/o. Ren Kager
 Utrecht Institute of Linguistics/OTS
 Trans 10
 3512 JK Utrecht

phone: +31-30-2538064
fax: +31-30-2536000
Deadline for submission of abstracts: December 1, 1998
Submission by fax or e-mail will not be accepted.
Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue