TÜlingu loengusari loodi 2019. aasta sügissemestril foorumina, kus saab kuulda keeleteaduslikke ettekandeid väga erinevatest lingvistika teemadest. Esinejaid on tulnud Tartust ja mujalt, Eestist ja välismaalt. Ettekanded toimuvad teisipäeviti kl 16:15–17:15 ning on kõigile huvilistele avatud. Ettekande lõpus on aega aruteluks, mis jätkub puhkeruumis joogi ja suupistetega.
Vihjed võimalike esinejate kohta on oodatud. Kui on külalisi Tartusse tulemas või on Tartu kolleegidel soov mõni ettekanne siinsele kuulajaskonnale esitada ja tagasisidet saada, siis palume kontakti võtta korraldajatega (virve.vihman [ät] ut.ee). Ühtlasi on võimalik liituda TÜlingu infolistiga samale aadressile kirjutades.
NB! Kavandame sel semestril TÜlingu ettekandeid hübriidsarjana: seni kuni võimalik kohtume Jakobi 2 ruumis 438, kuid pakume ühtlasi võimalust kuulata ettekandeid Zoomi teel. Sisenemisel palume kasutada koodi 146609.
Teisipäeviti kl 16:15–17:15, Jakobi 2-438
09.02 Kaius Sinnemäki (Helsingi ülikool)
n language typology it has been uncommon to hypothesize that cross-linguistic variation could depend on sociolinguistic factors. This is very different compared to, for instance, variationist corpus research where it has been common to compare the effects of “language internal” and “language external” factors on language structures. Things have started to slowly change during the past decade in language typology, too. Initial research has suggested that sociolinguistic (or perhaps more rightly demographic/sociological factors) may affect linguistic structures across languages, including morphological and phonological complexity (Sinnemäki 2009; Lupyan & Dale 2010; Moran & Blasi 2012; Bentz & Winter 2013; Sinnemäki & Di Garbo 2018). Here I report on a new study (Sinnemäki 2020) which proposes that the effect of “language internal” and “external factors” should be compared in typology in a similar spirit as is done in variationist research. Results based on a sample of roughly 250 languages suggest a complex interplay between grammatical and sociolinguistic factors such that the correlation between case marking and word order is conditioned by population size. I will also briefly discuss how comparative sociolinguistic research could be feasibly approached from a typological perspective to further enable bridging research on sociolinguistic and typological research.
16.02 Suzanne Lesage (Paris Diderot' ülikool)
In English and many other languages, third person possessives may take a local or nonlocal antecedent (1).
(1) Peteri lead Johnj to hisi/j parents’ place.
Some languages have reflexive possessive forms (RPs), typically used to refer to the local subject; compare the distribution of oma vs. the ordinary possessive tema in Estonian (2). Note that possessors can also stay unexpressed.
(2) Peeteri vii-s Jaanij omai/*jtema*i/j/øi/j vanema-te juurde.
Peeter.NOM lead-PST Jaan.GEN POSS parent-PL.GEN at
Peeteri led Jaanj to his parents’ place.
Reflexive possessives are seldom discussed in the literature, and usually assumed to obey the same binding constraints as ordinary reflexive pronouns (Kiparsky 2002). Preliminary observations suggest however that binding constraints on reflexive possessives are looser, and non-categorical. We hence predict that speakers will entertain the possibility that oma be bound by a nonlocal subject (3).
(3) Peeteri veen-is Jaanij [omai/j ema-st] / [enda-st] rääki-ma.
Peeter.NOM convince-PST Jaan.PART POSS.REFL mother-ELA REFL-ELA talk-INF
Peeterj convinced Jaani to talk about hisi/j mother/himselfi/*j
English and other languages also possess emphatic possessive forms such as French son propre (Charnavel 2012) or English his own. Such forms are comparable to RPs in being biased for reference to a local argument. However, restricting reference is not the main function of such pseudo-RPs. Hence we expect that binding constraints on pseudo-RPs are less tight than on RPs.
To test our hypotheses, we ran parallel crosslinguistic web-based experiments comparing two languages with pseudo-reflexives (English: his own, French: son propre) and one with reflexive possessives (Estonian: oma). A fourth experiment on Czech, another language with true RPs, is underway. In all our items, there are two possible antecedents for a possessive form: a local subject or some more distant expression.
We manipulated Type of clause embedding the possessive (independent and infinitive clause) and Type of possessive (with non-reflexive and pseudo-RPs in English and French, RP, simple possessive and covert possessive in Estonian). The items (20 for English and French and 24 for Estonian) and fillers (36) were translation equivalents (as far as possible) in all languages. 244 participants took part in this experiment (79 for English, 99 for French and 66 for Estonian). Sentences as in (4) were shown to native speakers who had to fill a gap as in (5).
(1) ENG : John allowed Donald to leave his (own) documents at the reception.
John made arrangements. Donald will leave his (own) documents at the reception.
FR: Jean a autorisé Paul à laisser ses (propres) papiers à l’accueil.
Jean s’est arrangé. Paul laissera ses documents à l’accueil.
EST: Peeter laseb Triinul ø/oma/tema dokumendid registratuuri jätta.
Peeter on kõik läbi mõelnud. Triinu jätab ø/oma/tema dokumendid registratuuri.
(2) _____________'s documents will be at the reception.
Les documents de __________ seront déposés à l’accueil.
_____________dokumendid jäetakse registratuuri.
In the infinitive condition, the possible antecedents were the matrix subject (John) and the local subject, i.e. the infinitive controller (Donald). In the independent condition, the possible antecedents were the local subject (Donald) and the subject of the first sentence (John).
Across languages, RPs (in Estonian) and pseudo-RPs (English and French) have a stronger bias for the local subject for independent sentences. As predicted, this preference is stronger for Estonian where the reflexive is grammaticalized, leading to a significant Type of clause * Type of reflexive form (pseudo-RP vs. RP) interaction.
Overall these crosslinguistic experiments give a gradient perspective on binding constraints with constraints for the RPs in Estonian less strong than what is assumed for reflexives but considerably stronger than what we found for pseudo-RPs in English and French.
Charnavel, I. (2012). On her own: Probing syntax and semantics with French propre (PhD Thesis). Doctoral dissertation, UCLA, Los Angeles, CA.
Kiparsky, P. (2002). Disjoint reference and the typology of pronouns. na.
02.03 Sali Tagliamonte (Toronto ülikool)
This study examines investigates a new discourse-pragmatic use of the word wait in a 10-million-word multi-community corpus of spoken vernacular North American English. This function is an extension from an original lexical meaning of pausing or lingering which as extended to indicate a pause in discourse as the speaker reflects on or corrects an earlier topic. Over 300 examples permit comparative sociolinguistic methods and statistical modelling in order to offer an early assessment of the variation among alternates of this innovative use and to test for broad social and linguistic factors in order to understand the underlying processes. The results expose notable recent developments: older people use longer, more temporally specified variants, wait a minute/wait a second, while wait alone is increasing in apparent time with women leading its advance. The robust increase in use of wait alone, e.g. “I haven’t seen her yet. No wait. Yes, I have”, co-occurrence with other markers, e.g. no, and the function of reflection and/or self-correction can be pinpointed to the generation of speakers born after 1970. Further, the unique contribution of the sociolinguistically stratified corpora under investigation also demonstrates that this development is proceeding according to well-known principles of linguistic change as wait develops from a verb with temporal specification to a full-fledged discourse-pragmatic marker on the left periphery of the main clause.
09.03 Fabian Tomaschek (Tübingeni ülikool)
The learning of articulatory skills and its effects on fine phonetic detail
23.03 Stef Spronck (Helsigi ülikool)
Bakhtin, Goffman and Jakobson walk into a framework. Says one to the other...
27.04 Andres Karjus (Tallinna ülikool)
Võistlus, valik ja vajadus keele muutumises
Sügissemestri kava 2020/21
Kevadsemestri kava 2020
Parema kasutuskogemuse tagamiseks kasutame küpsiseid. TÜ välisveeb ei töötle ega kogu isikuandmeid. Välisveeb kasutab FB Pixeli ja Google Analyticsi teenust. Loe lähemalt andmekaitsetingimustest.