Verbal Domains, Newcastle University (and hybrid), 26-27 June 2023 

 

Invited speakers 

 

Paula Fenger(Leipzig University) 

Stefan Keine (UCLA) 

Sana Kidwai (University of Cambridge) 

Helen Koulidobrova (Central Connecticut State University) 

Gillian Ramchand (UiT, The Arctic University of Norway) 

Coppe van Urk (QMUL) 

 

Call for papers 

 

Much recent work in minimalism has converged on the idea that there is a phase boundary between vP and TP around the level of voice or progressive aspect (Aelbrecht 2010, Aelbrecht and Harwood 2015, Ramchand & Svenonius 2014, Harwood 2015). While this work initially focused on well-studied phenomena in English such as VP ellipsis, expletive associate constructions and VP fronting, subsequent cross-linguistic work has suggested that the same boundary can be detected in Romance languages (Sheehan & Cyrino 2022, Casalicchio & Sheehan 2022) and unrelated languages such as Turkish and Japanese and within ‘words’ as well as in periphrastic structures (Fenger 2020). The ultimate explanation for this remains open, but Ramchand (2018) proposes an account based on the semantics of event composition.   

 

There is a tension between this claim and other work providing evidence for a v-related phase from asymmetries relating to subject/object extraction (see Cole and Hermon 1998; Bennett et al. 2012; Sato 2012, van Urk 2015; van Urk & Richard 2015). Such asymmetries seem to indicate that the v-related phase is located lower than voice/aspect, between the internal and external argument, at the level of v. Consider the following contrast from Defaka, which is similar to the patterns found in Malay and Indonesian (and also Dinka). The extraction marker -kè is required wherever an argument is moved from inside VP:  

 

Defaka – kè (Bennett et al. (2012)  

(1)  a. Bruce_indò   Bòmájírí-kè         [_CP  t_i[_VP  à    ésé-mà]]  

           Bruce FOC Boma know-EXT               her  see-NFUT  

           ‘It is Bruce that Boma knows saw her.’  

 

       b. áyá   jíkà_i     ndò   Bòmáì bíè-kè[_CP  ì ísò   [_VPt_isónó-mà-kè]]  

           new  houseFOC  Boma I ask-EXT   I ISO        buy-NFUT-EXT  

           ‘It is a new house that Boma asked me if I’m going to buy.’  

 

In example (1a), the matrix verbs bear the suffix -kè whereas the embedded verb does not. This is because the focused argument is base-generated in an external argument position and this position is, by hypothesis, on the edge of the embedded v-related phase (in spec vP). For this reason, subject extraction proceeds with no issue. Now compare this with example (1b) where the focused argument is base generated as an internal argument of the embedded clause, inside the vP phase. In this case, the embedded verb must also bear -kè, in order to facilitate extraction of the internal argument. Note that in both examples the matrix verb bears -kè because both internal and external arguments must transit through the matrix v-related phase edge on the way to the C-related focus position.   

 

Despite these robust and recurrent empirical patterns, the whole notion of phases remains somewhat controversial within generative grammar, and the idea that there is a v-related phase in addition to a C-related phase even more so (see Keine 2019). The evidence for successive cyclicity of the kind in (1), has been questioned (Zeijlstra & Keine 2020) and there is a certain sense of unease regarding the fragility of phasal diagnostics and their uneasy relationship with extraction restrictions (Boeckx & Grohmann 2007).   

 

This workshop seeks to bring together those interested in verbal domains both sympathetic to and critical of v-related phasehood to encourage a discussion of these and related issues. In particular, we are interested in encouraging the consideration of evidence from a diverse range of languages (including, but not limited to, Niger Congo, Indo-Aryan, Neo-Aramaic, Turkic and signed languages) from morphosyntactic and morphophonological phenomena, presented by a diverse range of researchers from early career to established academics. In this way, our aim is to re-evaluate this important theoretical issue, considering the implications of data from understudied languages, from phenomena not previously considered and from patterns seen in acquisition and contact. A non-exhaustive list of indicative questions follows:  

 

1. Is there a v-related phase? If not, then how can the empirical patterns described above be explained?  

 

2. If there is a v-related phase then what is its size and does this vary across languages? 

 

3. How, if at all, are v-related phases in evidence in code-switching and language acquisition? 

 

4. How, if at all, is the v-related phase relevant in signed languages?   

 

5. Is there robust morphological/syntactic evidence for successive cyclicity at the v-phase?  

 

6. What are the most robust diagnostics for v-related phasehood?  

 

7. How can we distinguish subject/object asymmetries at the v-phase level from that-trace effects at the C-phase level?  

 

8. Are there anti-locality effects at the v-phase level? 

 

9. How do richer verbal constructions containing light verbs fit into phase-based approaches?  

 

10. How do patterns of split ergativity and agreement reversals relate to phase theory?   

 

 

Abstract submission  

 

Abstracts should be anonymous and a maximum of 2 A4 pages longincluding references and examples. The deadline for submission is midnight on 14^th April 2023 GMT and notification of acceptances will be sent out in late April or early May. Some presentation slots will be reserved for postgraduate students and ECRs, so please indicate on your abstract if you have either status.  

 

Abstract submission link: https://app.oxfordabstracts.com/stages/5848/submitter 

 

Funding 

 

We gratefully acknowledge funding from the Van Riemsdijk Foundation,the Linguistics Association of Great Britain and Newcastle University’s School of English Literature, Language and Linguistics.  

 

Organising committee 

 

Vean Al-Saka 

Gabriel Martínez Vera 

Farah Nazir 

Emma Nguyen 

Michelle Sheehan 

Rebecca Woods 

The programme for Verbal Domains is now available via our website: https://blogs.ncl.ac.uk/verbal-domains/programme/

Registration will open shortly and in-person spaces are limited so please register early if you would like to attend in person. 

Student attendance is free, as is online attendance. There is small fee for waged in-person attendance to contribute to catering costs (£15).

Please help us advertise this event on social media and share this information with any students/colleagues who may be interested!

Anonymous wrote:

Verbal Domains, Newcastle University (and hybrid), 26-27 June 2023 

 

Invited speakers 

 

Paula Fenger(Leipzig University) 

Stefan Keine (UCLA) 

Sana Kidwai (University of Cambridge) 

Helen Koulidobrova (Central Connecticut State University) 

Gillian Ramchand (UiT, The Arctic University of Norway) 

Coppe van Urk (QMUL) 

 

Call for papers 

 

Much recent work in minimalism has converged on the idea that there is a phase boundary between vP and TP around the level of voice or progressive aspect (Aelbrecht 2010, Aelbrecht and Harwood 2015, Ramchand & Svenonius 2014, Harwood 2015). While this work initially focused on well-studied phenomena in English such as VP ellipsis, expletive associate constructions and VP fronting, subsequent cross-linguistic work has suggested that the same boundary can be detected in Romance languages (Sheehan & Cyrino 2022, Casalicchio & Sheehan 2022) and unrelated languages such as Turkish and Japanese and within ‘words’ as well as in periphrastic structures (Fenger 2020). The ultimate explanation for this remains open, but Ramchand (2018) proposes an account based on the semantics of event composition.   

 

There is a tension between this claim and other work providing evidence for a v-related phase from asymmetries relating to subject/object extraction (see Cole and Hermon 1998; Bennett et al. 2012; Sato 2012, van Urk 2015; van Urk & Richard 2015). Such asymmetries seem to indicate that the v-related phase is located lower than voice/aspect, between the internal and external argument, at the level of v. Consider the following contrast from Defaka, which is similar to the patterns found in Malay and Indonesian (and also Dinka). The extraction marker -kè is required wherever an argument is moved from inside VP:  

 

Defaka – kè (Bennett et al. (2012)  

(1)  a. Bruce_indò   Bòmájírí-kè         [_CP  t_i[_VP  à    ésé-mà]]  

           Bruce FOC Boma know-EXT               her  see-NFUT  

           ‘It is Bruce that Boma knows saw her.’  

 

       b. áyá   jíkà_i     ndò   Bòmáì bíè-kè[_CP  ì ísò   [_VPt_isónó-mà-kè]]  

           new  houseFOC  Boma I ask-EXT   I ISO        buy-NFUT-EXT  

           ‘It is a new house that Boma asked me if I’m going to buy.’  

 

In example (1a), the matrix verbs bear the suffix -kè whereas the embedded verb does not. This is because the focused argument is base-generated in an external argument position and this position is, by hypothesis, on the edge of the embedded v-related phase (in spec vP). For this reason, subject extraction proceeds with no issue. Now compare this with example (1b) where the focused argument is base generated as an internal argument of the embedded clause, inside the vP phase. In this case, the embedded verb must also bear -kè, in order to facilitate extraction of the internal argument. Note that in both examples the matrix verb bears -kè because both internal and external arguments must transit through the matrix v-related phase edge on the way to the C-related focus position.   

 

Despite these robust and recurrent empirical patterns, the whole notion of phases remains somewhat controversial within generative grammar, and the idea that there is a v-related phase in addition to a C-related phase even more so (see Keine 2019). The evidence for successive cyclicity of the kind in (1), has been questioned (Zeijlstra & Keine 2020) and there is a certain sense of unease regarding the fragility of phasal diagnostics and their uneasy relationship with extraction restrictions (Boeckx & Grohmann 2007).   

 

This workshop seeks to bring together those interested in verbal domains both sympathetic to and critical of v-related phasehood to encourage a discussion of these and related issues. In particular, we are interested in encouraging the consideration of evidence from a diverse range of languages (including, but not limited to, Niger Congo, Indo-Aryan, Neo-Aramaic, Turkic and signed languages) from morphosyntactic and morphophonological phenomena, presented by a diverse range of researchers from early career to established academics. In this way, our aim is to re-evaluate this important theoretical issue, considering the implications of data from understudied languages, from phenomena not previously considered and from patterns seen in acquisition and contact. A non-exhaustive list of indicative questions follows:  

 

1. Is there a v-related phase? If not, then how can the empirical patterns described above be explained?  

 

2. If there is a v-related phase then what is its size and does this vary across languages? 

 

3. How, if at all, are v-related phases in evidence in code-switching and language acquisition? 

 

4. How, if at all, is the v-related phase relevant in signed languages?   

 

5. Is there robust morphological/syntactic evidence for successive cyclicity at the v-phase?  

 

6. What are the most robust diagnostics for v-related phasehood?  

 

7. How can we distinguish subject/object asymmetries at the v-phase level from that-trace effects at the C-phase level?  

 

8. Are there anti-locality effects at the v-phase level? 

 

9. How do richer verbal constructions containing light verbs fit into phase-based approaches?  

 

10. How do patterns of split ergativity and agreement reversals relate to phase theory?   

 

 

Abstract submission  

 

Abstracts should be anonymous and a maximum of 2 A4 pages longincluding references and examples. The deadline for submission is midnight on 14^th April 2023 GMT and notification of acceptances will be sent out in late April or early May. Some presentation slots will be reserved for postgraduate students and ECRs, so please indicate on your abstract if you have either status.  

 

Abstract submission link: https://app.oxfordabstracts.com/stages/5848/submitter 

 

Funding 

 

We gratefully acknowledge funding from the Van Riemsdijk Foundation,the Linguistics Association of Great Britain and Newcastle University’s School of English Literature, Language and Linguistics.  

 

Organising committee 

 

Vean Al-Saka 

Gabriel Martínez Vera 

Farah Nazir 

Emma Nguyen 

Michelle Sheehan 

Rebecca Woods