View the meeting handbook - Linguistic Society of America

Natalie Operstein (University of California, Los Angeles) Session 100Prevocalization in Maxakalí & beyondMaxakalí is the only language known to productively alternate between fully articulated, prevocalized, and fully vocalizedconsonantal allophones. Earlier analyses of Maxakalí (pre)vocalization fail to derive correctly the place of articulation of (pre)vowelsgenerated by a number of consonants. I offer a solution to this problem by analyzing Maxakalí prevowels as forwardsegmentalizations of the consonants' vocalic component. Appealing to the notion of an inherent vocalic component of plainconsonants allows separating places of articulation of (pre)vowels from those of the consonants in Maxakalí, and in addition has profound implications for the internal composition ofconsonants in general.Polly O'Rourke (University of Arizona) Session 12Gender congruency & picture naming in SpanishI examined the production of bare nouns and noun phrases by native Spanish speakers within the picture-word interference paradigmin hopes of replicating the inhibitory gender congruency effect found in bare noun production in Italian by Cubelli, et al. 2005.Experiment 1 used an auditory distractor word while, in Experiment 2, the distractor word was presented visually. No gendercongruency effects, neither facilitatory nor inhibitory, were found in bare noun production in either experiment. These findings areconsistent with the notion that gender is accessed only when necessary for syntactic computation.David Y. Oshima (Arizona State University) WITHDRAWN Session 13Subject-oriented adverbs & related constructions: One meaning, different packagesI develop a construction grammar analysis of the following three constructions: (1) the subject-oriented adverb construction (Kindly,John made me a sandwich), (2) the ‘Adj. + to Inf.’ construction (John was kind to make me a sandwich), and (3) the ‘Adj. + of NP’construction (It was kind of John to make me a sandwich). While the three constructions have many semantic commonalities, theycontrast with one another with respect to the way their semantic components are realized. I present formal representations ofsyntactic/semantic properties of the three constructions, using the HPSG-style unification-based formalism.Iyabo F. Osiapem (Washington University, St. Louis) Session 61Past temporal reference in Black Bermudian English: Perfective be/perfective doneI address past temporal reference in the English spoken by 30 Black Bermudians. Although the Black Bermudian English (BBE) pasttemporal reference is similar to AAE and other Englishes of the Eastern Caribbean, BBE has two unique features--perfective be andperfective done. Perfective be is the combination of the present perfect with the be verb as in I'm been doing it so long now.Perfective done occurs in the form similar to the perfect as in I done lived down here for 60 years. I describe these features andexamine their variation.Roelant Ossewaarde (University at Buffalo, State University of New York) Session 1Against a directional account of agreementI discuss counterexamples to a directional approach of agreement. Theories of agreement typically assume a target-controller relation,with the latter projecting all or some agreement information to the former. Some assume that agreeing features on the target have littleor no semantic effect at all. I present problematic cases for such treatments, cases in which meaning is expressed by a mismatch ofvalues of agreement features (misagreement). Interpretation of each element in misagreement is required in order to derive the correctmeaning. These are counter-examples to theories that posit unidirectionality of the controller-target relationship.Jonathan Owens (University of Maryland, College Park) Session 19Jidda Hassan (U Miaduguri, Nigeria)Conversation markers in Arabic-Hausa codeswitching: Saliency & language hierarchiesUsing a multilingual (Arabic-Hausa-English-Standard Arabic) corpus from northeastern Nigeria, we show bilingual insertions of sixturn-initial conversation particles to be (statistically) sensitive to two broad factors: status of particle and matrix language it isembedded in. Status is defined by a saliency scale based on whether the particle has extended propositional reference, use as abackchannel marker or as a turn claimer, while ML is defined as Arabic (L1) vs Hausa (L2). On this basis, we explain why certainconversation particles (e.g. Hausa to ‘okay’) migrate outside their L2 domain into L1, whereas others (H. ee ‘yes backchannel’) donot.154