From iyanovic at andrew.cmu.edu Tue Nov 3 19:48:20 2015 From: iyanovic at andrew.cmu.edu (Igor Yanovich) Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2015 19:48:20 -0500 Subject: [Puzzles in language change] Nov 4: Blythe&Croft 2012 Message-ID: <249893C2-8732-4DF3-8314-6A327784B8D1@andrew.cmu.edu> Dear everyone, We meet tomorrow (Nov 4) to discuss Blythe & Croft 2012 (sent in an earlier email). The goal of the paper is to check which kinds of evolutionary settings (as we discussed before with relation to Reali & Griffiths's paper) lead to the emergence of an S-curve of change. The methodology is as follows. B&C define several ways in which a linguistic change may proceed - based on, e.g., whether there is a prestige differential between the modelled speakers. Then they check which trajectories linguistic changes under different settings show. Their conclusion is that the only sensible setting where an S-curve emerges is one where the innovative variant is reproduced preferentially, i.e. has a greater fitness. This is in opposition to e.g. cases when an equally fit innovation just spreads through the population by chance, without any functional force driving the change. If you have only limited time, but would like to skim some parts of the article, I'd suggest the order Sec 1 -> Sec 4 -> Sec 3. The terminology such as "neutral interactor selection" is not at all intuitive, and, I find, also not very clearly explained in the text. So if you are confused in Sec.3, that's likely not your fault. See you tomorrow! -Igor From iyanovic at andrew.cmu.edu Tue Nov 10 13:25:44 2015 From: iyanovic at andrew.cmu.edu (Igor Yanovich) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2015 13:25:44 -0500 Subject: [Puzzles in language change] Nov 11: computational linguistic geography Message-ID: <010d18250b02de1f9287cf3b68c91020.squirrel@webmail.andrew.cmu.edu> Dear everyone, For the rest of the semester, we won't have actual _readings_ in the reading group, but instead have presentations/discussions. Tomorrow, I will talk about the nascent research area of computational linguistic geography, first explaining what earlier research (both traditional and computational) has been done, and then talking a bit about my own pilot projects in the area. Next week, Nov 18, we will have a presentation by Holman Tse (UPitt), who will talk about contact-induced language change, including his own work on the phenomenon. See you tomorrow at the usual time! -Igor From iyanovic at andrew.cmu.edu Tue Nov 17 18:03:20 2015 From: iyanovic at andrew.cmu.edu (Igor Yanovich) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2015 18:03:20 -0500 Subject: [Puzzles in language change] Nov 18: Holman Tse "Contact-Induced Sound Change: Moving beyond the internal vs. external dichotomy" Message-ID: Dear everyone, Tomorrow at the reading group Holman Tse (UPitt) will tell us about his research on contact-induced sound change. Please find the abstract attached below. See you tomorrow! -Igor Title: Contact-Induced Sound Change: Moving beyond the internal vs. external dichotomy In both historical linguistics and in sociolinguistics, there has traditionally been a dichotomy between internally-motivated and externally-motivated change. In my presentation/discussion, I?ll talk about how my research seeks to move beyond this dichotomy through the study of sound change in under-researched contact settings. I?ll begin by discussing Thomason & Kaufman?s (1988) framework for the analysis of contact-induced change. According to this framework, there are two general mechanisms for change that have implications for the outcome of contact: language maintenance (borrowing) and interference through shift. In addition to these two mechanisms, the other important factor is intensity of contact. I will talk about two different projects on two different contact settings that illustrate these two mechanisms. Both involve intensive contact (or widespread bi- and multilingualism) and both involve results that challenge the traditional internal/external dichotomy. The first is on the historical development of the Somali Bantu dialect of Kizigua (Chizigula). This is a variety that developed out of the context of historic migration and subsequent language shift. I?ll present data from two time points that show a pattern typical of internally-motivated change. As I will show, however through a discussion of the social history of Kizigua speakers, the actual mechanism is interference through shift and hence a change that can be described as ?externally-motivated?. The second project I'll discuss is on Toronto Heritage Cantonese. In this ongoing project, I compare the vowel pronunciation patterns of two groups of speakers in Toronto, Canada: GEN 1 (Hong Kong born and raised) and GEN 2 (Toronto raised). My findings so far suggest that the best way of characterizing the changes between these two generational groups is ?phonological interference? rather than "phonetic assimilation". While I am still grappling with whether or not ?interference? is the best way of describing the results, it does seem clear that the internal/external dichotomy is inadequate for describing what is going on. From iyanovic at andrew.cmu.edu Wed Nov 18 15:37:16 2015 From: iyanovic at andrew.cmu.edu (Igor Yanovich) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2015 15:37:16 -0500 Subject: [Puzzles in language change] NO MEETING the Thanksgiving week Message-ID: Dear everyone, As you could probably guess, we are not going to meet next Wednesday. The next meeting, which is accidentally the last one, will be on Dec 2. All the best, Igor