Linguistic Variation

Elena Pagliarini (elena.pagliarini@uab.cat) 

Gemma Repiso Puigdelliura (gemma.repiso@uab.cat)

 

GOALS:

At the end of the course, students should be acquainted with: 

· an overview of some hot topics that are currently being investigated in formal approaches to linguistic variation; 

· current theoretical perspectives on the linguistic variation related to phonology and phonetics; 

· current perspectives on language acquisition concerning the syntax-semantic interface and the semantic-pragmatic interface, where variation can be found at group level and at language level. 

 

STRUCTURE & CONTENT:

This course investigates the relation between linguistic theory and language variation. Several case studies with a strong crosslinguistic variation component will be examined: 

 

(a) Linguistic variation in phonetics and phonology: 

a. variation and change in phonological theory; 

b. phonological variation through constraint ranking; 

c. variation and contact-induced sound change. 

 

(b) Linguistic variation in language acquisition: 

a. the acquisition of the semantic-pragmatic interface: scalar implicatures; 

b. the acquisition of quantification; 

c. the acquisition of negation. 

 

EVALUATION:

The assessment for this course will be based on one exam contributing 60% towards the final grade (30% for each block). The final exam will be composed by two parts: the first part of the exam will evaluate topics covered in the block Linguistic variation in phonology and phonetics, while the second part will assess material covered in the block Linguistic variation in language acquisition. The final exam will require students to demonstrate not only a solid understanding of the course material, but also critical thinking and effective writing skills. Students will be expected to apply their knowledge to tackle novel empirical and analytical problems. An additional 40% of the final grade (20% for each block) will be allocated to the completion of exercises or oral presentations to be completed in the classroom. This component aims to assess students’ ability to use their knowledge and apply it in new discussions, enhancing their overall learning experience. 

Re-evaluation: In the event that a student receives a final grade below 5 (within the range of 3 - 4.9), they may opt for a re-evaluation via a single final exam if they intend to pass the course. Successful completion of this exam will result in a final grade of 5. 

 

Examination-based assessment 

Under exceptional and justified circumstances, a single examination (100% of the grade) can be scheduled. Re-evaluation of this assessment can only be considered for students having failed with grades ranging from 3 to 4.9. The maximum final grade can only be 5.

 

REFERENCES:

Selected references for Linguistic variation in phonetics and phonology: 

Anttila, A. (2007). “Variation and optionality”. In P. de Lacy (ed.). The Cambridge Handbook of Phonology, 519-536. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 

Bermúdez-Otero, R. (2006). “Phonological change in Optimality Theory”. In K. Brown (ed.) Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics, 2nd edition, vol 9, 497-505. Oxford: Elsevier. 

Coetzee, A. W. & J. Pater (2011). “The place of variation in phonological theory”. In J. Goldsmith, J. Riggle & A. C. L. Yu (eds.). The Handbook of Phonological Theory. Second Edition, 401-434. Chichester, W. Sussex: Wiley-Blackwell. 

McCarthy, J. J. (2008). Optimality Theory: Applyting Theory to Data. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell. 

Johnson, K. A., & Babel, M. (2023). Language Contact Within the Speaker: Phonetic Variation and Crosslinguistic Influence. Language and Speech, 67(2), 401-437. https://doi.org/10.1177/00238309231182592 (Original work published 2024) 

Yu, A.C.L. (2020). The Phonetics of Sound Change. In The Handbook of Historical Linguistics (eds R.D. Janda, B.D. Joseph and B.S. Vance). https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118732168.ch14 

Selected references for Linguistic variation in language acquisition: 

Aravind, A., de Villiers, J., de Villiers, P., Lonigan, C., Phillips, B., Clancy, J., Landry, S., Swank, P., Assel, M., Taylor, H., Eisenberg, N., Spinrad, T. & Valiente, C. (2017). Children’s quantification with every over time. Glossa: a journal of general linguistics, 10(X), 1. [2] 

Barner, D., Brooks, N., & Bale, A. (2011). Accessing the unsaid: The role of scalar alternatives in children’s pragmatic inference. Cognition 118(1): 84-93. [1] 

Chierchia, G. (2013). Logic in Grammar: Polarity, Free Choice, and Intervention. Oxford: OUP Oxford. 

Gotzner, N., Barner, D., & Crain, S. (2020). Disjunction triggers exhaustivity implicatures in 4-to 5-year-olds: Investigating the role of access to alternatives. Journal of Semantics, 37(2): 219-245. [1] 

Guasti, M. T. (2017). Language Acquisition: The Growth of Grammar. Cambridge, MA: MIT press. 

Katsos, N., Cummins, C., Ezeizabarrena, M. J., Gavarró, A., Kuvač Kraljević, J., Hrzica, G., ... & Noveck, I. (2016). Cross-linguistic patterns in the acquisition of quantifiers. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 113(33): 9244-9249. [2] 

Maldonado, M., & Culbertson, J. (2021). Nobody doesn’t like negative concord. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 50: 1401-1416. [3] 

Skordos, D., & Papafragou, A. (2016). Children’s derivation of scalar implicatures: Alternatives and relevance. Cognition 153: 6-18. [1] 

Thornton, R., Notley, A., Moscati, V., & Crain, S. (2016). Two negations for the price of one. Glossa: a journal of general linguistics 1(1). [3]