Yearbook of the Poznan Linguistic Meeting <div class="oczasopismie"> <p><strong>Focus and Scope</strong></p> <p>The <em>Yearbook of the Poznań Linguistic Meeting</em> (YPLM) carries selected papers based on presentations at the <a href="">Poznań Linguistic Meeting</a>, a leading European linguistics conference.</p> <p> </p> </div> <div class="oczasopismie"> <div class="oczasopismie"><strong>DOI:</strong> <a href="">10.14746//yplm</a></div> <div class="oczasopismie"><strong>ISSN: 2449-7525</strong></div> <div class="oczasopismie"> </div> <div class="oczasopismie"><strong>Indexed in:</strong> <p>Arianta; Baidu Scholar; CEJSH (The Central European Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities); CNKI Scholar (China National Knowledge Infrastructure); CNPIEC - cnpLINKer; Dimensions; EBSCO (relevant databases); EBSCO Discovery Service; ERIH PLUS (European Reference Index for the Humanities and Social Sciences); Google Scholar; J-Gate; JournalTOCs; KESLI-NDSL; (Korean National Discovery for Science Leaders); Linguistic Bibliography; Linguistics Abstracts Online; MLA International Bibliography; MyScienceWork; Naviga (Softweco); Norwegian Register for Scientific Journals, Series and Publishers; Primo Central (ExLibris); ProQuest (relevant databases); Publons; QOAM (Quality Open Access Market); ReadCube; Semantic Scholar; Summon (ProQuest); TDNet; Ulrich's Periodicals Directory/ulrichsweb; WanFang Data; WorldCat (OCLC);</p> <p><strong>Journal metrics according to MNiSW (Polish Ministry of Science and Higher Education) (2023): </strong>20</p> </div> </div> <div class="oczasopismie"><strong>All articles published in YPLM are licensed under Creative Commons <a href="" rel="license">Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.<br /></strong></div> <div class="oczasopismie"><br /><a href="" rel="license"><img src="" alt="Creative Commons License" /></a><br /><br /></div> en-US <p>All papers published by the Yearbook of the Poznań Linguistic Meeting are published in an Open Access model using the <a href="">CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0</a> Creative Commons licence.</p> (Jarosław Weckwerth) (PRESSto) Sat, 25 Sep 2021 00:00:00 +0200 OJS 60 Sentence-final particles in multiple phases? Some evidence from language contact <p>Cinque’s (1999) cartographic theory associates one meaning with one functional head. As such, if applied to sentence-final particles (SFPs), cartographic assumptions ought to group semantically similar SFPs onto the same functional head cross-linguistically (cf. Pan 2019; Sybesma &amp; Li 2007). However, I show that aspectual and restrictive focus SFPs in Cantonese and Mandarin (Sinitic, Sino-Tibetan) seemingly contradict Cinque by occupying different structural positions despite their semantic closeness. To shed light on the problem, I adduce novel data from Guangzhou Cantonese and Singapore Cantonese, demonstrating that SFPs borrowed into these varieties are treated differently according to their structural height. Likewise citing scopal and other facts, I ultimately make a case for placing SFPs in multiple phases (Chomsky 2000 etc.), following Erlewine (2017) and Biberauer (2017), but <em>contra</em> Pan (2019), a.o. To accommodate Cinque (1999), I ultimately submit that different-phase SFPs constitute distinct lexical classes, which each cluster separately, but in the same semantically determined sequence compatible with cartographic assumptions.</p> Tsan Tsai Chan Copyright (c) 2021 Tsan Tsai Chan Sat, 25 Sep 2021 00:00:00 +0200 Semantic prosody of extended lexical units: A case study <p>Semantic prosody is typically referred to as an evaluative function of certain words or multiword items appearing within collocates of positive or negative meaning. The present study deals with the semantic prosody (context properties) of extended lexical units (ELUs) according to the psycholinguistic variables ‘valence’ (emotional positivity), ‘arousal’ (excitement, mood-enhancement), and ‘concreteness’. The object of investigation are the verbal phrases <em>feel blue</em> (unambiguous idiomatic ELU, without a literal counterpart) and <em>see red</em> (ambiguous ELU, idiomatic or literal). The study builds on Snefjella &amp; Kuperman (2016) who propose context norms for English words on the basis of a USENET mega-corpus. For the detection of ELU representations, a questionnaire-based survey was conducted with speakers of American English. For the detection of the context values of ELUs, a corpus research was carried on by using the Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA) and the News on the Web corpus (NOW). The results suggest that ELU contexts largely conform to the averaged context norms of ELU constituents. ELU representations are strongly dissociated from contexts.</p> Chariton Charitonidis Copyright (c) 2021 Chariton Charitonidis Sat, 25 Sep 2021 00:00:00 +0200 Toward a transdisciplinary approach to FL classroom interaction <p>The focus of the article is on the questions and issues that have arisen in research on communication in second language contexts, as well as possibilities of addressing them that open up when one moves to the understanding of scientific inquiry as “a form of <em>anti-</em>disciplinary or transgressive knowledge, as a way of thinking and doing that is always problematizing” (Pennycook 2007: 37).</p> <p>The article aims to point to some issues in research on communication in a FL classroom where a transdisciplinary approach might prove useful or even necessary to address them. An expanded analysis of a classroom discussion carried out within Hymes’ model that includes different modes and forms of communication as well as aspects of on-goingly changing contexts should illustrate the benefits of applying a transdisciplinary approach in research on communication &nbsp;in a second language classroom.</p> Kamila Ciepiela Copyright (c) 2021 Kamila Ciepiela Sat, 25 Sep 2021 00:00:00 +0200 Blends: an intermediate category at the crossroads of morphology and phonology <p>Blends are traditionally seen as irregular and unsystematic. In this paper it is shown that one must make a distinction between stub compounds or clipped compounds (<em>sitcom</em>, <em>misper</em>) and real blends (<em>brunch</em>, <em>advertorial</em>). In much of the literature on blends, however, stub compounds are classified as blends.</p> <p>Stub compounds appear to be compounds and follow the Compound Stress Rule, whereas blends turn out to form a category of its own. Blends exhibit a right-hand head and insofar they can be compared to compounds. However, their prosodic structure is a copy of the second source word, the word where the final part of the word comes from. The analysis presented here demonstrates that blends consist of one prosodic word, whereas compounds consist of two. This proves that blends are an intermediate category of their own at the intersection of phonology and morphology. The examples discussed mainly come from English. Data from Dutch and German is also presented.</p> Camiel Hamans Copyright (c) 2021 Camiel Hamans Sat, 25 Sep 2021 00:00:00 +0200 A critical look at partial acceptability in English and Polish <p>This paper is primarily concerned with the role of partial acceptability (and its ‘flavors’) in English linguistic examples taken from the field of generative grammar. Partially acceptable judgments as a subset of acceptability judgments form a heterogeneous group that plays a significant role in linguistic research and yet the extent to which partial acceptability is employed in the linguistic literature has not been studied extensively. The first part of the paper discusses a number of relevant issues related to the use of partial acceptability, such as problems with the conceptualization of gradience or excessive creativity with regard to levels of acceptability present in generative papers. The second part of the paper reports on a meta-linguistic study of partial acceptability in a pre-selected corpus of generative papers on English, with the focus on the types of partial acceptability and their function. Lastly, the English results are compared with the results of a previously conducted similar study of partial acceptability in Polish.</p> Sylwiusz Żychliński Copyright (c) 2021 Sylwiusz Żychliński Sat, 25 Sep 2021 00:00:00 +0200 Foreword to the special section <p>This is the foreword to the special section with articles from the PLM2019 session titled “Modern phonetics and phonological representation: a new outlook on an old controversy”.</p> Katarzyna Dziubalska-Kołaczyk, Ewelina Wojtkowiak Copyright (c) 2021 Katarzyna Dziubalska-Kołaczyk, Ewelina Wojtkowiak Sat, 25 Sep 2021 00:00:00 +0200 New vs. similar sound production accuracy: The uneven fight <p>The Speech Learning Model states that the process of equivalence classification reduces the accuracy of a similar L2 sound by forming an L1-L2 merged category whereas new sounds tend to be pronounced with greater accuracy due to lack of perceptual linkage with an L1 category (Flege 1995). We found further support for this differentiation in the production of the canonical schwa as a new sound by L1 Polish/L2 English speakers and as a similar sound by L1 Romanian/L2 English speakers, who produced an L1-L2 schwa merger. The aim of the current paper is to further investigate the production accuracy of new and similar sounds. First of all, a control group that consisted of native Romanian speakers was used to analyse the L1-L2 similar sound merger. Secondly, a measure of overall pronunciation ability based on foreign accent ratings (FAR) was included. The results confirm that production accuracy for new sounds is much greater than for similar sounds which form merged diaphones with the equivalent L1 sound. As a result, neither sound is produced on target when compared to a native speaker reference. Moreover, new sound production accuracy benefits much more from an increase in general proficiency and overall L2 pronunciation ability.</p> Jolanta Sypiańska, Elena-Raluca Constantin Copyright (c) 2021 Jolanta Sypiańska, Elena-Raluca Constantin Sat, 25 Sep 2021 00:00:00 +0200 London calling (or cooling?): Feature theory, phonetic variation, and phonological change <p>This article looks at the ongoing merger of /uː/ or /ɔː/ before tautosyllabic /l/, that is, words like <em>call(ing)</em> and <em>cool(ing)</em> in London English, the reasons for this merger and how it can be captured formally. It argues that the merger is the end point of a chain of phonological consequences of a phonetic process, the gradient fronting of /uː/, which leads to a reorganisation of the vowel system. The merger can thus only be understood by looking at the properties of London (Cockney) phonology and ongoing changes in this system. On the theoretical level, this article argues that underspecification in feature theory is crucial to understand the interaction between phonetic variation and phonological change, arguing that the vowel shifts in London English start out as phonetic changes along dimensions that are featurally underspecified. Underspecification thus provides a crucial link between phonological categories and phonetic gradience.</p> Christian Uffmann Copyright (c) 2021 Christian Uffmann Sat, 25 Sep 2021 00:00:00 +0200 On converse lability and its decline from Vedic to Epic Sanskrit: The verb juṣ- ‘to enjoy’ and ‘to please’ <p>In the Early Vedic language, we encounter two different systems of active vs. middle voice and valency oppositions. The emergence of many thematic Vedic transitive active forms (e.g. <em>īráya-<sup>ti</sup></em> ‘to raise sth. or so.’) is obviously innovative and secondary when compared to labile, and formally more archaic athematic active forms (e.g. <em>íyar-<sup>ti</sup></em> ~ <em>iyár-<sup>ti</sup></em> ‘to rise, to raise sth. or so.’). On this basis, it has been claimed that the original voice distinction was mainly driven by agency (i.e., volition, control, responsibility and animacy), whereas the secondary voice opposition was driven by transitivity distinctions and direct and indirect reflexive middle semantics (Pooth 2012, 2014). In this article, another verb in question, namely the psych verb <em>juṣ-</em> ‘to enjoy, to please’, will be examined as a parallel case to further discuss the general developments in the Vedic verb system, which are part of the general decline of lability and the increase of verb forms specified for transitive vs. intransitive behavior within Vedic (Kulikov 2014, 2012, 2006). This article will show that the Sanskrit psych verb <em>juṣ-</em> ‘to enjoy’ and ‘to please’ exhibits <em>converse lability</em> in Early Vedic Sanskrit, whereas it does not behave like this in Epic Sanskrit. The syntactic and semantic behavior of forms of <em>juṣ-</em> in both periods of Sanskrit will thus be compared.</p> Roland A. Pooth Copyright (c) 2021 Roland A. Pooth Sat, 25 Sep 2021 00:00:00 +0200