The 15th International Austronesian and Papuan Languages and Linguistics Conference (APLL) will be hosted by the Department of Asian Studies of Palacký University Olomouc, the Czech Republic. It will be held in Olomouc on August 23rd-25th, 2023.

The zoom link for the conference is: https://cesnet.zoom.us/j/97276656017 

The aim of this conference is to serve as a platform where researchers working on Austronesian and Papuan languages come together and discuss their research. In addition, this conference aims to stimulate collaboration among scholars, in particular junior scholars and scholars from indigenous communities. As such, the conference will take place in hybrid mode, so as to allow scholars from abroad to join us.

In addition to the general session, there are two thematic sessions: (i) Language socialization and revitalization and (ii) Complex sentences and clause chains. To submit an abstract, please click here.

Invited speakers:

To be announced

Conference venue:

Department of Asian Studies, třída Svobody 26, Olomouc

Contact: 

George Saad and František Kratochvíl 

apll15.olomouc@gmail.com

Thematic session one | Language socialization and revitalization

Host: George Saad

It has been well established that the Austronesian and Papuan world is the most linguistically diverse area of the world. In addition, it is also one of the least documented and most endangered regions, in particular Western New Guinea (Hammarström 2010). The area is rarely the subject of sociolinguistic and acquisition research; therefore, we have a limited understanding of how and in what context the Austronesian and Papuan languages are acquired (Stanford and Preston 2009) and cannot address ‘how differences in the interaction environment may shape language structure as well as language processing mechanisms’ (Adamou 2021:17). 

Indigenous communities such as those in the Austronesian and Papuan world often consist of small, kin-based groups, where a variety of adults as well as older children are involved in infant care. In many communities, there is an absence of a child-directed register or speech training (Du Bois 1944; Casillas, Brown, and Levinson 2021). Despite previous research suggesting that child-directed speech is crucial in enhancing lexical and syntactic development, recent studies among (Papuan) communities show that a lack of child-directed speech does not result in any form of developmental delay in the lexicon or in morphosyntax (Casillas, Brown, and Levinson 2021). Children in such communities may be better attuned to deriving word meanings from hearing others use words, as opposed to being directly engaged in joint attention (Brown & Gaskins, 2014). Infants may therefore develop more enhanced strategies to decipher overheard speech compared to infants in societies that are engaged in child-centred face-to-face interaction with their caregivers. 

A better understanding of the acquisition mechanisms of the region, in addition to their universal implications, will also help us distinguish various types of indigenous multilingualism (Vaughan and Singer, 2018; Lüpke 2016) as well as how they contribute to language shift and language change (e.g. Ross 2013; Adamou and Matras 2021; Adamou 2021). Furthermore, with a clearer image of these forces in play, we are also in a better position to engage in community-based revitalization efforts as well as critically evaluate our current revitalization practices (Austin and Sallabank 2011; Rice 2011; Grenoble 2021).

In this panel, we invite studies examining intergenerational transmission, language shift, language maintenance, and language revitalization among languages of the Austronesian and Papuan world that address the following questions:

●      How do speakers acquire the language in question?

●      What are the domains of use of the language in question?

●      What are some innovative methods to study language acquisition and socialization?

●      How effective are various existing language revitalization practices used in the region?

●      What are some of the main challenges to language revitalization?

●      How can we use technology to enhance language revitalization?

●      What is the impact of language revitalization on language change?

References

Adamou, Evangelia. The Adaptive Bilingual Mind: Insights from Endangered Languages. Cambridge University Press, 2021.

Adamou, Evangelia, and Yaron Matras, eds. The Routledge Handbook of Language Contact. London and New York: Routledge, 2021.

Austin, Peter K., and Julia Sallabank. “Introduction.” In The Cambridge Handbook of Endangered Languages, edited by Peter K. Austin and Julia Sallabank, 1–24. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011.

Brown, Penelope, and Suzanne Gaskins. “Language Acquisition and Language Socialization.” In The Cambridge Handbook of Linguistic Anthropology, edited by N. J. Enfield, Paul Kockelman, and Jack Sidnell, 187–226. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2014.

Casillas, Marisa, Penelope Brown, and Stephen C. Levinson. “Early Language Experience in a Papuan Community.” Journal of Child Language 48, no. 4 (2021): 792–814.

Du Bois, Cora. The People of Alor: A Social-Psychological Study of an East Indian Island. Minneapolis: The University of Minnesota Press, 1944.

Grenoble, Lenore A. “Why Revitalize?” In Revitalizating Endangered Languages: A Practical Guide, edited by Justyna Olko and Julia Sallabank, 9–22. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2021.

Hammarström, Harald. “The Status of the Least Documented Language Families in the World.” Language Documentation & Conservation 4 (2010): 177–212.

Lüpke, Friederike. “Uncovering Small-Scale Multilingualism.” Critical Multilingualism Studies 4, no. 2 (2016): 35–74.

Rice, Keren. “Documentary Linguistics and Community Relations.” Language Documentation & Conservation 5 (2011): 187–207.

Ross, Malcolm. “Diagnosing Contact Processes from Their Outcomes: The Importance of Life Stages.” Journal of Language Contact 6, no. 1 (2013): 5–47. https://doi.org/10.1163/19552629-006001002.

Stanford, James N., and Dennis R. Preston. “The Lure of a Distant Horizon: Variation in Indigenous Minority Languages.” In Variation in Indigenous Minority Languages, edited by James N. Stanford and Dennis R. Preston, 1–20. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 2009.

Vaughan, Jill, and Ruth Singer. “Indigenous Multilingualisms Past and Present.” Language & Communication, Indigenous multilingualisms, 62 (September 1, 2018): 83–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langcom.2018.06.003.

Thematic session two | Complex sentences and clause chains

Host: František Kratochvíl

One of the little-explored features of both Austronesian and Papuan languages is the structure of complex sentences and clause chains (cf. Foley 2010; Haiman and Thompson 1988; Heeschen 1994; Bril 2007; Bril 2010; Jonsson 2012; Ramsey et al. 2020; Sarvasy 2022). Both terms are used on purpose, to stimulate potential debate about their relationship.

Existing research has identified interesting inherited and areal features such as switch reference (e.g. Haiman and Munro 1983; van Gijn and Hammond 2016 and the papers therein), tail-head linkage (e.g. de Vries 2005), various types of mood and status marking - realis-irrealis (e.g. Roberts 1990), voice structures, nominalisations and demonstratives (e.g. Schapper and San Roque 2010; Kratochvíl 2011) to play a role in structuring complex clauses and clause chains across the region. Less attention has been paid to linear ordering and the role of chronological sequence in encoding complex events (cf. Pawley 2004), topic management (cf. Haiman 1978; Reesink 2014), or discourse planning (cf. Sarvasy et al. 2022).

At the same time, it is expected that dominant national languages reorganize the traditional structures and through extensive borrowing of clause linkers (e.g. the Indonesian kalau 'if', sampai 'until', karena 'because', sebab 'so that') and it is likely that accompanying syntactic structures and discourse practices may be imported as well (cf. Van Heuvel 2008; Saad and Fricke 2017).

We invite papers that deal with aspects of complex sentences and/or clause chains in either Austronesian or Papuan languages from a variety of perspectives, hoping for contemporary accounts of these complex structures, updates on the role of various types of marking (including various degrees of finiteness), discourse organization and planning, and acquisition. Both comparative papers and papers on individual languages are welcome. We encourage the papers to address the following questions:

● Which principles determine the linear ordering of clauses in complex sentences and clause chains (e.g. chronological sequence, topic management)?

● Does the notion of finiteness play any role in the complex sentence or clause chain organization (e.g. nominalisation, various types of non-finiteness, sentence level particles, etc.)?

● What types of linkers are used in complex sentences and clause chains, what are their grammatical properties and diachronic sources (including borrowing)?

● How are complex sentences and clause chains acquired?

References

Bril, Isabelle. 2007. “Coordination, Information Hierarchy and Subordination in Some Austronesian Languages.” Frankfurter Afrikanistische Blätter, no. 19: 213–43.

Bril, Isabelle. 2010. Clause Linking and Clause Hierarchy. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Foley, William A. 2010. “Clause Linkage and Nexus in Papuan Languages.” In Clause Linking and Clause Hierarchy: Syntax and Pragmatics, edited by Isabelle Bril, 121:27–50. Studies in Language Companion Series. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Gijn, Rik van, and Jeremy Hammond. 2016. Switch Reference 2.0. Vol. 114. John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Haiman, John, and Sandra A. Thompson. 1988. Clause Combining in Grammar and Discourse. Typological Studies in Language ; v. 18. Amsterdam ; Philadelphia: J. Benjamins.

Haiman, John, and Pamela Munro. 1983. Switch-Reference and Universal Grammar : Proceedings of a Symposium on Switch Reference and Universal Grammar, Winnipeg, May 1981. Typological Studies in Language, v. 2. Amsterdam ; Philadelphia: J. Benjamins Pub. Co.

Haiman, John. 1978. “Conditionals Are Topics.” Language 54: 564-589.

Heeschen, Volker. 1994. “How Long Are Clauses and Sentences in a Papuan Language like Eipo?” In Topics in Descriptive Papuan Linguistics, edited by Ger P. Reesink, 50–74. Leiden: Vakgroep Talen en Culturen van Zuidoost-Azië en Oceanië Rijksuniversiteit te Leiden.

van Heuvel, Wilco. 2008. Grammatical Borrowing in Biak. In Grammatical Borrowing in Biak, edited by Yaron Matras and Jeanette Sakel, 329–42. De Gruyter Mouton. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110199192.329.

Jonsson, Niklas. 2012. “Temporal and Co-Varying Clause Combining in Austronesian Languages: Semantics, Morpho-Syntax and Distributional Patterns.” PhD Thesis, Department of Linguistics, Stockholm University.

Kratochvíl, František. 2011. “Discourse-Structuring Functions of Abui Demonstratives.” In Nominalization in Asian Languages: Diachronic and Typological Perspectives, 2:761–92. John Benjamins.

Pawley, Andrew. 2004. Episodic Event Reports in Kalam: Case Studies from Serial Verb and Multiclause Constructions. Vol. 2005.

Reesink, Ger. 2014. Topic management and clause combination in the Papuan language Usan. Information structure and reference tracking in complex sentences, 105, p.231.

Roberts, John R. 1990. “Modality in Amele and Other Papuan Languages.” Journal of Linguistics 26 (2): 363–401.

Rumsey, Alan, Lauren W. Reed, and Francesca Merlan. "Ku Waru clause chaining and the acquisition of complex syntax." Frontiers in Communication 5 (2020): 19.

Saad, George, and Hanna Fricke (2017). If it exists in one language, why not use it in another? The insertion of kalau ‘if’ in Abui and Central Lembata, two languages of Eastern Indonesia. Talk presented on June 23rd, 2017, at the Ninth Austronesian and Papuan Languages and Linguistics. CNRS-LACITO, Paris, France.

Sarvasy, Hannah S. 2020. “The Acquisition of Clause Chaining in Nungon.” Frontiers in Psychology 11. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01456.

Sarvasy, Hannah S. 2022. Quantifying clause chains in Nungon texts. Studies in Language, 46(1): 161-200. https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.19058.sar.

Sarvasy, Hannah S., Adam Milton Morgan, Jenny Yu, Victor S. Ferreira, and Shota Momma. 2022. “Cross-Clause Planning in Nungon (Papua New Guinea): Eye-Tracking Evidence.” Memory & Cognition, March. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-021-01253-3.

Schapper, Antoinette, and Lila San Roque. 2010. “Demonstratives and Non-Embedded Nominalisations in the Papuan Languages of South-East Indonesia.”

Vries, Lourens de. 2005. “Towards a Typology of Tail-head Linkage in Papuan Languages.” Studies in Language 29 (2): 363–84.