Call for Papers

We welcome submissions addressing issues relating (but not restricted) to the following set of questions: 

Synchronic questions:

• Broadly, why is this functional variation observed for the t-morpheme in Afroasiatic?

• Why can some languages express either middles, passives, or anticausatives using the t-morpheme, while others can express all three? and

• Can languages that may express middles, passives, and anticausatives with the t-morpheme use all three functions for all types of verbs, or do we find semantic restrictions?

Diachronic questions:

• Which functional origin can be reconstructed for the Proto-Afroasiatic t-morpheme? Was it always valency-altering?

• More broadly, how do valency-altering morphemes develop?

• Which diachronic developments have led to the functional distribution we find the morpheme in during its synchronic stages in the individual languages?

• Did languages with no synchronic functional overlaps have stages that did feature such overlaps? If yes, what might have triggered a functional separation? And vice versa,

• Did languages with synchronic functional overlaps have stages that did not feature any overlaps? If yes, what might have triggered their development?

General questions:

• Can we observe any innovative diachronic developments in the individual branches and languages of Afroasiatic, and if yes, which?

• Which processes can trigger and lead to these innovations?

• How can different theoretical and historical linguistic models help us address these processes of reanalysis?

• Are there typological patterns in the innovation of new functions and reanalysis of valency-altering morphemes? Are there any patterns specific to Afroasiatic or any of its subbraches?