Third Conference on the Endangered Languages of East Asia 
Setting boundaries: how to (re-)draw the lines defining endangered languages
May 6th-8th, 2024

Conference topic

As the theme of this third meeting of CELEA we have chosen boundaries. The concept of “boundary” with regards to language may have different interpretations, which vary in applicability, pertinence, and even desirability depending on what aspect of language one discusses. Of course, setting boundaries is a necessary step in the process of understanding how languages work – that is, the process by which we define what is what or, to say it differently, how and why something is different from something else.

Indeed clearly defining language features and behaviors is a desirable thing, since by doing so we should provide a common ground to make our analysis of single languages intelligible to others and, more generally, to enhance cross-linguistic comparison. Linguistic typology has long resorted to categories as a way to ensure this common ground. However, languages often display variations that escape the parameters previously set to define a certain category – this is often true specifically for those indigenous and minority languages that have started to be investigated only recently. This ultimately makes us question what a language category should be in order to an effective tool for language comparison (Haspelmath 2010, Bickel 2010). Connected to this matter are the obstacles posed by how we employ even commonly known linguistic terminology in our definitions, which too often becomes a harbinger of misunderstandings due to the lack of general consensus on its interpretation (Croft 2022). Also related is the issue of when a certain feature becomes something else (specifically in light of the essentially gradient nature of grammaticalization, Heine 2003, Hopper & Traugott 2003) or when a certain language develops into a different one, which comes together with the challenge of dividing a language family’s history into periods.

As a tool for communication, language also occupies a place within society. Especially for indigenous and minority languages, how this space has been and is delimited, denied, (re-)gained, and shaped intertwines tightly, among other factors, with language ideologies, language identity, and wellbeing (Schieffelin et al. 1998, Taff et al. 2018, among others), with sometimes strikingly different outcomes that directly depend on the multifaceted past of East Asian countries.

With this conference we will “cut along the dotted lines” of East Asian endangered languages to see how the minority and/or indigenous languages of the area contribute to language-specific descriptions as well as to theoretical linguistics. We specifically encourage contributions that explore issues related to categorial status, the use of terminology in language description, the space(s) of language within society, language periodization, and language-specific features that have to do with either factual or perceived distance and boundaries (e.g. definiteness, givenness, possession, spatial/discourse deixis, egophoricity, pragmatic uses of language registers, …).