Category: Alumni News

Professor Louise McNally (PhD, 1992) has been named a 2025 Fellow of the Linguistic Society of America (LSA). Louise, who is currently Professor in Department of Translation and Language Sciences at Universitat Pompeu Fabra in Barcelona, joins a distinguished group of linguists celebrated for their sustained impact on the field, including several other UC Santa Cruz alumni and faculty.

Congratulations on this well-deserved honor, Louise!

The WHASC Editors recently conducted a virtual interview with Andrew Hedding,

who completed his PhD in Linguistics at UC Santa Cruz in 2022 with a dissertation titled How to Move a Focus: The Syntax of Alternative Particles. After graduating, Andrew joined the Department of Linguistics at the University of Washington, where he is now an Assistant Professor.

What kind of research are you working on at present?

Since finishing at UCSC, I’ve continued to work on various aspects of the syntax of Mixtec languages (which was the main focus of my dissertation). A few of my current projects emerged more or less directly out of questions left unanswered by my dissertation (e.g., on non-interrogative uses of wh-words), but I’ve also started a few completely new projects looking at new domains of Mixtec syntax (e.g., on argument structure). One project emerging out of my dissertation is co-authored with Michelle Yuan from UCLA. In a recent NELS presentation, we compared subextraction possibilities in San Martín Peras Mixtec with apparent subextraction in Tseltalan Mayan languages (the Tseltalan data comes from a recent paper by Judith Aissen and Gilles Polian). Though the languages display superficially similar patterns, we identify a number of empirical differences which we correlate with distinct syntactic properties of the languages. Ultimately, we argue that the superficially similar patterns emerge via distinct derivations.

Can you share a bit about your journey from UCSC to your current role at the University of Washington? Looking back, what was the transition from life as a graduate student to life as a faculty member like? Did you feel prepared for the transition? Was there anything unexpected that you faced?

After finishing my PhD, I got a position as a one-year visiting professor at the University of Washington in Seattle. During that visiting year, I applied for (and ultimately got) a permanent tenure track position here. On the one hand, I felt prepared for life as a faculty member—I had taught or TAed versions of the same classes while at UCSC, and I had experience balancing my teaching and research responsibilities. At the same time, however, the transition was hard. Between teaching more classes (as the primary instructor), added service responsibilities, meeting new colleagues, and moving to a new city, there were times when it was very overwhelming. I’ve had to be patient with myself, but now that I am in my third academic year at UW, I feel like each quarter is getting a bit easier. 

What advice would you give to current UCSC graduate students who are aspiring to enter academia or pursue similar career paths?

At times the job market can be very frustrating and disheartening—I was on the job market for 3 years and faced a lot of rejection. Getting a job requires hard work, but it also requires luck. My advice would be to focus on the things you can control: work hard to create a few research projects that you can be proud of, present at conferences and meet people in your area, cultivate your teaching and mentorship skills, and most of all, be resilient. 

How has your research evolved since you graduated from UCSC? Are there any particular influences or experiences that played a major role in shaping your current research focus?

Since leaving grad school, I have done more theoretically-informed language description, in addition to my “strictly-theoretical” work. Ben Eischens (another UCSC alum, now at UCLA) and I recently wrote a paper describing the phonology of San Martín Peras Mixtec, another in Spanish that transcribes a personal narrative, and we are currently working on a third that describes the basic morphosyntax of the language. In part, these projects have emerged as we have gained a deeper understanding of the language. However, I think I have also been influenced by colleagues here at UW that have a deep commitment to language documentation and description. 

Looking ahead, what are some of the future directions for your research? Are there new areas or questions in linguistics that you’re excited to explore?

I expect that my future work will continue to focus on various aspects of Mixtec syntax and the ways that it interfaces with semantics and phonology. However, I am also excited by the prospect of collaborating more with colleagues at UW with diverse interests and backgrounds. As an example, I recently collaborated with two computational linguists here to conduct an “iconic” artificial language learning experiment while in Mexico. The artificial language we used is entirely pictographic, so it does not presuppose that participants be familiar with a particular set of sounds or even require that the participants be literate. In principle, this should make it more feasible for a diverse set of participants with varied language backgrounds to participate in this type of experiement. This summer, we ran an experiment which taught participants several different nominal modifiers, and then asked them to produce phrases with multiple modifiers, to see if participants would order them in a scope-isomorphic way. This was a completely different type of project for me, but it was fun, and I’m hoping to find more ways to collaborate with my new colleagues here in the future!

Delaney Gomez-Jackson graduated in 2023 with a BA and MA in linguistics, with a thesis entitled “Questions and indefinites in Santiago Laxopa Zapotec.” During her time at UC Santa Cruz, she was involved in the Zapotec Language Project and Nido de Lenguas, as well as the NSF grant on animacy and resumption. Since graduating, she has been employed at Motorola as a Linguistic Researcher, using her linguistics training and expertise in Zapotec to localize technologies for Indigenous communities around the world.

Recently, Delaney shared her thoughts with WHASC about her career at Motorola, how her time at UC Santa Cruz prepared her for it, and the future of linguistics in technology.

Tell us a bit about your current work as a Linguistic Researcher at Motorola and your work with Lenovo.

My work as a Linguistic Researcher at Motorola targets two areas: (1) globalization and (2) machine translation.

In the realm of globalization, I am working on Motorola’s Digital Inclusion Initiative, which aims to increase indigenous communities’ access to technology and raise awareness for language revitalization. My role has been to identify potential languages to pursue for the initiative (given parameters such as the number of speakers, dialect variants, orthographies) and make connections with linguists and community leaders. Our projects have included UI localization for Kaingang, Nheengatu, Kangri, Cherokee, Māori, and Ladin as well as the creation of a keyboard for Kuvi. We recently published a white paper with UNESCO that documents the process of localizing indigenous languages onto smartphones.

As for machine translation, my work has centered on improving the quality of our large language model (LLM) — this involves both identifying morphological and syntactic similarities between languages to better train our model, as well as staying up to date with the latest research on metrics for model performance. 

How do you see the role of linguists evolving in the tech industry, particularly in projects focused on language inclusion and AI?

The inclusion of languages in the digital realm is important since smartphone communication has become increasingly prevalent in the modern world, especially among younger generations (who play a crucial role in language revitalization). It is important that indigenous communities have the resources to participate in digital communication if they decide that it is beneficial for their community. Linguists are crucial to this digital inclusion process — they help to bridge the gap between business partners, software engineers, and the language community involved in the project by clearly communicating the language needs of the community to these corporate groups.

Linguists are equally important in the realm of AI; in particular, linguists can help to improve the performance of LLMs. Models are trained to recognize patterns from language data to generate translations; in other words, they are not explicitly taught syntax but use prediction and probability to generate translations. Linguists therefore play a role in error analysis and general output evaluation. Certain syntactic phenomenon can present challenges for LLMs, so linguists can help elaborate on these issues. 

Could you tell us a bit about your MA thesis, Questions and Indefinites in Santiago Laxopa Zapotec? What drew you to work on this particular topic?

Santiago Laxopa Zapotec has a rich and underexplored pronominal system. Before working on quexistentials in SLZ, I was interested in impersonal pronouns. My advisor, Maziar, introduced me to Hengeveld et al. (2021)’s work on quexistentials, which motivated my thesis research. Questions and indefinites in Santiago Laxopa Zapotec explores the syntax-semantics interface of quexistentials, which are interrogative pronouns derived from indefinite pronouns, in Santiago Laxopa Zapotec. I argue that indefinite and interrogative pronouns have, underlyingly, the same semantics, and the difference between the readings arise from the syntactic environments in which they appear. In short, the interrogative reading surfaces when the quexistential is bound by an interrogative operator, which then provides the semantics for the question reading. 

How did your experience in projects like the Zapotec Language Project and Nido de Lenguas influence your approach to language and your current work as a Linguistic Researcher in the tech industry?

My participation in the Zapotec Language Project was the cornerstone to my experience as a linguist, both in academia and in the tech industry. Through the Zapotec Language Project, I gained my initial experience doing fieldwork to help populate the dictionary and text databases. I learned how to collaborate with language consultants in a respectful and culturally sensitive way, which has carried over into my interactions with language consultants with whom Motorola has collaborated. Being a part of Nido de Lenguas was also an invaluable experience since it helped me bridge the gap between linguistics in an academic context and in the context of helping raise language awareness among our local community. This experience has been especially useful for interfacing with stakeholders and the public about “big picture” linguistic facts about a particular language, as well as the importance of language revitalization. 

The WHASC Editors recently conducted a virtual interview with Ben Eischens, who earned his PhD in Linguistics from UC Santa Cruz in 2022 with a dissertation titled Tone, Phonation, and the Phonology-Phonetics Interface in San Martín Peras Mixtec. Following his graduation, Ben joined the Department of Linguistics at the University of California, Los Angeles, where he currently serves as an Assistant Professor.

What kind of research are you working on at present?

Right now, I’m working on a bunch of different projects, each focusing on a different aspect of San Martín Peras Mixtec’s phonology and phonetics. These include the phonetics of phonation and nasality, diachronic sound change, the learning of lexical tendencies in a phonological alternation with lots of exceptions, and whether we can define the Mixtec ‘couplet’ in general phonological terms. I’ve been amazed at just how many different things there are to look at in a single language, and that the list just keeps growing with time.

Can you share a bit about your journey from UCSC to your current role at UCLA? Looking back, what was the transition from life as a graduate student to life as a faculty member like? Did you feel prepared for the transition? Was there anything unexpected that you faced?

It was definitely a big transition! I felt prepared by my time at UCSC for the teaching and research side of things — in some sense, you keep doing the same things, just on a larger scale. The strangest thing for me was that I still felt very much like a graduate student when I started at UCLA, but I suddenly had the role of a faculty member. Thankfully, my colleagues have all been extremely welcoming and supportive, so I feel like I belong in the UCLA Linguistics community.

Looking ahead, what are some of the future directions for your research? Are there new areas or questions in linguistics that you’re excited to explore?

On the more formal side of things, I’ve gotten interested in nasality, and especially in the relationship between its phonetic characteristics and phonological representation. I’ve also still got lots of work to do on the phonology and phonetics of phonation type in Mixtec, which can help us understand more about Silverman’s (1996) so-called ‘laryngeally-complex’ languages, where the same vowel can host orthogonal contrasts in both tone and phonation type. I also see myself doing more and more collaborative work in the future. There are just so many interesting questions to ask, and I don’t have the expertise to address them all. Instead of reinventing the wheel, I’ve been learning that it’s best to team up with others who have the necessary expertise so you can tackle the problem together.

What advice would you give to current UCSC graduate students who are aspiring to enter academia or pursue similar career paths?

My biggest piece of advice is to listen to your advisor. They have a good idea of what you need to do to get where you want to go, and they are genuinely invested in helping you get there. The other thing is to make sure you’re working on things that you enjoy. In my experience, the only way you’ll put in the amount of work needed to complete big research projects is if you get some satisfaction or happiness out of doing the research. That’s not to say it’ll always be fun, even if the topic is something you care deeply about. But you’ll get some fulfillment out of the process, and that can help you keep at it.

How has your research evolved since you graduated from UCSC? Are there any particular influences or experiences that played a major role in shaping your current research focus?

One aspect of my research that has grown (and still has lots of room to growǃ) is on the documentation/description side. I’m learning that there are so many ways to make my fieldwork data accessible and useful to the language community I work with, so I’m working on a number of projects to do that. My biggest influence in this has been the Mixtec community in CA. Members of the community are working in all sorts of different ways to make resources accessible in Mixtec, whether that’s through translation and interpretation, holding an after-school program in Mixtec for the children of Mixtec-speaking parents (see Centro Binacional’s Salinas webpage for info), or advocating for the labor rights of Indigenous migrant farmworkers in CA. While my research on phonation or tone might not immediately seem like it can contribute to this, it turns out that there are lots of ways that it can.

The WHASC Editors recently had the chance to chat (virtually) with Anissa Zaitsu, who received her BA and MA in linguistics from UC Santa Cruz in 2018, with a thesis on reduced why-questions. After graduating, Anissa went on to hold a prestigious Baggett Fellowship at the University of Maryland, before joining Stanford University as a PhD student in linguistics, where she is now. Her dissertation on negative concord in African American English is co-supervised by Vera Gribanova, also a Santa Crucian (PhD, 2010).  

Could you tell us about your ongoing dissertation project at Stanford? What are the central questions you’re addressing, and what drew you to them?

My dissertation at Stanford focuses on Negative Concord, and in particular, tracks the distribution and interpretation of Negative Concord Items (NCIs) in African American English (AAE) across a range of syntactically and semantically significant domains. In languages with NC, NCIs display a kind of variation: at times, they seem to convey negative meaning, while at other times, they do not. This variation is especially notable in Non-Strict NC systems, where NCIs routinely occur without an overt marker of clausal negation, particularly in the preverbal subject position. Although many approaches attempt to account for these facts within a unified framework, several critical questions remain unresolved, some of which challenge the viability of a unified approach.

I address these challenges by examining the NC system in AAE, a Non-Strict NC system that, relatively freely, allows Long Distance Negative Concord (LDNC), where an NCI can be separated from its licensing negation by a finite clause boundary. LDNC is useful for probing patterns that might be obscured in monoclausal environments. My research highlights that a key issue in previous approaches is the lack of attention to the semantic properties of NCIs, which should be involved in explaining its dependency on negation. I argue that the cases challenging a unified approach offer valuable insights into the semantic nature of NCI dependencies. Ultimately, I propose that a unified approach to NC is possible, but it requires a more nuanced semantic analysis, allowing for a relatively straightforward syntactic explanation of the dependency.

I have always been drawn to phenomena that reveal the division of labor between syntax and semantics, and my interest in Negative Concord patterns dates back to my time at UC Santa Cruz. I vividly remember my final assignment on Negative Auxiliary Inversion in Jorge Hankamer’s Syntax 1 class, which initially sparked my curiosity in this area. Later, as an MA student, I took Jim McCloskey’s seminar on polarity, where I encountered different theoretical approaches to Negative Concord. It’s rewarding to see my current research connect back to those formative experiences. I’m also proud to demonstrate how fieldwork on non-standard varieties, like AAE, is not only viable but also crucial for answering some of the most challenging theoretical questions.

What has been the most rewarding aspect of your linguistics journey so far, and what challenges have you encountered along the way?

The most rewarding aspect of my linguistics journey has been connecting with people—whether in reading groups, classrooms, conferences, or casual hallway conversations. I love the collaborative effort involved in learning about language together, and being around intellectually curious people is motivating and exhilarating.

The most difficult part, however, is that sometimes we have to be still. We need to sit quietly with our ideas, deconstruct them, and piece them back together on our own. While the conversations you have with others are valuable and help inform this process, at the end of the day, it’s sometimes just you and a blank page. This kind of quietness has always been a bit challenging for me. I’m still working through it, and perhaps it will be a lifelong process, but it is incredibly rewarding when things finally click and the page becomes a kind of interlocutor of its own.

What advice would you give to current undergraduate/MA students at UC Santa Cruz interested in pursuing PhD-level research in linguistics?

Every challenge you face in research is a chance to uncover something new—not just about language, but about yourself. Pay attention to what sparks your curiosity, how you tackle difficult tasks, and what you care most about. Let these discoveries shape your next steps, both in academia and beyond.