PhD Program Requirements

Coursework

The following coursework requirements apply to students who enter the program in September 2026. Students who have not completed their coursework as of September 2026 may opt in to these requirements or may follow the previous requirements, which can be found in the previous Graduate Student Handbook archived here.

By the end of Year 2 (Year 3 PhDU), students must successfully complete a total of 5.0 (7.0 for PhDU) full-course equivalents (FCEs) with a minimum median grade of A–. See Timelines at-a-glance for the recommended timeline for course completion.

• • 1.0 FCEs (1.5 PhDU) from Set A courses (see Table 3 below).
  • 1.0 FCEs (1.5 PhDU) from Set B courses (see Table 3 below).
  • 1.0 FCE of further coursework (2.0 PhDU), of which 1.0 must be taken at the 1200 level
  • LIN2101H (PhD1 Forum, 0.5 FCE)
  • LIN2201H (Minor Paper, 0.5 FCE) & LIN2202Y (Qualifying Paper, 1.0 FCE)

Additional policies:

• If a student has previously taken a course in Sets A or B (or its equivalent), they are permitted with approval from the Graduate Chair to substitute up to 1.0 FCE of these with electives.

• Students may take up to 0.5 FCE outside of the department with approval from their supervisor and the Graduate Chair.

• Under exceptional circumstances, a student may take an independent study course (Reading Course - LIN1503H; Research Course LIN1505H) as an elective. No more than 0.5 FCE of the program requirement can be fulfilled by an independent study course. Students must get the preliminary approval of the Graduate Chair before approaching the instructor. Once the permission of the Graduate Chair and the instructor has been secured, the following form must be submitted, appended with a syllabus, for final approval and enrollment.  

PhD 1 Forum (Year 1) 

Year 1 PhD and Direct-Entry PhD students are enrolled in PhD1 Forum (LIN2101Y), a professional development course completed in the first term of study.  A credit/no credit grade is assigned.

Minor Paper and Qualifying Paper

The following requirements apply to students entering in Fall 2026 and after. For students who entered in Fall 2025, please discuss options for your second GP with your supervisor and the Graduate Chair. The previous GP requirements hold for all other students. The requirements can be found in the previous Graduate Student Handbook archived here.

Every PhD student must write a Minor Paper (MP) and a Qualifying Paper (QP). Students are given three terms (12 months) to complete each paper. In the default case, PhD regular students enrol in the Minor Paper in October of Year 1 and defend the Minor Paper by August 31 of Year 1. PhDU students enrol in the Minor Paper in May Year 1 and defend by April 30 of Year 2. However, on the advice of their supervisor and approval of the Graduate Chair, it may be in the best interest of the student to complete the Minor Paper in Year 2 (Year 3 PhDU) after completing the QP. In all cases, the Minor Paper (as well as the Qualifying Paper, see below) must be completed by August 31 of Year 2 for PhD regular (April 30 of Year 3 for PhDU).

At the beginning of both the MP and QP, the student must submit to the Graduate Office a MP/QP Enrolment Form which establishes the topic of the paper, its area, the supervisor, and the second reader. Enrolment Forms must be submitted no later than October 15th for PhD Regular (May 31st PhDU) of the year in which the MP/QP is undertaken.  The Minor Paper and the Qualifying Paper must have distinct supervisors, and the two committees should have at least one distinct member.
If a student fails to complete either the MP or QP in three terms (12 months), they need to request an extension, which will only be granted with a compelling rationale. The expectation is that, like any other course, the MP and QP are completed and assigned a grade within the allotted timeframe. Extensions should be the exception and not the norm. 

Minor Paper (LIN2201H)

 The scope of a Minor Paper is equivalent to a proceedings- or squib-length contribution (15-20 double-spaced pages). While the nature of the Minor Paper will vary across sub-disciplines, examples of projects include: 

• Squib-length linguistic analysis
• Conceptual replication, re-implementation, or incremental extension of studies in the literature

In some cases, a critical literature review or a detailed research proposal may be appropriate, with the approval of the committee. It is strongly recommended that Minor Papers build upon coursework. The Minor Paper’s weight is 0.5 FCE, but the associated course (LIN2201H), and the timeframe for writing the MP is three semesters.

Supervisor and committee

The committee consists of three faculty members: a supervisor and a second reader; a third reader is typically chosen closer to the time of defense. The student chooses the supervisor in consultation with the Graduate Chair. The supervisor chooses the other two members, in consultation with the student. The student should meet regularly with the supervisor while writing the Paper, and with the second reader as appropriate. The third reader is involved in the defense stage of the paper. (As noted above, the Minor Paper and the Qualifying Paper must have distinct supervisors, and the two committees should have at least one distinct member.)

Presentations

Students will make at least one presentation of their paper to the relevant research group. This presentation will allow students to receive feedback on their work prior to completion. 

Completion and Defense

Evaluation of the Minor Paper is based on two components: the paper itself, and an oral defense. The committee members have two weeks to read the paper, and then the student meets with the committee in a closed examination. The student makes a very brief presentation (20 minutes), and the members of the committee then question the student. Questions are not necessarily limited to the immediate topic of the paper but may deal with relevant background or related questions. At the end of this meeting, the committee members discuss the paper and the defense, and arrive at one of the following decisions, which is communicated to the student at the end of the meeting: 

1. The paper passes as it stands
2. The paper passes with minor revisions
3. The paper fails

The committee also decides on a grade for the paper, with B- being the minimum passing grade. If the paper passes as it stands, the student need only submit the paper. If the paper is judged to pass with minor revisions, the student has one week to make the required changes. These are submitted to the supervisor, whose responsibility it is to see that they have been done satisfactorily. If the supervisor determines that they have been, the paper passes. If not, the paper fails. In case of failure, the supervisor prepares a written report indicating the areas of weakness. The student receives a copy of the report. If a paper fails, the student consults with the supervisor and the Graduate Chair in order to decide whether to continue with the same topic or to attempt a different topic. 

When the supervisor has approved the final version of the paper, the supervisor notifies the Graduate Chair and graduate administrator, using the Minor Paper Completion Form. A PDF copy of the final paper should be sent to the Graduate Office. Completed Minor Papers are available in the departmental library. 

Criteria for passing the Minor Paper

The paper must be a work of high quality that has the potential to make an original contribution. Factors to be taken into account in evaluating both the paper and the student's oral defense include the following: 

a.    Knowledge of literature and major issues
b.    Originality and creativity
c.    Judgment and critical ability
d.    Form and presentation

Qualifying Paper (QP) (LIN2202Y)

The QP represents an original piece of scholarship in the student's area of concentration. It has the scope of a journal article. The QP feeds substantially into the dissertation proposal. The QP’s weight is 1.0 FCE.

Relationship to first GP/Minor Paper

As noted above, with the consultation and approval of the supervisor and Graduate Chair, the QP may be completed before the Minor Paper. A Minor Paper cannot retroactively serve as a QP without revision and expansion. In exceptional circumstances, a student can pivot to making their Minor Paper a QP, but the requirements of QP hold.

Supervisor and committee

A committee of three faculty members is set up: a supervisor, a second reader, and a third reader. The student chooses the supervisor in consultation with the Graduate Chair. The supervisor chooses the other two members, in consultation with the student. The student should meet regularly with the supervisor and 2nd reader while writing the paper. The third reader is involved in the defense stage of the paper. As outlined above, the Minor Paper and the Qualifying Paper must have distinct supervisors, and the two committees should have at least one distinct member.

Presentations

Students will make at least one presentation of their paper to the relevant research group. This presentation will allow students to receive feedback on their work prior to completion. 

Completion and Defense

Same as for Minor Paper. 

Criteria for passing the Qualifying Paper

The paper must be a work of original research of high quality, which has the potential to be developed into a journal article. Factors to be taken into account in evaluating both the paper and the student's oral defense include the following: 

a.    Knowledge of literature and major issues
b.    Originality and creativity
c.    Judgment and critical ability
d.    Form and presentation

In evaluating criterion (d), the committee may take into account the extent to which the paper is suitable for initial submission as a journal article. 

Publication in a Journal

A student who has had a recent article published in a refereed journal may submit the article as an MP or QP. Such papers are treated like all other papers. A committee is set up, and the supervisor and the second reader decide if the article is suitable as a Minor or Qualifying Paper, and what further work, if any, is required. The paper is defended as described above. Publication in a journal does not in and of itself make a paper an acceptable MP or QP, nor does rejection by a journal make a paper unacceptable. 

Candidacy

It is a regulation of the School of Graduate Studies that doctoral students in a four-year PhD program must achieve candidacy by the end of Year 3 (or end of Year 4 for PhDU students). In our department, we expect students to achieve candidacy by the end of summer Year 2 (PhD Regular) or end of summer Year 3 (PhDU). See Timelines at-a-glance below.

In order to achieve candidacy in the Department of Linguistics, a student must have completed all coursework, both MP and QP, and the language requirement. In addition, they must have an approved thesis topic, a supervisor and a supervisory committee. 

Thesis

The following policies apply to all students who have not completed their GPs (or MP/QP) as of September 2026.

Each student completes a doctoral dissertation in one of the Department's areas of research in the final two years of the program.

Once the MP and QP (or GP2) have been successfully defended, students will be given six months to form their dissertation committee, submit their written dissertation proposal, and give an oral presentation of the proposal to the department. If a student does not complete a proposal in this timeframe, this will be a cause for concern in the May Progress assessment. 

Dissertation Committee

In the normal case, the dissertation supervisor will be the QP supervisor or an actively involved QP committee member. More generally, it is expected that there will be significant overlap in the membership of the QP committee and the dissertation

Written Thesis Proposal

The written proposal should be a short document, no more than 20, double-spaced manuscript pages that builds on the QP and includes:

a.    a clear statement of the major problem to be investigated in the thesis 
b.    an outline of the major areas to be investigated, including discussion of the relation between each topic and the overall problem 
c.    a review of the appropriate literature 
d.    evidence of sufficient relevant prior work to demonstrate the student's readiness to undertake the proposed research (e.g., a draft of a possible chapter, Generals/Qualifying paper, or publication)

Oral Thesis Proposal 

Once the written proposal has been accepted by the supervisory committee, an oral presentation is scheduled on a date to be arranged with the Graduate Chair. The presentation is open to all members of the Department, and faculty and PhD students are expected to attend. The presentation should include: 

a.    a clear statement of the topic of research interest
b.    a synthesis of the major relevant literature, and how the topic relates to it
c.    an indication of the major areas of research involved in the dissertation
d.    a sense of the direction the student plans to take in carrying out the research

If the presentation does not meet these criteria, as determined by the faculty present, the student meets with the supervisor, and makes a second oral presentation no more than three months after the first. If the second presentation is also found to be unacceptable, the student will not be permitted to continue in the program. 
 

While the writing of the thesis is overseen by a supervisory committee of three faculty members, students are also expected to present their work on a regular basis. Students are expected to give a presentation at least once per year, in the appropriate research group, or at an appropriate workshop or conference, until the thesis is completed. With the consent of the supervisory committee, a student may choose not to make a presentation during the final stages of writing. 

The thesis must show “the results of original investigation, conducted by the candidate, on the approved topic from the major field. The thesis shall constitute a significant contribution to the knowledge of the field and must be based on research conducted while registered for the PhD program”. Calendar of the School of Graduate Studies, section 12.1.2.8

Each student defends their thesis at a Final Oral Examination (thesis defense), conducted by an examination committee appointed by the School of Graduate Studies. The committee consists of the student's supervisory committee, two members of the graduate faculty who were not closely involved in the preparation of the thesis, an external examiner, and an examination committee chair.

For more instructions regarding the FOE, please see:

LIN FOE Instructions 2025-26.pdf

SGS FOE Guidelines

SGS Regulations

PhDU (Direct Entry)

At the beginning of each year until a student achieves candidacy, at the time of registration, the student and the Graduate Chair and their supervisor review the student's progress through the program, ascertain whether the student has completed all requirements to date, and discuss the student's plans for the coming year. This meeting, sometimes referred to as an 'intake meeting', is usually held in August with the Graduate Chair (PhD) or Associate Graduate Chair (MAs).Every PhD and Direct-Entry PhD student is required to have a supervisor at all stages of enrolment in the doctoral program. Students are assigned an initial supervisor before Fall session Year 1 begins. Normally, this supervisor will serve as QP supervisor. If not, the supervisor changes to be MP supervisor. Until candidacy, the supervisor is the current QP/MP supervisor. For students who have achieved candidacy, and established a supervisory committee, it is the supervisor's responsibility to ensure that the student's progress is appropriately monitored.  

May Progress Meetings 

As stated in the SGS Calendar, “a student is expected to meet with [the supervisory] committee at least once a year, and more often if the committee so requires. At each meeting, the supervisory committee will assess the student's progress in the program and provide advice on future work.” These meetings must be recorded in the student's file and on ROSI.  

In the Department of Linguistics, this formal requirement is fulfilled by the May Progress Meeting (also referred to as May Monitoring). All PhD students meet with their supervisory committee at the end of the winter term each year, to discuss their progress in the program.  For students who have not yet achieved candidacy, the committee will normally be comprised of their current MP or QP supervisor and second reader, in addition to the Graduate Chair. For first year PhDU students, the meeting should include the initial/admitting supervisor, the Graduate Chair and one other faculty member as chosen in consultation with the student and supervisor. For students who have achieved candidacy, the meeting includes the thesis committee only.

In preparation for the May Progress meeting, all students should submit to the committee an updated copy of their CV, a May Progress form with the student portion completed, and their previous May Progress form.  The committee and the student then discuss the student's progress in the program, and the committee provides advice on future work. The meetings are normally chaired by the supervisor, but any committee member may act as chair.  The Graduate Office will email each student in April with more information.

After the meeting, the committee completes the appropriate May Progress report. Copies are provided to the student, the Graduate Chair and to the graduate administrator. The supervisor discusses the report with the student, and the student may respond in writing.  

The supervisory committee may meet more frequently than once per year, as deemed necessary by the committee. It should be borne in mind that these meetings do not replace the regular meetings between the student and the supervisor. 

Repeated failure to achieve satisfactory progress in May Progress may jeopardize a student’s status in the program. Satisfactory progress is determined based on the goals and recommendations outlined in the May Progress report from the previous year. If the student’s progress is found to be less than satisfactory, a detailed 6-month timeline should be provided in the form and the committee should meet again in six months. At this meeting, a second Progress report will be completed. If progress is found to be less than satisfactory again, a second 6-month timeline should be provided, and the committee will meet again at the end of those six months. If the student’s progress is not found to be satisfactory at that point, program termination procedures will be initiated. If at either of the aforementioned meetings progress is deemed to be satisfactory, termination procedures will not be initiated. In other words, termination procedure is only initiated after three consecutive unsatisfactory progress reports. 

The Program Length for the Regular-Entry PhD is 4 years and for the Direct-Entry PhD, 5 years. The Time Limit for the Regular-Entry PhD is 6 years and for the Direct-Entry PhD 7 years. There is partial funding, known as Doctoral Completion Award (DCA), available for these additional two years (years 5-6 for regular and 6-7 for PhDU). The DCA in second year is significantly lower and varies depending on available funds and student needs in a given year. Students must have completed or at least scheduled their proposal defense to be eligible for any DCA funding.

Students who need to continue their studies past the Time Limit need to request a program extension with a rationale; these are subject to approval by the department and the School of Graduate Studies (SGS). No funding is available beyond the Time Limit.