Apologies for the delay in posting this.
At the LSA I was part of a panel on the status of paradigms in morphological theory, and in particular what historical linguistics had to say about this question. In particular, we were interested in the question of whether there was evidence from language change which shed light on the question of whether paradigms are formal objects in synchronic linguistic theory. That is, given that many of the phenomena we see “synchronically” in the world’s languages can be described more or less well in either paradigmatic or paradigmless theories, does language change she any light on this? The panelists were:
It was a good session, I think. My talk ended up being a bit orthogonal to the other speakers, unfortunately – I was talking in more general terms about the relationship between synchrony and diachrony, how to interpret a change as “paradigmatic”, and whether paradigmaticity could be important in language change but still be epiphenomenal in synchronic grammar.