LINGUIST List 15.2581

Thu Sep 16 2004

Calls: Translation/Canada; Pragmatics/Italy

Editor for this issue: Amy Wronkowicz <amylinguistlist.org>


As a matter of policy, LINGUIST discourages the use of abbreviations or acronyms in conference announcements unless they are explained in the text. To post to LINGUIST, use our convenient web form at http://linguistlist.org/LL/posttolinguist.html.

Directory

  1. anais.tatossian, For a Proactive Translatology
  2. x6huax, Metapragmatics

Message 1: For a Proactive Translatology

Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2004 15:01:05 -0400 (EDT)
From: anais.tatossian <anais.tatossianumontreal.ca>
Subject: For a Proactive Translatology


For a Proactive Translatology

Date: 07-Apr-2005 - 09-Apr-2005
Location: Montreal, Quebec, Canada
Contact: Andr� Clas
Contact Email: andre.clasumontreal.ca

Linguistic Sub-field: Translation

Call Deadline: 01-Dec-2004

Meeting Description:

Researchers and practitioners are invited to submit proposals for this
three-day international symposium organized and hosted by META to
commemorate its 50th anniversary. Abstracts should ideally cover the
area of proactive translation studies and research.

Over the last half century the translation market has undergone
significant changes together with the emergence of theoretical and
scientific studies of translation as a discipline. A pioneer and
pathfinder among translation journals, Meta has gained and maintained
its status and stature as an acknowledged reference in the field,
thanks to the broad perspective it offers on approaches, both
theoretical and practical, to translation, interpretation and
terminology. In a sense, the history of Meta mirrors that of the
profession and the discipline. Meta would like to seize this
opportunity of its 50th anniversary to both look back and take stock
as it looks ahead and prepares for the future.

As translatology developed as a distinct discipline, the language
market expanded exponentially creating new needs. To what extent have
universities been able to meet these needs? What has been the impact
of theoretical studies - which have been rather extensive and
outstanding - on translation pedagogy and practice? Does research
necessarily translate into practice? The gap, so often criticized,
between research and practice does indeed exist. While proactive
translatology does not claim to bridge this gap, it seeks to be
forward looking, to anticipate needs. Poised at the forefront of
innovation, it stands ready to respond appropriately.

The organizers are hopeful that this symposium will at the very least
strike a chord within the language community and serve as a stepping
stone to more commitment, activism and thought-provoking
contributions.

Submissions focusing on all proactive dimensions of translation
studies are being sought:

The Discipline: Translatogy has always been defined in terms of its
inter-disciplinarity. Should attempts be made to lessen the cleavages
in the discipline or should diversified approaches - which are
potential sources of enrichment - be encouraged? How could
dissemination of research in related disciplines be promoted?

Pedagogy: The pedagogical context is evolving not in terms only of
approaches and means but also of social change affecting successive
generations of students. How can teaching strategies and program
content be reshaped? What possibilities do new technologies offer in
this area?

Cultural and Political Dimensions: Discoursal practice implies social
commitment. Can / should translatology and terminology be considered
in abstraction? How should this commitment be addressed?

Terminology: Terminology is undergoing constant change. What should
the theoretical frameworks for the study of specialized languages be?
What is the role of the new approaches proposed over recent years,
such as social-terminology, social cognitive, communicative or
text-based approaches.

New Technologies: As text editing tools and support, new technologies
are crucial. How has research in this area impacted the profession?
Does research respond to the real needs of language professionals?
What are the possibilities for the future?

Presentations may be made in French, English or Spanish; however, the
availability of interpretation services is not foreseen.

Abstracts of about 250 words should be submitted before December 1st,
2004 as Word attachments to the following address: metaumontreal.ca
Authors are asked to indicate their name, address and professional
affiliation and indicate any special needs (AV equipment) for their
presentation. Selection will be completed and confirmed by January 20,
2005. Meta will publish the proceedings of the symposium.
Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue

Message 2: Metapragmatics

Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2004 06:17:50 -0400 (EDT)
From: x6huax <x6huaxrz.uni-jena.de>
Subject: Metapragmatics


Metapragmatics
Short Title: IPRA

Date: 11-Jul-2005 - 11-Jul-2005
Location: Riva sul Garda, Italy
Contact: Axel Huebler
Contact Email: x6haberz.uni-jena.de

Linguistic Sub-field: Pragmatics

Call Deadline: 13-Oct-2004

This is a session of the following conference: 9th International
Pragmatics Conference

Meeting Description:

The panel will not pursue the methodological reflection of the theory
of pragmatics, but focus on aspects of use, i.e., on actual, concrete
meta-utterances as discourse data which are used for specific
communicative purposes.

We encourage the discussion of meta-linguistic comments that (i)
reflect the interactional frame of an utterance, or (ii) refer
to/report on other utterances for further interactional purposes, in
forms ranging from direct quotations via indirect speech to global
references to speech acts. The data may be taken from sources as
diverse as ordinary conversations, talk shows, internet chats,
reviews, reports, argumentation, psychotherapy, etc.

Call for Papers

Somewhat late, Wolfgang Bublitz and I have decided to try to organize
a panel on metapragmatics for the 2005 conference of the International
Pragmatics Association (IPrA) in Riva sul Garda, Italy
(http://www.ipra.be). Our concept for this theme session is outlined
in more detail below.

Unfortunately, abstracts for contributions to this panel need to be
handed in very soon as the official deadline is October 15. We thus
ask all colleagues interested in participating to contact us via
e-mail before October 13.

Please follow the guidelines for abstracts to be found in the general
call for papers (above).

We look forward to receiving your proposals,
Axel H�bler

Prof. Dr. Wolfram Bublitz
Chair of English Linguistics, English Department
University of Augsburg
e-mail: wolfram.bublitzphil.Uni-Augsburg.DE

Prof. Dr. Axel H�bler
Chair of English Linguistics, English Department
University of Jena
e-mail: x6huaxrz.uni-jena.de


Metapragmatics
Panel Abstract
9th International Pragmatics Conference

Wolfram Bublitz and Axel H�bler

Our reading of the term metapragmatics will deviate from what seems to
have become commonly associated with it, namely a methodological
reflection on the theory of pragmatics (a definition that is based on
one meaning of meta- which indicates a theoretical viewpoint on
whatever concept it is prefixed to). The panel, however, will not
address the theory of pragmatics, i.e. theoretical issues related to
the central concerns, concepts, methods, terminology and consistency
of such a theory. Nor do we want to address systematic aspects of
reflexivity inherent in language and language use, as far as they
serve to secure comprehension of the propositional, entailed,
presupposed and inferred content, the illocutionary force or the
textual organization (including means of discourse deictics and
references to turn taking) of current talk. We also discourage
contributions to systematic aspects of single theories of language and
meta-language in general (e.g. related to the nature of discourse/text
data, to questions of expressibility/inexpressibility, language
change/decay).

Instead, we would like to have the emphasis put on aspects of use,
i.e. on actual, concrete meta-utterances as discourse data which are
used for specific communicative purposes. This perspective embraces
two - partly connected - lines of investigation.

Firstly, we encourage the discussion of meta-linguistic comments on
the interactional (not cognitive) frame into which a given utterance
is embedded. Such frames do not primarily concern the propositional
content, immediate illocutionary force or textual place of an
utterance but, on a 'higher' level of communication, superordinate
speech acts such as ARGUING, CHALLENGING, DISPUTING, SUPPORTING, as
well as interpersonal, evaluative and face-related activities such as
INSULTING, JOKING, TEASING. Here, metapragmatic language is related to
the 'conversational game' interactants are actually playing. It is a
vehicle that enables speakers to assess, edit, gloss or label their
fellowspeakers' (or third partys') establishment of or deviation from
a specific interactional frame and thus reflects their view of the
appropriate or inappropriate use of language to create and maintain
acceptable social relations. Metapragmatic utterances can be used
retrospectively (He didn't insult me in so many words but the tone of
everything he said was extremely rude) or (as topic interruptions) in
mid-conversation (Don't go back on your word! or Why are you
shouting?) and even prospectively (e.g. as a disclaimer: Now don't get
mad at me but ...). These evaluative parentheses are
coherence-disturbing in that they change (temporarily) the direction
of the conversation, whose different streaks (on all levels of
communication) had been in total syntony until then. Metapragmatic use
of language in this sense is not simply talking about but changing the
direction of and thus creating new discourse.

Secondly, such metapragmatic comments can be discussed as means of
referring to utterances (of the speaker him-/herself, the listener or
a third party) and reporting on them (in forms ranging from direct
quotations via indirect speech to global references to speech acts (He
insulted her) and speech act sequences (They had a vivid
discussion)). As a line of investigation on its own, this could
contribute to the general philosophical orientation of the conference,
for instance with aspects concerning truth and sincerity conditions
(compare He said he would come and He promised he would come), but may
have to be characterized differently along related parameters such as
'fictitious - documentary'; 'attitudinal identification - distance';
'losses - gains in terms of propositional and non-propositional
meaning'.

The data sources may range from ordinary conversations, talks shows or
internet chats to reviews and reports, and from argumentation to
psychotherapy; the selection may be restricted to one type (e.g.,
political debate) or varied and thus open for comparative treatment
(e.g., the use of direct quotations in narratives and news reports).
Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue