* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
LINGUIST List logo Eastern Michigan University Wayne State University *
* People & Organizations * Jobs * Calls & Conferences * Publications * Language Resources * Text & Computer Tools * Teaching & Learning * Mailing Lists * Search *
* *
LINGUIST List 16.2467

Wed Aug 24 2005

Calls: Sign Language/Germany; Romance/General Ling/USA

Editor for this issue: Erin Hockenberger <erinlinguistlist.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.
        1.    Onno Crasborn, How to Recognize a Sentence: Methodological and Linguistic Issues in the Creation of Sign Language
        2.    Jose Camacho, Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages 36

Message 1: How to Recognize a Sentence: Methodological and Linguistic Issues in the Creation of Sign Language
Date: 23-Aug-2005
From: Onno Crasborn <o.crasbornlet.ru.nl>
Subject: How to Recognize a Sentence: Methodological and Linguistic Issues in the Creation of Sign Language

Full Title: How to Recognize a Sentence: Methodological and Linguistic Issues in
the Creation of Sign Language

Date: 23-Feb-2006 - 24-Feb-2006
Location: Bielefeld, Germany
Contact Person: Els van der Kooij
Meeting Email: e.van.der.kooijlet.ru.nl
Web Site: http://www.let.ru.nl/sign-lang/sentence/

Linguistic Field(s): Language Description; Phonetics; Phonology; Syntax;
Text/Corpus Linguistics

Language Family(ies): Sign Language

Call Deadline: 10-Sep-2005

Meeting Description:

This workshop focuses on the problem of how to determine sentence domains in
sign languages. This topic has become especially urgent now that more and more
sign language corpora are being collected and need annotation at sentence and
discourse level.

Background of the workshop topic

Until recently, sign language analysis implied the use of analogue video
technology, patiently winding tapes back and forth. While the advent of digital
video in the 1990s, it has become possible to quickly compare different sets of
data. The creation of transcription software such as SignStream and ELAN is
facilitating the transcription and analysis of larger corpora. The creation of
sign language corpora that could be used by researchers with varying interests
is still in its pilot stages, however. The EU-funded creation and publication of
the online ECHO corpus containing comparable data from multiple European sign
languages was an important pilot project, which raised many methodological
questions about transcription and segmentation of sign language data.

The need for the creation of sign language corpora and the need to discuss
issues as the above is particularly urgent, given the threat sign languages in
western countries face from the rapid medical developments in recent years, as
Johnston (2004) demonstrated for the situation in Australia.

One of the most important questions that arose from the ECHO project is
intimately tied to linguistic analysis: how does one determine sentence
boundaries in sign languages? Any sign language corpus will need to contain
sentence-level translations in a spoken language for easy accessibility. For
this purpose, and of course for linguistic analysis itself, we need a clear view
on where sentences start and end, when a sentence is not completed, etc. This is
not a trivial matter for any sign language studied to date, as relatively little
is known about syntactic, prosodic, and discourse domains. In published papers
on different sign language phenomena one rarely finds discussion on how sentence
boundaries were determined. Moreover, the presence of many simultaneous
channels, including the two manual articulators, allows for complex overlapping
structures. The risk of letting spoken language boundaries influence the
analysis of a sign language already at the transcription stage is clearly present.

Details of the call for abstracts

We invite abstracts for presentations addressing the question of how we can
define a sentence domain in looking at sign language data. All kinds of
linguistic perspectives (and theoretical backgrounds) are welcome, from
phonetics and prosody to syntactic and discourse studies, as long as the
background above is taken into account.

Presentation slots will be 20 minutes, followed by 10 minutes of discussion.
There is a general discussion session at the end of the workshop. Further, there
will be opportunity for focused discussion during a workshop dinner.

Abstracts can be maximally 200 words excluding references. Abstracts should be
sent as a PDF or Word document to e.van.der.kooijlet.ru.nl by September 10, 2005.
Message 2: Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages 36
Date: 22-Aug-2005
From: Jose Camacho <jcamachorutgers.edu>
Subject: Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages 36

Full Title: Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages 36
Short Title: LSRL

Date: 31-Mar-2006 - 02-Apr-2006
Location: New Brunswick, New Jersey, United States of America
Contact Person: Jose Camacho
Meeting Email: lsrlrci.rutgers.edu
Web Site: http://lsrl.rutgers.edu

Linguistic Field(s): General Linguistics

Language Family(ies): Romance

Call Deadline: 20-Nov-2005

Meeting Description:

Conference devoted to any aspect of Romance Linguistics.


Keynote speakers: Anna Cardinaletti, Aafke Hulk , Donca Steriade, Enric Vallduví

Abstracts are invited for 20-minute talks (plus 10 minutes for discussion) on
any aspect of Romance Linguistics.

Abstracts should be no more than two pages in length (including examples and
references), in 12-point type. All margins should be at least one inch wide (or
2.5 cm).

Authors are asked to submit their abstracts as e-mail attachments (pdf or rtf
formats are preferred, MS Word is also acceptable). No faxes will be accepted.
In the email message, please also include the title of the paper, name of the
author(s), affiliation(s), address, phone number, and e-mail address.

Organizers: José Camacho, Viviane Déprez, Nydia Flores, Liliana Sánchez

Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue

Please report any bad links or misclassified data

LINGUIST Homepage | Read LINGUIST | Contact us

NSF Logo

While the LINGUIST List makes every effort to ensure the linguistic relevance of sites listed
on its pages, it cannot vouch for their contents.