LINGUIST List 16.2467
|
Wed Aug 24 2005
Calls: Sign Language/Germany; Romance/General Ling/USA
Editor for this issue: Erin Hockenberger
<erin linguistlist.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. 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.crasborn let.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.kooij let.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.kooij let.ru.nl by September 10, 2005.
Message 2: Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages 36
|
Date: 22-Aug-2005
From: Jose Camacho <jcamacho rutgers.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: lsrl rci.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. LSRL 36 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

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