LINGUIST List 17.1080
|
Mon Apr 10 2006
Calls: Cognitive Science/Germany;General Ling/India
Editor for this issue: Kevin Burrows
<kevin 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. Sascha
Michel,
Cognitive Approaches to Word-Formation/ Kognitive Ansätze der Wortbildung
2. Narayana
K.V,
South Asian Language Analysis Annual Conference
Message 1: Cognitive Approaches to Word-Formation/ Kognitive Ansätze der Wortbildung
|
Date: 07-Apr-2006
From: Sascha Michel <sa.michelgmx.de>
Subject: Cognitive Approaches to Word-Formation/ Kognitive Ansätze der Wortbildung
Full Title: Cognitive Approaches to Word-Formation/ Kognitive Ansätze der
Wortbildung
Date: 05-Oct-2006 - 07-Oct-2006
Location: Munich/Bavaria, Germany
Contact Person: Sascha Michel
Meeting Email: sa.michelgmx.de
Linguistic Field(s): Cognitive Science; Morphology
Subject Language(s): English (eng)
German, Standard (deu)
Call Deadline: 01-May-2006
Meeting Description:
2nd International Conference of the German Cognitive Linguistics Association
Session: Cognitive Approaches to Word-Formation/ Kognitive Ansätze der Wortbildung
Cognitive Approaches to Word-Formation
Call for Papers
From a cognitive point of view, the formation of new words with already existing
linguistic material can be considered as a highly creative and innovative act on
the part of the producer: with reference to patterns of existing (more or less
established) word-formation units and processes, new system- or normconforming
linguistic units are created, which either reach the stage of lexicalization
(e.g. recycelbar) or remain occasional single formations (e.g. unkaputtbar).
According to the way of formation and criterial correspondences, the research on
word-formation traditionally assumes an established stock of word-formation
processes (compounding, derivation, conversion, shortening) and units (e.g.
affixes, combining forms, words). Examples, which cannot be integrated into
these categories, but reveal similarities with respect to certain
characteristics (e.g. semi-affixes) respectively formation processes (e.g.
reduplication, back-formation, compounding yielding synthetic compounds), are
thus integrated into separated categories (cf., for example, Fleischer/Barz
²1995, Henzen 1965).
Recent approaches (cf., for example, Donalies ²2005) radically question these
classification attempts by levelling the mentioned intermediate and special
categories and considering the examples as representatives of the 'established'
word-formation units (e.g. alleged semi-suffixes as suffixes or constituents of
compounds) and processes (e.g. reduplication and back-formation as compounding
resp. explicit derivation).
Although this ''clear-out attempt'' undoubtedly constitutes a necessary
scientific-theoretical venture, one must criticize that intracategorical
differences (e.g. within the types of compounding or shortening) remain just as
unconsidered as intercategorical similarities, differences and transitions (e.g.
the grammaticalization of compound constituents to affixes).
At the same time, these classifications can be described as theoretical
constructs, which are determined by a far-reaching neglect of the specific
language usage.
Assuming this polarity in the formation of categories with respect to
word-formation research, the section wants to pursue questions of categorization
of word-formation units and processes under cognitive aspects. Among others,
contributions are welcome which deal with the following questions and topics:
- How is the mental lexicon structured (which levels can be distinguished)?
- Which cognitive processes are involved in the formation (producer
perspective) and/ or reception (recipient perspective) of new resp. already
existing secondary words? Is it possible to draw conclusions for the
formation and structure of categories?
- What is the potential of (more recent) cognitive theories (e.g. the
prototype theory, cf. Mangasser-Wahl 2000) for the categorization of
word-formation units and processes? Which exploration modes are necessary for this?
- Do researches on the acquisition of the vocabulary and word-formation
patterns point to cognitive formation of categories?
- What evidences can be got by aphasics?
- Are there socio-pragmatic differences with respect to categorizations? What
role do sociological variables (e.g. age, gender, origin) and contextual
factors play?
- Can a singular categorization postulate be justified for a language or must
be assumed plural (perhaps coexistent) categorization patterns (i.e.
dependent on certain varieties?)
- Can diachronic changes be discovered?
The length of the presentations will be 20 minutes, followed by a 10-minute
discussion.
Please send your abstract (max. 500 words on one page) as e-mail attachment to
the following address by 1 May 2006: sa.michelgmx.de.
Participants will be notified of the acceptance of their papers by 1 July 2006.
Literature (selected)
Donalies, Elke (2005): Die Wortbildung des Deutschen. Ein Überblick. 2.,
überarbeitete Auflage. Tübingen: Narr ( = Studien zur deutschen Sprache, Bd. 27).
Fleischer, Wolfgang/ Barz, Irmhild (1995): Wortbildung der deutschen
Gegenwartssprache. Unter Mitarbeit von Marianne Schröder. 2., durchgesehene und
ergänzte Auflage. Tübingen: Niemeyer.
Henzen, Walter (1965): Deutsche Wortbildung. 3., durchgesehene und ergänzte
Auflage. Tübingen: Niemeyer.
Mangasser-Wahl, Martina (2000): Von der Prototypentheorie zur empirischen
Semantik. Dargestellt am Beispiel von Frauenkategorisierungen. Frankfurt am Main
et al.: Lang (= Arbeiten zu Diskurs und Stil, Bd. 6).
Marchand, Hans (1969): The Categories and Types of Present-Day English
Word-Formation. A Synchronic-Diachronic A
German Version:
Kognitive Ansätze der Wortbildung
Call for Papers
Die Bildung neuer Wörter aus bereits vorhandenem Sprachmaterial stellt - unter
kognitiven Aspekten betrachtet - einen höchst kreativen und innovativen Akt
seitens des Produzenten dar. Durch Bezugnahme auf Muster vorhandener (mehr oder
weniger etablierter) Wortbildungseinheiten und -arten entstehen system- und/oder
normgerechte sprachliche Einheiten, welche entweder zur Lexikalisierung (z.B.
recycelbar) gelangen oder okkasionelle Einzelbildungen (z.B. unkaputtbar) bleiben.
Je nach Bildungsweise und kriterieller Übereinstimmung geht die
Wortbildungsforschung traditionell von einem festen Bestand an Wortbildungsarten
(Komposition, Derivation, Konversion, Kürzung) und
-einheiten (z.B. Affixe, Konfixe, Wörter) aus. Belege, die sich einer Zuordnung
in diese Kategorien entziehen, aber untereinander gewisse Ähnlichkeiten in Bezug
auf bestimmte Eigenschaften (z.B. Affixoide) bzw. Bildungsarten (z.B.
Reduplikation, Rückbildung, Zusammenbildung) aufweisen, werden somit gesonderten
Kategorien zugeordnet (vgl. z.B. Fleischer/Barz ²1995; Henzen 1965).
Neuere Ansätze (vgl. z.B. Donalies ²2005) stellen diese tradierten
Einteilungsversuche radikal in Frage, indem sie die genannten Zwischen- und
Sonderkategorien nivellieren, das heißt die Belege als Repräsentanten der
'etablierten' Wortbildungseinheiten (z.B. vermeintliche Suffixoide als Suffixe
oder Kompositionsglieder) und -arten (z.B. Reduplikation und Rückbildung als
Komposition bzw. explizite Derivation) betrachten.
Handelt es sich bei einem solchen ''Entrümpelungsversuch'' zweifelsfrei um ein
notwendiges wissenschaftstheoretisches Unterfangen, muss kritisiert werden, dass
intrakategoriale Differenzierungen (z.B. innerhalb der Kompositions- oder
Kurzworttypen) ebenso unberücksichtigt bleiben wie interkategoriale
Gemeinsamkeiten, Unterschiede und Übergänge (z.B. die Grammatikalisierung von
Kompositionsgliedern zu Affixen).
Gleichzeitig lassen sich jene Einteilungen als theoretische Konstrukte
beschreiben, die durch eine weitgehende Vernachlässigung des konkreten
Sprachgebrauchs geprägt sind.
Ausgehend von der Annahme polarer Kategorienbildungen innerhalb der
Wortbildungsforschung möchte sich die Sektion deshalb Fragen der Kategorisierung
von Wortbildungseinheiten und -arten unter kognitiven Aspekten widmen. Unter
anderem sind Beiträge willkommen, welche die folgenden Fragestellungen und
Themen behandeln:
- Wie ist das mentale Lexikon strukturiert (welche Ebenen lassen sich
unterscheiden)?
- Welche kognitiven Prozesse laufen bei der Bildung (Produzentenperspektive)
und/ oder bei der Rezeption/ Verarbeitung (Rezipientenperspektive) neuer
bzw. vorhandener sekundärer Wörter ab? Lassen sich dabei Rückschlüsse auf
Kategorienbildungen bzw. -strukturen ziehen?
- Worin liegt das Potenzial (neuerer) kognitiver Theorien und Modelle (z. B.
der Prototypentheorie, vgl. Mangasser-Wahl 2000) für die Kategorisierung von
Wortbildungseinheiten und -arten? Welche Erhebungsmodi sind hierfür
erforderlich?
- Geben Untersuchungen zum Wortschatzerwerb und zum Erwerb von
Wortbildungs-muster Hinweise auf kognitive Kategorienbildungen?
- Welche Evidenzen können aus Aphasien gewonnen werden?
- Gibt es sozio-pragmatische Kategorisierungsunterschiede? Welche Rolle
spielen soziologische Variablen (z.B. Alter, Geschlecht, Herkunft) und
Kontextfaktoren?
- Lässt sich ein singuläres Kategorisierungspostulat für eine Sprache
rechtfertigen oder müssen pluralische (evtl. koexistierende)
Kategorisierungsmuster angenommen werden (d.h. in Abhängigkeit von
bestimmten Varietäten)?
- Sind diachrone Entwicklungsprozesse festzustellen?
Für Präsentationen sind 20 Minuten vorgesehen, gefolgt von einer 10-minütigen
Diskussion.
Wenn Sie einen Vortrag halten möchten, senden Sie bitte Ihr Abstract (max. 500
Wörter auf einer Seite) als E-Mail-Anhang bis zum 1. Mai 2006 an die folgende
Adresse: sa.michelgmx.de.
Die Mitteilung über die Auswahl der Beiträge werden Sie bis zum 1. Juli 2006
erhalten.
Literatur (Auswahl)
Donalies, Elke (2005): Die Wortbildung des Deutschen. Ein Überblick. 2.,
überarbeitete Auflage. Tübingen: Narr ( = Studien zur deutschen Sprache, Bd. 27).
Fleischer, Wolfgang/ Barz, Irmhild (1995): Wortbildung der deutschen
Gegenwartssprache. Unter Mitarbeit von Marianne Schröder. 2., durchgesehene und
ergänzte Auflage. Tübingen: Niemeyer.
Henzen, Walter (1965): Deutsche Wortbildung. 3., durchgesehene und ergänzte
Auflage. Tübingen: Niemeyer.
Mangasser-Wahl, Martina (2000): Von der Prototypentheorie zur empirischen
Semantik. Dargestellt am Beispiel von Frauenkategorisierungen. Frankfurt am Main
et al.: Lang (= Arbeiten zu Diskurs und Stil, Bd. 6).
Marchand, Hans (1969): The Categories and Types of Present-Day English
Word-Formation. A Synchronic-Diachronic Approach. Second edition. Wiesbaden:
Otto Harrassowitz.
Message 2: South Asian Language Analysis Annual Conference
|
Date: 06-Apr-2006
From: Narayana K.V <sala26kannadauniversity.org>
Subject: South Asian Language Analysis Annual Conference
Full Title: South Asian Language Analysis Annual Conference
Short Title: SALA-26
Date: 19-Dec-2006 - 21-Dec-2006
Location: Mysore, Karnataka, India
Contact Person: Narayana K.V
Meeting Email: sala26kannadauniversity.org
Web Site: http://kannadauniversity.org
Linguistic Field(s): General Linguistics
Call Deadline: 31-Aug-2006
Meeting Description:
This conference will create an occasion for the scholars working in the
field of south asian lingustics to meet and discuss recent developments in
their areas of research
ANNOUNCEMENT
The 26th annual conference of South Asian Language Analysis(SALA) will be held
at Mysore, Karnatak, INDIA from December 19 to 21, 2006. The conference will be
jointly sponsered by Kannada University,Hampi,India and Central Institute of
Indian Languages, Mysore,India.
CALL FOR PAPERS
ABSTRACT SUBMISSION
Abstracts must be postmarked by AUG 31,2006. An author may submit at most one
single and one joint abstract. In case of joint authorship, one address should
be designated for communication with SALA. Abstracts should be as specific as
possible, with a statement of topic, approach and conclusions, and should be no
more than 400 words (not including data and references, which may be placed on
the reverse side). 5 copies of an anonymous, one-page paper.
(1) paper title
(2) session (General/Para/Special)
(3) name(s) of author(s)
(4) affiliation(s) of author(s)
(5) address where notification of acceptance should be sent
(6) phone number for each author
(7) email address for each author
(8) subfield (syntax, phonology, discourse analysis, bilingualism etc.)
SEND ABSTRACTS TO:
SALA26
Department of Kannda Language Studies
Kannada University,Hampi
Vidyaranya 583276 Karnataka,India
Or
SALA26
Central Institute of Languages,Mysore
570006,Karnataka,India
Abstracts may also be submitted via e-mail. Only those abstracts formatted PDF
or Microsoft Word can be accepted. Electronically submitted abstracts should
have the author's name as filename, followed by the appropriate file extension.
The text of the message must contain the information requested in (1)-(8) above.
We cannot accept faxed abstracts. Send electronic submissions to
kannadauniversity.org> or gmail.com>
PRESENTATION AND PUBLICATION
Individual presentations are allotted 20 minutes plus 10 minutes for discussion.
Panels can be proposed for either a 2-hr or a 3-hr period. An attempt will be
made to publish selected papers (revised and edited) presented at the conference.
GENERAL SESSION
The General Session will ocver all areas of South Asian linguistic interest. We
encourage individual papers or panel proposals from diverse theoretical
frameworks and especially welcome those with interdisciplinary focus.
SAMPLE TOPIC AREAS
The Organizers welcome papers on all aspects of theoretical and applied
linguistics in relation to
South Asian languages. SALA 26 especially welcomes papers and symposia that
address the following special themes:
# Use of South Asian Languages in Commerce, Media, and the Internet
# Endangered South Asian Languages: Role of the State and Society
# Language, Religion, and Identity in South Asia
# Language and Inequality: The Language of Dalit and Feminist Literatures
# Evolving Standards in South Asian Languages
# Theoretical and Applied Linguistic Traditions in South Asia and Contemporary
Linguistics
# Multilingualism, Language Mixing, and Convergence in South Asia
# Linguistic Pluralism and Creativity in South Asian Literatures
# Diasporic Creativity in South Asian Languages
# Teaching South Asian Languages as Heritage Languages
# Language in Education in South Asia (Regional and National)
# Indian English as a Contact Language
# Conflicts and Courtships between English and South Asian Languages
# Constructs of Critical Linguistics in South Asian Context
# Kannada and Dravidian Linguistics
# Language Technology and South Asian Languages
# Psycholinguistics and the Processing of South Asian Languages
This Year the LINGUIST List hopes to raise $52,932. This money will go to help keep the
List running by supporting all of our Student Editors for the coming year.
See below for donation instructions, and don't forget to check out our Fund Drive 2006
LINGUIST List Cruise for some Fund Drive fun!
http://linguistlist.org/cruise.html
There are many ways to donate to LINGUIST!
You can donate right now using our secure credit card form.
Alternatively you can also pledge right now and pay later.
For all information on donating and pledging, including information on how to donate by
check, money order, or wire transfer, please visit:
http://linguistlist.org/donate.html
The LINGUIST List is under the umbrella of Eastern Michigan University and as such can
receive donations through the EMU Foundation, which is a registered 501(c) Non Profit
organization. Our Federal Tax number is 38-6005986. These donations can be offset against
your federal and sometimes your state tax return (U.S. tax payers only). For more
information visit the IRS Web-Site, or contact your financial advisor.
Many companies also offer a gift matching program, such that they will match any gift
you make to a non-profit organization. Normally this entails your contacting your human
resources department and sending us a form that the EMU Foundation fills in and returns
to your employer. This is generally a simple administrative procedure that doubles the
value of your gift to LINGUIST, without costing you an extra penny. Please take a moment
to check if your company operates such a program.
Thank you very much for your support of LINGUIST!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.
|
|
