LINGUIST List 17.2718
|
Fri Sep 22 2006
Calls: General Ling/United Kingdom; Pragmatics, Semantics/Poland
Editor for this issue: Dan Parker
<dan 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. Christopher
Beedham,
Summer School and Conference on the Method of Lexical Exceptions
2. Adam
Glaz,
Extensions of Vantage Theory: Points of View In Language Structure and Use
Message 1: Summer School and Conference on the Method of Lexical Exceptions
|
Date: 22-Sep-2006
From: Christopher Beedham <c.beedhamst-andrews.ac.uk>
Subject: Summer School and Conference on the Method of Lexical Exceptions
Full Title: Summer School and Conference on the Method of Lexical Exceptions
Short Title: LEXEP
Date: 02-Sep-2007 - 08-Sep-2007
Location: St Andrews, Scotland, United Kingdom
Contact Person: Karen Drysdale
Meeting Email: < click here to access email >
Web Site: http://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/modlangs/conferences/lexephomepage.htm
Linguistic Field(s): General Linguistics
Call Deadline: 31-May-2007
Meeting Description:
Summer school and conference on the 'method of lexical exceptions'.
Participants in the Summer School are invited to submit abstracts to give a paper at the Conference on any facet of the method of lexical exceptions or on exceptions in general. Papers which discuss specific rules and their exceptions - in any language whatsoever - as areas of potential research are particularly welcome; critical papers are also welcome. The purpose of the Conference is to develop the method and take it further than where it is at the moment. You may also submit an abstract if you are not participating in the Summer School. You may give your paper in English, German, Russian, or French; if you wish to give a paper in another language please contact the organisers.
Papers will be 40 mins. long, including 10 mins. discussion. Abstracts should not exceed more than one page of A4, and should be written in Times New Roman, in 12-point type, with a 2.5 cm margin all round. Abstracts should be sent to us preferably electronically, as an attachment to an e-mail (if your abstract contains special symbols be sure to Embed True Type Fonts under Save As), and must reach us by 31 May 2007.
Message 2: Extensions of Vantage Theory: Points of View In Language Structure and Use
|
Date: 22-Sep-2006
From: Adam Glaz <adam.glazumcs.lublin.pl>
Subject: Extensions of Vantage Theory: Points of View In Language Structure and Use
Full Title: Extensions of Vantage Theory: Points of View In Language Structure and Use
Short Title: 10th ICLC 2007: Vantage Theory
Date: 15-Jul-2007 - 20-Jul-2007
Location: Krakow, Poland
Contact Person: Adam Glaz
Meeting Email: < click here to access email >
Linguistic Field(s): Cognitive Science; Linguistic Theories; Pragmatics; Semantics
Call Deadline: 03-Nov-2006
Meeting Description:
The session is devoted to linguistic applications of vantage theory (VT;
cf. http://klio.umcs.lublin.pl/~adglaz/vt.html), a cognition-based model of
(colour) categorization. VT has been shown to constitute a valuable
contribution to language studies. The present session will be devoted to
reviewing the VT-linguistics interface and, hopefully, extending the
application of VT onto previously unexplored areas. It will also deal with
more general issues addressed in the VT literature, such as subjectivity of
meaning, speaker agency and linguistic relativity, as well as posing new
questions in ways not anticipated by the convener.
The session is planned as a continuation and extension of an earlier event
at the 6th ICLC in Stockholm, 1999. That earlier session was devoted to
linguistic applications of vantage theory (VT), a cognition-based model of
(colour) categorization. It was convened and chaired by VT's founder, the
late Robert E. MacLaury, and the papers delivered appeared in print in a
special issue of Language Sciences (vol. 24, nos. 5-6, 2002). VT was shown
to constitute a valuable contribution to language studies. The present
session will be devoted to reviewing the VT-linguistics interface and,
hopefully, extending the application of VT onto previously unexplored areas.
VT holds that people categorize by drawing an instinctive and subconscious
analogy to the way they orient themselves in spacetime. A category is a sum
of the vantages taken on it, i.e. arrangements of fixed and mobile
cognitive coordinates, a vantage being a point of view. Fixed coordinates
vary depending on the domain, mobile coordinates are reciprocally balanced
degrees of attention to similarity and difference. Vantages and categories
arise as quickly as one can think and talk, the process playing a primary
role in language use. (More on VT at http://klio.umcs.lublin.pl/~adglaz/vt.html).
The participants are invited to (i) offer proposals for solving problems at
the VT-linguistics interface or (ii) address the more general issues raised
by Robert MacLaury in relation to language.
As for (i), the list of questions includes but is by no means limited to
the following:
-What problems arise while applying VT to language? What
modifications/adaptations of the theory are called for?
-Which areas of linguistics are especially open to analyses couched within
the VT tradition? Which ones pose more problems?
-How to best understand a vantage? What analogues does it have in
language? Can one provide clear and unambiguous linguistic examples of the
dominant and recessive vantages? Can one preserve the terminology? What
relationship between vantages can be thought of (hierarchies, embedding,
other)? How does the notion of vantage relate to that of point of view?
-What other VT constructs figure as important in linguistic analyses?
The more general level (ii) embraces at least three interrelated issues,
potential springboards for discussion:
-Subjectivity of meaning. To what extent is meaning ''given'' by language
units and to what does it emerge out of the subject's interactions with the
world?
-Speaker agency. Within the bounds of their cognitive abilities
conceptualizers enjoy a considerable amount of leeway and are unconstrained
by language in any dramatic sense. But in what sense are they, if at all?
Where are the limits of the freedom?
-Linguistic relativity. VT stresses cultural and individual differences
between speakers. Do conceptualizations yield different results because of
the nature of the language spoken or regardless of it?
It is hoped that the session will also pose new questions in ways not
anticipated by its convener.
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.
|
|
