LINGUIST List 17.2763
|
Tue Sep 26 2006
Confs: Cognitive Science,Linguistic Theory,Pragmatics/Poland
Editor for this issue: Jeremy Taylor
<jeremy linguistlist.org>
|
To post to LINGUIST, use our convenient web form at
http://linguistlist.org/LL/posttolinguist.html.
|
Directory
1. Sukriye
Ruhe,
Extensions of Vantage Theory: Points of View In Language Structure and Use
Message 1: Extensions of Vantage Theory: Points of View In Language Structure and Use
|
Date: 26-Sep-2006
From: Sukriye Ruhe <sukruhmetu.edu.tr>
Subject: Extensions of Vantage Theory: Points of View In Language Structure and Use
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: Adam Glaz
Contact Email: < click here to access email >
Linguistic Field(s): Cognitive Science; Linguistic Theories; Pragmatics; Semantics
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.
Theme Session at the 10th ICLC in Krakow, Poland (July 2007). Please send
abstracts (500 words max.) to Adam Glaz at adam.glazumcs.lublin.pl before
Nov 3, 2006.
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 (hierarhies,
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
theworld?
-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.
|
|
