* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
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 19.3526

Wed Nov 19 2008

Calls: General Ling,Hist Ling/United Kingdom; Translation/USA

Editor for this issue: Kate Wu <katelinguistlist.org>


LINGUIST is pleased to announce the launch of an exciting new feature: Easy Abstracts! Easy Abs is a free abstract submission and review facility designed to help conference organizers and reviewers accept and process abstracts online. Just go to: http://www.linguistlist.org/confcustom, and begin your conference customization process today! With Easy Abstracts, submission and review will be as easy as 1-2-3!
Directory
        1.    Wendy Ayres-Bennett, Bon Usage et Variation Sociolinguistique
        2.    Christophe Fricker, Translatable: Creativity and Knowledge Formation


Message 1: Bon Usage et Variation Sociolinguistique
Date: 19-Nov-2008
From: Wendy Ayres-Bennett <wmb1001cam.ac.uk>
Subject: Bon Usage et Variation Sociolinguistique
E-mail this message to a friend

Full Title: Bon Usage et Variation Sociolinguistique

Date: 16-Jul-2009 - 18-Jul-2009
Location: Cambridge, United Kingdom
Contact Person: Magali Seijido
Web Site: http://www.mml.cam.ac.uk/french/observations/conference.html

Linguistic Field(s): General Linguistics; Historical Linguistics; History of
Linguistics; Sociolinguistics

Call Deadline: 15-Jan-2009

Meeting Description:

Parmi les champs de réflexions les plus caractéristiques de l'histoire de
l'activité grammaticale en France, on trouve le souci de déterminer, parmi
toutes les variantes, le « bon usage ». Cette notion de « bon usage »,
aujourd'hui chargée de connotations archaïques et élitistes, est souvent perçue
comme un ensemble de prescriptions normatives correspondant à un modèle
socioculturel. Si notre réflexion commence par la tradition française et surtout
par la tradition des remarqueurs nous voudrions situer les textes français en
nous interrogeant sur les manifestations de la tradition du « bon usage » dans
d'autres pays européens.

Appel à Communications

Colloque « Bon Usage et Variation Sociolinguistique :
Perspectives diachroniques et traditions nationales »
Murray Edwards College, Université de Cambridge, 16-18 juillet 2009

Parmi les champs de réflexions les plus caractéristiques de l'histoire de
l'activité grammaticale en France, on trouve le souci de déterminer, parmi
toutes les variantes, le « bon usage ». Cette notion de « bon usage »,
aujourd'hui chargée de connotations archaïques et élitistes, est souvent perçue
comme un ensemble de prescriptions normatives correspondant à un modèle
socioculturel.

Dans ce colloque, parmi les problématiques propres à ouvrir le débat :

-Nous souhaiterions nous interroger sur l'évolution de la notion de « bon usage
» : Quels sont les facteurs qui ont influencés la conception du « bon usage » ?
A quels enjeux socioculturels cette tradition correspond-elle?

Pour élaborer le « bon usage », de Tory à Vaugelas et ses successeurs, les
grammairiens et les remarqueurs se sont appuyés sur l'observation de productions
diverses : littérature, textes non littéraires, communication orale. Un problème
typique est celui de la délimitation sociale et géographique des locuteurs
pouvant représenter le « bon usage ». Selon la période, l'appartenance
religieuse, l'importance accordée à l'écrit et l'oral les modèles ont beaucoup
variés et se sont déplacés notamment de l'idéal savant au Palais ou à la Cour.
La période prise en compte ira du XVIe siècle - pendant lequel circule l'idée de
« correction de langage » - au XXIe siècle.

-Nous souhaiterions également nous interroger sur le caractère prescriptif des
ouvrages sur le « bon usage » : l'élaboration du « bon usage » se fonde-t-elle
toujours sur une réduction des variantes?

En 1689, le remarqueur N. Andry de Boisregard écrivait « c'est un défaut
ordinaire à nos Grammairiens de s'imaginer que dés qu'une chose se dit de deux
façons, il faut condamner l'une pour autoriser l'autre. Pourquoy ne
pourront-elles pas estre toutes deux bonnes? ». Si Vaugelas, dans ses Remarques
sur la langue Françoise (1647), s'appuyait souvent sur un modèle prescriptif il
y a également des observations dans lesquelles il adopte une position plutôt «
sociolinguistique ». Il reconnaissait la valeur relative des différents usages
et présentait une analyse nuancée selon laquelle les usages sont plus ou moins
bons selon le contexte, le registre, le style?

-Suite à cette question nous voudrions examiner dans quelle mesure les textes
qui prescrivent le « bon usage » nous fournissent des données précieuses sur la
variation sociolinguistique, surtout pour les périodes antérieures.

En utilisant par exemple des formules telles que « Ne dites pas X? » ou « X est
une faute » ces textes nous renseignent-ils sur les usages régionaux,
populaires?? Dans quelle mesure constituent-ils des sources intéressantes pour
l'étude du français « non-standard », objet difficile à décrire pour les
périodes où nous manquons d'enquêtes? D'autre part, pour les époques où nous
n'avons pas d'enregistrements, les observations sur les mediums d'expressions
donnent-elles des témoignages utiles pour la description de l'oral?

-Comment cette tradition évolue-t-elle aujourd'hui? Le Bon Usage de Grevisse
s'inscrit-il dans une filiation?

Nous aimerions considérer les influences directes et indirectes entre les
différents textes qui s'appuient sur le « bon usage ». Dans quelle mesure
Grevisse, décrit dans une des préfaces comme « le Vaugelas du 20e siècle »,
suit-il les traces des remarqueurs? A quel point les différentes traditions
nationales s'entre-influencent-elles?

-Nous proposons donc d'élargir le champ à d'autres traditions nationales pour
essayer de dégager des spécificités de cette notion dans d'autres langues.

Si notre réflexion commence par la tradition française et surtout par la
tradition des remarqueurs nous voudrions situer les textes français en nous
interrogeant sur les manifestations de la tradition du « bon usage » dans
d'autres pays européens. A quel point est-il possible d'identifier des notions
communes qui unifient toutes les traditions? A quel point les grammaires du «
bon usage » s'adaptent-elles au contexte national particulier?

Organisation du Colloque :
Ce colloque se fait dans le cadre du projet 'Observations on the French
language', subventionné par la Arts and Humanities Research Council de la
Grande-Bretagne. Les organisatrices sont Wendy Ayres-Bennett et Magali Seijido,
Université de Cambridge.

Comité Scientifique :
Wendy Ayres-Bennett, Université de Cambridge
Philippe Caron, Université de Poitiers
Jean-Marie Fournier, Université de Paris III
Douglas Kibbee, Université d'Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Francine Mazière, Université Paris XIII
Gilles Siouffi, Université Paul Valéry Montpellier III

Conférenciers Invités :
Sylvie Archaimbault (Directrice du laboratoire d'histoire des théories
linguistiques UMR 7597 - CNRS/Université Paris-Diderot) : sur la tradition russe
Ingrid Tieken-Boon van Ostade (Universiteit Leiden): sur la tradition anglaise
Nicola McLelland (University of Nottingham): sur la tradition allemande
Danielle Trudeau (San José State University): auteur du livre, Les Inventeurs du
bon usage 1529-1647), Minuit 1992.

Modalités :
Les communications pourront se faire en français et en anglais.

Les propositions de communication, qui ne doivent pas contenir plus de 350 mots,
sont à envoyer avant le 15 janvier par document attaché à l'adresse électronique
suivante : ms693cam.ac.uk. Une réponse sera donnée avant le 28 février 2009.

Des informations sur le logement, le programme et les frais d'inscription seront
mises sur le site web du colloque :
http://www.mml.cam.ac.uk/french/observations/conference.html.
Pour tout renseignement supplémentaire, contacter Magali Seijido: ms693cam.ac.uk


Call for Papers

Good usage and Sociolinguistic Variation:
Diachronic Perspectives and National Traditions
Murray Edwards College, University of Cambridge, 16-18 July 2009

One of the most typical and recurrent themes in the history of linguistic
thought in France is the desire to identify 'good usage'. This notion of 'good
usage' - which today carries elitist, indeed even archaic, connotations - is
often considered to consist of a collection of normative prescriptions which
reflect a particular socio-cultural model.

In this conference we wish to explore this question from a number of different
angles:
How did the notion of 'good usage' emerge and evolve? What factors have helped
shape our conception of 'good usage'? How does it relate to different
socio-cultural factors?

In elaborating good usage grammarians and remarqueurs, from Tory to Vaugelas and
his successors, have relied on observing different types of usage, whether
literary, non-literary or oral. A typical problem is that of the choice of the
social and geographical origin of the speakers selected to represent 'good
usage'. According to the period, the relative importance attributed to written
or spoken usages and socio-cultural features, whether religious or political,
models of good usage have varied greatly and have relied variously on educated
usage, the usage of the law courts or the King's court. The conference will
focus on the period from the 16th century - period of the production of the
first grammars of French - to the present day.

We also wish to consider the extent to which works on 'good usage' are
prescriptive: does the elaboration of 'good usage' always imply the reduction of
variants?

In 1689 the remarqueur Andry de Boisregard wrote: 'it is a common mistake
amongst grammarians to imagine that as soon as something can be said in two
different ways, we have to condemn one in order to authorize the other. Why
can't they both be acceptable?'. If Vaugelas in his Remarques sur la langue
Françoise (1647) often relied on a prescriptive model, at times he adopted a
stance which is more 'sociolinguisitic' in orientation. In other words, he
recognized the relative value of different usages and presented a nuanced
analysis according to which different usages are more or less acceptable
according to the context, register, style, etc.

Following on from this, we would like to examine the extent to which texts which
prescribe 'good usage' provide us with valuable information about
sociolinguistic variation, especially for earlier periods in the history of the
language.

How far do these texts furnish us with information about regional and popular
usages when they use expressions such as 'Don't say X?' or 'X is incorrect'? Do
they constitute valuable sources for the study of 'non-standard' language,
something which is often difficult to describe for periods for which no
sociolinguistic surveys are available? When these texts refer to differences
between written and spoken usages can we use them to build up a picture of
spoken language for those periods for which no recordings are available?

How is this tradition developing today? Is Grevisse's famous work, Le Bon Usage,
typical of a certain genre?

We should like to consider the direct and indirect influences between the
different texts which make reference to 'good usage'. To what extent does
Grevisse, described in one of the Prefaces to his work as 'the 20th-century
Vaugelas', follow in the footsteps of the remarqueurs? To what extent do the
different national traditions influence each other?

We are therefore proposing to open up the discussion to include consideration of
other national traditions in order to look at the different interpretations of
this notion in relation to different languages.

If our reflections on the topic began with the French tradition and particularly
with the tradition of the remarqueurs, we would like to contextualize this
discussion by considering the tradition of 'good usage' in other European
countries. To what extent is it possible to identify common features which unite
all the traditions? To what extent do 'good usage' grammarians adapt their
discussion and analysis to the particular national context?

Conference Organization:
This conference is taking place under the auspices of the AHRC funded project
'Observations on the French language' (Art and Humanities Research Council of
Great Britain). The organizers are Wendy Ayres-Bennett and Magali Seijido,
University of Cambridge.

Organizing Committee:
Wendy Ayres-Bennett, University of Cambridge
Philippe Caron, Université de Poitiers
Jean-Marie Fournier, Université de Paris III
Douglas Kibbee, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Francine Mazière, Université Paris XIII
Gilles Siouffi, Université Paul Valéry Montpellier III

Invited Speakers:
Sylvie Archaimbault (Directrice du laboratoire d'histoire des théories
linguistiques UMR 7597 - CNRS/Université Paris-Diderot) : on the Russian tradition
Ingrid Tieken-Boon van Ostade (Universiteit Leiden): on the English tradition
Nicola McLelland (University of Nottingham): on the German tradition
Danielle Trudeau (San José State University): author of Les Inventeurs du bon
usage (1529-1647), Minuit 1992.

Practical Information:
Papers may be given in French or English.

Abstracts of papers, which should not exceed 350 words in length, should be sent
by e-mail attachment by 15 January 2009 to the following address:
ms693cam.ac.uk. Colleagues will be informed whether their paper has been
accepted by 28 February 2009 at the latest.

Practical details of the conference venue, accommodation and programme will be
posted on the conference website in due course:
http://www.mml.cam.ac.uk/french/observations/conference.html

For any further information please contact Magali Seijido: ms693cam.ac.uk
Message 2: Translatable: Creativity and Knowledge Formation
Date: 19-Nov-2008
From: Christophe Fricker <cef15duke.edu>
Subject: Translatable: Creativity and Knowledge Formation
E-mail this message to a friend


Full Title: Translatable: Creativity and Knowledge Formation

Date: 24-Apr-2009 - 25-Apr-2009
Location: Durham, NC, and Chapel Hill, NC, USA
Contact Person: Christophe Fricker
Meeting Email: cef15duke.edu

Linguistic Field(s): Translation

Call Deadline: 15-Jan-2009

Meeting Description:

This international, interdisciplinary, and transcultural conference will bring
together not only writers and scholars who translate literary texts, but
cultural theorists, publishers and editors, and others interested in many facets
of the process of translation between and among languages and media, and the
politics and influence of translation in today's increasingly globalized
culture. We thus invite proposals for papers representing a broad spectrum of
academic disciplines, languages and national cultures.

Call for Papers

Translatable: Creativity and Knowledge Formation across Cultures
An interdisciplinary conference on the poetics and pragmatics of literary
translation
to be held at Duke University and the University of North Carolina at Chapel
Hill, April 24-25, 2009

Conference Organizers: Peter Burian (Classical Studies, Duke), Eric Downing
(English and Comparative Literature, UNC), Christophe Fricker (Germanic
Languages and Literature, Duke), Erdag Göknar (Turkish Studies/Slavic and
Eurasian Studies, Duke)

This international, interdisciplinary, and transcultural conference will bring
together not only writers and scholars who translate literary texts, but
cultural theorists, publishers and editors, and others interested in many facets
of the process of translation between and among languages and media, and the
politics and influence of translation in today's increasingly globalized
culture. We thus invite proposals for papers representing a broad spectrum of
academic disciplines, languages and national cultures.

We envision meetings organized around two overarching themes:

1) translation and creation, including such topics as translation as a mode of
thought, the influence of translation and translated texts on the development of
national literatures, the role of translation in the artistic development and
expression of creative writers, poetics of translation, translation and
adaptation in multiple media; and

2) translation in the formation and dissemination of knowledge, including such
topics as post-colonial translation in the age of English-language hegemony,
translating Islam for the West and the West for Islam, translation in the
economy of contemporary cultures, translation as a model or model for
intercultural communication, translation in the age of global English.

This conference will take advantage of demonstrated interest in literary
translation, both as an activity and a subject of scholarly inquiry, at our
universities and in the wider academic community. It has been prepared by a
series of well-attended "Translatable" events at Duke over the last two years,
featuring prominent literary translators from a number of linguistic, literary,
and cultural traditions.

The opening lecture and the first day of the conference will be held at Duke;
the second day will take place on the UNC campus. Our hope is that this initial
conference will be followed by Translatable conferences elsewhere, and that the
conference papers will provide the basis for the publication of a volume of
distinguished and wide-ranging essays.

Please send proposals (no longer than 300 words) and a short CV to all four
organizers at pburianduke.edu, goknarduke.edu, edowningemail.unc.edu and
cef15duke.edu by 15 January 2009.

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.