LINGUIST List 21.3338|
Thu Aug 19 2010
Calls: Disc Analysis, Pragmatics, Semantics/United Kingdom
Editor for this issue: Di Wdzenczny
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!
The Pragmatics of Quoting in CMC
Message 1: The Pragmatics of Quoting in CMC
From: Christian Hoffmann <Christian.Hoffmannphil.uni-augsburg.de>
Subject: The Pragmatics of Quoting in CMC
E-mail this message to a friend
Full Title: The Pragmatics of Quoting in CMC
Short Title: PragofQuo
Date: 03-Jul-2011 - 08-Jul-2011
Location: Manchester, United Kingdom
Contact Person: Prof. Dr. Wolfram Bublitz
Meeting Email: Wolfram.Bublitzphil.uni-augsburg.de
Linguistic Field(s): Discourse Analysis; Pragmatics; Semantics
Call Deadline: 30-Sep-2010
This panel addresses the pragmatics of quoting as a metacommunicative
act in forms of computer-mediated communication (CMC). Surprisingly, not
much research has been done into this intriguing topic even though quoting
is doubtless one of CMC's most peculiar and also most frequent features; in
fact, excessive quoting seems to be characteristic of several forms of CMC.
We adopt the established reading of quoting as the act of transferring a
source text of an author A1 from its context to another (temporally and
locally shifted) context by a quoter (A1 or A2) as a target text (quotation); to
this we append the medium-induced amendment that the quoter can be
non-human software (and quoting accordingly a process rather than an
act). With the advent of CMC, quoting has undergone a metamorphosis as
to its forms, socio-technological potential of textual reproduction and
manipulation, functional range and, in general, as to its pragmatics.
We invite contributions which focus on the pragmatics of quoting in 'new'
instead of 'old' media (books, newspapers, letters etc.) except for reasons
of comparison. Leading questions are:
-In which way is quoting achieved in CMC (i.e., what means, devices,
strategies are employed)?
-To what end is quoting used in CMC (i.e., what are the motives and
functions behind quoting)?
-Who is the quoting agent (i.e., is quoting actively and intentionally
performed by a human user or executed automatically by non-human
In particular, we wish to encourage the discussion of
-verbal, kinesic, pictorial or filmic quotation signals which evoke and
indicate pragmatic functions of quotations in new media contexts (e.g.
stylistic embellishment, authentification, alignment and affiliation, topical
coherence, dialogicity, etc.) - and
-the kind and degree of technological reproductivity (automatization),
intentionality and authorship in quotes of different Internet-based text
genres, ranging from manual citations and copy-paste procedures (in chats
and weblogs) to semi-automatic quotes (in emails or message boards) and
fully automatic reproductions (in social network sites);
Call For Papers
Abstracts are invited for 30-minute talks (20 minutes presentations plus 10
minutes for discussion). Abstracts should be anonymous and confined to
one page (including examples and references) with 1-inch margins and a
font no smaller than 11 point.
Please send a pdf-file to christian.hoffmann(at)phil.uni-augsburg.de. The
subject of the message should specify 'IPRA abstract', and the body of the
message should include author name(s), affiliation(s) and contact
information (including email address), and the title of the abstract.
The language of the conference session is English, and abstracts
should be written in the language of presentation.
September 30, 2010: Deadline for abstract submission
October 15, 2010: Notification of acceptance
July 3-8, 2011: IPRA Conference (Manchester)
Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue
Page Updated: 19-Aug-2010
While the LINGUIST List makes every effort to ensure the linguistic relevance of sites listed
on its pages, it cannot vouch for their contents.