* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
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 24.4364

Mon Nov 04 2013

FYI: Second Call for Book Chapters: Imperatives and Other Directive Strategies

Editor for this issue: Uliana Kazagasheva <ulianalinguistlist.org>

Date: 04-Nov-2013
From: Daniel Van Olmen <d.vanolmenlancaster.ac.uk>
Subject: Second Call for Book Chapters: Imperatives and Other Directive Strategies
E-mail this message to a friend

Call for Book Chapters

General Information:
Imperatives and Other Directive Strategies.
Edited by Simone Heinold (University of Frankfurt, Germany) and Daniël Van Olmen (Lancaster University, United Kingdom).

The volume will be submitted for publication to the John Benjamins series Studies in Language Companion, edited by Werner Abraham and Elly van Gelderen (http://benjamins.com/#catalog/books/slcs/main).

Description:
The volume aims to examine the following issues from a broadly functionalist perspective:
1. the imperative in different languages;
2. the relation between the imperative and other directive strategies;
3. similar non-imperative directive strategies in different languages.

As it stands, the first part contains a study of the expression of evidentiality in the imperative in Innu and a contrastive analysis of the imperative in English and Dutch. We invite proposals for chapters dealing with the functional variation that the imperative exhibits across languages (e.g. TAM, non-directive uses, paradigms, speech acts) and, more generally, with the question whether and, if so, how the imperative can be defined cross-linguistically (e.g. an underlying necessity modal, a prototypically directive category with possible extensions, some abstract schema).

At present, the second part contains a comparison of the imperative and the directive infinitive in German, a study of free-standing que-clauses versus the imperative in varieties of Spanish and an investigation into the directive past participle in German. We welcome proposals for chapters looking into the differences between the imperative and other directive strategies and the factors motivating the use of these strategies (e.g. the traditional explanation of politeness but also –and perhaps more importantly– formal and functional differentiation).

As it stands, the third part contains a study of past- and perfective-based directives in a small typological sample, an examination of insubordinated conditional and complement clauses in Germanic and an investigation into directives in varieties of English. We invite proposals for chapters dealing with non-imperative directive strategies and the question how similarities and differences between languages can be explained (e.g. cultural factors, distribution of labor, conventionalization, language-specific grammatical factors).

Abstracts:
Abstracts should be approximately 500 words in length (excluding references) and be sent to both Simone Heinold (heinoldlingua.uni-frankfurt.de) and Daniël Van Olmen (d.vanolmenlancaster.ac.uk) by 1 December 2013. The editors will make a selection in order to ensure the coherence of the volume and notify the authors about the acceptance of theirs abstracts within a week.

Chapters:
The authors of accepted abstracts will be expected to contribute a chapter of maximum 12,500 words in length and to review one of the other chapters. A first version of the chapters will be due by 1 March 2014. They will then be submitted to internal and external peer review, the deadline of which will be 1 June 2014. The final version of the chapters will be due by 1 September 2014.


Linguistic Field(s): General Linguistics

Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue



Page Updated: 04-Nov-2013

Supported in part by the National Science Foundation       About LINGUIST    |   Contact Us       ILIT 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.