LINGUIST List 25.850|
Wed Feb 19 2014
Calls: Semantics, Typology, Discourse Anaylsis, Psycholing, General Ling/Spain
Editor for this issue: Bryn Hauk
From: Anastasios Tsangalidis <atsangalauth.gr>
Subject: Workshop on Evidentiality, Mirativity and Modality
E-mail this message to a friend
Full Title: Workshop on Evidentiality, Mirativity and Modality
Date: 06-Oct-2014 - 08-Oct-2014
Location: Madrid, Spain
Contact Person: Anastasios Tsangalidis
Meeting Email: < click here to access email >
Linguistic Field(s): Discourse Analysis; General Linguistics; Psycholinguistics; Semantics; Typology
Call Deadline: 15-Mar-2014
A workshop on Evidentiality, Mirativity and Modality is to be submitted for consideration within the International Conference on Evidentiality and Modality in European Languages 2014, to be held at the
Facultad de Filología, Universidad Complutense de Madrid.
The aim of this workshop is to focus on the relation between mirativity and evidentiality. Ever since DeLancey’s work on Lhasa Tibetan, mirativity has been promoted as a cross-linguistic category which encodes information that is “new or surprising to the speaker”. However, there has been much debate on whether such a category is relevant to cross-linguistic analysis and even to Tibetan. Lazard, for instance, challenges DeLancey’s theory on the grounds that inference, hearsay and unexpected observation are all facets of the mediative category. Hill rejects both the category of mirativity and DeLancey’s analysis of Tibetan data, claiming that the particle ḥdug encodes sensory evidence, not new information. It seems, then, that the category of mirativity cannot be taken for granted. The goal of this workshop will be:
(i) To reassess the relation between mirative meaning and evidentiality as well as modality in European languages. More specifically, we wish to explore the question whether mirativity can be seen as a legitimate semantic category on its own or whether it is always a possible extension of evidential meaning.
(ii) To determine whether mirativity is a valid concept in languages which encode surprise not in a separate morphosyntactic category, but in specific constructions
Agnès Celle & Anastasios Tsangalidis
agnes.celleuniv-paris-diderot.fr & atsangalauth.gr
Subject language(s): Any European language
The language of the workshop will be English.
Registration for the workshop is done as part of the normal conference registration process:
Early bird registration opens: 1 June 2014
Registration (full fee): 1 July 2014
Registration closes: 7 October 2014
Conference Fees (including coffee breaks, Wi-Fi access, and a conference pack):
Early Bird Registration (from 1 June to 30 June 2014):
- Regular participants: 120 Euros
- Students (with valid ID): 70 Euros
- Regular participants: 150 Euros
- Students (with valid ID): 100 Euros
Call for Papers:
We welcome proposals for 20 minute papers on topics including (but not limited to) the following areas:
- (Ad-)mirative mood and meaning in European languages: to what extent are all individual markers the exponents of a single, cross-linguistic, category? For example, what various analysts call ‘mirative’ in different Balkan languages involves quite distinct properties – both formally and notionally. Assuming that mirativity is a valid cross-linguistic category, is it prototypically organized? To what extent can different mirativity markers deviate from the prototype?
- The connection between unexpectedness, direct / indirect evidence, sensory evidence and modality, especially in terms of speaker’s responsibility
- Further possible questions concerning mirativity: are there well-attested paths of development out of particular lexical/grammatical sources? Is mirativity located in the Tense-Aspect-Mood area? Is it a property of sentences or utterances? Does it involve a specific sentence form or focus construction reflecting information structure? Can mirativity be subsumed under the broad category of “noncanonicity judgement” (Fillmore & Kay & O’Connor) and how is it related to constructions such as “Mad Magazine sentences” (Akmajian), “Incredulity Response Constructions” (Fillmore & Kay & O’Connor), “What’s X doing Y?” (Kay & Fillmore)?
Paper submissions are invited for 20 minutes talks + 10 min. discussion – including a 300 word abstract and a title. Data from any European language(s) can be presented. Note, however, that the working language of the workshop will be English. All papers will be circulated beforehand in order to facilitate roundtable discussion.
Abstract submission deadline: 15 March 2014
Notification of acceptance by the workshop convenors: 30 March 2014
Notification of acceptance by the conference organisers: 26 April 2014
Papers accepted for oral presentation due by 5 September 2014
Akmajian, Adrian, 1984. Sentence types and the form-function fit, in NLLT 2, 1, 1-23.
Chafe, Wallace & Johanna Nichols (eds.). 1986. Evidentiality. The linguistic coding of epistemology. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
DeLancey, Scott, 1997. Mirativity: The grammatical marking of unexpected information. Linguistic Typology 1. 33-52.
Fillmore, Charles & Kay, Paul & O’Connor, Mary. 1988. Regularity and idiomaticity in grammatical constructions: the case of “Let alone”. Language 64: 501-538.
Hill, Nathan. 2012. “Mirativity” does not exist: ḥdug in “Lhasa” Tibetan and other suspects. Linguistic Typology 16, 389-433.
Kay, Paul and Fillmore Charles J. 1999. Grammatical Constructions and Linguistic Generalizations: The What's X Doing Y? Construction, Language, Vol. 75, No. 1, 1-33.
Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue
Page Updated: 19-Feb-2014
While the LINGUIST List makes every effort to ensure the linguistic relevance of sites listed
on its pages, it cannot vouch for their contents.