LINGUIST List 29.3712

Wed Sep 26 2018

Calls: Morphology, Pragmatics, Semantics, Syntax, Typology/Germany

Editor for this issue: Everett Green <everettlinguistlist.org>


***************** LINGUIST List Support *****************

Fund Drive 2018
28 years of LINGUIST List!
Please support the LL editors and operation with a donation at:
https://funddrive.linguistlist.org/donate/




Date: 24-Sep-2018
From: Yvonne Treis <yvonne.treiscnrs.fr>
Subject: Ideophones and Interjections
E-mail this message to a friend

Full Title: Ideophones and Interjections

Date: 21-Aug-2019 - 24-Aug-2019
Location: Leipzig, Germany
Contact Person: Yvonne Treis
Meeting Email: < click here to access email >

Linguistic Field(s): Morphology; Pragmatics; Semantics; Syntax; Typology

Call Deadline: 09-Nov-2018

Meeting Description:

(Session of 52nd Annual Meeting of the Societas Linguistica Europaea)

Our workshop focusses on two word classes, ideophones (IDEO) and interjections (INTJ), that have been faced with definitional problems of a rather different nature than other word classes, in part because they are situated at the boundary of arbitrary vs. “motivated” language. In this workshop we would like to bring together scholars who study the semantics, morphology, syntax and pragmatics of IDEO and INTJ from a typological, diachronic, areal and/or multimodal perspective.

INTJ are on the whole defined, throughout history, in negative terms on account of their phonological marginality, their non-participation in morphological processes and their syntactic autonomy. IDEO are also difficult to define notionally, on account of the great variety of IDEO lexemes in the world’s languages, and many definitions, as with INTJ, highlight the non-standard phonology found with this word class. We have decided to consider INTJ and IDEO in the same workshop with the hope that setting them up in opposition to each other will make us more efficient in searching for consistent (and contrasting) definitions and in discussing issues of methodology and analysis that are common to both. Considering that in many languages, INTJ & IDEO do not participate in morphological processes, it is reasonable to ask whether they should, or even can be, topics in grammars, and if so, how they can be described (and not only listed). They express emotions or reactions (INTJ) and sensory imagery (IDeO), in other words subjective notions with great cultural variability. The difficulty in translating them and accurately capturing their meaning makes describing them difficult, marginalizing them even more compared to other word classes.

IDEO have been given cross-linguistic consideration, through work on sound symbolism (Hinton et al 1994), and in typology and descriptive work (see Voeltz & Kilian-Hatz 2001, Dingemanse 2011, Reiter 2011). In contrast, work on INTJ has tended to be situated within the field of pragmatics (Ameka 1992, Cram 2008, Poggi 2009) rather than being carried out from the perspective of typology.

We invite abstracts addressing one or more of the following questions from the perspective of language-specific and cross-linguistic analysis:

- Typology: How can one proceed from language-specific to cross-linguistic definitions of “interjection” and “ideophone”? What formal, semantic and pragmatic criteria can be used to compare INTJ & IDEO across languages?

- Categorization: Where are the boundaries between INTJ and IDEO, INTJ and fixed expressions, INTJ and “imperativa tanta” etc.?

- Morphology: In which languages do we find productive processes for the formation of INTJ & IDEO? Of which derivational processes can they themselves be the input?

- Semantics: What are the semantic domains expressed by INTJ and IDEO? When INTJ and IDEO occur in grammars, it is often in the form of lists, divided into semantic sub-classes: are other configurations for their description possible?

- Diachrony: What are possible origins of INTJ and IDEO?

- Areality: How do INTJ and IDEO spread across language boundaries or within a linguistic area? Are there phono-symbolic patterns that are characteristic of specific linguistic areas? In which linguistic areas do we find similarly elaborated systems?
- Multimodality: Which gestures are associated with INTJ and IDEO?

- Methodology / Tools: What types of linguistic data most frequently yield INTJ and IDEO? Are there differences in frequency between certain linguistic genres and everyday language? Which (non-)verbal stimuli can be used to trigger their use and to help us capture their meaning?

- Histriography: How have INTJ and IDEO typically been defined and described in research traditions of certain areas, language branches, families?

Call for Papers:

Potential participants are invited to contact the workshop organizers with an expression of interest: aimee.lahaussoiscnrs.fr and yvonne.treiscnrs.fr

The final date for the submission of an abstract for a 20-minute presentation (max. 300 words, exclusive of references) is *9 November 2018*. Submission at this stage is non-anonymous.

Important Dates
- Submission of abstracts to workshop convenors: 9 November 2018
- Notification of inclusion of abstract in the workshop proposal: 20 November 2018
- Notification of acceptance/rejection of the workshop proposal by the SLE organizers: 15 December 2018
- If our workshop proposal is accepted, submission of full abstracts to SLE by the participants: 15 January 2018

[For a list of references please contact the session convenors.]




Page Updated: 26-Sep-2018