LINGUIST List 32.3121
Mon Oct 04 2021
Calls: Discourse Analysis, Pragmatics, Socioling, Text/Corpus Ling/France
Editor for this issue: Everett Green <everettlinguistlist.org>
Martine SEKALI <sekali
GReG P.L.S. 6 “Dis-orders of meaning: crisis discourse and counter-discourse” E-mail this message to a friend
Full Title: GReG P.L.S. 6 “Dis-orders of meaning: crisis discourse and counter-discourse”
Short Title: GReG P.L.S. 6
Date: 05-May-2022 - 06-May-2022
Location: Université Paris Nanterre, France
Contact Person: Sophie Raineri
Meeting Email: < click here to access email >
Web Site: https://crea.parisnanterre.fr/groupe-de-recherche-sur-les-grammaires-greg--654115.kjsp
Linguistic Field(s): Discourse Analysis; Pragmatics; Sociolinguistics; Text/Corpus Linguistics
Call Deadline: 01-Dec-2021
In this conference, “Dis-orders of meaning: crisis discourse and counter-discourse”, the GReG (Groupe de Recherche sur les Grammaires/ Grammar Research Group) at Paris Nanterre University will further reflect on the mapping of linguistic parameters involved in the (re )elaboration of meaning, theorized as a dynamic linguistic activity, the study of which requires the integration of multiple levels of analysis, including morpho-syntax, phonology, intonation, gesture, semantics and pragmatics. This session is directly related to the time of the crises we are currently going through, first with the movement – nationwide and beyond – of opposition to ongoing reforms of the public service, then with the global health crisis induced by the COVID-19 pandemic.
Our goal is to react to the short-term time frame of the political arena by resorting to necessarily long-term (collective) reflection, applying linguistic research to the written and spoken discourse and counter-discourse produced as part of, and in reaction to, reforms, crises and breaking points in France, in the English-speaking world and beyond.
The policies designed to transform the public service in France, and specifically (higher) education and research, have produced a considerable amount of institutional discourse and counter-discourse that deserve attention by the scientific research community. Likewise, the pandemic crisis has led to unprecedented forms of institutional discourse. These, in turn, have sparked a wide range of counter-discourse, counterfeiting, caricatures and conspirational discourse, all worth investigating for their linguistic, but also sociological, philosophical and historical dimensions.
We will focus the resources, mechanisms and effects of this output, in any language, ideally covering a broad range of discourse, including:
- official statements / speeches
- debate and exchange between different types of actors, such as politicians, members of the media, academics or individual citizens;
- digital communication: web sites, web forums, social networks, Twitter posts, and so on;
- legal writing such as draft laws, decrees, ordinances and directives;
- expert reviews;
- session minutes and progress reports;
- the political press;
- any other relevant genre.
Johannes Angermuller (Open University/EHESS)
Joanna Thornborrow (Université de Bretagne Occidentale)
- The languages of the conference are French and English.
- Venue: University Paris Nanterre (France)
Call for Papers:
While other directions of research are not ruled out, various aspects of this general theme we would like to see developed can be organized around four related notions, the inter-relatedness of which can be an object of study as well:
- Authority: what linguistic parameters define it? How can one differentiate between a discourse of authority, authoritative speech and authoritarian speech? What characterizes the discursive genre of expert reviews, which are pivotal in institutional discourse and counter-discourse alike? How is a decree constructed as such, linguistically speaking? What semantic representation emanates from the constant use of the word “pedagogy” (in French: “pédagogie”) in official discourse? What authority and/or authorship can counter-discourse have, and how is it constructed?
- Intersubjectivity: What linguistic forms construct the presence or absence of the other in a speech? To what extent is the voice of the other taken into account and integrated in the co-construction of the discourse and projects under study? What strategies (prise en charge, ie commitment to an utterance, pragmatic accommodation or intersubjective modalities) can be observed in these different types of discourse?
- Transparence/Opacity: What is the place of orthophemism, euphemism and dysphemism in the discourse and counter-discourse under discussion? To what extent do these types of discourse resort to simplification on the one hand, and/or to complexification on the other, and what linguistic devices are used to do so? Can these two strategies be used in combination? Can discourse be simplified and/or complexified to the point that it becomes devoid of meaning?
- Performativity: How is the relationship between legal texts and the institutional argumentative discourse that accompanies them articulated? What speech acts, such as persuasion, promises, reassurance or explanations, are used and in what form? What forms of staging characterize these types of discourse? What are the performative properties of counter-discourse?
We encourage the submission of all types of research papers provided they are based on authentic corpora: qualitative analyses of written texts, speeches and interactions; papers characterizing types of discourse based on specifically collected corpora; studies focusing on the meaning and usage of specific linguistic forms (time, aspect or modal markers, logical connectors, phraseological units, lexical or semantic neologisms, and so on). Submissions can focus on any of the dimensions of language and their interfaces (morpho-syntax, lexicology, phonetics and phonology, prosody, gesture, semantics or pragmatics) and be based on any theoretical and methodological framework, such as discourse analysis, conversational analysis, sociolinguistics, speaker-centered theory of enunciative operations, cognitive linguistics, corpus linguistics, pragmatics, interactional socio-linguistics, or use a combined approach. Although this conference mainly aims to bring linguists together, we will also gladly welcome contributions from teams combining two or more fields, such as, but not limited to, linguistics and sociology, history, political science, media or communication studies and education sciences
Adam, M. & Kotzee, B. (2019) The rhetoric of the UK higher education Teaching Excellence Framework: a corpus-assisted discourse analysis of TEF2 provider statements, Educational Review. DOI: 10.1080/00131911.2019.1666796
Angermuller, J. (2013) « Discours académique et gouvernementalité entrepreneuriale. Des textes aux chiffres », in J. Angermuller, F. Lebaron & M. Temmar (dir.), Les discours sur l'économie, Paris, PUF, p. 71-84.
Angermuller J. & Scholz, R. (2013) « Au nom de Bologne ? Une analyse comparée des discours politiques sur les réformes universitaires en Allemagne et en France », Mots. Les langages du politique 102: 22-36. URL : http://journals.openedition.org/mots/21245
Askehave, I. (2007) The impact of marketization on higher education genre
Page Updated: 04-Oct-2021