From bbs.lists at gmail.com Sat May 1 18:12:51 2010 From: bbs.lists at gmail.com (Hongyin Tao) Date: Sat, 1 May 2010 11:12:51 -0700 Subject: 2nd Call for Papers: First International Symposium on Chinese Language and Discourse Message-ID: 2nd Call for Papers First International Symposium on Chinese Language and Discourse 首届汉语语言与话语国际研讨会 /首屆漢語語言與話語國際研討會 University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California, USA October 29-30, 2010 This is the first of a series of international symposia on the theme of Chinese Language and Discourse, to be held once every two years in different parts of the world. Paper proposals are invited to showcase latest advancements in broadly-defined discourse functional studies of the Chinese language. Topics may include, but are not limited to, the following: o Language and interaction o Language and society o Language and culture o Language and cognition o Corpora and Chinese studies o Language change and development o Chinese language acquisition and education o Chinese language and new media o Multilingualism and identity construction o Language contact Keynote speakers Charles Goodwin (UCLA) Li Wei (University of London) Kang Kwong Luke (Nanyang Technological University/the University of Hong Kong) Sandra A. Thompson (UC Santa Barbara) Presentations are for 30 minutes, including 5 minutes for discussion. A one page abstract should be submitted to the conference email address: CLD.symposium2010 at gmail.com Deadline for submission of abstracts: May 31, 2010 Notification of acceptance: June 15, 2010 NEW! CLD Workshop: Processing Audio/Video Data for Chinese Discourse Analysis, with Dr Hong, Huaqing, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore. Workshop description: Introducing common computer software programs for discourse data processing involving transcription, audio/video and text alignment, search multimedia results in a user-friendly environment. Participants at the workshop are encouraged to bring with them their own natural discourse data and will have a chance to analyze them using the tools introduced. Workshop date and time: Friday, Oct 29, pre-conference workshop, from 9:00-12:00. Best Student Paper Award A cash prize of $300 will be awarded to a paper submitted and presented by a current student who has not had a PhD degree at the time of the symposium. Selection is based on both the content and the presentation. Those who wish to participate in the competition should indicate the intention with “For Best Student Paper Award” marked on top of the abstract. A full paper is encouraged but not required for the competition. ________________________________________ Sponsors: Asian Languages and Cultures Dept, UCLA; UCLA Confucius Institute Organizer: Hongyin Tao, UCLA Executive Editor, Chinese Language and Discourse: An International & Interdisciplinary Journal and Studies in Chinese Language and Discourse Book Series From eep at hum.ku.dk Mon May 3 12:26:11 2010 From: eep at hum.ku.dk (Elisabeth Engberg-Pedersen) Date: Mon, 3 May 2010 14:26:11 +0200 Subject: SALC III, first call Message-ID: The Third Conference of the Scandinavian Association for Language and Cognition FIRST CALL FOR PAPERS The Third Conference of the Scandinavian Association for Language and Cognition (SALC III) will take place at the University of Copenhagen, June 14-16th (3 days) 2011. Keynote speakers: Lawrence Barsalou, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia Per Durst-Andersen, Copenhagen Business School, Copenhagen, Denmark Rachel Giora, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel Marianne Gullberg, Lund University, Lund, Sweden Hannes Rakoczy, University of Göttingen, Germany The conference includes, but is not limited to the following themes: Cognitive impairment and language use Language acquisition and cognition Language and cognitive development and evolution Language and consciousness Language and gesture Language change and cognition Language structure and cognition Language use and cognition Linguistic relativity Linguistic typology and cognition Psycholinguistic approaches to language and cognition Specific language impairment We now invite the submission of abstracts for paper or poster presentations. The deadline is December 1st 2010. Papers will be allocated 20 minutes plus 10 minutes for discussion. Posters will stay up for a day and be allocated to dedicated, timetabled sessions. The language of the conference is English. Abstracts of no more than 300 words (excluding references) should be sent by email as a Word attachment to eep at hum.ku.dk by December 1st 2010 (subject: SALC III abstract). The document should contain presentation title, the abstract and preference for paper or poster presentation. Please DO NOT include information identifying the author(s) in the email attachment. Author(s) information including name, affiliation and email address(es) should be detailed in the body of the email. Notification of acceptance decisions will be communicated by February 1st 2011. For details of SALC, see: http://www.salc-sssk.org/ From paul at benjamins.com Mon May 3 17:39:52 2010 From: paul at benjamins.com (Paul Peranteau) Date: Mon, 3 May 2010 13:39:52 -0400 Subject: New Benjamins book: Fiedler & Schhwarz - The Expression of Information Structure Message-ID: The Expression of Information Structure. A documentation of its diversity across Africa. Edited by Ines Fiedler and Anne Schwarz (Humboldt University, Berlin / Humboldt University, Berlin & James Cook University, Cairns) Typological Studies in Language 91 2010. xii, 383 pp. Hardbound 978 90 272 0672 5 / EUR 105.00 / USD 158.00 e-Book – Not yet available 978 90 272 8842 4 / EUR 105.00 / USD 158.00 This book analyzes the different patterns found across subsaharan Africa to express information structure. Based on languages from all four African language phyla, it documents the great diversity of linguistic means used to encode information-structural phenomena and is therefore highly relevant for some of the most pertinent questions in modern linguistic theory. The special contribution of this volume is the perspective on a variety of information-structurally related phenomena which go far beyond classical notions such as focus and topic. Detailed investigations are dedicated to so far less discussed focal subcategories, like focus on verbal operators or the thetic-categorical distinction. Finally, the information-structural configuration of unmarked, canonical sentence structures is recognized. The papers provide evidence that the formal means to encode information-structural categories range from means such as morphological markers or syntactic operations, famous in linguistics, to less well-known strategies, such as defocalization rather than focalization. Table of contents Introduction Ines Fiedler and Anne Schwarz vii–xii Information structure marking in Sandawe texts Helen Eaton 1–34 Topic and focus fields in Naki Jeff Good 35–68 The relation between focus and theticity in the Tuu family Tom Güldemann 69–94 Focus marking in Aghem: Syntax or semantics? Larry M. Hyman 95–116 On the obligatoriness of focus marking: Evidence from Tar B'arma Peggy Jacob 117–144 Focalisation and defocalisation in Isu Roland Kießling 145–164 Discourse function of inverted passives in Makua-Marevone narratives Oliver Kröger 165–192 Topic-focus articulation in Taqbaylit and Tashelhit Berber Amina Mettouchi and Axel Fleisch 193–232 Focus in Atlantic languages Stéphane Robert 233–260 Topic and focus construction asymmetry Ronald P. Schaefer and Francis Oisaghaede Egbokhare 261–286 Verb-and-predication focus markers in Gur Anne Schwarz 287–314 Why contrast matters: Information structure in Gawwada (East Cushitic) Mauro Tosco 315–348 Focus and the Ejagham verb system John R. Watters 349–376 Language index 377 Subject index 379–383 "Through its presentation of studies of information structure in languages from all of the major indigenous language phyla of Africa this volume makes a significant contribution to this increasingly important area of linguistic theory and analysis. Of particular interest are the investigations of special verb-focus marking in several languages, a phenomenon to which insufficient attention has been paid in the past. This volume is a welcome addition to the growing literature on the typological variation in information structure across languages." Robert D. Van Valin Jr., Heinrich Heine University, Düsseldorf Paul Peranteau (paul at benjamins.com) General Manager John Benjamins Publishing Company 763 N. 24th St. Philadelphia PA 19130 Phone: 215 769-3444 Fax: 215 769-3446 John Benjamins Publishing Co. website: http://www.benjamins.com From paul at benjamins.com Mon May 3 17:37:07 2010 From: paul at benjamins.com (Paul Peranteau) Date: Mon, 3 May 2010 13:37:07 -0400 Subject: New Benjamins Book: Spevak - Constituent Order in Classical Latin Prose Message-ID: Constituent Order in Classical Latin Prose Olga Spevak University of Toulouse Studies in Language Companion Series 117 2010. xv, 318 pp. Hardbound 978 90 272 0584 1 / EUR 105.00 / USD 158.00 e-Book – Not yet available 978 90 272 8851 6 / EUR 105.00 / USD 158.00 Latin is a language with variable (so-called 'free') word order. Constituent Order in Classical Latin Prose (Caesar, Cicero, and Sallust) presents the first systematic description of its constituent order from a pragmatic point of view. Apart from general characteristics of Latin constituent order, it discusses the ordering of the verb and its arguments in declarative, interrogative, and imperative sentences, as well as the ordering within noun phrases. It shows that the relationship of a constituent with its surrounding context and the communicative intention of the writer are the most reliable predictors of the order of constituents in a sentence or noun phrase. It differs from recent studies of Latin word order in its scope, its theoretical approach, and its attention to contextual information. The book is intended both for Latinists and for linguists working in the fields of the Romance languages and language typology. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Table of contents Preface xiii–xiv Abbreviations xv–xvi Introduction 1–12 Placement constraints and liberties in Latin constituent order 13–26 Pragmatic functions 27–114 Declarative sentences 115–194 Interrogative sentences 195–204 Imperative sentences 205–222 Noun phrases 223–282 Conclusion 283–286 References 287–298 Index locorum 299–302 Index rerum 303–304 Three commented texts 305–318 Paul Peranteau (paul at benjamins.com) General Manager John Benjamins Publishing Company 763 N. 24th St. Philadelphia PA 19130 Phone: 215 769-3444 Fax: 215 769-3446 John Benjamins Publishing Co. website: http://www.benjamins.com From mliu at mail.NCTU.edu.tw Wed May 5 07:51:36 2010 From: mliu at mail.NCTU.edu.tw (Mei-chun Liu) Date: Wed, 5 May 2010 15:51:36 +0800 Subject: An inquiry about emotion verbs Message-ID: Dear all, I have been looking at Mandarin emotion verbs and found that besides Experiencer-as-subject and Stimulus-as-subject verbs, there is a subgroup of verbs that clearly lexicalize an agent-like Affector as the subject, something like: He stir-angered his boss. (Mandarin: ta ji-nu le laoban.) He provoke-infuriated his boss. (Mandarin: ta re-huo le laoban.) I'm wondering if there's any other language(s) where the majority of emotion verbs prefer lexicalizing such an eventive predication with an agent-like Affector (similar to Van Valin's Effector') as the subject and a patient-like Affectee as the object. Thank you very much in advance for your kind reply. In other words, are there emotional predicates in other languages that clearly take a more volitional role than the so-called Experiencer as the subject? Thanks in advance for your kind replies or suggestions. Best regards, Meichun Liu NCTU, Taiwan DFLL, National Chiao Tung University mliu at mail.nctu.edu.tw Fax: +886-3-5726037 Phone:+886-3-5712121 x. 58103 From d.trenkic.96 at cantab.net Wed May 5 11:31:56 2010 From: d.trenkic.96 at cantab.net (Danijela Trenkic) Date: Wed, 5 May 2010 12:31:56 +0100 Subject: 3 Lecturers in TESOL, York, UK Message-ID: University of York Department of Educational Studies http://www.york.ac.uk/depts/educ/ 3 Lecturers in TESOL The Department of Educational Studies is seeking to appoint a Lecturer to work on the MA in Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages (MA TESOL) programme and to work with the team involved with the teaching and learning of second languages. The ideal applicants will have relevant experience of teaching TESOL, of teaching and supervising at Masters level, and of course administration. Academic expertise in the areas of teaching young learners, materials design, assessment and pronunciation are of particular interest, as is the ability to teach aspects of linguistics / language description, but applications are encouraged from those in other areas, such as teacher training and ESL management. Applicants should have an established research profile. Informal enquiries to Dr Graham Low, tel: +44 (0)1904 433463 or email: gdl1 at york.ac.uk. Please also see the department web pages at www.york.ac.uk/depts/educ Salary will be within the range £35,646 - £43,840 per annum. The post is full time and for three years. It will commence on 1 September 2010 or as soon as possible thereafter. A maximum of 3 posts are available. Closing date: Thursday 27 May 2010. For further information and to apply on-line, please visit our website: http://www.york.ac.uk/jobs/ Alternatively contact HR Services on 01904 434835 quoting reference number UoY00782. -- Danijela Trenkic, PhD (Cantab) Lecturer Department of Educational Studies University of York Heslington YO10 5DD, United Kingdom http://www.york.ac.uk/depts/educ/people/TrenkicD.htm From rchen at csusb.edu Fri May 7 15:19:42 2010 From: rchen at csusb.edu (Rong Chen) Date: Fri, 7 May 2010 08:19:42 -0700 Subject: ICLC 11, Xi'an first call for papers Message-ID: ICLC 11: Language, Cognition, Context July 11-17, 2011, Xi’an, China (http://www.iclc11.org; iclc11 at xisu.edu.cn) Under the auspices of the International Cognitive Linguistics Association, co-organized by China Cognitive Linguistics Association and China International Forum on Cognitive Linguistics, and hosted by Xi’an International Studies University, the 11th International Cognitive Linguistics Conference will be held July 11- 17, 2011, in the historic city of Xi’an, China. General guidelines Like all previous ICLCs, ICLC 11, Xi’an will be a gathering of cognitive linguists to present their most recent research in the study of language. We invite abstracts that subscribe to the assumption that language is part of human cognition, not an autonomous and separate system. Language is seen as influenced and, to a large extent, even determined by forces not only within it but also outside it—factors of general human cognitive capacities as well as factors that result from the diversity of societies, cultural groups, discourse types, and communicative modes. As such, presentations at ICLC 11, Xi’an may be on any facet of human language—including the non-verbal—from any cognitive linguistics perspective. The following general areas are provided as a sampler, not an exclusive list of possibilities: cognitive grammar, cognitive semantics, construction grammar, conceptual metaphor, conceptual integration, embodiment of language, cognitive psycholinguistics, cognitive sociolinguistics, cognitive stylistics, cognitive applied linguistics, corpus linguistics, and application of a cognitive linguistics theory to other disciplines. ICLC 11, Xi’an will hold a general session, theme sessions, and a poster session. Presentations for the general session and theme sessions will be allotted 25 minutes, with 20 minutes for presentation and 5 minutes for discussion. The poster session will be given a two-hour time window, without competing with the general session or the theme sessions. Each presenter can appear in the program a maximum of two times: once as a first author and once as a co-author. Abstracts for both the general session and theme sessions will go through the same anonymous peer-review process. A presentation for a theme session (see below) will thus be submitted twice—once to the theme session organizer and once to the Organizing Committee. The conference website (http://www.iclc11.org) is being constructed and will be updated with new information as it becomes available. Questions regarding the conference should be addressed to iclc11 at xisu.edu.cn. Abstract Submission and Requirements Abstracts will be accepted from June 16, 2010 to November 15, 2010. Details about how to submit abstracts will be announced by June 15, 2010. Abstracts should be no more than 500 words, including references. They should reflect the soundness of argument, substance of content, and relevance to cognitive linguistics—the three criteria on which acceptance decisions will be based. An abstract about an empirical study, therefore, ought to include preliminary findings. Similarly, an abstract of a theoretical presentation should outline how a position is defended in addition to what that position is. Theme sessions Theme sessions at ICLC 11, Xi’an are expected to encourage the broadest participation possible by scholars in the entire cognitive linguistics community and to present studies that are of as high caliber as those presented in the general session. We ask that theme session organizers follow these procedures: 1. Announce their call for papers on the listserv Cogling and send it to the conference website for posting. They are also encouraged to publicize their calls on other popular listservs (e.g., funknet, linguistlist) or venues. 2. By October 15, 2010, submit to the Organizing Committee a one-page proposal plus a list of potential presenters and their titles (with a maximum of three-sentence description for each) for review by a panel composed of members of the Organizing Committee and the Advisory Committee. 3. In the latter part of October, 2010, theme session organizers will receive decisions on their sessions from the review panel. For an approved theme session, the organizer should remind his/her presenters to submit their abstracts to the Organizing Committee by November 15, 2010. Should a session not be approved, the organizer is asked to encourage his/her presenters to submit their abstracts to the general session. 4. By February 15, 2011, theme session organizers will have received the results of the abstract review. Should the number of accepted presentations for a theme session fall below 5, the session will be cancelled. Should it be greater than 24, the organizer will be asked to select no more than 24 for the session. Those presentations not selected by the organizer will be automatically routed to the general session. Important dates June 16, 2010: Abstract submission begins. October 15, 2010: Theme session proposals due November 15, 2010: Abstract submission ends February 15, 2011: Notification of acceptance March 15, 2011: Early registration begins. July 11-17, 2011: Conference in session Keynote speakers Harald Baayen, University of Alberta, Canada Ewa Dabrowska, Northumbria University, UK Mirjam Fried, Czech Academy of Sciences Prague, Czech Republic Kaoru Horie, Tohoku University, Japan Ronald Langacker, University of California, San Diego, USA John Lucy, Chicago University, USA Jiaxuan Shen, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, China Co-organizers China Cognitive Linguistics Association (http://www.ccla2006.com) China International Forum on Cognitive Linguistics (http://cifcl.buaa.edu.cn) Host Xi’an International Studies University (http://www.xisu.edu.cn) Organizing Committee Dingfang Shu (Co-Chair), Shanghai International Studies University Thomas Fuyin Li (Co-Chair), Beihang University Dafu Yang (Executive Co-Chair), Xi’an International Studies University Rong Chen, California State University, San Bernardino Shisheng Liu, Tsinghua University Hui Zhang, PLA International Studies University Yajun Jiang, Xi’an International Studies University Advisory Committee Yuelian Liu (Chair), Xi’an International Studies University, China Laura Janda, University of Tromsø, Norway Maarten Lemmens, Université Lille 3 & CNRS, France Klaus-Uwe Panther, University of Hamburg, Germany Rene Dirven, University Duisburg-Essen, Germany Suzanne Kemmer, Rice University, USA Elzbieta Tabakowska, Jagiellonian University of Kraków, Poland From phonosemantics at earthlink.net Sat May 8 05:56:25 2010 From: phonosemantics at earthlink.net (jess tauber) Date: Sat, 8 May 2010 01:56:25 -0400 Subject: More on language and genome Message-ID: Some time ago I posted here and elsewhere about apparent parallels between morphosyntactic typology and the structures of genomes in living organisms. Much has happened since then, and the numbers of these parallelisms has been growing rapidly. I have also suggested that the numbers of ideophones in languages correlates (barring cultural or educational biases against them) with morphosyntactic type. High synthesis and/or fusion appears to militate against large numbers of ideophones. Numbers of ideophones in low synthesis, low fusion languages can be in the thousands, and over dialect areas, tens to hundreds of thousands, it appears. Yet individual knowledge and use varies wildly, and ideophones can associate one with a particular village, perhaps even family, so are a mark of identity. Individual ideophones are very mobile, areally. Ideophones also provide a source of fresh root material for the lexicon, as they are relatively refractory to historical change, although they will adapt to a language's phonology. Over the last several decades the role of viruses has changed radically in the eyes of researchers. First thought to be rare, annoying, and occasionally fatal castoffs from the genomes of cellular lifeforms, it now is apparent that they are everywhere- a sample of water from a lake in Germany had 254 MILLION per milliliter, i.e. one gram. Other interesting factoids- unlike eukaryotic cells, which generally exhibit 'vertical transmission' of genetic information (family trees), bacteria and archaea (the two non-nucleated cellular types) make primary use of 'horizontal transmission', trading genes, or groups of related genes, like baseball cards, between like and unlike 'species' ambivalently. This is why drug resistance, or virulance, spreads so quickly. Though some of this is done through special interconnecting tubes, the bulk comes from viruses. Other viruses are able to incorporate themselves (with or without these fresh genes) into the host genome. This may account for perhaps 10 to 20 percent of the bacterial genome, according to my readings. Genes like these are regularly deleted from these genomes- probably when their usefulness ceases, though how a bacterial cell could know that eludes me. New ones refresh the system regularly. The big surprise, though, is what happens in OUR cells. It looks like maybe most of our total amount of DNA (the so called 'junk') is of viral origin. Some is relatively fresh, requiring suppression or excission and deletion- the rest is of variable age, even from very ancient times in the history of life. And it has regulatory function. Much of the management of the genome comes from virally-transmitted genes. Viruses can even infect other viruses! Surprises all around. But the most interesting thing is that the relative numbers of viral genes within any type of life (if you consider viruses part of this) vary typologically in exactly the same way as the numbers of ideophones vary in human languages considered against their morphosyntactic type. There are other parallels- people have compared the genetic code to a phonological system, and proteins translated from genes are thought of as 'words'. But if one considers these letter by letter, as it were, then this isn't quite right. Instead, entire proteins are more like entire clauses, or multiclause formations. Consider the bacterial operon, a physically unbroken chain of genes all transcribed together into an unbroken messanger RNA, controlled by a single activating signal. When the RNA is translated into enzymes, each of these is connected as well, and each one in sequence takes the reaction product of the one before and passes its own new product off to the next. Serial verbs!!! In nucleated (eukaryotic) cells, gene clusters are broken up, not only from each other, but also internally, allowing variable editing of the messanger RNA, and translation of multiple protein products, all from the same underlying gene. This is why you and I only need around 23000 genes in stored form, yet have hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of finished products (and this doesn't even start to include post-translational modifications (derivations!), which multiply things still more. Gene products from such genes can come together (quaternary structure) to create larger units (hemoglobin with its four elements is a good example), but this is often hierarchical, not serial. Bacteria can do this too- I should point that out. There is also something akin to Saussurean arbitrarization going on. In simple proteins all the information to fold up and become functional resides in the primary structure consisting of the ordering of the constituent amino acids defined by the translation of the gene's codons. The structure of the genetic code isn't close to being arbitrary, though there are minor variations found in some organisms as well as in cellular organelles, such as the mitochondrion, which were once free-living. All the variations revolve around a symmetrical underlying consensus form of the code. Amino acids by codons have side chains that define their physical and chemical properties, as well as preferred functions within protein folds, internal bonds, docking sites, and catalytic sites. The code is arranged in such a way that any mutation will more likely than not give a new amino acid product with the same properties (the code's degeneracy), or one very similar to it. 'Sound symbolism' in ideophones is defined by diagrammatic iconicity utilizing the feature geometry of the language's phonology. In many cases small changes in features will result in ideophones with similar meaning- for example in Japanese, where voiced stops connote the same idea as unvoiced ones, only a larger version (the periodic table arranges elements in similar fashion, but I won't here go into other parallels there as well). So the genetic code has much in common with phonology as used in ideophones, which possess the most iconic form/meaning mappings of segemental strings in language. As I've mentioned above, besides chemical and physical properties amino acids also have a role in certain cases in other functions of protein folding, etc. Yet it is nearly impossible to predict the three dimensional conformation of a protein from its primary structural sequence of amino acids. The best one can do is secondary structure, the alpha helices and beta sheets and similar structures, and then only approximately. Something else is going on. Similarly, though you might expect these structures, and higher level ones, to fold up spontaneously, in many cases this doesn't work. There is a very important class of proteins in cells, called chaperonins or heat-shock proteins, that play the role of mandrel, or shoehorn depending on your preference. Often partially folded new proteins come up against energetically ambivalent choices- go this way or that, or prefer a nonfunctional pattern that could be dangerous (various brain-wasting diseases caused by 'prions' spread by misfolding of proteins that then recruit other, 'normally' folded ones to change over to the dark side, as it were). The chaperonins also can re-fold many proteins that have been misfolded due to temperature or other issues. A very high percentage of proteins in cells make use of this mechanism. So we have a sort of disconnect between iconic coding, as found in the mapping of the genetic code to many simpler protein products, and more arbitrarized coding, where conformation is mediated not by the code, but by functions and structures higher up in the system, as well as post-translational modifications that can add, subtract, or move elements of the protein. I'll leave off here, and see whether anyone bites (Tom, are you out there? Perhaps not as 'out there' as me, no?). There are other parallels, and hopefully I'll be able to throw together a paper on this before long that might get some attention. Best to all, Jess Tauber phonosemantics at earthlink.net From jose.deulofeu at wanadoo.fr Sat May 8 07:35:54 2010 From: jose.deulofeu at wanadoo.fr (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?henri_jos=E9_deulofeu?=) Date: Sat, 8 May 2010 09:35:54 +0200 Subject: Passing of Claire Blanche Benveniste Message-ID: Dear all, I let you kow of the passing of Claire Blanche Benveniste, Professor Emiritus at our university. To put it in a nutshell she was a kind of (attractive) feminine french version of Dwight Bolinger : impossible to classify as a linguist but extraordinarily perceptive about linguistic facts. In keeping of a preceding message, I will say it is a pity that she mostly wrote in French, so that her litterature will remain unknown to english reading community, unless one of you would be interested in editing an english "Blanche-Benveniste reader". For those of you who read French , an obituary has been published by the French newspaper Le MONDE , available on the website at the section "carnet". The practical point of my message is the following. I am redacting a kind of "Laudatio" of her for my colleagues. And I would like to mention one opinion of her about language. But I don't know how. Indeed two days before dying of a terrible cancer, she was finishing her last paper and as usual she gave the draft to me for discussion. As we were strongly arguing about what is the main function of language, I asked to her (she was a radical antifunctionalist pace): Well Claire, if according to you; language main function is not "communication" not "cognition", not interaction, what kind of tool language could be for you, if it is not a mere arbitrary combination of signs ? And she answered in French : "Peut- être nous permettre de penser ensemble" (to think together). We remain silent one moment and as the air was cooling in her splendid provençal garden, she wanted to go inside. And I will for ever remember her waving at me through a blooming lilac, as I was taking leave of her for the last time. Has any one of you heard of language as "allowing us to think together". I want to include her answer into my laudatio but I would like to know if she was kind of quoting someone or making by herself a last effort to undersatand what we are all of us trying to. Thanks a lot Henri-José Deulofeu Professeur UNIVERSITÉ AIX-MARSEILLE I DEPT. LINGUISTIQUE FRANCAISE 29 AV. Robert Schuman 13621 Aix-en-Provence CEDEX +33442953569 From macw at cmu.edu Sat May 8 12:08:57 2010 From: macw at cmu.edu (Brian MacWhinney) Date: Sat, 8 May 2010 14:08:57 +0200 Subject: More on language and genome In-Reply-To: <22789339.1273298185336.JavaMail.root@wamui-haziran.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: Jess, I agree that there are strong parallels between the genetic and linguistic codes. In an article in "Connection Science" from 2005, I used the example of the four structural levels in protein-folding as an illustration of the emergence of properties in biological systems. Like you, I view language as an emergent biological system. I also understand and agree with the parallels you are drawing between viral diffusion in eukaryotic DNA and the diffusion of sound patterns in language communities. However, there is a certain semiotic slippage in some of the attempted parallels. In particular, the effects of a given virus on gene expression seem much more accidental than the parallel effects in linguistic memes. As you note, there is no known way to predict quaternary structure in proteins. To the extent that a given virus would embed itself in the regulatory "junk" of the DNA, its effects on protein folding would not be systematic or intentional, but rather just fortuitous. In this way, viruses would be unlike ideophones or other mimetic patterns in human language. Mimetic patterns have meaning, at least initially, whereas the only meaning of a virus is self-replication. By the way, I am assuming here that the full range of linguistic mimetic patterns is much wider than just segmental ideophones, and that it includes tone patterns, vowel shifts, communicative markers, trendy lexical items, and higher-level constructions. You might respond that the initial transparency of mimetic patterns eventually gets lost in human communication systems. I would agree with that. But then I would bump into my second problem with your analysis, which is that you are relying on "feature geometry" to constrain the effects of ideophones. Probably you are also relying on something like morphosyntactic geometry too, since you suggest that mimetic expression is clearer in analytic languages. But, this seems to me to be too narrow. If memes really operate in an isomorphic way to viruses, then we would expect interactions throughout the linguistic system, just as viruses have their effects through all the levels of protein-folding. The diffusion of a particular linguistic meme across language communities and through the whole of linguistic structure should be constrained by many forces apart from simple feature geometry. For example, a communicator form such as a new intonational pattern on the old communicator "well" is going to be constrained by intonational structures from other lexical items, particularly other communicators, specific conversational patterns within which it is used, specific sentential constructions to which it attaches, and so on. I don't think readers of this list fail to appreciate the interactive quality of linguistic expression. So, I think it makes sense to push the viral analysis beyond just a defense of the role of ideophones. And I also think it important to recognize the extent to which mimetic patterns have meaning initially, although this meaning can eventually be lost as the viral memes become incorporated into the DNA of language. -- Brian MacWhinney From phonosemantics at earthlink.net Sat May 8 18:05:21 2010 From: phonosemantics at earthlink.net (jess tauber) Date: Sat, 8 May 2010 14:05:21 -0400 Subject: More on language and genome Message-ID: I'll have to take the time to respond to Brian's concerns properly. Currently I'm in touch with several people involved in the research on viruses I was referring to and am being swamped with papers still to read on the topic- I've been out of the game too long, and am playing catch-up. But just a few quick points. Viruses genomes code several types of objects- minimally their capsids (if they have any) and any proteins they need to enter and exit a cell, and hijack its metabolism to reproduce themselves. But there is often more, in many cases means of incorporating themselves into the DNA of the host, and other genes dragged along for the ride, some from previous hosts, and some new from scrambling of these genes. Viral genes proper affect processual control when incorporated, but these other genes can add new external capacities, as well as alter existing ones. There are viruses that are larger than some bacteria, and these contain huge numbers of genes that a mere parasite wouldn't require for survival. At the other end of the spectrum are viroids that don't have enough of their own genes to survive in a host alone, and hitch their wagons to other viruses to gain entry into cells, or hijack metabolic processes. So things are a bit more complex on the biological end than simple generalizations can account for, just as I overgeneralize a bit about typology (a not uncommon phenomenon), or ideophones. Apparently viruses are a hotbed of rampant recombination, to the point that it is useless to talk about deep lineages. Variable RNA editing comes has viral ancestry, and eukaryotic immune systems get their own capabilities from viral recombinational mechanisms as well. If the folks I'm corresponding with are correct, most of the regulatory and innovational machinery is viral in origin. I agree with your observation that the effects of a given virus on gene expression (in host cells) may be accidental, but then so may be the effects of ideophones and interjections (which I link in my model as part of pragmatic negotiation rather than as part of automatizing, streamlining, and backgrounding grammaticalization). 'Memes' may be too broad a category in this context. Remember that ideophones are not always known or accepted by listeners- a number of field researchers have written about this. They are easier to find in relaxed communicative situations that perhaps are less friendly to grams- a testable hypothesis if anyone wants to take the time to look. One of my current correspondents writes: '1998 it was assumed that 8% of the human genome are of viral origin, 2008 it was 45 %. I predict that in further 10 years it becomes increasingly clear that 98% of the human genome are products of viral genome editing. They not only insert and duplicate genetic content arrangements, viruses invent genes and insert them into cellular genomes.' There is some kind of iconic linkage between the genetic code and protein structure (primary works of course, unless there is later modification after transcription or translation; secondary in proteins not needing chaperonin-driven refolding, etc., tertiary less certainly, and so on, effects dimming the further up the hierarchy the string climbs). But there may also be an effect in the opposite direction, from the proteome downwards, with similar reduction of effectiveness. Many proteins of the same function in different organisms are known to retain largely the same outward shape, with their main reaction centers in the same places, even though the sequence of amino acids can have drifted all over the place. All these sequences converge on the same or similar final product- possibly with the help of chaperonins or other interactions. When chaperonins do their job, lower hierarchical level structure is disrupted in favor of new connectivities at the higher level, even further than it would be in spontaneous hierarchical folding. This is what I mean by arbitrarization, in that configurations favored by bottom-up processes (parallel to those found in ideophone construction and semantics involving lower-dimensions starting from the linear sequencing) adapt to top-down pressures from the existing population of protein products. I should have mentioned that later evolution may change the initial amino acid sequence so that the protein more easily attains the 'desired' functional configuration. Not every protein needs a chaperonin. It would be interesting to know whether these latter forms have a different statistical spread of aa sequences, peptide folds, etc. from shorter, virally recombined genes of the nonregulatory type. That would be my prediction, in any case. Ideophones aren't the only places where there is diagrammatic order- you can find it in serializable verbs in the Papuan Kalam-Kobon family, and we're all familiar with this effect in grammatical paradigms (though not all of them). If I'm right about how class reanalysis and language type shift work together, as the paradigm-like diagrammatic quality of large-scale ideophone systems dies, it passes through the lexicon for a while and eventually settles onto grammatical morphology, where it increases, though I won't call it iconicity. Rather iconicity shifts to symbolicity and then on to indexicality as each class gets the diagrammatical imperative. Then diagrammaticality gets off the morphological tit and affects syntactic structure proper, before the whole process begins again, in the morphosyntactic cycle. I would like to know whether this cycle exists in living organisms as well- maybe helping to explain the rise and fall of genomic and organismal sizes, lifestyles, etc. There are relationships that have been discovered only in the past couple of years- again I'm trying to play catch-up here. In eukaryotic organisms there is always regulatory junk- virally derived. In fact people are now claiming that the eukaryotic nucleus itself was originally a giant virus (they DO exist, you know, bigger than bacteria!). The other organelles were either other viruses, bacteria, or archaea. It has been found that there is a strong correlation between relative amounts of this regulatory junk DNA and life history. Organisms (plants and animals) that have very large amounts relative to protein coding DNA take their time to mature, often retaining infantile character (including the very valuable ability to regenerate whole body parts and organs, including the brain, to heal wounds without scarring, etc.) into adulthood (neoteny), and waiting til circumstances in the environment are most propitious. Their organs are simpler, and contain fewer, larger cells, and fewer types of cells. In other words, everything is continuously negotiated. More junk, more negotiation, more pragmatic orientation. Animals and plants with the least relative amount of regulatory junk DNA vs. protein coding type have the opposite life history. They have more different interconnected (even overlapping) organ systems, with greater numbers of smaller cells, with more types per organ. Ability to heal is via quick scarring rather than slow regeneration. Regeneration is minimized. Maturation is accelerated (metamorphosis), with earlier stages often reduced. All this is done 'on the clock'- they don't depend on variable environmental cues. It would be interesting to know whether the latter type has any specializating modifications in the remainder of the DNA that take the place of the excised junk. I'm guessing there are, and that they will resemble, from a systemic perspective, what we see in languages that increase their synthesis and fusion. In the past I had hypothesized that viruses matched this type, bacteria and archaea agglutinating languages, and eukaryotes analytical languages. I know now that this is too simple, since viruses vary radically in size and genome, as do bacteria, archaea, and eukaryotes. There is overlap. But broadly there is still some comparability. In giant viruses most of the genes are not regulatory, and the smaller you go, the higher the proportion of genes are regulatory until with the smallest viroids, all that is left is regulatory. For eukaryotes the opposite seems to be true, in that the organisms with the largest cells have the largest proportion of regulatory DNA, and the smallest of housekeeping, protein-coding genes. So any developmental hierarchical comparisons would have to be more than single dimensional- but then again multidimensional hierarchies in typology aren't unheard of, either. More later. Jess Tauber phonosemantics at earthlink.net From faucon at cogsci.ucsd.edu Sun May 9 18:32:53 2010 From: faucon at cogsci.ucsd.edu (Gilles Fauconnier) Date: Sun, 9 May 2010 11:32:53 -0700 Subject: Passing of Claire Blanche Benveniste In-Reply-To: <150137.71114.qm@web82205.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Sun, 9 May 2010, Gilles Fauconnier wrote: > > > Here is the link to the Le Monde obituary that Jose indicated: > > http://www.lemonde.fr/carnet/article/2010/05/07/claire-blanche-benveniste-linguiste_1348114_3382.html > > Merci, Jose, de nous avoir avertis. Comme tous les collegues et amis de Claire, je suis tres peiné par cette nouvelle. > > Gilles > > _______ > > > > ----- Original Message ---- > From: henri josé deulofeu > To: funknet at mailman.rice.edu > Sent: Sat, May 8, 2010 12:35:54 AM > Subject: [FUNKNET] Passing of Claire Blanche Benveniste > > Dear all, > I let you kow of the passing of Claire Blanche Benveniste, Professor Emiritus at our university. To put it in a nutshell she was a kind of (attractive) feminine french version of Dwight Bolinger : impossible to classify as a linguist but extraordinarily perceptive about linguistic facts. In keeping of a preceding message, I will say it is a pity that she mostly wrote in French, so that her litterature will remain unknown to english reading community, unless one of you would be interested in editing an english "Blanche-Benveniste reader". For those of you who read French , an obituary has been published by the French newspaper Le MONDE , available on the website at the section "carnet". The practical point of my message is the following. I am redacting a kind of "Laudatio" of her for my colleagues. And I would like to mention one opinion of her about language. But I don't know how. Indeed two days before dying of a terrible cancer, she was finishing > her last paper and as usual she gave the draft to me for discussion. As we were strongly arguing about what is the main function of language, I asked to her (she was a radical antifunctionalist pace): Well Claire, if according to you; language main function is not "communication" not "cognition", not interaction, what kind of tool language could be for you, if it is not a mere arbitrary combination of signs ? And she answered in French : "Peut-être nous permettre de penser ensemble" (to think together). We remain silent one moment and as the air was cooling in her splendid provençal garden, she wanted to go inside. And I will for ever remember her waving at me through a blooming lilac, as I was taking leave of her for the last time. > Has any one of you heard of language as "allowing us to think together". I want to include her answer into my laudatio but I would like to know if she was kind of quoting someone or making by herself a last effort to undersatand what we are all of us trying to. > Thanks a lot > > Henri-José Deulofeu > Professeur > UNIVERSITÉ AIX-MARSEILLE I > DEPT. LINGUISTIQUE FRANCAISE > 29 AV. Robert Schuman > 13621 Aix-en-Provence CEDEX > +33442953569 > From yutamb at mail.ru Mon May 10 10:21:06 2010 From: yutamb at mail.ru (Yuri Tambovtsev) Date: Mon, 10 May 2010 17:21:06 +0700 Subject: Linguistic and Dermatoglyphic distances Message-ID: Dear Funknet colleagues, I wonder if there is some connection between dermatoglyphic and genome distances? I calculated dermatoglyphic and linguistic distances. Looking forward to hearing if there is some correlation between dermatoglyphic and genome data to yutamb at mail.ru Be well, Yuri Tambovtsev, Novosibirsk, Russia From mark at polymathix.com Mon May 10 18:25:36 2010 From: mark at polymathix.com (Mark P. Line) Date: Mon, 10 May 2010 13:25:36 -0500 Subject: Linguistic and Dermatoglyphic distances In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Yuri Tambovtsev wrote: > Dear Funknet colleagues, I wonder if there is some connection between > dermatoglyphic and genome distances? I calculated dermatoglyphic and > linguistic distances. Looking forward to hearing if there is some > correlation between dermatoglyphic and genome data to yutamb at mail.ru Be > well, Yuri Tambovtsev, Novosibirsk, Russia There have been numerous studies for over a century that establish correlations between dermatoglyphics and other phenotypes whose genetic bases are well-known -- particularly genetic conditions such as Down's Syndrome. There is also a ton of work on correlations between dermatoglyphics and mitochondrial DNA haplogroups and between dermatoglyphics and nuclear genetic markers (such as blood types). -- Mark Mark P. Line From sn.listen at gmail.com Fri May 21 09:04:51 2010 From: sn.listen at gmail.com (Sebastian) Date: Fri, 21 May 2010 11:04:51 +0200 Subject: Conference on Grammaticography relocated to Hawai'i Message-ID: Dear all, the conference on Electronic Grammaticography announced on this list last month will be relocated from Leipzig to Hawai'i, where it will run as a workshop under the umbrella of the 2nd International Conference on Language Documentation and Conservation (ICLDC2, http://nflrc.hawaii.edu/ICLDC/2011/index.html). ICLDC2 will be held February 11-13, 2011 at the Hawai‘i Imin International Conference Center on the University of Hawai‘i at Manoa campus. The exact date of the workshop as well as more details will be announced in due course. The reason for this relocation is that I have received many comments from people wanting to attend both events and having them at the same venue will make this considerably easier. Topic and invited speakers remain unchanged. See the programme below. I wish to thank all participating institutions and people for making this short-notice relocation possible. Best wishes Sebastian Full Title: Electronic Grammaticography Date: Feb-2011 (Exact date to be confirmed) Location: Manoa, Hawai'i Contact Person: Sebastian Nordhoff Meeting Email: sebastian_nordhoff at eva.mpg.de Web Site: http://www.eva.mpg.de/lingua/conference/11-grammaticography2011 == Meeting Description == This meeting wants to bring together field linguists, computer scientists,and publishers with the aim of exploring production and dissemination of grammatical descriptions in electronic/hypertextual format == Call for Papers == For long a step-child of lexicography, the domain of grammaticography has received growing interest in the recent past, especially in what concerns lesser studied languages. At least three volumes contain parts dealing with this question (Ameka et al. 2006, Gippert et al. 2006, Payne & Weber 2007). At the same time, advances in information technology mean that a number of techniques become available which can present linguistic information in novel ways. This holds true for multimedial content on the one hand (see e.g. Barwick & Thieberger 2007), but also so called content-management-systems (CMS) provide new possibilities to develop, structure and maintain linguistic information, which were unknown when the idea of an electronic grammar was first put to print in Zaefferer (1998). Recent publications in grammaticography often allude to the possibilities of hypertext grammars (Weber 2006, Evans & Dench 2006), but these possibilities are only starting to get explored theoretically (Good 2004, Nordhoff 2008) and in practice (Nordhoff 2007). This conference will bring together experts on grammar writing and information technology to discuss the theoretical and practical advantages hypertext grammars can offer. We invite papers dealing with the arts and crafts of grammar writing in a wide sense, preferably with an eye on electronic publishing. Topics of interest are: -general formal properties of all grammatical descriptions (GDs) in general, and hypertext GDs in particular -functional requirements for GDs and the responses of the traditional and the hypertext approach (cf. Nordhoff 2008) -discussion or presentation of implementations dealing with the media transition from book to electronic publication -opportunities and risks of hypertext grammars -integration with fieldwork or typological work -treatment of a particular linguistic subfield (phonology, syntax, ...) within a hypertext description Presentations will be 30 minutes + 15 minutes discussion. == Invited Speakers == Nick Evans (Australian National University) Christian Lehmann (Universität Erfurt) Jeff Good (University of Buffalo) == Submission of Abstracts == (a) Length: up to one page of text plus up to one page containing possible tables and references (b) Format: The abstract should include the title of the paper and the text of the abstract but not the author's name or affiliation. The e-mail message to which it is attached should list the title, the author's name, and the author's affiliation. Please send the message to the following address: sebastian_nordhoffeva.mpg.de (c) Deadline: The abstracts should reach us by FRIDAY, October 01. Submitters will be notified by MONDAY, November 01. == References == Ameka, F. K., A. Dench & N. Evans (eds.) (2006). Catching language -- The Standing Challenge of Grammar Writing. Berlin, New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Barwick, L. & N. Thieberger (eds.) (2006). Sustainable data from digital fieldwork. Sydney: University of Sydney. Gippert, J., N. Himmelmann & U. Mosel (eds.) (2006). Essentials of language documentation. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Good, J. (2004). "The descriptive grammar as a (meta)database". Paper presented at the EMELD Language Digitization Project Conference 2004. [paper] Nordhoff, S. (2007). "Grammar writing in the Electronic Age". Paper presented at the ALT VII conference in Paris. Nordhoff, S. (2008). "Electronic reference grammars for typology -- challenges and solutions". Journal for Language Documentation and Conservation, 2(2):296-324. Payne, T. E. & D. Weber (eds.) (2007). Perspectives on grammar writing. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Zaefferer, D. (ed.) (1998). Deskriptive Grammatik und allgemeiner Sprachvergleich. Tübingen: Niemeyer. From spike at uoregon.edu Fri May 21 18:12:34 2010 From: spike at uoregon.edu (Spike Gildea) Date: Fri, 21 May 2010 11:12:34 -0700 Subject: InField 2010: Deadline for housing next Monday Message-ID: *** Apologies for cross-postings *** DEADLINE FOR UNIVERSITY HOUSING, EARLY REGISTRATION INSTITUTE ON FIELD LINGUISTICS AND LANGUAGE DOCUMENTATION (InField 2010) UNIVERSITY OF OREGON, Eugene, Oregon, USA http://logos.uoregon.edu/infield2010/home/index.php APPLICATION AND REGISTRATION Applications for registration are available on the website. Those received by midnight (Pacific time) tomorrow, May 22, will be processed by Monday, May 24. The deadline for us to commit to our reserved dormitory housing is May 24, so we those who wish to utilize this housing option will need to act by the close of business Monday to either register online or else tell us by other means (email, telephone) that the registration information and payment is already enroute. We will still accept registrations after that date, but the availability of university housing will no longer be guaranteed. The Institute on Field Linguistics and Language Documentation is designed for field linguists, graduate students, and language activists to receive training in current techniques and issues in language documentation, language maintenance, and language revitalization. Workshops: June 21st – July 2nd Laboratory week: July 5th – July 9th Field Training: July 5th – July 30th For details and application/registration forms, visit our website: http://logos.uoregon.edu/infield2010/home/index.php ASSOCIATED EVENTS: http://www.uoregon.edu/~nwili/summer_2010_index.shtml • NILI Summer Institute (June 21-July 2) The Northwest Indian Language Institute (NILI) will also be hosting its annual Summer Institute, with courses covering topics including Northwest languages, linguistics, and language teaching methods, centered on the theme Language and Place. Participants at InField will also be able to attend NILI courses if they prefer any of these to some workshops. •Stabilizing Indigenous Languages Conference (June 25-27) •Athabaskan/Dene Languages Conference (June 25-27) •45th International Conference on Salish and Neighboring Languages (June 25-27) •Hokan-Penutian Languages Conference (June 25-27) SPONSORS Linguistics Society of America U.S. National Science Foundation and the U.S. National Endowment for the Humanities: Documenting Endangered Languages Program University of Oregon Graduate School & Department of Linguistics From pedprax at terra.com.br Tue May 25 18:53:53 2010 From: pedprax at terra.com.br (Pedro Henrique Lima Praxedes Filho) Date: Tue, 25 May 2010 15:53:53 -0300 Subject: VI ALSFAL - Fortaleza-Cear=?iso-8859-1?Q?=E1-Brasil_?= - Call for papers / Llamada de trabajos / Chamada de trabalhos Message-ID: ASFLA10: Call for papers and registrations(PARA ESPAÑOL, POR FAVOR, VEA MÁS ABAJO / PARA PORTUGUÊS, POR FAVOR, VEJA ABAIXO): IN ENGLISH: Dear Colleagues, This is to remind you that the period of the 1st. call for papers for the VI Conference of the ALSFAL will be over on June 6. In order to register yourself, submit abstracts, and sign up for up to 2 pre-conference workshps, out of 13, please visit the conference website at http://www.6alsfal-uece.com.br. There will be 6 plenaries (Christian Matthiessen, Louise Ravelli, Kay O'Halloran, Christopher Taylor, Nora Kaplan, and Orlando Vian Jr) and 11 roundtables. The VI Conference of the ALSFAL will be held from October 7 to October 9, 2010. The pre-conference workshops will be held from October 5 to October 6, 2010. All the activities, which will revolve around the theme 'Systemic-Functional Linguistics and its potential for semiotic-discursive emporwerment', will happen at Ponta Mar Hotel, in Fortaleza, the capital city of the Brazilian northeastern State of Ceará and will be hosted by UECE's (Universidade Estadual do Ceará) Graduate Program in Applied Linguistics. We encourage you to take advantage of the early bird payment period, which will last until July 15. We look forward to seeing you all in Fortaleza in October! Very best wishes, Pedro Praxedes For the Organizing Committee -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- EN ESPAÑOL: Estimado(a)s Colegas, Esto es para recordarles que el plazo de la primera llamada de trabajos para el VI Congreso de la ALSFAL se terminará el 6 de junio. A fin de inscribirse en el congreso, enviar resúmenes y registrarse en un máximo de 2 minicursos, de 13, por favor, visite la página web del congreso en http://www.6alsfal-uece.com.br. Habrá 6 sesiones plenarias (Christian Matthiessen, Louise Ravelli, Kay O'Halloran, Christopher Taylor, Nora Kaplan, and Orlando Vian Jr) y 11 mesas redondas. El VI Congreso de la ALSFAL tendrá lugar del 7 de octubre al 9 de octubre de 2010. Los minicursos pre-congreso tendrán lugar del 5 de octubre al 6 de octubre de 2010. Todas las actividades, que girarán en torno al tema 'La Lingüística Sistémico Funcional y su potencial para el empoderamiento semiótico-discursivo', ocurrirán en el Hotel Ponta Mar, en Fortaleza, capital del Estado de Ceará, en Noreste de Brasil y están siendo organizadas por el Programa de Postgrado en Lingüística Aplicada de la Universidade Estadual do Ceará-UECE. Animamos a todo(a)s a aprovechar el período de pago early bird, que se prolongará hasta el 15 de julio. ¡Estamos esperando por usteds aquí en Fortaleza en octubre! Un cordial saludo, Pedro Praxedes Por el Comité Organizador -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- EM PORTUGUÊS: Prezado(a)s Colegas, Esta mensagem tem a intenção de lembrá-los que o período relativo à 1a. chamada de trabalhos do VI Congresso da ALSFAL terminará em 6 de junho. A fim de inscrever-se no congresso, submeter resumos e inscrever-se em até 2 minicursos pré-congresso, de 13, por favor, visite o web site do congresso em http://www.6alsfal-uece.com.br. Haverá 6 conferências plenárias (Christian Matthiessen, Louise Ravelli, Kay O'Halloran, Christopher Taylor, Nora Kaplan, and Orlando Vian Jr) e 11 mesas redondas. O VI Congresso da ALSFAL acontecerá de 7 de outubro a 9 de outubro de 2010. Os minicursos pré-congresso acontecerão de 5 de outubro a 6 de outubro de 2010. Todas as atividades, que girarão em torno do tema 'A Linguística Sistêmico-Funcional e seu potencial de empoderamento semiótico-discursivo', terão lugar no Hotel Ponta Mar, em Fortaleza, a capital do Estado do Ceará, e serão anfitrionadas pelo Programa de Pós-Graduação em Linguística Aplicada da UECE (Universidade Estadual do Ceará). Encorajamos a todo(a)s a aproveitarem o período de pagamento early bird, que se prolongará até 15 de júlio. Estamos esperando por vocês aqui em Fortaleza em outubro! Um abraço, Pedro Praxedes Pela Comissão Organizadora -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Esta mensagem foi verificada pelo E-mail Protegido Terra. Atualizado em 24/05/2010 From Henrik.Rosenkvist at nordlund.lu.se Wed May 26 10:23:45 2010 From: Henrik.Rosenkvist at nordlund.lu.se (Henrik Rosenkvist) Date: Wed, 26 May 2010 12:23:45 +0200 Subject: Pragmatical similarity between 1p imperative and indicative? Message-ID: Hi! In a paper I am working with I argue that first person imperatives are (pragmatically) quite similar to indicatives, since a request aimed at oneself rarely is denied. However, I have no references to lean on here, and therefore I wonder: do you agree about the similarity, and has anyone written about this? best Henrik -- Henrik Rosenkvist docent, nordiska språk Språk- och litteraturcentrum Lunds universitet Box 201 221 00 Lund tel: 046-222 87 04 e-post: Henrik.Rosenkvist at nordlund.lu.se Henrik Rosenkvist Assistant Professor, Scandinavian Languages Dept. of Languages and Literature Lund University P. O. Box 201, SE-221 00 Lund, SWEDEN Tel.: +46 46 222 87 04 E-mail: Henrik.Rosenkvist at nordlund.lu.se From amnfn at well.com Wed May 26 12:37:43 2010 From: amnfn at well.com (A. Katz) Date: Wed, 26 May 2010 05:37:43 -0700 Subject: Pragmatical similarity between 1p imperative and indicative? In-Reply-To: <4BFCF6B1.3010105@nordlund.lu.se> Message-ID: In languages that I am familiar with, there is no first person imperative. The imperative is marked as second person, and even when someone commands himself to do something, he is addressing himself in second person, as if he were someone else. --Aya Katz http://hubpages.com/profile/Aya+Katz On Wed, 26 May 2010, Henrik Rosenkvist wrote: > Hi! > > In a paper I am working with I argue that first person imperatives are > (pragmatically) quite similar to indicatives, since a request aimed at > oneself rarely is denied. However, I have no references to lean on here, and > therefore I wonder: do you agree about the similarity, and has anyone written > about this? > > best > > Henrik > > -- > Henrik Rosenkvist > docent, nordiska språk > Språk- och litteraturcentrum > Lunds universitet > Box 201 > 221 00 Lund > tel: 046-222 87 04 > e-post: Henrik.Rosenkvist at nordlund.lu.se > > Henrik Rosenkvist > Assistant Professor, Scandinavian Languages > Dept. of Languages and Literature > Lund University > P. O. Box 201, SE-221 00 Lund, SWEDEN > Tel.: +46 46 222 87 04 > E-mail: Henrik.Rosenkvist at nordlund.lu.se > > > > From eitan.eg at gmail.com Wed May 26 12:38:20 2010 From: eitan.eg at gmail.com (E.G.) Date: Wed, 26 May 2010 14:38:20 +0200 Subject: Pragmatical similarity between 1p imperative and indicative? In-Reply-To: <4BFCF6B1.3010105@nordlund.lu.se> Message-ID: Dear Henrik, I'm not really sure about your question, at least as it is phrased. It would first of all depend on your definition of modality, which can be pretty broad as well as pretty restricted. I am also not sure that 'first person imperative' is a useful term, but let's leave that alone for now. Nonetheless, here's a shot. You could begin by having a look at the World Atlas of Linguistic Structures, (e.g., http://wals.info/feature/72) to have an idea of what's encoded morphosyntactically cross-linguistically. You can also check out Johan Van der Auwera's homepage for a lot of interesting (and downloadable) articles on modality and grammaticalization, as well as Xrakovskij's book on the typology of imperative constructions, where you will find a great discussion of the problems involved in multiperson imperative paradigms. (Judging from what I can see from the languages I work on, these paradigms are pretty unfounded.) Givón has also written a lot about modality, and the chapters in his Syntax volumes might be of interest to you. You will find in these works all the usual references to modality. But I assume that you are interested in *explaining* the different function of first person vis-a-vis other persons. I also assume that you mean languages that encode this explicitly, i.e., morphosyntactically. So the first question would be to what extent is this attested cross-linguistically, and what are the ways in which it came to be encoded. Then the question would be why, given an explicit morphosyntactic encoding that can be usefully called 'first person imperative (or imperative-hortative), does it have the meaning it does, and why does it differ from the meanings associated with other persons in the same "paradigm." For this, I would suggest you take a look at frameworks like those proposed by Traugott, Bybee, and Langacker, among many others, which have been useful in thinking about semantic asymmetries between different persons in related domains. There are also a lot of useful discussions in the literature on subjectification and intersubjectification. The basic notion, at least to my mind, here is that of pragmatic inferencing and its role in functional change. Just a very brief and rough sketch: If you take future tenses (and here I refer to those that arise from allative source constructions) for example, the first person is often quite different from the third person (disregarding for now the matter of number), since it is hard – or perhaps unnecessary or too costly vis-a-vis possible 'benefits' in most contexts – for an addressee to distinguish a speaker's statement of his or her intentions from a prediction about an event's coming to pass. For that matter, in Traugott's framework, one might also say that speakers don't invite such inferences, for pretty obvious pragmatic reasons. This distinction is more salient in the third person, however. where hearers can make 'speaker-oriented inferences' (at the expense of 'subject-oriented inferences,' i.e., they can infer that the speaker is making a prediction about an event rather than just a statement of the subject's intentions. This has important consequences, since the rise and generalization of speaker-oriented inferences lead to the relaxing of selectional restrictions on the type of subjects and verbal predicates that can be used in the construction. For example, it is speaker-oriented inferences that lead to the admission of inanimate or otherwise non-volitive subjects. In other words, if the speaker-oriented inferences come to dominate the meaning of a given construction (=> the predominance of prediction rather then report of intention), then you can say things like "The glass is going to break," which would be mostly impossible for non-volitive or immobile subjects if the construction is dominated by subject-oriented inferences. This is irrelevant in most cases for first person subjects, which would in most languages be overwhelmingly human. This works similarly for the kinds of verbal predicates admitted in the construction. These are inherently diachronic questions, since we are talking about the conventionalization and generalization of such inferences. This has been discussed a lot by Traugott & Dasher in their book Regularity and Semantic Change, and by Bybee et al. in their Evolution of Grammar. It could be said that a rise in the frequency of speaker-oriented inferences leads to greater frequency of the construction itself, at least in some cases. Another reason that this is also necessarily a question of usage is that asymmetries can be explained through frequency (Haspelmath Cognitive Linguistics 19.1:1-33). There are a few ways in which this might be important. One, the contexts in which a speaker might want to direct an imperative at himself might be rare. Incidentally, in languages that I speak, although I have no idea how typical this is cross-linguistically, a second person imperative would be used in cases when a speaker has a sort of mental dialogue, e.g., "You're going to be exhausted tomorrow, go to sleep." Two, as you say, contexts in which a speaker directs a request at himself and then denies it would probably be rare, and since they aren't directed at an external addressee, a potential speaker in his or her turn, it probably wouldn't have much chance of being replicated. It is also relevant to look at the number distinctions. It seems that first person plural imperative-hortative is more commonly encoded morphosyntactically that first person singular. Take "let's" for example, vs. "let me/lemme". To my knowledge, the second doesn't have self-directed imperative/hortative force, even with things like "lemme see, it oughta be around here somewhere" or "I'll do it, just lemme make a call first." For an interesting system with encoding of both 1sg and 1pl, you could take a look at: M. Taube, Le Développement d'un Auxiliaire Modal en Yiddish: lozn 'laisser', in J. Fisiak (ed.) *Papers from the 6th International Conference on Historical Linguistics [=Amsterdam Studies in the Theory and History of Linguistic Science IV, Current Issues in Linguistic Theory, vol. 34]*: 499-514. As far as I can see, it seems that it's pretty common for languages *not* to morphosyntactically encode first person singular imperative-hortatives, and I know of at least one case in which this morphosyntactically encoded category was lost (Hebrew). Also, where there is morphosyntactic encoding, it often seems to be found most in deliberative questions. If this is the case, then these first person imperative-hortatives are also more contexually bound than the other persons, which would surely also be a determining factor for its meaning vis-a-vis that of other persons. But this is something that experts on modality can help you out with a lot more than I can. In any event, it seems to come back to "grammars code best what speakers do most," with the proviso that speakers are also hearers, and play an important role in semantic change. Good luck with your work! Best wishes, Eitan > From mark at polymathix.com Wed May 26 13:45:07 2010 From: mark at polymathix.com (Mark P. Line) Date: Wed, 26 May 2010 08:45:07 -0500 Subject: Pragmatical similarity between 1p imperative and indicative? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Let's think about that for a minute.... -- Mark Mark P. Line A. Katz wrote: > In languages that I am familiar with, there is no first person imperative. > The imperative is marked as second person, and even when someone commands > himself to do something, he is addressing himself in second person, as if > he were someone else. > > --Aya Katz > > http://hubpages.com/profile/Aya+Katz > > On Wed, 26 May 2010, Henrik Rosenkvist wrote: > >> Hi! >> >> In a paper I am working with I argue that first person imperatives are >> (pragmatically) quite similar to indicatives, since a request aimed at >> oneself rarely is denied. However, I have no references to lean on here, >> and >> therefore I wonder: do you agree about the similarity, and has anyone >> written >> about this? >> >> best >> >> Henrik >> >> -- >> Henrik Rosenkvist >> docent, nordiska språk >> Språk- och litteraturcentrum >> Lunds universitet >> Box 201 >> 221 00 Lund >> tel: 046-222 87 04 >> e-post: Henrik.Rosenkvist at nordlund.lu.se >> >> Henrik Rosenkvist >> Assistant Professor, Scandinavian Languages >> Dept. of Languages and Literature >> Lund University >> P. O. Box 201, SE-221 00 Lund, SWEDEN >> Tel.: +46 46 222 87 04 >> E-mail: Henrik.Rosenkvist at nordlund.lu.se >> >> >> >> -- Mark Mark P. Line Bartlesville, OK From rcameron at uic.edu Wed May 26 13:57:31 2010 From: rcameron at uic.edu (Cameron, Richard) Date: Wed, 26 May 2010 08:57:31 -0500 Subject: Pragmatical similarity between 1p imperative and indicative? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Right. In Spanish, I see this referred to as the Exhortative. First person plural (nosotros/nosotras) can take two forms, I believe: 1) Vamos a comer (Lit. We are going to eat = Let's eat) with the verb, 'ir' (Vamos)in the indicative. OR Comamos. (Lit: We eat) with the verb in the present subjunctive. I don't know of commands like this for first person singular. - Richard Cameron On Wed, May 26, 2010 8:45 am, Mark P. Line wrote: > Let's think about that for a minute.... > > -- Mark > > Mark P. Line > > > > A. Katz wrote: >> In languages that I am familiar with, there is no first person >> imperative. >> The imperative is marked as second person, and even when someone >> commands >> himself to do something, he is addressing himself in second person, as >> if >> he were someone else. >> >> --Aya Katz >> >> http://hubpages.com/profile/Aya+Katz >> >> On Wed, 26 May 2010, Henrik Rosenkvist wrote: >> >>> Hi! >>> >>> In a paper I am working with I argue that first person imperatives are >>> (pragmatically) quite similar to indicatives, since a request aimed at >>> oneself rarely is denied. However, I have no references to lean on >>> here, >>> and >>> therefore I wonder: do you agree about the similarity, and has anyone >>> written >>> about this? >>> >>> best >>> >>> Henrik >>> >>> -- >>> Henrik Rosenkvist >>> docent, nordiska språk >>> Språk- och litteraturcentrum >>> Lunds universitet >>> Box 201 >>> 221 00 Lund >>> tel: 046-222 87 04 >>> e-post: Henrik.Rosenkvist at nordlund.lu.se >>> >>> Henrik Rosenkvist >>> Assistant Professor, Scandinavian Languages >>> Dept. of Languages and Literature >>> Lund University >>> P. O. Box 201, SE-221 00 Lund, SWEDEN >>> Tel.: +46 46 222 87 04 >>> E-mail: Henrik.Rosenkvist at nordlund.lu.se >>> >>> >>> >>> > > > -- Mark > > Mark P. Line > Bartlesville, OK > >