CfP Corpus Methods in Cognitive Linguistics - Theme Session (ICLC 2015)

[Dylan Glynn]

**Call for Papers - Corpus Methods in Cognitive Linguistics**


Theme Session at the 13th International Cognitive Linguistics Conference 
(ICLC-13

(apologies for crossposting)

  

This is a call for submissions for a theme session at the International Conference of Cognitive Linguistics (ICLC-13, 20-25 July 2015, Newcastle, UK).

  

Building on the tradition developed by Dirven/et al./  (1982), Schmid (1993), Geeraerts/et al./  (1994) and Gries (2003), the theme session will focus on usage-based approaches in Cognitive Linguistics. More specifically, the session has two aims:

  

1. Develop corpus methods for attaining descriptive adequacy.

2. Develop corpus methods for attaining explanatory adequacy.

  

1. Description and social variation

Given the theoretical assumptions of the Cognitive Linguistics model of language, sociolinguistic variation is integral to structure. Therefore, accounting for this complexity in language description is necessary for descriptive accuracy. This aim continues the line of research represented in Dirven & Kristiansen (2008), Geeraerts/et al/. (2010), Pütz/et al./  (2012), and Reif/et al./  (2013).

  

2. Explanation and hypothesis testing

Proposals such as (but not restricted to) prototype effects in categorisation, force dynamics in causation, metaphor and metonymy in conceptualisation, frame semantic structuring of argument structure or grounding in construal are central to the paradigm of Cognitive Linguistics. These theories and those like them seek to explain how language production is possible. Examples of recent contributions in this line of research include Gries & Stefanowitsch (2006), Stefanowitsch & Gries (2006), Glynn & Fischer (2010), Glynn & Robinson (2014).

  

Although these two aims, description and explanation, are inherently related, the theme session hopes to highlight specifically their place in the development of corpus methodology. Studies employing corpora / natural language production that seek to develop the field, in either or both these ways, are invited for submission.

*Submission Guidelines*

Abstracts not strictly adhering to submission guidelines will not be 
considered.

*Abstracts*

Abstracts should be clearly structured:

question / problem

answer / solution

data / method

conclusions / results (expected)

*Formatting*

Abstracts should be formatted following the guidelines set by the 
conference:

length: 1 A4 page (including title, name, affiliation, data, figures, 
references)

typeface: 10 point Arial, single-spaced

margins: 2.5 cm

format: files should be prepared in .doc, .docx, or .odt

file: title of the file should be: CMCL_AUTHOR_NAME

*Session Submission*

Date: 20 October 2014

Address: dglynn at univ-paris8.fr

Email subject: CMCL Theme session

*Conference Submission*

After acceptance to the theme session, the abstracts must be reviewed 
again, following the process for abstract reviewing for general session 
papers. This second stage will be anonymous, organised by the conference 
and will involve uploading the abstract to the conference site. This 
must be done by the 3^rd November.

The link to the conference site with further information is:

https://www.northumbria.ac.uk/about-us/news-events/events/2015/07/iclc-13-the-13th-international-cognitive-linguistics-conference/

*Organisers*

Dylan Glynn, University of Paris VIII

Nele Põldvere, Lund University

Jaroslaw Jozefowski, University of Sheffield

Karolina Krawczak, Adam Mickiewicz University, Poznan'

*Website*

http://www.dsglynn.univ-paris8.fr/cmcl_iclc.html  

*References*

Dirven, R., Goossens, L., Putseys, Y., & Vorlat, E. (1982). /The scene 
of linguistic action and its perspectivization by speak, talk, say, and 
tell/. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. //

Geeraerts, D., Grondelaers, S., & Bakema, P. (1994). /The structure of 
lexical variation. Meaning, naming, and context/. Berlin & New York: 
Mouton de Gruyter.//

Geeraerts, D., Kristiansen, G., & Piersman, Y. (Eds.). (2010). /Advances 
in Cognitive Sociolinguistics/. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.

Glynn, D. & Robinson, J. (Eds.). (2014). /Corpus Methods for Semantics 
Quantitative studies in polysemy and synonymy/. Amsterdam & 
Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

Glynn, D., & Fischer, K. (Eds.) (2010). /Quantitative Cognitive 
Semantics: Corpus-driven approaches/. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter

Gries, St. Th. (2003). /Multifactorial analysis in corpus linguistics: A 
study of particle placement/. London & New York: Continuum Press.

Gries, St. Th., & Stefanowitsch, A. (Eds.). (2006). /Corpora in 
Cognitive Linguistics: Corpus-based approaches to syntax and lexis/. 
Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.//

Kristiansen, G., & Dirven, R. (Eds.). (2008). /Cognitive 
Sociolinguistics: Language variation, cultural models, social systems/. 
Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.//

Pu?tz, M., Robinson, J. A., & Reif, M. (Eds.). (2012a). Cognitive 
Sociolinguistics: Variation in cognition and language use. Special issue 
of /Review of Cognitive Linguistics/, 10(2).

Reif, M., Robinson, J. A., & Pu?tz, M. (Eds.). (2013). /Variation in 
language and language use: Sociolinguistic, socio-cultural and cognitive 
perspectives/. Frankfurt/Main: Peter Lang.//

Schmid, H.-J. (1993). /Cottage and co., idea, start vs. begin. Die 
Kategorisierung als Grundprinzip einer differenzierten 
Bedeutungsbeschreibung/. Tu?bingen: Max Niemeyer. //

Stefanowitsch, A., & Gries, St. Th. (Eds.). (2006). /Corpus-based 
approaches to metaphor and metonymy/. Berlin & New York: Mouton de 
Gruyter. Hearsay and reported speech: Evidentiality in Romance