<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_default" style="color:rgb(0,102,0)">Dear all,</div><div class="gmail_default" style="color:rgb(0,102,0)"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="color:rgb(0,102,0)">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;line-height:normal"><span lang="EN-US">We invite abstract submissions for papers on the topic of “<b>Queer(ing)
Lexicography</b>” for the Euralex 2018 conference in Ljubljana, 17-21 July 2018<span></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;line-height:normal"><span lang="EN-US"><br></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;line-height:normal"><span lang="EN-US">*We'd be grateful for forwarding this CFP to any potentially interested individuals*</span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;line-height:normal"><span lang="EN-US"><br></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;line-height:normal"><span lang="EN-US">ABSTRACT: </span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;line-height:normal"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;line-height:normal"><span lang="EN-US">The role of dictionaries in society at large has been theorized and critiqued
also with respect to hidden ideologies (e.g.
Kachru & Kahane, 1995). Due to the fact that Unidentified Authorising
Dictionaries (Moon, 1989) are often drawn
on to legitimize and naturalize discriminatory discourses, they have been
subjected to critical linguistic scrutiny. While feminist critique has yielded
somewhat satisfactory results (Hoem Iversen,
2005), insights into constructions of sexuality are scarce </span><span lang="EN-US">(Pakuła, 2018)</span><span lang="EN-US">.
The few studies exploring non-heterosexual aspects of macro- and megastructures
point to the inherent positioning of heterosexuality as an unquestioned norm
and thus – in the educational context – might inhibit language learning, as is
the case with textbooks and in-class interactions (see Pavlenko, 2004; Nelson, 2009). Somewhat disappointingly, there
seems to be little resonance between what is done in the field of critical
applied linguistics and metalexicography, as each camp preaches to the already
converted (cf. Russell, 2012). This panel
sets out to bridge these two (seemingly distant) worlds.<span></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;text-indent:36pt;line-height:normal"><span lang="EN-US">“’Queer’ is one of a handful of terms in English that
establish references by opposition and exclusion, not just by simple
description. That is, instead of identifying properties that the object under
discussion contains, calling something ‘queer’ suggests that it is out of place
in some sense, that is excessive and overextended, that it disrupts and
subverts an otherwise tranquil domain.” (Leap 1996: 101). The tranquil domain queer
aims at disrupting and subverting in this panel is lexicography and the related
disciplines involved in the mono- and interlingual dictionary-making. This
panel on “Queer(ing) Lexicography” (Nossem 2018) aims at showcasing possibilities
to overcome the apparent opposition between the anti-normative ‘queer’ that
resists definition and can be seen as a “linguistic experiment, namely as a
signifier without a stable signified” (Barrett 2002: 27), and the theory and
practice of lexicography, with its focus on definitions and classifications
(Nossem 2018). <span></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;text-indent:36pt;line-height:normal"><span lang="EN-US">In accordance with Motschenbacher, who explains that
“Queer Linguistics transfers ideas from Queer Theory to linguistics” (2011: 6),
we aim at further developing the field of Queer Lexicography by uniting ideas
and concepts from Queer Theory and Queer Studies, and lexicography, i.e. by
integrating an interdisciplinary heteronormativity research in the field of
lexicography. By introducing queer approaches, and in the spirit of action
research (Burr, 1995) we want to question
normalized practices in lexicography, metalexicography, lexicology, semantics, corpus
linguistics, and other linguistic fields, especially in their relation to
dictionary-making. We propose to examine the linguistic manifestation of
heteronormativity and, connected with it, binary gender and sexual identity discourses
(Bing & Bergvall 1996 in Motschenbacher 2011: 21) as well as the
instrumental use of dictionaries in public and media discourses with view of appreciating
the multitude of sexual and gender identities of dictionary users (and
compilers).<span></span></span></p>
<span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><br clear="all" style="break-before: page;">
</span>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height:normal"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;line-height:normal"><span lang="EN-US">Papers which address the following topics are most welcome:<span></span></span></p>
<p class="gmail-MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst" style="text-align:justify;line-height:normal"><span lang="EN-US">-<span style="font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times New Roman"">
</span></span><span lang="EN-US">Queer Studies and lexicography<span></span></span></p>
<p class="gmail-MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="text-align:justify;line-height:normal"><span lang="EN-US">-<span style="font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times New Roman"">
</span></span><span lang="EN-US">Gender Studies and lexicography<span></span></span></p>
<p class="gmail-MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="text-align:justify;line-height:normal"><span lang="EN-US">-<span style="font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times New Roman"">
</span></span><span lang="EN-US">Sexuality Studies and
lexicography<span></span></span></p>
<p class="gmail-MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="text-align:justify;line-height:normal"><span lang="EN-US">-<span style="font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times New Roman"">
</span></span><span lang="EN-US">Critical heteronormativity
research in lexicography<span></span></span></p>
<p class="gmail-MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="text-align:justify;line-height:normal"><span lang="EN-US">-<span style="font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times New Roman"">
</span></span><span lang="EN-US">(Anti-)normative approaches in
lexicography<span></span></span></p>
<p class="gmail-MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="text-align:justify;line-height:normal"><span lang="EN-US">-<span style="font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times New Roman"">
</span></span><span lang="EN-US">Manifestation of dominant and minority
discourses in dictionaries<span></span></span></p>
<p class="gmail-MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="text-align:justify;line-height:normal"><span lang="EN-US">-<span style="font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times New Roman"">
</span></span><span lang="EN-US">Dictionaries as authoritative
tools<span></span></span></p>
<p class="gmail-MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="text-align:justify;line-height:normal"><span lang="EN-US">-<span style="font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times New Roman"">
</span></span><span lang="EN-US">Power and ideology in
dictionaries<span></span></span></p>
<p class="gmail-MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="text-align:justify;line-height:normal"><span lang="EN-US">-<span style="font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></span><span lang="EN-US">Critical analysis of normative
meaning definitions in mono-and interlingual dictionaries<span></span></span></p>
<p class="gmail-MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="text-align:justify;line-height:normal"><span lang="EN-US">-<span style="font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times New Roman"">
</span></span><span lang="EN-US">Queer approaches to semantics
in relation to dictionary making<span></span></span></p>
<p class="gmail-MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="text-align:justify;line-height:normal"><span lang="EN-US">-<span style="font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times New Roman"">
</span></span><span lang="EN-US">Queer approaches to corpus
linguistics in relation to dictionary making<span></span></span></p>
<p class="gmail-MsoListParagraphCxSpLast" style="text-align:justify;line-height:normal"><span lang="EN-US">-<span style="font-stretch:normal;font-size:7pt;line-height:normal;font-family:"Times New Roman"">
</span></span><span lang="EN-US">Dictionaries in public and
media discourses of non-normativities<span></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;line-height:normal"><span lang="EN-US">Please send abstracts no longer than 300 words (excluding
references) to Eva Nossem (<a href="mailto:e.nossem@mx.uni-saarland.de">e.nossem@mx.uni-saarland.de</a>) and Łukasz Pakuła (<a href="mailto:l.pakula@gmail.com">l.pakula@gmail.com</a>)
by <b>26 November 2017</b>.<span></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;line-height:normal"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt;text-align:justify;line-height:normal"><i><span lang="EN-US">References:<span></span></span></i></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt;text-align:justify;line-height:normal"><i><span lang="EN-US"> </span></i></p>
<p class="gmail-MsoBibliography" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span lang="EN-US">Barrett, R. 2002. Is queer theory
important for sociolinguistic theory? In K. Campbell-Kibler, R. J. Podesva, S.
J. Roberts, and A. Wong (Eds) <i>Language
and Sexuality. Contesting Meaning in Theory and Practice </i>(pp. 25-43).
Stanford California: CSLI<span></span></span></p>
<p class="gmail-MsoBibliography" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span lang="EN-US">Bing, J. M., and V. L. Bergvall. (1996).
The question of questions: Beyond binary thinking. In V. L. Bergvall, J. M.
Bing, and A.F. Freed (Eds.). <i>Rethinking
Language and Gender Research. Theory and Practice.</i> (pp. 1-30). London:
Longman.<span></span></span></p>
<p class="gmail-MsoBibliography" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span lang="EN-US">Burr,
V. (1995). <i>An Introduction to Social Constructionism</i>. Routledge.<span></span></span></p>
<p class="gmail-MsoBibliography" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span lang="EN-US">Hoem
Iversen, S. (2005). “Her frequent quarrelling drove him to drink” – Gender
stereotyping in illustrative dictionary examples. <i>Språk Og Språkundervisning</i>,
<i>3</i>, 11–16.<span></span></span></p>
<p class="gmail-MsoBibliography" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span lang="EN-US">Kachru,
B. B., & Kahane, H. R. (1995). <i>Cultures, ideologies, and the dictionary:
studies in honor of Ladislav Zgusta</i>. Tübingen: Niemeyer.<span></span></span></p>
<p class="gmail-MsoBibliography" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span lang="EN-US">Leap, W L. (1996). <i>Word's Out.
Gay Men's English</i>. Minneapolis MN: U of Minnesota Press<span></span></span></p>
<p class="gmail-MsoBibliography" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span lang="EN-US">Moon,
R. (1989). Objective or objectionable? Ideological aspects of dictionaries. <i>English
Language Research: Language and Ideology</i>, (3), 59–94.<span></span></span></p>
<p class="gmail-MsoBibliography" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span lang="EN-US">Motschenbacher,
H. (2010). <i>Language, Gender, and Sexual
Identity: Poststructuralist Perspectives</i>. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.<span></span></span></p>
<p class="gmail-MsoBibliography" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span lang="EN-US">Nelson,
C. D. (2009). <i>Sexual Identities in English Language Education: Classroom
Conversations</i> (1st ed.). New York: Routledge.<span></span></span></p>
<p class="gmail-MsoBibliography" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span lang="EN-US">Nossem,
E. (2018): Queering Dictionaries: Balancing Power Relations in Dictionaries. In
B. J. Baer and K. Kaindl (Eds.), <i>Queering
Translation, Translating the Queer. Theory, Practice, Activism</i>. New York:
Routledge.<span></span></span></p>
<p class="gmail-MsoBibliography" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span lang="EN-US">Pakuła,
Ł. (2018). Dictionaries and heteronormativity: a look back. In Ł. Pakuła (Ed.),
<i>Linguistic perspectives on sexuality in education: representations,
constructions, and negotiations.</i> Houndmills, Basingstoke: Palgrave
Macmillan.<span></span></span></p>
<p class="gmail-MsoBibliography" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span lang="EN-US">Pavlenko,
A. (2004). Gender and sexuality in foreign and second language education:
Critical and feminist approaches. In B. Norton & K. Toohey (Eds.), <i>Critical
pedagogies and language learning</i> (pp. 53–71). Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.<span></span></span></p>
<p class="gmail-MsoBibliography" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt;line-height:normal"><span lang="EN-US">Russell,
L. R. (2012). This is What a Dictionary Looks Like: The Lexicographical
Contributions of Feminist Dictionaries. <i>International Journal of
Lexicography</i>, <i>25</i>(1), 1–29. </span><span lang="EN-US"><span></span></span></p>
</div></div>