[Lingtyp] CfP: Workshop "Managing information structure in spoken and sign languages" at SLE 2019
peterarkadiev at yandex.ru
Mon Sep 17 08:57:17 EDT 2018
Managing information structure in spoken and sign languages: formal properties and natural discourse organization
Workshop proposal for the 52nd Annual meeting of the Societas Linguistica Europaea, Leipzig, August 21–24 2019.
Deadline: November 1, 2018
Please, send your abstract to: alpgurev at gmail.com
The aim of the workshop is to bring together scholars working on information structure (IS) across different linguistic modalities (vocal/auditory and manual/visual). Taking into account experimental, corpus and field data from spoken and sign languages, we will take a new look at IS phenomena occurring cross-modally, with a special attention to interaction between IS and discourse organization. We solicit non-anonymous 300-word abstracts (.doc & .pdf) for inclusion into the workshop proposal to be submitted to SLE organizers.
Modern linguistics deals with IS at least since Mathesius (1929). As controversial as this may be in details, the very existence of such universal phenomena as theme (topic), rheme (comment, focus), categorical vs. non-categorical (thetic) utterances, seem to be generally accepted and addressed in studies on both spoken and sign modalities (Féry, Ishihara 2016; Kimmelman, Pfau 2016).
IS-related phenomena have been approached from different angles. They have been thoroughly analyzed in logic and semantics (Jacobs 2001; Maslova, Bernini 2006; Krifka, Musan 2012), as well as from pragmatic (Moneglia, Raso 2014), cognitive (Chafe 1976; Gundel 1988; Tomlin 1995), grammatical (Lambrecht 1994, Kuroda 2006, Zimmermann, Féry 2010, Dalrymple, Nikolaeva 2011, Van Gijn et al 2014), and recent typological perspectives (on the latter see e.g. the workshop “Beyond Information Structure” at the 50th SLE meeting in Zürich, http://sle2017.eu/downloads/workshops/Beyond%20information%20structure.pdf). A great deal of attention has been drawn to formal properties of IS that help distinguish one category from another, both universally (Lambrecht 1994; Féry 2016) and cross-linguistically. To give but one example, in Russian, syntactic (esp. word order) and intonational properties of utterances are strongly influenced by IS factors (Kovtunova 1976; Yanko 2008; Slioussar 2007; Paducheva 2015), and this is also the case in Russian Sign Language where sign order, non-manual markers and manual prosody all interact with IS (Kimmelman to appear). When it comes to oral and sign production, prosody seems to play an extremely important role (Kodzasov 2009; Calhoun 2012; Féry 2013, Crasborn & van der Kooij 2013, Herrmann 2015).
Although the theme – rheme distinction has a great impact on the overall structure of a coherent text (see, for instance, the notion of theme dynamics in Daneš 1964, Enkvist 1976), the formal properties of these and other IS-related categories have been primarily studied on the basis of isolated sentences. However, recently the focus of attention has been shifted to the interplay between IS and the organization of natural spoken discourse (Raso, Melo 2014; Moneglia, Cresti 2015; Fernandez-Vest, Van Valin 2016; Kibrik et al. to appear). The goal of our workshop is to follow this new line of research integrating the data of sign languages into a broader context of IS in natural discourse production. The scope of the workshop will include, but not be limited to, the following key questions:
• Does the fundamental distinction between thetic and categorical utterances on the one hand, and that between theme and rheme on the other hand, stand against data of natural discourse in spoken and sign languages? If yes, what are the main formal properties of these categories as they arise in corpora of natural discourse?
• What is the exact role of prosody in delimiting IS categories in natural speech? What approach(es) to describing intonational structure yields better results when analyzing the information structure of spoken discourse in spoken and sign languages?
• What are functional and structural parallels between prosodic means of information structure encoding in spoken languages (i.e., phrasal accents, their placement rules, tonal patterns which are associated with accents) and prosodic means of information structure encoding in sign languages (including non-manual prosody, i.e. face expressions, head and body movement as well as manual prosody – pauses, speed, size and other integral characteristics of movement in sign systems)?
• How does the grammatical structure and / or intonation inventory of a language affect the interplay between grammar and prosody as they contribute to encode the IS? Specifically, (a) what is the role of prosody in the languages which grammaticalize IS marking (e.g., have grammaticalized topic); (b) what is the role of the phrase-level intonation in tonal languages?
• What are the possible contexts for neutralization of the theme – rheme opposition in natural discourse? For instance, in Russian, clausal themes and rhemes share a great number of formal properties when combined with non-final transitional continuity (Du Bois et al. 1993; see Yanko 2008; Korotaev 2018), and in American Sign Language, topics and foci can be marked by the same non-manual markers (eyebrow raise) in some contexts (Wilbur 2012). Do such contexts differ across languages?
• How are sentences with different illocutionary force integrated into the complex hierarchical structure in spoken and sign languages? Specifically, how are they integrated in the contexts which are sensitive to neutralizing illocutionary force meanings, e.g. in reported speech? Which grammatical and prosodic patterns are at play? Are prosodic signals of integrating IS accompanied by such grammatical phenomena as indexical shift?
• How is the prosody-IS coherence maintained in natural discourse in the case of communicative breakdowns – caused by speech generation problems or by interactional problems? Are coherency restoration strategies different in spoken and sign languages?
• What are the best practices for tagging IS in prosodically annotated spoken and sign language corpora?
• How do gestures participate in packaging information in spoken and sign languages?
We welcome empirically grounded contributions that address single (spoken and sign) language phenomena or favour a cross-linguistic and cross-modal perspective.
Calhoun, Sasha. 2012. The Theme/Rheme Distinction: Accent Type or Relative Prominence? Journal of Phonetics 40, 329-349.
Chafe, Wallace. 1976. Givenness, contrastiveness, definiteness, subjects, topics, and point of view. In: Li, Charles N. (ed.). Subject and topic. New York: Academic Press. 25-55
Crasborn, Onno & Els van der Kooij. 2013. The phonology of focus in Sign Language of the Netherlands. Journal of Linguistics 49(03). 515–565.
Dalrymple, Mary and Nikolaeva, Irina. 2011. Objects and information structure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Daneš, František. 1964. A three-level approach to syntax. Travaux Linguistiques de Prague 1: 225–240.
Du Bois, John, Stephan Schuetze-Coburn, Danae Paolino, and Susanna Cumming. 1993. Outline of discourse transcription. In: Jane A. Edwards, Martin D. Lampert (eds.). Talking data: Transcription and coding in discourse research. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. 45-89.
Enkvist, Nils Erik. 1973. Theme dynamics and style: an experiment. Studia anglica posnaniensia, 5:127-35
Fernandez-Vest, M. M. Jocelyne and Robert D. Van Valin Jr. (eds). 2016. Information Structuring of Spoken Language from a Cross-linguistic Perspective. Trends in Linguistics Studies and Monographs. Vol. 283. Walter de Gruyter.
Féry, Caroline. 2013. Focus as prosodic alignment. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 31.3. 683–734.
Féry, Caroline. 2016. Intonation and prosodic structure. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press.
Féry, Caroline and Shinichiro Ishihara (eds.). 2016. The Oxford handbook of Information Structure. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Gundel, Jeanette K. 1988. Universals of topic-comments structure. In: M. Hammond, E. A. Moravcsik, and J. R. Wirth (eds.). Studies in Syntactic Typology. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 209–242.
Herrmann, Annika. 2015. The marking of information structure in German Sign Language. Lingua 165. 277–297.
Jacobs, Joachim. 2001. The dimensions of topic-comment. Linguistics 39 (4): 641–681.
Kibrik, Andrej A., Nikolay A. Korotaev and Vera I. Podlesskaya. To appear. Russian spoken discourse: Local structure and prosody.
Kimmelman, Vadim. To appear. Information Structure in Sign Languages. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
Kimmelman, Vadim and Roland Pfau. 2016. Information Structure in Sign Languages. In Caroline Féry & Shinichiro Ishihara (eds.), The Oxford handbook of Information Structure, 814–834. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Krifka, Manfred and Renate Musan (eds). 2012. The Expression of Information Structure. Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.
Kovtunova, Irina I. 1976. Sovremennyj russkij jazyk: porjadok slov i aktual’noe členenie predloženija [Modern Russian: Word order and information structure]. Moscow: Prosveščenie.
Kodzasov, Sandro V. 2009. Issledovanija v oblasti russkoj prosodii [Studies in Russian Prosody]. Moscow: Jazyki Slavjanskix Kul’tur.
Korotaev, Nikolay. 2018. Topic, focus, and transitional continuity in Russian spoken narratives. 51st Annual Meeting of the Societas Linguistica Europaea. Book of abstracts. 137-138.
Kuroda, Sige-Yuki. 2005. Focusing on the matter of topic : a study of wa and ga in Japanese. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 14. 1-58.
Lambrecht, Knud. 1994. Information Structure and Sentence Form. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press.
Maslova, Elena and Giuliano Bernini. 2006. Sentence topics in the languages of Europe and beyond. In: Bernini, Giuliano and Marcia L. Schwartz. (eds.) Pragmatic organization of discourse in the languages of Europe. [Empirical approaches to language typology. EUROTYP ; 20-8]. Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin – New York, 67-120.
Mathesius, Vilém. 1929. Zur Satzperspektive im modernen Englisch. Archiv für das Studium der modernen Sprachen und Literaturen 155: 200–210.
Moneglia, Massimi and Tommaso Raso. 2014. Notes on the Language into Act Theory. In Raso, Tommaso and Heliana Mello (eds). Spoken Corpora and Linguistics Studies. Amsterdam: Benjamins, 468-494.
Paducheva, Elena V. 2015. Kommunikativnaja struktura predloženija. Materialy dlja proekta korpusnogo opisanija russkoj grammatiki [Communicative structure of the sentence. Materials for a corpus-based Russian grammar]. Moscow, http://rusgram.ru/.
Raso, Tommaso and Heliana Melo (eds). 2014. Spoken Corpora and Linguistic Studies. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Sloussar, Natalia. 2007. Grammar and Information Structure. A Study with Reference to Russian. Utrecht: LOT Publications.
Tomlin, Russel. S. 1995. Focal attention, voice, and word order. In Word Order In Discourse, P. Downing and M. Noonan (eds.), 517–552. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing.
Van Gijn Rik, Hammond Jeremy, Matić Dejan, Van Putten Saskia, Galucio Ana Vilacy (Eds.) 2014. Information Structure and Reference Tracking in Complex Sentences. [Typological Studies in Language 105]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Wilbur, Ronnie B. 2012. Information Structure. In Roland Pfau, Markus Steinbach & Bencie Woll (eds.), Sign language: An international handbook, 462–489. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
Yanko, Tatiana. 2008. Intonacionnye strategii russkoj reči v tipologičeskom aspekte [Intonational strategies in spoken Russian from a comparative perspective]. Moskva: Jazyki Slavjanskix Kul’tur.
Zimmermann Malte and Caroline Féry C. (eds). 2010. Information Structure: Theoretical, Typological, and Experimental Perspectives. Oxford University Press, 2009, 177-205.
Peter Arkadiev, PhD
Institute of Slavic Studies
Russian Academy of Sciences
Leninsky prospekt 32-A 119991 Moscow
peterarkadiev at yandex.ru
More information about the Lingtyp