28.1471, Calls: Cog Sci, Lang Acquisition, Pragmatics, Psycholing, Semantics/Norway

[The LINGUIST List]

LINGUIST List: Vol-28-1471. Thu Mar 23 2017. ISSN: 1069 - 4875.

Subject: 28.1471, Calls: Cog Sci, Lang Acquisition, Pragmatics, Psycholing, Semantics/Norway

Moderators: linguist at linguistlist.org (Damir Cavar, Malgorzata E. Cavar)
Reviews: reviews at linguistlist.org (Helen Aristar-Dry, Robert Coté,
                                   Michael Czerniakowski)
Homepage: http://linguistlist.org

*****************    LINGUIST List Support    *****************
                       Fund Drive 2017
                   25 years of LINGUIST List!
Please support the LL editors and operation with a donation at:
           http://funddrive.linguistlist.org/donate/

Editor for this issue: Kenneth Steimel <ken at linguistlist.org>
================================================================


Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2017 14:05:29
From: Ingrid Lossius Falkum [ingridlf at gmail.com]
Subject: Acquiring Figurative Meanings 2017

 
Full Title: Acquiring Figurative Meanings 2017 
Short Title: AFM2017 

Date: 05-Oct-2017 - 06-Oct-2017
Location: Oslo, Norway 
Contact Person: Franziska Köder
Meeting Email: franziska.koeder at gmail.com, i.l.falkum at ifikk.uio.no
Web Site: https://www.hf.uio.no/ifikk/english/research/news-and-events/events/conferences/2017/acquiring-figurative-meanings.html 

Linguistic Field(s): Cognitive Science; Language Acquisition; Pragmatics; Psycholinguistics; Semantics 

Call Deadline: 19-May-2017 

Meeting Description:

A central question in the field of developmental pragmatics is how children
learn to understand and use figurative expressions, such as metaphor (She is
my sunshine), metonymy (The violin is late for rehearsal) and irony ([on a
rainy day] Lovely weather today!). Figurative language is challenging for
children because what is said (the ‘literal’ meaning) differs from what is
communicated (the figurative meaning). Previous developmental studies indicate
that children understand metaphors and metonyms before ironical utterances.
This difference is not explained by the standard pragmatic account that
analyzes all kinds of figurative language as conversational implicatures
triggered by blatant violations of the Maxim of Quality (Grice, 1967).
However, contemporary pragmatic theories, which consider irony a form of
echoic use (Wilson & Sperber, 1981, 2012) or pretense (Clark & Gerrig, 1984),
set irony clearly apart from other kinds of figurative uses such as metaphor
and metonymy.

The aim of the conference is to bring together researchers from different
fields and theoretical backgrounds who work on figurative language development
and related topics. One central question is whether metaphor, metonymy, irony
and other kinds of figurative uses have a similar developmental trajectory and
are processed in a similar way. 

Keynote Speakers:

Eve Clark (Stanford University)
Herbert Colston (University of Alberta)
Penny Pexman (University of Calgary)
Nausicaa Pouscoulous (University College London)
Gabriella Rundblad (King’s College London)
Deirdre Wilson (University College London)


Call for Papers:

We invite authors to submit an anonymous, max. 500 words long abstract for a
talk of 20 minutes plus 10-minute discussion or a poster. We especially
encourage papers that link theoretical and empirical research, for instance by
conducting theoretically informed empirical studies or by empirically testing
and comparing the predictions of existing pragmatic theories. Submissions
should be made via Easychair (https://easychair.org/cfp/AFM2017). We welcome
contributions addressing some of the following topics of interest:

- Children’s processing, comprehension and production of figurative language,
including (but not limited to) irony, metonymy, metaphor and hyperbole
- Typical and atypical development of figurative language processing,
comprehension and production
- Theoretical accounts of figurative language
- Figurative language and its relation to cognitive and affective abilities
(such as Theory of Mind, epistemic vigilance, metalinguistic awareness,
emotion understanding)
- The relationship between figurative language and lexical innovation
- Figurative language in second language acquisition




------------------------------------------------------------------------------

*****************    LINGUIST List Support    *****************
                       Fund Drive 2017
Please support the LL editors and operation with a donation at:
            http://funddrive.linguistlist.org/donate/

This year the LINGUIST List hopes to raise $70,000. This money
will go to help keep the List running by supporting all of our 
Student Editors for the coming year.

Don't forget to check out the Fund Drive 2017 site!

http://funddrive.linguistlist.org/

We collect donations via the eLinguistics Foundation, a
registered 501(c) Non Profit organization with the federal tax
number 45-4211155. The donations can be offset against your
federal and sometimes your state tax return (U.S. tax payers
only). For more information visit the IRS Web-Site, or contact
your financial advisor.

Many companies also offer a gift matching program. Contact
your human resources department and send us the necessary form.

Thank you very much for your support of LINGUIST!
 


----------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-28-1471	
----------------------------------------------------------