33.2245, Calls: Gen Ling, Lang Acquisition, Pragmatics, Psycholing, Syntax/Germany

[The LINGUIST List]

LINGUIST List: Vol-33-2245. Sun Jul 10 2022. ISSN: 1069 - 4875.

Subject: 33.2245, Calls: Gen Ling, Lang Acquisition, Pragmatics, Psycholing, Syntax/Germany

Moderator: Malgorzata E. Cavar (linguist at linguistlist.org)
Student Moderator: Billy Dickson
Managing Editor: Lauren Perkins
Team: Helen Aristar-Dry, Everett Green, Sarah Goldfinch, Nils Hjortnaes,
        Joshua Sims, Billy Dickson, Amalia Robinson, Matthew Fort
Jobs: jobs at linguistlist.org | Conferences: callconf at linguistlist.org | Pubs: pubs at linguistlist.org

Homepage: http://linguistlist.org

Hosted by Indiana University

Please support the LL editors and operation with a donation at:
           https://funddrive.linguistlist.org/donate/

Editor for this issue: Everett Green <everett at linguistlist.org>
================================================================


Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2022 03:16:33
From: Max Bonke [dgfs45-ellipsis at uni-koeln.de]
Subject: Creativity and routine in proposition reconstructions under ellipsis (Workshop at DGfS conference 2023, Cologne, Germany)

 
Full Title: Creativity and routine in proposition reconstructions under ellipsis (Workshop at DGfS conference 2023, Cologne, Germany) 
Short Title: DGfS-45 

Date: 08-Mar-2023 - 10-Mar-2023
Location: Cologne, Germany 
Contact Person: Max Bonke
Meeting Email: dgfs45-ellipsis at uni-koeln.de
Web Site: https://dgfs2023.uni-koeln.de/en/ 

Linguistic Field(s): General Linguistics; Language Acquisition; Pragmatics; Psycholinguistics; Syntax 

Call Deadline: 15-Aug-2022 

Meeting Description:

Conference date: March 8th to March 10th, 2023
Conference location: University of Cologne, Germany
Conference URL: https://dgfs2023.uni-koeln.de/en/
Workshop convenors: Max Bonke (University of Cologne) and Volker Struckmeier
(RUB)


Call for Papers:

Workshop description and call for papers
Elliptical utterances can fulfill propositional functions in discourse. As
such, they can, e.g., be used to answer questions and be rejected as untrue
(e.g., by B and A2. respectively, in 1)

(1)  A1: How many burgers did you eat?
  B: Twelve.
A2: No, no, no, that can't be true!

In our workshop, we ask how variable the encoding and interpretation of
elliptical utterances can be – and how creative our theories will thus have to
become. We are specifically interested, therefore, in data that have hitherto
not been centrally discussed, and approaches to ellipsis resolution that
challenge established theories.

While syntactic, discourse, information-theoretic and other explanations
(e.g., Merchant 2004, Reich 2007, Lemke 2020) have been proposed, ellipsis
research is still limited empirically in other ways. We ask whether (or where)
ellipsis phenomena exist which would force our theories to become even more
creative:

I. Most theories of ellipsis are based on a restricted sample of (mostly
Indo-European) languages. Would a typologically more diverse range of
languages lead us to discover structures which are unexpected, given the
ellipsis literature so far? Would ellipsis data from signed languages do so?

II. What can structurally diverse environments reveal about options for
creative uses of ellipsis? Do ellipsis options differ between semantically
different clause types (independently of or in addition to syntactic factors)?
 Can embedded environments (e.g., complement or relative clauses) shed new
lights on how ellipsis works in a way that the standard main clause cannot? Do
comparatively under-researched clause types (e.g., exclamatives, optatives)
allow for different ellipsis options? Does ellipsis work differently depending
on the truth, falsity or contingency of the utterance that (partially) elides
– or of antecedent utterances from the discourse?

III. Ellipsis theories often presuppose a 'normally functioning discourse',
examples of which are provided by linguists. Can quantitative data from
corpus/production studies (e.g., on challenging performance conditions) force
us to allow for more (or less) creativity in ellipsis options? How differently
from fully competent speakers do (L1 or L2) learners use ellipsis? Conversely,
could ellipsis be 'easier' (more creative?) in writing, where, e.g., memory
retrieval is less of an issue?

IV. Last, but not least, we invite new theoretical analyses that make
interesting predictions regarding (im-) possible elliptical forms, and/or the
interpretation of elliptical utterances, given a discourse context.
 
We hope to attract researchers interested in challenging ellipsis theories by
showing the creative uses, diverse contexts and complex conditions of
ellipsis. 
 
References:  Lemke, Robin. 2020. Experimental investigations on the syntax and
usage of fragments.  Universität des Saarlandes Dissertation. Merchant, Jason.
2004. Fragments and ellipsis. Linguistics and Philosophy 27:661–738. Reich,
Ingo. 2007. Toward a uniform analysis of short answers and gapping. In Kerstin
Schwabe & Susanne Winkler (eds.), On information structure, meaning and form.
467–484. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

Abstract submission guidelines:
Abstracts should be submitted anonymously in PDF format and not exceed 500
words, excluding references. Talks will be 20 minutes, with 10 minutes
additional time for discussion.

Please submit your abstracts to: dgfs45-ellipsis at uni-koeln.de

Workshop information:
The DGfS organizers currently expect that the conference will be held on-site
in Cologne, not online. Presenters will thus be expected to make the necessary
travel arrangements. A limited number of travel grants are available for
presenters who are DGfS members and have low (or no) income.

Please note: presenters at DGfS workshops are not allowed to present in more
than one workshop. While you can be a co-author in more than presentation at
the conference,




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

***************************    LINGUIST List Support    ***************************
 The 2020 Fund Drive is under way! Please visit https://funddrive.linguistlist.org
  to find out how to donate and check how your university, country or discipline
     ranks in the fund drive challenges. Or go directly to the donation site:
                   https://crowdfunding.iu.edu/the-linguist-list

                        Let's make this a short fund drive!
                Please feel free to share the link to our campaign:
                    https://funddrive.linguistlist.org/donate/
 


----------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-33-2245	
----------------------------------------------------------