[Corpora-List] workshop on modality, evidentiality and corpora

Tue Mar 11 15:13:45 UTC 2014

*Call for workshop papers on *

*Evidentiality, Modality and Corpus Linguistics *

  *INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON EVIDENTIALITY AND MODALITY IN *

*EUROPEAN LANGUAGES 2014 (EMEL’14)*

Facultad de Filología, Universidad Complutense de Madrid,

6-8 October 2014

*Workshop convenors:*

Dylan Glynn (Linguistique anglaise, psycholinguistique University of Paris
VIII)

dglynn at univ-pari8.fr

Paola Pietrandrea  (University of Tours & CNRS LLL)
paolapietrandrea at gmail.com

  MODAL CATEGORIES.

TOWARDS THE TYPOLOGICALLY VALID ANNOTATION OF

DEONTIC, EPISTEMIC, EVIDENTIAL STRUCTURES IN NATURAL LANGUAGE.

Submissions are invited for 20 minutes talks + 10 min. discussion.

Abstracts of 300 words (excluding references) are invited.

Please make sure the abstract contains a clear summary of the research
question, the data and method and (prospective) results.

The language of the workshop will be English.

Abstract submission deadline: 7 April 2014

Notification of acceptance by the workshop convenors: 25 April 2014

Notification of acceptance by the conference organisers: 26 April 2014

Papers accepted for oral presentation due by 5 September 2014

Registration for the workshop is done as part of the normal conference
registration process:

Early bird registration opens: 1 June 2014

Registration (full fee): 1 July 2014

Registration closes: 7 October 2014

Conference Fees (including coffee breaks, Wi-Fi access, and a conference
pack):

Early Bird Registration (from 1 June to 30 June 2014):

- Regular participants: 120 Euros

- Students (with valid ID): 70 Euros

Late Registration:

- Regular participants: 150 Euros

- Students (with valid ID): 100 Euros

 *Call Information*

This workshop seeks to bring together the research traditions of
computational linguistics, corpus linguistics and typology in the study of
modality (deontic, epistemic, evidential). More specifically, the
categorisation / annotation of the different modal phenomena and the
various factors with which they interact is a fundamental concern for all
three approaches. Collaboration of such concerns cross the theoretical and
methodological divisions and our insights from different perspectives
should be to the benefit of all.

Within the computational tradition, as pointed out by Nissim *et
al.*(2013), recent years have witnessed the development of annotation
schemes
and annotated corpora for different aspects of modality in different
languages (McShane et al. (2004); Wiebe *et al.* (2005); Szarvas *et
al.*(2008); Sauri and Pustejovsky (2009); Hendrickx *et
al.* (2012); Baker *et al. *(2012)). While there have been efforts towards
finding a common avenue for modality annotation, such as the CoNLL-2010
Shared Task, ACL thematic workshops and a special issue of Computational
Linguistics (Morante and Sporleder (2012)), the computational linguistics
community is still far from having developed working, shared standards for
converting modality-related issues into annotation categories.

A similar state of affairs holds for the immense quantity of research in
the corpus-driven tradition in modality research where the where
functionally determined annotation schemas have long been the focus of
debate Most of the research in this tradition has focused on the
operationalisation of the manually annotated categories, but recent years
have seen the growth methods that employ inter-coder agreement measures and
predictive statistical modeling. Key references include, but are not
restricted to: Coates (1983); Biber & Finegan (1988, 1989); Aijmer (1997,
2013), Hunston & Thompson (1998); Krug (2000); Nuyts (2001); Mushin (2001);
Tucker (2001); Scheibman (2002); Kärkkäinen (2003), Rizomilioti (2003);
Facchinetti, Krug & Palmer (2003); Paradis (2003); Marín-Arrese (2004);
Martin & White (2005); Simon-Vandenbergen & Aijmer (2007); Hunston (2007);
Englebretson (2007); Cornillie (2007); Narrog (2008, 2012); Divjak (2010);
Diewald & Smirnova (2010a); Boye (2012); Beijering (2012); Deshors (2012);
and Glynn & Sjölin (2014).

In typology, identifying and characterizing the range of modal types and
their marking across the languages of the world is clearly an ongoing and
immensely difficult task, which is leading towards a complete
classification of modal functions and a thorough understanding of the
relations holding between modal categories as well as towards an
understanding of the grammatical vs. lexical nature of modal markers across
languages. One such line of research where the use of corpora is gaining
methodological importance is comparative linguistics. Examples of typology
research in the field include: van der Auwera & Plungian (1998); Johanson &
Utas (2000); Plungian (2001, 2011); Dendale & Tasmowski (2001); Squartini
(2001, 2004); Aikhenvald (2004); Wiemer (2005); Wiemer & Plungjan (2008);
Holvoet (2007); Xrakovskij (2007); Guentcheva & Landaburu (2007), Hansen &
De Haan (2009); Boye & Harder (2009); Mortelmans *et al.* (2009); Boye
(2010); Diewald & Smirnova (2010b, 2011); Mauri & Sanso’ (2012); and
Abraham & Leiss (2013).

We invite topologists, computational linguists and corpus linguists working
on in the field to join our discussion on the contribution that corpus
analyses can bring to the study of modality.

Ideas for research questions include but are not limited to the following:

1. What do corpora teach us about modality? How can corpus analyses help us
to refine the repertoire of modal functions? How can the analysis of
(parallel) corpora help to determine cross-linguistic (typologically valid)
consistency in modal categories?

2. How do we operationalise (for annotation) non-observable (functional -
conceptual) modal categories? Do current annotation schemata allow for a
thorough identification of the modality and evidentiality markers existing
in discourse?

3. What methods exist (usage-feature analysis, sentiment analysis, latent
semantic analysis *etc*.) for the description of modal structures?

4. What statistical instruments of analysis do we need for accounting for
the distribution of modal markers in corpora?

*References*

Abraham, W. & E. Leiss (eds.). 2013. *Funktionen von Modalität*. Berlin:
Mouton de Gruyter.

Aijmer, K. 1997. I think – an English modal particle. T. Swan & O. Jansen
Westvik (eds.), *Modality in the Germanic Languages*, 1–48. Berlin: Mouton
de Gruyter.

Aijmer, K. 2013. Analyzing modal adverbs as modal particles and discourse
markers. L. Degand, B. Cornillie, P. Pietrandrea (eds.), *Discourse markers
and modal particles: categorization and description*, 89-106. Amsterdam:
John Benjamins.

Aikhenvald, Y. 2004. *Evidentiality*. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Baker, K., B. Dorr, M. Bloodgood, C. Callison-Burch, N. Filardo, C. Piatko,
L. Levin, & S. Miller. 2012. Use of modality and negation in
semantically-informed syntactic MT. *Computational Linguistics 38*.

Beijering, K. 2012. Expressions of Epistmeic Modality in Mainland
Scandinavian. PhD dissertation, University of Groningen.

Biber, D. & E. Finegan. 1988. Adverbial stance types in English. *Discourse
Processes* 11: 1–34.

Biber, D. & E. Finegan. 1989. Styles of stance in English: Lexical and
grammatical marking of evidentiality and affect. *Text* 9: 93–124

Boye, K. 2010. Semantic maps and the identification of cross-linguistic
generic categories: Evidentiality and its relation to Epistemic
Modality. *Linguistic
Discovery* 8: 4–22.

Boye, K. 2012. *Epistemic Meaning. A crosslinguistic and
functional-cognitive study*. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Boye, K. & P. Harder. 2009. Evidentiality: Linguistic categories and
grammaticalization. *Functions of Language* 16: 9-43.

Coates, J. 1983 *The Semantics of the Modal Auxiliaries*. London: Croom Helm

Coates, J. 1995. The expression of root and epistemic possibility in
English. J. Bybee & S. Fleischman (eds.) *Modality in Grammar and Discourse*,
55-66*. *Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Cornillie, B. 2007. Evidentiality and Epistemic Modality in Spanish
(Semi-)Auxiliaries. A Cognitive-Functional Approach. Berlin: Mouton de
Gruyter.

de Haan, F. 2005. Typological approaches to modality. W. Frawley (ed.). *The
Expression of Modality. The expression of cognitive categories*, 27–70.
Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Dendale, P. & L. Tasmowski (eds.). 2001 *Evidentiality *(Sp. ed. *Journal
of Pragmatics* 33). Amsterdam: Elsevier.

Deshors, S. 2012. A multifactorial study of the uses of *may* and *can* in
French-English interlanguage. PhD dissertation, University of Sussex.

Diewald, G. & E. Smirnova (eds). 2010a. *The Linguistic Realization of
Evidentiality in European Languages*. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Diewald, G. & E. Smirnova, 2010b. *Evidentiality in German. Linguistic
realization and regularities in grammaticalization*. Berlin: Mouton de
Gruyter.

Diewald, G. & E. Smirnova (eds). 2011. *Modalität und Evidentialität*.
Trier: Wissenschaftlicher Verlag.

Divjak, D. 2010. Corpus-based evidence for an idiosyncratic aspect-modality
interaction in Russian. In D. Glynn & K. Fisher (eds), *Quantitative
Methods in Cognitive Semantics: Corpus-driven Approaches*, 305-330. Berlin:
Mouton de Gruyter.

Englebretson, R. 2007. (ed.) *Stancetaking in Discourse: Subjectivity,
evaluation, interaction. *Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Facchinetti, R. & F. Palmer (eds.). 2003 *English Modality in Perspective:
Genre analysis and contrastive. *Bern: Peter Lang.

Glynn, D. & M. Sjölin, (eds.) 2014.* Subjectivity and Epistemicity. Stance
strategies in discourse and narration. *Lund: Lund University Press.

Guentcheva Z. et J. Landaburu (eds.), 2007.* L'énonciation médiatisée II -
Le traitement épistémologique de l'information: illustrations amérindiennes
et caucasiennes*,

Hansen Bj & F. De Haan. 2009. *Modals in the languages of Europe, a
reference work.* Berlin: Mouton.

Hendrickx, I., A. Mendes, & S. Mencarelli. 2012. Modality in text: a
proposal for corpus annotation.  *Proc. of LREC’12*.

Holvoet, A. 2007 *Mood and Modality in Baltic. *Krakow: Wydawnictwo
Uniwersytetu Jagielloflskiego.

Hunston, S. & G. Thompson (eds.) 1998 *Evaluation in Text. Authorial stance
and the construction of discourse*. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Hunston, S. 2007. Using a corpus to investigate stance quantitatively and
qualitatively, R. Englebretson (ed.) *Stancetaking in Discourse:
Subjectivity, Evaluation, Interaction*, 27-48. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Johanson, L. & B. Utas (eds.) 2000. *Evidentials: Turkic, Iranian and
Neighbouring Languages. *Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Karkkainen, E. 2003. *Epistemic Stance in English Conversation. A
description of its interactional functions, with a focus on* I Think.
Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Krug, M. 2000. *Emerging English Modals: A corpus-based study of
grammaticalization. *Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Marín-Arrese, J. 2004 (ed.) *Perspectives on Evidentiality and Modality in
English and Spanish. *Madrid: Editorial Complutense.

Martin, J. & White, P. 2005. *Language of Evaluation. Appraisal in English*.
London: Palgrave Macmillan

Mauri C. & A. Sanso’. 2012. HYPERLINK "
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0388000110000963" What do
languages encode when they encode reality status? *Language Sciences* 34:
99-106.

McShane, M., S. Nirenburg, & R. Zacharski. 2004. Mood and modality: out of
theory and into the fray. *Nat. Lang. Eng *10: 57–89.

Morante, R. & C. Sporleder. 2012. Modality and negation: An introduction to
the special issue. *Computational Linguistics *38: 223–260.

Mortelmans, T., K. Boye, & J. van der Auwera, (eds.). 2009. *Modals in the
Languages of Europe*: *A reference work*. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Mushin, I. 2001. *Evidentiality and Epistemological Stance: Narrative
retelling. *Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Narrog, H. 2008. *Modality in Japanese: The layered structure of the clause
and hierarchies of functional categories*. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Narrog, Heiko. 2012. *Modality, Subjectivity, and Semantic Change A
cross-linguistic perspective*. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Nissim, M., P. Pietrandrea, A. Sansò, & C. Mauri. 2013. Cross-linguistic
annotation of modality: a data-driven hierarchical model. Proceedings of
the 9th ISO Workshop on Interoperable Semantic Annotation. Potsdam, 19-20
mars 2013.

Nuyts, J. 2001a. *Epistemic Modality, Language, and Conceptualization. A
cognitive-pragmatic perspective*. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Nuyts, J. 2001b. Subjectivity as an evidential dimension in epistemic modal
expressions. *Journal of Pragmatics *33: 383-400.

Paradis, C. 2003. Between epistemic modality and degree: the case of
really. Facchinetti, R., Krug, M. & Palmer, F. (eds.) *Modality in
Contemporary English*. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Plungian, V. 2001. The place of evidentiality within the universal
grammatical space. *Journal of Pragmatics *33: 349-357.

Plungjan, V. 2011. *Введение в грамматическую семантику: грамматические
значения и грамма-тические системы языков мира*. Москва: Российский
государственный гуманитарный университет.

Rizomilioti, V. 2003. *Epistemic Modality in Academic Writing: A
corpus-linguistic study. *PhD thesis. The University of Birmingham.

Sauri R. & J. Pustejovsky. 2012. Are you sure that this happened? Assessing
the factuality degree of events in text. *Computational Linguistics*, 38:
261– 299.

Scheibman, J. 2002. *Point of View and Grammar: Structural patterns of
subjectivity in American English conversation*. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Simon-Vandenbergen, A.-M. & Aijmer, K. 2007. *The Semantic Field of Modal
Certainty*. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Squartini M. 2001a. The internal structure of evidentiality in Romance *Studies
in Language *25: 297–334.

Squartini M. 2004. Disentangling evidentiality and epistemic modality in
Romance. *Lingua *114: 873–895

Szarvas, G., V. Vincze, R. Farkas, & J. Csirik. 2008. The bioscope corpus:
annotation for negation, uncertainty and their scope in biomedical texts.
In *Proc of BioNLP ’08*, Stroudsburg, pp. 38–45.

Tucker, G. 2001. Possibly alternative modality: a corpus-based
investigation of the modal adverb *possibly. Functions of Language *8:
183-215.

van der Auwera, J. & V. Plungian. 1998. Modality’s semantic map. *Linguistic
Typology *2: 79–124.

Wärnsby, A. (De)coding Modality: The Case of *Must*, *May*, *Måste* and *Kan.
*PhD Dissertation, Lund University.

Wiebe, J., T. Wilson, and C. Cardie (2005). Annotating expressions of
opinions and emotions in language. *Language Resources and Evaluation *39:
165–210.

Wiemer, B. 2005. Conceptual affinities and diachronic relationships between
epistemic, inferential and quotative functions. B. Hansen & P. Karlík
(eds.), *Modality in Slavonic Languages*, *New perspectives*, 107–131.
München: Otto Sagner.

Wiemer, B. & V. Plungjan. (eds.). 2008. *Lexikalische Evidenzialitätsmarker
im Slavischen*. München: Otto Sanger.

Xrakovskij, V. (ed.) 2007. *Evidencial'nost' v jazykax Evropy i Azii. Sb.
statej pamjati N A.* *Kozincevoj *(Evidentiality in the Languages of Europe
and Asia. In the memory of N. A. Kozinceva). Saint-Petersburg: Nauka.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/corpora/attachments/20140311/361e5acd/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
UNSUBSCRIBE from this page: http://mailman.uib.no/options/corpora
Corpora mailing list
Corpora at uib.no
http://mailman.uib.no/listinfo/corpora