27.4599, Calls: Disc Analysis, Pragmatics, Semantics, Socioling, Text/Corpus Ling/Switzerland

Fri Nov 11 16:30:26 UTC 2016

LINGUIST List: Vol-27-4599. Fri Nov 11 2016. ISSN: 1069 - 4875.

Subject: 27.4599, Calls: Disc Analysis, Pragmatics, Semantics, Socioling, Text/Corpus Ling/Switzerland

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 2016
                   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: Fri, 11 Nov 2016 11:30:18
From: Cristina Lastres López [cristina.lastres at usc.es]
Subject: Revisiting Discourse Markers and Discourse Relations

Full Title: Revisiting Discourse Markers and Discourse Relations 

Date: 10-Sep-2017 - 13-Sep-2017
Location: Zurich, Switzerland 
Contact Person: Cristina Lastres López
Meeting Email: cristina.lastres at usc.es

Linguistic Field(s): Discourse Analysis; Pragmatics; Semantics; Sociolinguistics; Text/Corpus Linguistics 

Call Deadline: 21-Nov-2016 

Meeting Description:

Revisiting discourse markers and discourse relations in functional-cognitive
space: Models and applications across languages, registers and genres

Organisers: 

María de los Ángeles Gómez González & Cristina Lastres López
University of Santiago de Compostela

Discourse relations, also known as 'coherence relations' or 'rhetorical
relations' (Mann & Thompson, 1988; Taboada, 2006; Taboada & Mann, 2006),
comprise many different relations between clauses or larger units that are
essential for maintaining the cohesion and coherence of discourse (Halliday &
Hassan, 1976; Shriffrin, 1988). Among others, relations such as cause, result,
purpose, concession, or condition, to name but a few, have been studied from
many different perspectives (Van der Auwera, 1998; Couper-Kuhlen & Kortmann,
2000; Dancygier & Sweetser, 2000, 2005; Gómez González & Taboada, 2005;
Sanders & Sweetser, 2009; Taboada & Gómez González, 2012; Ruiz de Mendoza &
Gómez González, 2014; Lastres López, 2015, 2016; Gómez González, in press;
among others). Previous studies have shown that the markers of discourse
relations are generally 'multifunctional' in the sense that they may not only
express different rhetorical relations in different contexts but can also be
interpreted differently in one and the same context, and consequently they are
difficult to assign to one particular semantic category (Couper-Kuhlen &
Kortmann, 2000; Andersen, 2001; Aijmer, 2002; Asher & Lascarides, 2003;
González, 2005; Siegel, 2006; Izutsu, 2008; Romero-Trillo, 2012; Cuenca, 2013;
Lastres López, 2015, 2016; Gómez González, in press). Likewise, the expression
of discourse relations does not necessarily involve the obligatory presence of
a discourse marker, and thus the relation may either be expressed differently
(lexically, for example) or it may not have an explicit linguistic signal in
discourse at all (Taboada, 2006; Taboada & Mann, 2006; Prasard et al., 2008;
Levy & Jaeger, 2010).

Call for Papers:

Following Schiffrin's (1988) distinction between 'particles' (well, then, or
you know) and 'connectives' (but, because, or if), this workshop invites
proposals that address the notions of discourse markers and discourse
relations within the so-called 'functional-cognitive space' or ''the
topography of the theoretical space occupied by functional, cognitivist and/or
constructionist accounts of language as seen against the background of
formalist approaches'' (Gómez González et al., 2014: 11; cf. also Butler &
Gonzálvez-García, 2014). Our aim is to create a forum in which participants
can share ideas regarding the theoretical description of discourse relations
and discourse markers from functional, cognitivist and/or constructionist
perspectives, as well the usage-based application of such proposals across
different languages, registers and genres. Although functional classifications
of discourse markers and discourse relations seem to prevail in the
literature, as in the studies mentioned above, there is still some debate
regarding such issues as their degree of syntactic integration, or the
taxonomies and functional domains that are most amenable to the principles of
exhaustivity (in the selection of observed phenomena) and flexibility in their
application to different languages, registers, genres, technical formats and
theoretical frameworks, to mention but a few (Briz Gómez & Pons Bordería,
2010; Bolly et al., 2015, in press; Crible & Degand, 2015). Similarly, while a
large body of research has primarily focused on English, contrastive
investigations comparing the similarities and divergences among (varieties of)
languages (including native and non-native) as well as between original
versions and their translations have proved very useful to explore the
dynamics of discourse markers usage and their involvement in signalling
coherence relations (Taboada, 2004; Aijmer & Simon-Vandenbergen, 2006; Taboada
et al., 2013; Gómez González, in press). Nevertheless, the richness of these
contrastive investigations does not detract from the fact that much ground has
yet to be covered.

We therefore invite proposals that examine discourse markers and discourse
relations from synchronic or diachronic perspectives, either theoretical or
applied across varieties of the same language or cross-linguistically. In
particular, this panel welcomes proposals dealing with the following research
questions, among others: 

- What is the most effectual classification of discourse markers and/or
discourse relations within functional-cognitive space and why? Can
functionalist, cognitivist and constructionist accounts be integrated? Does
such a model follow the principles of flexibility and exhaustivity?
- How is a given discourse marker and/or discourse relation best
conceptualised within functional-cognitive space? Does such a model have
empirical validity for several languages? 
- How are discourse relations expressed and used across languages and genres? 
- When, how frequently and why are discourse relations either made explicit or
left implicit? Can a discourse relation be expressed by devices other than
connectives and particles? Why does that happen?
- Is there any difference between native and non-native usage of discourse
markers and discourse relations? What are the factors at play?

Abstracts should be submitted as email attachments to cristina.lastres at usc.es
by 21 November 2016. Abstracts should be 300 words, excluding references. 

Important Dates:

21 November 2016: Deadline for submission 300 word abstracts to the workshop
organisers (submission contact: cristina.lastres at usc.es)
23 November 2016: Notification of initial acceptance by the workshop
organisers
25 November 2016: Submission of the workshop proposal to the SLE 
15 December 2016: Notification of acceptance of workshop proposals from SLE
organizers to workshop organizers
15 January 2017: Deadline for submission of full abstracts to SLE
31 March 2017: Notification of paper acceptance 
10-13 September 2017: SLE conference

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

*****************    LINGUIST List Support    *****************
                       Fund Drive 2016
Please support the LL editors and operation with a donation at:
            http://funddrive.linguistlist.org/donate/

        Thank you very much for your support of LINGUIST!

----------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-27-4599	
----------------------------------------------------------