29.3647, Calls: Discourse Analysis, Pragmatics, Sociolinguistics/China

[The LINGUIST List]

LINGUIST List: Vol-29-3647. Fri Sep 21 2018. ISSN: 1069 - 4875.

Subject: 29.3647, Calls: Discourse Analysis, Pragmatics, Sociolinguistics/China

Moderator: linguist at linguistlist.org (Malgorzata E. Cavar)
Reviews: reviews at linguistlist.org (Helen Aristar-Dry, Robert Coté)
Homepage: https://linguistlist.org

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: Fri, 21 Sep 2018 19:36:08
From: Martin Gill [martin.gill at abo.fi]
Subject: Deception in Public Discourse

 
Full Title: Deception in Public Discourse 

Date: 09-Jun-2019 - 14-Jun-2019
Location: Hong Kong, China 
Contact Person: Martin Gill
Meeting Email: martin.gill at abo.fi

Linguistic Field(s): Discourse Analysis; Pragmatics; Sociolinguistics 

Call Deadline: 15-Oct-2018 

Meeting Description:

(Session of the 16th International Pragmatics Conference)

In 2016, Oxford Dictionaries chose ‘post-truth’ as international word of the
year. The choice seemed to confirm a widely shared perception that, just as
the free-for-all of social media was marginalizing authoritative news sources,
so rational public discourse was being eroded by a tide of popular unreason.
This perception was reinforced by the Brexit debate in the UK and the election
of Donald Trump in the US, both characterized by polarized opinions,
propagation of ‘fake news’, and often blatant disregard for facts, as well as
extensive use of social media and rising levels of incivility.

To some, the currency of concepts such as ‘post-truth’ and ‘alternative facts’
reflects a crisis of confidence in evidence-based discourse, threatening the
norms, institutions and discursive practices, as well as the mutual trust,
that inform civil society, if not democracy itself (Brennan 2017). According
to Enfield (2017), “post-truth discourse may be one of the most pressing
problems of our time”. Yet, disinformation for political ends has a long
history, and appeals to emotion rather than reason are familiar persuasive
techniques. Likewise, distrust of utterances in the public sphere and
scepticism about the truthfulness, sincerity and motivation of those making
them long predates the ‘post-truth’ era. It is therefore timely to ask: to
what extent is the present exceptional in this respect? If it is, what are its
characteristics, in what specific forms and modalities are they realized, and
in what contexts? How do they differ from those of earlier times?


Call for Papers:

This panel will focus on the nature, prevalence and potential consequences of
deception in public discourse, and papers of 20 minutes on any aspect of this
theme are invited; ample time for discussion will be included. The focus
includes all forms of discourse in the public sphere, both on and off line.
Contributors are welcome to adopt any relevant theoretical perspective and
methodology, and to focus on theoretical issues or empirical data. Please send
abstracts to martin.gill at abo.fi and/or to the IPrA conference website
https://ipra2019.exordo.com/ by October 15 2018.

Deception may include lying, invention, suppression or omission of facts,
evasion, failing to tell, euphemism, misnaming, misspeaking, etc., but how
clearly can these be distinguished from legitimate forms of political /
ideological expression and promotional discourse, or again from satire or
parody? To what extent have changing news formats, genres, media and audiences
affected these issues? Are there identifiable differences between deceptive
and ‘normal’ discourse? Are there features that make a story more or less
credible or repeatable? How influential are new forms of publication, audience
engagement, and the affordances of online media in promoting deceptive
discourse? What multimodal dimensions are relevant? Is the notion of deception
itself being redefined? Ultimately, what implications do these phenomena have
for the conduct of discourse in the contemporary public sphere?




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

*****************    LINGUIST List Support    *****************
Please support the LL editors and operation with a donation at:

              The IU Foundation Crowd Funding site:
       https://iufoundation.fundly.com/the-linguist-list

               The LINGUIST List FundDrive Page:
            https://funddrive.linguistlist.org/donate/
 


----------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-29-3647	
----------------------------------------------------------