30.2456, Calls: Cognitive Science/Bulgaria

[The LINGUIST List]

LINGUIST List: Vol-30-2456. Mon Jun 17 2019. ISSN: 1069 - 4875.

Subject: 30.2456, Calls: Cognitive Science/Bulgaria

Moderator: Malgorzata E. Cavar (linguist at linguistlist.org)
Student Moderator: Jeremy Coburn
Managing Editor: Becca Morris
Team: Helen Aristar-Dry, Everett Green, Sarah Robinson, Peace Han, Nils Hjortnaes, Yiwen Zhang, Julian Dietrich
Jobs: jobs at linguistlist.org | Conferences: callconf at linguistlist.org | Pubs: pubs at linguistlist.org

Homepage: http://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: Mon, 17 Jun 2019 19:06:22
From: Angeliki Athanasiadou [angath at enl.auth.gr]
Subject: What Makes a Figure?: Re-Thinking Figuration

 
Full Title: What Makes a Figure?: Re-Thinking Figuration 

Date: 23-Apr-2020 - 24-Apr-2020
Location: Sofia, Bulgaria 
Contact Person: Angeliki ; Herbert Athanasiadou ; Colston
Meeting Email: angath at enl.auth.gr ; colston at ualberta.ca

Linguistic Field(s): Cognitive Science 

Call Deadline: 10-Aug-2019 

Meeting Description:

Looking across different figures and noting their generic structures and
functions (e.g., involving two domains and inviting mappings between them
[metaphor], invoking a portion of one domain or substituting a relevant
component of a related domain, to realize the entirety of a targeted domain
[metonymy], inviting contradictions between usually two domains [irony],
invoking a single domain but exaggerating it [hyperbole] or giving it a
circular construction [tautology], etc., what can we understand better about
the processes involved in figuration as a whole?  How might we re-think
“standard” or “accepted” processes in figurative functioning to enable a
broader pan-figural or at least more-collective-figural understanding?

For instance, in considering ideas like, what makes a metaphor—what factors
other than concreteness might distinguish between source and target domains? 
Or, for the question of what makes a metonymy—is substitution the primary
means by which to conceptualize metonymic reference, etc.?  Or further still,
for irony, what new conceptualizations might be had to grapple with the idea
of ironic contradiction, etc.?  Across these and other related questions, what
processes (i.e., cognitive, linguistic, embodied, social, perceptual,
cultural, emotional, etc.) seem involved in figuration proper, in figuration
broadly, or at least in more than one figure, for either their comprehension
or their usage, or involving some other activity with them?

Moreover, in looking at the broad structural make-up and component functional
underpinnings of different figures, as well as in related rhetorical tropes or
rhetorical devices (i.e., understatement, oxymoron, litotes, hyperbole,
simile, idioms, proverbs, antithesis, antiphrasis, tautology, euphemism,
hypallage, etc.), what gains might be had in understanding figurativeness more
holistically?

The proposed theme session will accordingly welcome abstracts investigating
the following and/or related topics:

New ways to conceptualize old figures (i.e., what makes a[n] X?),
New mediums in which to conceptualize old figures,
New functional underpinnings of figures/rhetorical devices,
Consideration of what kinds of cognitive/social/cultural/other processes might
unite the comprehension or pragmatic effect explanations of different figures
and/or rhetorical devices,
Considerations of structure and functioning of lesser-studied figures and
rhetorical tropes/devices,
Comparisons of structure and functioning of more than one type of
figure/trope/device,
Considerations of broad typographical frameworks attempting to categorize or
organize a range of figures and rhetorical tropes/devices, based on their
structures, functions, processes or other criteria,
Considerations of any of the above topics based on comprehension, usage or
other experience/behavior (e.g., appreciation, emotional reaction,
persuasiveness, thinking aloud, etc.).

We also welcome work both theoretical in nature as well as empirical, with a
receptivity re: the latter to a wide array of methodologies.


Call for Paper:

Contributions are invited to a theme session on “What Makes a Figure?:
Re-Thinking Figuration” to be held at the 5th International Figurative Thought
and Language conference, Sofia, Bulgaria.

Abstracts must be submitted by email directly to the theme session organizers,
by August 10, 2019.

Angeliki Athanasiadou (angath at enl.auth.gr)
Herbert Colston (colston at ualberta.ca)




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

***************************    LINGUIST List Support    ***************************
 The 2019 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://iufoundation.fundly.com/the-linguist-list-2019

                        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-30-2456	
----------------------------------------------------------