30.4458, Calls: Applied Ling, Comp Ling, Discipline of Ling, Gen Ling, Ling Theories/Germany

Sat Nov 23 10:33:13 UTC 2019

LINGUIST List: Vol-30-4458. Sat Nov 23 2019. ISSN: 1069 - 4875.

Subject: 30.4458, Calls: Applied Ling, Comp Ling, Discipline of Ling, Gen Ling, Ling Theories/Germany

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: Sat, 23 Nov 2019 05:30:27
From: Alicia Katharina Börner [alicia.boerner at rub.de]
Subject: The Limits of Experimentation - Current Challenges in Experimental Linguistic Practice

Full Title: The Limits of Experimentation - Current Challenges in Experimental Linguistic Practice 
Short Title: LofE 

Date: 22-May-2020 - 23-May-2020
Location: Bochum, Nordrhein-Westfalen, Germany 
Contact Person: Tibor Kiss
Meeting Email: limitsofexperimentation at ruhr-uni-bochum.de
Web Site: http://www.ruhr-uni-bochum.de/limitsofexperimentation 

Linguistic Field(s): Applied Linguistics; Computational Linguistics; Discipline of Linguistics; General Linguistics; Linguistic Theories 

Call Deadline: 08-Dec-2019 

Meeting Description:

Linguistics has experienced an increasing focus on experimental evidence in
recent times. This does not only concern external linguistic interfaces dealt
with in psycho- or sociolinguistics. Proper linguistic sub-disciplines show a
rapidly growing interest in experimental data as a base for theoretical
linguistics, leading to new research strands such as experimental phonology,
experimental syntax, experimental semantics or experimental pragmatics. 
Despite an ongoing fundamental discussion on the general relevance of
experimental data in theoretical linguistics, each linguistic sub-discipline
has at commands a set of formal methods for data collection, which are
frequently applied or newly developed. Here, linguists can refer to various
sets of guidelines. Furthermore, we can orient ourselves by means of a large
variety of study documentations. But as it turns out, many practical aspects
remain unclear. Both methods on their own or together seem to not yet be
exhaustive enough to answer all questions on proper procedure or to function
as a base for a replication of individual studies.
As an example, take the challenges in the field of experimental syntax, which
are not restricted to acceptability judgments, but are rather very general in
nature. Until today, the need for judgment data in syntactic theorizing is
controversially discussed. Proponents of experimental approaches call into
question the empirical base of theories based on informal methods (Wasow &
Arnold 2005; Featherston 2007; Gibson & Fedorenko 2010; Häussler & Juzek
2017). Other researches point to the practicability and various achievements
of informal theorizing, thus defending introspective approaches (Phillips &
Lasnik 2003; Phillips & Wagers 2007; Phillips 2009).
Proponents of experimental approaches can make use of a set of established
formal methods (Likert Scales, Forced Choice, Magnitude Estimation) and newly
introduced ones (Thermometer Task (Featherston 2008), Sentence Fragment
Arrangement Task (e.g. Störzer 2017)). They can draw on concrete guidelines
for experimental practice (Cowart 1997; Schütze 1996/22016; Schütze & Sprouse
2013) as well as on numerous study documentations. But various issues
regarding conception or implementation remain unresolved or unaddressed in
both sources, ranging from questions related to study design or sentence
material to debates about an up-to-date procedure or about adequate
method-specific statistical analyses. Moreover, guidelines are often too vague
to ensure a uniform application.

2nd Call for Papers:

In light of the various open questions regarding experimental linguistic
practice, the purpose of this conference is to bring together experimental
researchers working in different strands and different linguistic
sub-disciplines or related areas in order to gather and critically discuss
open issues. Thus, each individual contribution presents certain intricate
practical aspects corresponding pragmatic solutions, or methodological
reflections and impulses on linguistic experimentation. With this, we want to
contribute to a critical evaluation of current standards as well as to the
development of new standards and guidelines in the field. 

Here is a non-exhaustive list of questions that could be addressed at this
conference:

General Relevance
- Is experimental data indeed a necessary precondition for empirically
adequate theoretical analyses? 
Formal methods
- What do we consider the most promising formal methods for a given
experimental sub-discipline and what are fruitful combinations of those
methods? 
- Is there a need for developing novel methods? 
Factorial design
- How complex can we make our factorial designs in investigations of complex
phenomena, while still guaranteeing a working analysis? 
Sentence material
- What are the most reliable approaches to item construction? 
- Can we establish concrete standards for control items? 
- Are there new in-depth studies on the nature and functions of filler items
in different formal methods? 
Procedure
- What are the limits and benefits of instructions? 
- How complex can we phrase instructions, while still ensuring a constant
compliance throughout the experiment session? 
- What are the standards concerning a web-based collection of data? 
- Are there advances in the controllability of online studies? 
Analysis
- What is the ideal way of analyzing data gathered with different formal
methods? 
- What are the current standards in the pre-processing of data in different
formal methods? 
- Power analysis: can we have too many participants? 

Submission Details:

We invite submissions on questions of experimental practice, independent of
the linguistic sub-discipline. Abstracts should be geared to 30+15 minute
talks and should not exceed 1500 words including data, graphics and
references. Submission is being managed with EasyChair at
https://easychair.org/conferences/?conf=lofe2020. Abstracts should be
anonymously submitted in doc(x)- or pdf-format, until December 8, 2019. 

submission link: https://easychair.org/conferences/?conf=lofe2020
deadline for submission: December 8, 2019
notification of acceptance: January 10, 2020

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

***************************    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-30-4458	
----------------------------------------------------------