33.787, Calls: Cog Sci, Disc Analysis, Ling Theories, Pragmatics/Germany

[The LINGUIST List]

LINGUIST List: Vol-33-787. Tue Mar 01 2022. ISSN: 1069 - 4875.

Subject: 33.787, Calls: Cog Sci, Disc Analysis, Ling Theories, Pragmatics/Germany

Moderator: Malgorzata E. Cavar (linguist at linguistlist.org)
Student Moderator: Billy Dickson
Managing Editor: Lauren Perkins
Team: Helen Aristar-Dry, Everett Green, Sarah Goldfinch, Nils Hjortnaes,
      Joshua Sims, Billy Dickson, Amalia Robinson, Matthew Fort
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: Tue, 01 Mar 2022 03:50:14
From: Markus Egg [markus.egg at hu-berlin.de]
Subject: Metaphors and Stance Markers in Register Variation

 
Full Title: Metaphors and Stance Markers in Register Variation 
Short Title: MeStaR 

Date: 16-Jun-2022 - 17-Jun-2022
Location: Berlin, Germany 
Contact Person: Markus Egg
Meeting Email: markus.egg at hu-berlin.de
Web Site: https://sfb1412.hu-berlin.de/de/events/workshops/ 

Linguistic Field(s): Cognitive Science; Discourse Analysis; Linguistic Theories; Pragmatics 

Call Deadline: 14-Mar-2022 

Meeting Description:

Interlocutors and their social relations constitute a central part of
register, which is reflected e.g. in the ‘tenor’ feature in Systemic
Functional Linguistics (SFL) (Halliday & Hasan, 1985) or in Biber’s (2006b)
dimension ‘involved vs. informational production’. Metadiscourse elements
address this feature or dimension, allowing speakers or writers to interact
with their audience in order to manage their mutual relation and to guide the
audience in processing the discourse. These elements are constitutive for
register and must be used appropriately in a specific constellation of
interlocutors; at the same time, they allow the classification of discourse in
terms of a specific register. 

The workshop intends to deepen our understanding of such elements, focussing
on two phenomena that are crucial for tenor, viz., metaphors and stance
markers. 

For metaphors, their relation to tenor was discussed in Goatly (1994, 2011),
who correlates functions of metaphors with SFL features, e.g., if the
interlocutors are of equal status and close, metaphors tend to be attitudinal
and emotive. Also, Steen et al. (2010) attribute differences of metaphors to
their respective registers (for news, conversation, fiction, and academic
discourse). For instance, the informational registers use metaphor to express
content to a much larger extent than conversation. There is also work on
metaphor in specific registers, e.g., newspapers (Krennmayr, 2011), academic
discourse (Beger, 2015; Herrmann, 2015), or fiction (Dorst, 2015). 

Stance markers subsume different types of linguistic means, ranging from
specific lexical items such as first and second person pronouns or epistemic
adverbs and particles over inflectional and derivational morphology (e.g.
diminutives) to syntactic constructions such as imperatives and questions
(Biber, 2006a; Hyland, 2005). Research on the distribution of stance markers
across registers provides evidence not only for their salience in
conversational discourses as a means of indicating speaker’s involvement and
fostering addressee’s engagement (Goulart et al., 2020; Qin & Uccelli, 2019).
Speakers and writers also use these markers to create interactional identities
according to the communicative purposes in contexts with varying degrees of
formality (Barbieri, 2015). In written informational discourses, these markers
allow writers to convey a credible picture of themselves as members of
professional and scientific communities and to develop and manage the social
and epistemic common ground with their audiences (Hyland, 2010).


2nd Call for Papers:

EXTENDED DEADLINE
Submission deadline: 14 March-2022
Notification of acceptance: 30-Mar-2022

Interlocutors and their social relations constitute a central part of
register, which is reflected e.g. in the 'tenor' feature of situation
description in Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL) (Halliday & Hasan, 1985)
or in Biber’s (2006b) dimension 'involved vs. informational production'.
Metadiscourse elements address this feature or dimension, allowing speakers or
writers to interact with their audience in order to manage their mutual
relation and to guide the audience in processing the discourse. These elements
are constitutive for register and must be used appropriately in a specific
constellation of interlocutors; at the same time, they allow the
classification of discourse in terms of a specific register. 
The workshop intends to deepen our understanding of such elements, focusing on
two phenomena that are crucial for tenor, viz., metaphors and stance markers. 
For metaphors, their relation to tenor was discussed in Goatly (1994, 2011),
who correlates functions of metaphors with SFL features, e.g., if the
interlocutors are of equal status and close, metaphors tend to be attitudinal
and emotive. Also, Steen et al. (2010) attribute differences of metaphors to
their respective registers (for news, conversation, fiction, and academic
discourse). For instance, the informational registers use metaphor to express
content to a much larger extent than conversation. There is also work on
metaphor in specific registers, e.g., newspapers (Krennmayr, 2011), academic
discourse (Beger, 2015; Herrmann, 2015), or fiction (Dorst, 2015). 
Stance markers subsume different types of linguistic means, ranging from
specific lexical items such as first and second person pronouns or epistemic
adverbs and particles over inflectional and derivational morphology (e.g.
diminutives) to syntactic constructions such as imperatives and questions
(Biber, 2006a; Hyland, 2005). Research on the distribution of stance markers
across registers provides evidence not only for their salience in
conversational discourses as a means of indicating speaker’s involvement and
fostering addressee’s engagement (Goulart et al., 2020; Qin & Uccelli, 2019).
Speakers and writers use these markers also to create interactional identities
according to the communicative purposes in contexts with varying degrees of
formality (Barbieri, 2015). In written informational discourses, these markers
allow writers to convey a credible picture of themselves as members of
professional and scientific communities and to develop and manage the social
and epistemic common ground with their audiences (Hyland, 2010).
We are interested in the way these two phenomena serve to create and modulate
register dimensions, for instance, degrees of conceptual orality and literacy
and social relations between the interlocutors. For both types of phenomena,
their influence on register is closely tied to their semantic contribution,
hence, we expect their comparison to yield further insights into
metalinguistic strategies of register administration.

Questions include, but are not restricted to the following:

- How do metaphors and/or stance markers contribute to establishing and
signalling specific registers (including academic language and languages for
specific purposes)?
- How are metaphors and/or stance markers as register markers acquired and how
do they change over time?
- What is the relation between metaphors and stance markers in the field of
register? 
- Do metaphors and/or stance markers play a different role in register across
languages?

We especially welcome empirical studies, experimental as well as corpus-based
ones. 

Format of the Abstracts: Authors should submit anonymous abstracts of max. 500
words excluding figures and references to mestar22-sfb1412 at lists.hu-berlin.de.
References should be formatted according to the APA 7th guidelines. Abstracts
will be peer reviewed.




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

***************************    LINGUIST List Support    ***************************
 The 2020 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://crowdfunding.iu.edu/the-linguist-list

                        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-33-787	
----------------------------------------------------------