Organization: Frank Sode, Valerie Wurm, Sarah Zobel (Humboldt-University Berlin)
Kontakt: attitudesdgfs@aol.com
The grammar, meaning, and use of attitude predicates has been an active topic of research in both linguistics and philosophy at least since Hintikka’s seminal work. While Hintikka’s work remains influential, it is clear that the analysis he offers falls short in the face of the variability and complexity of attitude predicates across languages. Two areas in which this has become especially apparent concern (i) the decomposition of attitude meanings and its consequences for the typology of attitude predicates, as well as (ii) the composition of complex attitude predicates formed via modification or from combinations of lexemes/morphemes with or without their own attitudinal lexical semantics. Greater insight into these two areas furthers our understanding of the overall landscape of attitude semantics and helps identify the primitive ’building blocks’ of attitude predicates cross-linguistically. Additionally, it may shed light on the division of labor between semantics and pragmatics at the syntax-semantics-interface of clausal embedding with attitude predicates.
The main aim of this workshop is to encourage discussion between researchers contributing to these two areas based on new data, empirical observations, and theoretical considerations on: (I) grammatical evidence for semantic decomposition—for attitude predicates in general and for subgroups thereof and (II) complex attitude predicates with potentially non-transparent composition and differing argument structure to their lexical/morphological parts.
Koordination: Timo Buchholz, Heiko Seeliger (Universität zu Köln), Katharina Zahner-Ritter (Universität Trier)
Kontakt: dgfs24-prosodyattitudes@uni-koeln.de
The attitude a speaker is taking towards what they are saying or towards their interlocutor may influence the prosodic realization of an utterance. Examples include attitudes resulting in the prosodic marking of ambiguous sentences as particular speech acts (e.g., exclamations, or questions), speech-act-modifying attitudes such as incredulity, doubt, rhetoricity, or reluctance e.g., for questions, sarcasm and irony, and, more generally, a speaker's emotions. We hypothesize that it is a strong cross-linguistic tendency that attitudinal meaning is encoded in prosody, and that listeners of different languages employ different strategies to decode and interpret prosodic cues to attitude. This workshop brings together researchers working on (cross-linguistic aspects of) prosody with interfaces to pragmatics and semantics, also from the perspective of language acquisition.
Koordination: Antje Dammel (Universität Müster), Wolfgang Imo (Universität Hamburg), Jens P. Lanwer (Universität Münster)
Kontakt: abstracts.stance@uni-muenster.de
Einstellungen oder Haltungen (stances) gegenüber anderen und deren (sprachlichem) Handeln sowie gegenüber Ereignissen und anderen Erfahrungsinhalten sind in zwischenmenschlicher Kommunikation allgegenwärtig. Wenn entsprechende Haltungen sozial einklagbar zum Ausdruck gebracht werden, spricht Du Bois (2007) von einem Akt des stance taking. Beim stance taking geht es immer um die Triangulation von mindestens zwei Subjekten in Bezug auf die Evaluation von und die Positionierung zu einem gemeinsamem stance object. Es liegt daher nahe, Verfahren des stance taking mit Blick auf den Gebrauch von Pronomen genauer zu untersuchen, die speech act partcicipants ebenso wie andere Referenzobjekte grammatisch kodieren können. Bisher wurde die Rolle von Pronomen in Bezug auf Verfahren des stance taking jedoch nicht systematisch erforscht. Dieses Desiderat greift die AG auf.
Koordination: Ana Yara Postigo Fuentes, Stefan Hartmann, Rolf Kailuweit, Alexander Ziem (HHU Düsseldorf)
Kontakt: Ana.Postigo.Fuentes@hhu.de
Recent years have arguably seen an unprecedented rise in the spread of extremist narratives. Crises such as the Covid-19 pandemic or the war in Ukraine have fostered misinformation and conspiracy theories, and across different countries, we are currently experiencing a re-emergence of populist rhetoric. Investigating extremist narratives is therefore a highly relevant cross-disciplinary enterprise in which linguistic approaches can play a major role: extremist narratives have to rely on language, from the use of rhetoric devices to the framing of events. This workshop aims at bringing together researchers from different disciplines investigating the language of extremist narratives from a broad variety of theoretical and methdological perspectives. We will discuss how exactly extremist narratives can be defined, how they are conveyed linguistically, and which methodological approaches are appropriate for studying extremist narratives.
Koordination: Annika Herrmann (Universität Hamburg), Nina-Kristin Meister (Universität Göttingen), Marloes Oomen, Floris Roelofsen (Universität Amsterdam)
Kontakt: visual.clause.typing@gmail.com
Webseite
The workshop aims at bringing together scholars interested in visual ways to mark clause types, both in purely visual sign languages and in multi-modal linguistic interaction. It welcomes both empirical and theoretical contributions, as well as work exploring new methods to measure and/or analyze visual cues. Topics include but are not limited to: New empirical and theoretical studies on the interaction between clause-type marking and the expression of speaker stance/attitude (e.g. biases in questions). New empirical and theoretical studies on the relation between clause type and speech act type, based on evidence from sign languages and/or multi-modal linguistic interaction. New experimental and corpus-based studies on the use of facial expressions and other non-manuals to mark clause types and/or speech acts. New typological studies on visual cues for clause-type marking, comparing different sign and/or spoken languages.
The conference languages will be International Sign / American Sign Language (ASL) and English. Interpreting is provided.
Koordination: Annette Hautli-Janisz (Universität Passau), Gabriella Lapesa (Universität Stuttgart), Ines Rehbein (Universität Mannheim)
Kontakt: dgfs2024-framing@fim.uni-passau.de
Framing is a central notion in the study of language use to package information strategically in order to achieve conversational goals. Entman (1993) defines framing as "to select some aspects of a perceived reality and make them more salient \[...\] to promote problem definition, causal interpretation, moral evaluation, and/or treatment recommendation". This well-known frame definition has recently been operationalized in NLP in terms of coarse-grained topic dimensions, e.g., by modeling the framing of immigration as a challenge to economy vs. a human rights issue. But there is more to frames than topics. The workshop thus aims at bringing together researchers from theoretical, applied and computational linguistics, to discuss what constitutes a frame and how we can develop a theoretically motivated (computational) model of framing.
Koordination: Stefanie Dipper, Tatjana Scheffler, Sebastian Reimann, Adam Roussel (RU Bochum)
Kontakt: metaphor-dgfs2024@ruhr-uni-bochum.de
Figurative and non-literal language, such as metaphor, metonymy, or personification, poses a special challenge for computational analysis, since these expressions are not used with their usual, ordinary meanings, as represented in corpus data or recorded in lexical resources, but with different, derived meanings. In the AG, we would like to bring together computational linguists working on the automatic analysis of non-literal language. A special focus will be on non-conventionalized usages, such as novel metaphors or innovative forms of metonymy. In addition, we are particularly interested in approaches applicable to languages other than English, for example low-resource languages or domains. We welcome contributions dealing with the identification of (specific forms of) non-literal language, with the interpretation of figurative expressions, or with the relation between literal and non-literal meanings in distributional semantic representations.
Koordination: Sascha Alexeyenko (Universität Göttingen), Katharina Hartmann (Universität Frankfurt)
Kontakt: sascha.alexeyenko@uni-goettingen.de
Linearization restrictions have spanned both the verbal/clausal and the nominal domain. In the verbal domain, they have focused on the linearization of core arguments in relation to the verb, and the positions of auxiliaries and particles, see the “Final-over-Final Condition”. In the nominal domain, research has concentrated on the positions of adnominal elements in relation to the noun, in particular on the patterns observed in Greenberg's “Universal 20”. Linearization constraints applying to modification structures have also been addressed, e.g. by the “Head-Final Filter”. However, the research approaches in linearization have been developed to a major extent independently of each other. To increase cross-fertilization between such approaches, this workshop aims at bringing together researchers working in these different domains, with the ultimate goal of addressing the question to which extent various linearization constraints can be brought to a common core. We are especially interested in contributions that discuss novel empirical facts and/or theoretical approaches to constraints on linearization applying to individual domains and in particular bridging between domains.
Koordination: Cécile Meier (Universität Frankfurt), Carla Umbach (Universität Köln)
Kontact: dgfs2024@carla-umbach.de
A famous minimal pair in the discussion around kinds is The Coke bottle has a narrow neck. vs. ?The green bottle has a narrow neck. The difference in acceptability is explained by saying that Coke-bottle expresses a well-established kind whereas green bottle does not. It is notoriously difficult, however, to pin down the notion of well-establishedness.
The opposite pole in the spectrum of kinds is the notion of ad-hoc kinds which is used to interpret NPs that are kind-like but at the same time require on-line construction, for example similarity demonstratives (such a table), and partial lists (water, herbal teas, and the like). As in the case of well-establishedness, it is notoriously difficult to pin down the contrast between ad-hoc kind referring expressions and, on the one hand, those referring to regular kinds (bottles) and, on the other hand, those not referring to kinds at all (people in the next room).
The workshop aims at bringing together research in linguistics on genericity, and in particular on kinds, and research in cognitive psychology on concepts.
Koordination: Alina Gregori (Universität Frankfurt), Corinna Langer (Universität Frankfurt)
Kontakt: langer@lingua.uni-frankfurt.de | gregori@lingua.uni-frankfurt.de
Cross-linguistically, focus marking is an important function of prosody that has been studied extensively for numerous languages. A higher level of pragmatic prominence (that is, a higher notion of contrast in focus) is often marked by greater prosodic prominence. Our workshop goals are to look at the relation between prosody and focus from different angles and to tackle the multifaceted interfaces of prosody with phonetics, syntax, pragmatics and visual communication in focus marking. We welcome contributions that offer a new perspective on the prosodic marking of focus: be it typological, from a signaling point, complementing syntactic/morphological marking, offering a multimodal approach or another perspective that sheds light on the use of prosody and its interaction with pragmatic prominence.
Koordination: Oliver Bunk, Annika Labrenz, Antje Sauermann (Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin), Esther Jahns (Universität Oldenburg)
Kontakt: idslrueg@hu-berlin.de
Research on language attitudes and ideologies shows that certain patterns of speech are valorized while others are marginalized, and this often involves an evaluation of their speakers. These patterns tend to be associated with particular communicative situations and thus reflect register variation. Such evaluations of languages and linguistic varieties reflect power relations and social injustice, particularly affecting multilingual speakers. This perspective, prevalent in monolingually biased societies of the Global North, requires the integration of Global South perspectives. Moreover, the evaluation of registers has received less attention. To address these gaps, the workshop aims to 1) clarify the interplay between language attitudes, ideologies, and register use, 2) unite perspectives from both the Global South and North, 3) integrate different research methods (interviews, surveys, corpus analysis, experiments), and 4) incorporate different theoretical approaches (variationist sociolinguistics, critical sociolinguistics, linguistic anthropology).
Koordination: Magdalena Repp, Clare Patterson, Ingmar Brilmayer (Universität zu Köln)
Kontakt: mrepp1@uni-koeln.de
Call for Papers
Psycholinguistic research has mainly been limited to the study of short and isolated items consisting of one or two sentences. However, these highly controlled designs fail to fully capture the different levels of linguistic processing and their interplay, which ultimately enable successful language comprehension. A growing number of researchers have therefore started to use naturalistic stimuli in experiments tapping language comprehension. However, the field is still very young and heterogeneous, and there seems to be little interaction within the naturalistic research community. This workshop aims to foster scientific exchange within the naturalistic research community. We want to discuss how reference is processed during naturalistic language settings and exchange inside on naturalistic experiment designs, methods, and results.
Koordination: Sebastian Bücking (Universität Oldenburg), Helga Gese (Universität Tübingen), Katharina Kellermann (RPTU Kaiserslautern-Landau)
Kontakt: schulgrammatik@ds.uni-tuebingen.de
In didaktischen Kontexten wird Grammatik meist mit (Morpho-)Syntax gleichgesetzt, während Semantik eine untergeordnete Rolle spielt. Diese Benachteiligung der Semantik spiegelt sich in Bildungsplänen, Unterrichtsmaterialien sowie in didaktischen Publikationen, in denen semantische Ansätze allerdings nur im Sinne problematischer ontologiebasierter Zugänge zu Wortarten und Satzgliedern verstanden und daher – zurecht – kritisiert werden. Gleichzeitig herrscht in der Didaktik weitgehend Konsens darüber, dass Grammatikunterricht nicht nur sprachliche Formen, sondern Form-Funktions-Zusammenhänge thematisieren sollte. Die AG möchte diskutieren, inwieweit diese funktionale Ausrichtung von einer Stärkung semantischer Themen profitieren könnte. Wir laden Beiträge ein, die semantische Phänomene und Grundlagen für den Grammatikunterricht aus theoretisch-konzeptioneller, empirischer oder unterrichtspraktischer Sicht reflektieren.
Koordination: Kristin Börjesson (MLU Halle-Wittenberg), Sandra Döring (Universität Leipzig)
Kontakt: ag_sprache_betrachten_2024@uni-leipzig.de
In sprachwissenschaftlichen Lehrveranstaltungen im Lehramtsstudium steht die Untersuchung menschlicher Sprache auf unterschiedlichen Beschreibungsebenen im Mittelpunkt. Jedoch ist die Zeit im Lehramtsstudium knapp bemessen. In vergleichsweise wenigen Modulen müssen die in der Sprachwissenschaft etablierten Untersuchungsmethoden, aber auch die erzielten Erkenntnisse so vermittelt werden, dass sie den Absolvent:innen als fachwissenschaftliches Professionswissen zum flexiblen Einsatz in ihrem beruflichen Handlungsfeld Schule zur Verfügung stehen. Nicht selten müssen in diesem Zusammenhang auch Einstellungen und Überzeugungen bzgl. Sprache thematisiert werden. Idealerweise sollten die Absolvent:innen in der Lage und interessiert daran sein, die Sprach(en)betrachtung ihrer Schüler:innen gegenstandsangemessen und lernförderlich initiieren und unterstützen zu können. Damit dies glückt, darf die Auswahl dessen, was Gegenstand solch sprachbetrachtender Aktivitäten im Unterricht sein soll – und damit auch Gegenstand der universitären Lehramtsbildung sein muss –, nicht länger und allein Ministerien und Schulbuchverlagen überlassen werden, sondern muss zielorientiert aus sprachwissenschaftlicher Sicht diskutiert werden.
Die AG lädt vor allem in der Lehramtsbildung tätige Sprachwissenschaftler:innen zur Diskussion der Frage ein, welche Themen, Phänomene und Prinzipien sich eignen, um exemplarisch Sprach(en)betrachtung in der (hoch-)schulischen Lehre positiv und nachhaltig zu fördern.
Copyright © DGfS2024-Team 2024
Letzte Änderung: 23. Feb. 2024