LINGUIST List 22.391|
Sat Jan 22 2011
Calls: Philosophy of Language, Semantics, Pragmatics/Germany
Editor for this issue: Amy Brunett
LINGUIST is pleased to announce the launch of an exciting new feature: Easy Abstracts! Easy Abs is a free abstract submission and review facility designed to help conference organizers and reviewers accept and process abstracts online. Just go to: http://www.linguistlist.org/confcustom, and begin your conference customization process today! With Easy Abstracts, submission and review will be as easy as 1-2-3!
1. Anika Schiemann ,
Dialogicity in Argumentation
Message 1: Dialogicity in Argumentation
From: Anika Schiemann <anika.schiemannuni-bonn.de>
Subject: Dialogicity in Argumentation
E-mail this message to a friend
Full Title: Dialogicity in Argumentation
Date: 25-Sep-2011 - 28-Sep-2011
Location: Berlin, Germany
Contact Person: Anika Schiemann
Meeting Email: < click here to access email >
Web Site: http://www.romanistentag.de/_sek_sprachwiss_s-VI_sekbeschr.html
Linguistic Field(s): Philosophy of Language; Pragmatics; Semantics
Call Deadline: 15-Feb-2011
Dialogicity in Argumentation: Formal and structural properties
Daniela Pirazzini (University of Bonn) – daniela.pirazziniuni-bonn.de
Anika Schiemann (University of Bonn) – anika.schiemannuni-bonn.de
As a basic principle of communication and as the foundation of human interaction at large ‘dialogue’ is commonly seen as also being a basic principle of language itself. In this context, the focus is placed not only on the dialogically directed nature of language use but also on the constitutive role of dialogue for language as a system, a fact that is also reflected by the frequently employed notion of ‘Language as Dialogue’. Within the occidental tradition, true to Plato’s fundamental concept of ‘thought’ as an ‘inner conversation of the soul with itself’ (Plato, Sophist, 263e), ‘dialogue’ is further associated with the mental processes of reflection and judgment and is consequently seen as a source of cognition and knowledge or even as a precondition for any form of establishing the truth (as for instance in the framework of the Consensus theory of truth by Habermas). It is this essential interconnection with processes of reflection, judgment and cognition which causes the aspect of ‘dialogue’ to be particularly significant within argumentative discourse. In the field of argumentation theory, the highly interactive and hence dialogical character of argumentation is emphasized in particular by the Pragma-Dialectical Approach (cf. e.g. van Eemeren/Grootendorst 1992, 2004), where it constitutes one of the main definitional elements of the notion ‘argumentation’, seen as a ‘difference of opinion’ is assumed to be the general starting point of any argumentative action and the latter is viewed as primarily aimed at resolving such difference of opinion by means of ‘critical discussion’ to finally reach an ‘agreement’. Thus, without the aspect of interaction between various communication partners argumentation would virtually lose the basis of its existence. For this reason even in monologically realized argumentative texts it is possible to presume the implicit presence of a (fictitious) communication partner as well as a potential dissent which are then accounted for in the argumentation process, for example by the use of strategies connected with the anticipation of counter-arguments.
Also within the framework of theoretical approaches which are less focussed on the interactional aspect of language use, as for instance within the Théorie de la Polyphonie (cf. e.g. Ducrot 1984 and more recently e.g. Bres/Haillet/Mellet/Nølke/Rosier 2005) which concentrates mainly on systematic aspects in language, the integration of dialogical elements as a combination of different ‘voices’ or ‘standpoints’ (points de vue) is considered to be a constitutive part of argumentation. Following these introductory remarks, the session proposed here also assumes such a larger concept of ‘dialogue’ in connection with argumentation. By using the general notion of ‘dialogicity’ we intend to subsume different forms of reference to (potential) previous or future communication partners. In this way it is possible to take into consideration argumentation processes which are both dialogically (in the classical sense) and monologically realized, seeing that in both cases the (potential) presence of another party can be linguistically marked. In this context we may ask whether it is possible to identify essentially different forms of integrating dialogical elements in the course of an argumentation process, and accordingly whether it is possible to distinguish various ‘types’ of dialogicity, each with specific functions in the global context of the argumentative action (e.g. with regard to certain argumentative goals).
Call for Papers:
The session intends to contribute to the object of investigation described above by focussing on the identification and analysis of the various linguistic (formal) manifestations of dialogicity in argumentative texts. Given that within the group of linguistic indicators of dialogicity the so called 'connectives' or 'connectors' have already been the object of numerous in-depth analysis in the field of argumentation theory, this session shall be deliberately dedicated to other linguistic phenomena at the various levels of linguistic analysis. Thus, particular objects of investigation may include, but are not limited to the following:
-On the Pragmatic level: speech acts with direct reference to the addressee and with mainly appellative character
- In this context, from the viewpoint of Rhetoric: some classical figures of speech connected with 'addressing', 'questioning' or 'affectivity' such as obsecratio, licentia, interrogatio, percontatio, subiectio, dubitatio, sermocinatio etc. and their specific manifestations
- On the levels of Syntax and Morphology: parallel structures, some forms of negation, the application of mood
- On the Lexical level: in addition to evidently relevant verba dicendi/putandi/ sentiendi, numerous other meta-dialogic and meta-argumentative expressions, as well as markers of anaphoric reference with dialogical orientation or also a wide variety of linguistic expressions of modalization
We welcome both theoretical and empirical contributions (with respect to various discourse contexts, e.g. science, religion, politics, law etc.) concerning Romance languages or adopting a cross-linguistic perspective. Studies exploring diachronic phenomena as well as studies focussing on synchronic aspects would be appreciated.
Thus, embracing a wide range of linguistic phenomena connected to dialogic references in argumentation and their functions - true to the main topic of the congress 'Romance Philology in Dialogue...' – we hope to appeal to members of different disciplines. The aim is to unite various insights and methods of analysis used by scholars of argumentation theory, communication sciences, linguistics, rhetoric, semiotics, certain areas of philosophy such as informal and natural logic, epistemology or philosophy of law and thereby generate a fruitful discussion and cooperation with regard to the study of the dialogic dimension of language in general and argumentation in particular.
Interested persons are invited to send suggestions for topics (for talks and posters) with an abstract of max. 3000 characters to anika.schiemannuni-bonn.de and to daniela.pirazziniuni-bonn.de before February 15th 2011.
The presentation time will be 20-25 minutes with a 5-10 minute discussion period. The languages of the conference are Romance languages (French, Italian, Spanish), English and German. Abstracts will be anonymously reviewed and notification of acceptance will be emailed by February 25th 2011.
Deadline for Receipt of Abstracts: February 15th 2011
Notification of acceptance: February 28th 2011.
Date of the conference: September 25-28th 2011
Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue
Page Updated: 22-Jan-2011
While the LINGUIST List makes every effort to ensure the linguistic relevance of sites listed
on its pages, it cannot vouch for their contents.