Call for papers

This workshop aims at bringing together researchers who are interested in the use of connectives (and the like) from a contrastive perspective. It raises the question to what extent and how global and/or local languages differ in the expression of contingency relations (i.e. cause-consequence, condition, hypothesis, concession, opposition or restriction etc.), more specifically in written language. We especially welcome papers that take into consideration one or more of the following questions:

Are there significant cross-linguistic differences in the expression of contingency relations in written texts ?
For instance, are some languages more explicit in this domain than others (e.g. Lamiroy 1994, Nølke 1989) ? If so, how can this be explained ?
Perhaps, one should not only look at connectives when accounting for the explicitness of contingency relations. In other words: do languages differ in the means they use to express these kinds of relations (e.g. Suomela-Salmi 1992) ?
And can this, in turn, be explained by some typological characteristics of the languages concerned ? Or should cross-linguistic differences be reduced to cultural and rhetorical principles that rule the linguistic community ?
And what about the role of different text types or genres in all of this ?
Are cross-linguistic differences in the use of connectives compatible with the universal idea that connectives are some kind of cognitive signals that facilitate textual comprehension?
Connectives obviously play a role in the cohesion of a text, but to what extent do they contribute to its cohesiveness (cf. studies referred to by Granger & Tyson 1996) ? Can contrastive or cross-linguistic studies help in verifying this?
If linguistic communities are confronted with differences in the ways and frequency of signaling textual relations, what does this mean then for the cognitive treatment of text by language users in these communities: are there cognitive differences between them ?
How are all the above cross-linguistic differences treated by translators ?
How are they acquired by second language learners ?
How do connectives arise, develop and evolve across languages ?

Contributions will fall within one of the following domains :

Contrastive linguistics
Translation studies
Second language acquisition
Contrastive rhetoric
Intercultural communication
Cognitive or psycholinguistic research across languages

Important dates:

Submission of name and topic: 10 December 2008
Notification of acceptance for Workshop proposals: the week following 15 December 2008
Submission of abstract: 31 January 2009
Nofitication of acceptance: 31 March 2009
Registration: from April 1 onwards
Conference: 9-12 September 2009

References

Granger, S. & Tyson, S. (1996) Connector usage in the English essay writing of native and non-native EFL speakers of English. World Englishes 15 (1), 17-27

Lamiroy, B. (1994) Pragmatic connectives and L2 acquisition: the case of French and Dutch. Pragmatics 4(2), 183-202.

Nølke, H. (1989) Contrastive pragmatic linguistics. In: K.M. Lauridsen & O. Lauridsen (eds.) Contrastive linguistics. Aarhus: The Aarhus School of Business, 199-233.

Suomela-Salmi, E. (1992) Some aspects of the pragmatic organization of academic discourse. In A.-Ch. Lindeberg, N. E. Enkvist & K. Wikberg (eds.) Nordic Research on Text and Discourse. NORDTEXT Symposium 1990. Åbo: Åbo Academy Press.