Gastvorträge und Werkstattgespräche 2017


Aline Meili (Universität Zürich)

Untersuchungen zur WhatsApp-Kommunikation von Gehörlosen

Dienstag, 23. Mai 2017, 10:15 Uhr bis 12:00 Uhr

Dieser Gastvortrag findet im Rahmen der Vorlesung „Interaktion im virtuellen und physischen Raum“ von Christa Dürscheid statt.

 


Anja Stukenbrock (Universität Lausanne)

Der Geist im Raum - Deixis am Phantasma aus interaktionslinguistischer Sicht.

Donnerstag, 18. Mai 2017, 16:15 Uhr bis 18:00 Uhr

Ausgehend von multimodalen Praktiken deiktischer Referenzherstellung, die sichtbare Phänomene im gemeinsamen Wahrnehmungsraum von Interaktionsbeteiligten betreffen, gehe ich in dem Vortrag der Frage nach, welche multimodalen Ressourcen die Beteiligten mobilisieren, um Unsichtbares deiktisch im Raum zu verankern und für gemeinsame Imaginationsprozesse intersubjektiv verfügbar zu machen. Meine These lautet, dass sich die Verfahren, die Beteiligte zum Zeigen auf Vorzustellendes (Deixis am Phantasma, Bühler 1934) verwenden, nicht grundlegend, aber in theoretisch und empirisch bezeichnenden Details vom Zeigen auf Anwesendes (demonstratio ad oculos, Bühler 1934) unterscheiden.

 


Carolyn O'Meara (Universität Mexico)

When to use which spatial frame of reference: Landmark-based systems in Seri

Donnerstag, 4. Mai 2017, 16:15 Uhr bis 18:00 Uhr

Spatial frames of reference are used when describing the location of an object with respect to a reference object. In a relative frame of reference a speaker can describe the location of an object using their own body’s coordinate system (The cup is to the right of the vase) or with an absolute frame of reference using cardinal directions (Zug is south of Zürich). Seri, a language isolate spoken in northern Mexico, has various frames of reference options available to its speakers. This is not surprising, since even English speakers can make use of different types of frames of reference in discourse, whether it be absolute, relative or intrinsic. However, which frames of reference are used or even available to speakers can be related to the context of the speech utterance (small vs. large scale space), rural vs. urban settings (Pederson 1998), the local environment (Palmer 2015; Tucker 2017), linguistic factors, including language contact (Bohnemeyer et al. 2015), sociodemographic factors, among others. To complicate matters, lexical items in a language do not necessarily correspond to a particular frame of reference (e.g., right or left can be interpreted relatively or intrinsically). In languages that have multiple options for interpreting spatial descriptions involving frames of reference (e.g., Yucatec Maya (Bohnemeyer 2011)), it is often puzzling how speakers choose which strategy to use and how they are interpreted “correctly” or not. In this talk, I will problematize these issues by focusing on data from Seri and the different factors that contribute to frames of reference preference in natural discourse, with an emphasis on landmark-based frames of reference.

 


Oliver Bendel (Fachhochschule Nordwestschweiz)

Ethische Fragen an der Schnittstelle von physischem und virtuellem Raum

Dienstag, 2. Mai 2017, 10:15 Uhr bis 12:00 Uhr

Dieser Gastvortrag findet im Rahmen der Vorlesung „Interaktion im virtuellen und physischen Raum“ von Christa Dürscheid statt.

 


Anne Carlier (Universität Lille)

The development of the partitive article in Romance: a typological perspective

Donnerstag, 6. April 2017, 16:15 Uhr bis 18:00 Uhr

 


Gary Lupyan (Universität Wisconsin-Madison)

The role of adaptation in explaining linguistic diversity

Donnerstag, 16. März 2017, 16:15 Uhr bis 18:00 Uhr

Why do people speak different languages? Religious explanations aside, the usual account is that languages diverge when an initial speech community disperses, such that the language of the new speech communities begins to drift independently instead of together (Sapir, 1921). Without denying the existence of such non-functional random drift, it is becoming clear that many linguistic differences from phonology to grammar, to vocabulary show a fit to the environment—that is, show evidence of design. For example, some aspects of phonology can be predicted from climate (Everett, Blasi, & Roberts, 2015), some aspects of grammar can be predicted from the size of the language's population (Lupyan & Dale, 2010), and differences in the number of color words relate to the use of dyes in a culture (Conklin, 1973). Such nonrandom variation calls for the need to consider whether and by what mechanisms languages adapt to the environments in which they are learned and used. I will discuss some of the reasons why researchers have been reticent to accept the idea that linguistic diversity is caused by adaptation, and describe some of the challenges that this adaptationist perspective faces. I will end by outlining some of the exciting new research questions that arise when we apply the adaptationist perspective to questions of linguistic diversity.