Palmer, Jason. "Language Universality Idea Tested With Biology Method." BBC NEWS April 15, 2011.

A long-standing idea that human languages share universal features that are dictated by human brain structure has been cast into doubt. A study reported in Nature has borrowed methods from evolutionary biology to trace the development of grammar in several language families. The results suggest that features shared across language families evolved independently in each lineage. The authors say cultural evolution, not the brain, drives language development. . . .
Read the rest here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-13049700.

Keneally, Christine. "Language Lessons: You Are What You Speak." NEW SCIENTIST June 1, 2010.

LANGUAGES are wonderfully idiosyncratic. English puts its subject before its verb. Finnish has lots of cases. Mandarin is highly tonal.

Yet despite these differences, one of the most influential ideas in the study of language is that of universal grammar. Put forward by Noam Chomsky in the 1960s, it is widely interpreted as meaning that all languages are basically the same and that the human brain is born language-ready, with an in-built program that is able to decipher the common rules underpinning any mother tongue. For five decades this idea has dominated work in linguistics, psychology and cognitive science. To understand language, it implied, you must sweep aside the dazzling diversity of languages and find the common human core.


But what if the very diversity of languages is the key to understanding human communication? This is the idea being put forward by linguists Nicholas Evans of the Australian National University in Canberra and Stephen Levinson of the Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics in Nijmegen, the Netherlands. They believe that languages do not share a common set of rules. Instead, they say, their sheer variety is a defining feature of human communication - something not seen in other animals. And that's not all. Language diversity is the "crucial fact for understanding the place of language in human cognition", Levinson and Evans argue. . . .

Thanks for the tip to Marcel Pragnell (http://www.vividview.com/).

Read the rest here: http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20627621.000-language-lessons-you-are-what-you-speak.html?DCMP=OTC-rss&nsref=online-news.

Cfp: "The Critical Potential of Language," Special Issue JOURNAL FUR PSYCHOLOGIE.

Spawned by the linguistic turn, and in psychology specifically by the narrative turn associated with the names of Theodor Sarbin and Jerome Bruner, language became the central focus in many areas of the social sciences. The special issue of the German Journal für Psychologie aims to look behind the curtains of this development to investigate the meaning of language for our understanding of psychic life as the core subject matter of psychological investigations. Specifically, language shall be investigated with respect to its critical potential for psychology in particular and the social sciences more generally. The works of Giambattista Vico and Johann Gottfried Herder mark an important starting point for two different developments in the conceptualization of language. The positivistic approach regards language as a tool, used by actors to communicate. Language is seen to be a specifically human ability, a system to be investigated. It is merely used in order to describe reality, from which it is completely detached. Hence, language is not seen to be actively creating something, but merely an ability to describe and capture reality. In contrast, the aim to define language can also be understood as an investigation into the being-in-the-world of subjects. The major categories such as 'world', 'reality', 'nature', 'humanity' may be counterposed or related to the category 'language', but it seems clear that all categories, including the category ' language', are themselves constructions in language, and can thus only within a particular system of thought be separated from language for relational inquiry. Thus, language is not seen as a passive tool but as the active praxis of subjects to create the world. Fundamental for this understanding are the works of Mikhail Bakhtin. He introduced a new understanding of the 'sign' which is never equivalent to what it signifies, but instead derives its meaning from social convention. Bakhtin, therefore, not only rejects a positivistic understanding of language but also de-individualizes language and renders it a social element which makes possible collaborative action. It was Lev Semyonovich Vygotsky who utilized these insights for psychology by studying the internalization of these social signs in the process of language acquisition. Another point of departure for investigations into language can be found in the works of Karl Marx. His ideas and concepts are present - even though implicitly – in the works of Bakthin as well as the Vygotsky School. Similarly implicit is the way in which Marx treats the phenomenon of language. Most commonly quoted are the Theses on Feuerbach, in which an idealistic understanding of language is countered with a dynamic-dialectical approach. Language is thus rendered as practical consciousness and combines the creative and active character of language with its analytic character. While the above outlines only a few approaches among many to a critical understanding of language, this special issue of the Journal für Psychologie aims at exploring language as a concept that is capable of critique. Is language emancipatory per se, creative, and as such critical? Or do we need a specific concept of language in order to unfold its critical potential? Is it possible to deconstruct existing illusions, ideologies and fetish form by means of language? And most importantly: To what extent is it possible to envision a critical psychology that utilizes the power of language? Abstracts (approx. 2 pages) should be submitted to mdege@clarku.edu no later than August 31, 2010.

"The Art of Stylistics," 29th Annual Conference, International Poetics and Linguistics Association, Roosevelt Academy, July 31-August 1, 2009.

Plenary Speakers:

Dr. Charles Forceville (University of Amsterdam)
Dr. Michaela Mahlberg (University of Liverpool)
Prof. Keith Oatley (University of Toronto)
Prof. Rob Pope (Oxford Brookes University)
Prof. Gerard Steen (VU University Amsterdam)
Emeritus Prof. Peter Verdonk (University of Amsterdam)

For further information about PALA 2009, please send an e-mail to Dr. Michael Burke at pala2009middelburg@roac.nl.

Alternatively, access the conference webpage here: http://www.roac.nl/roac/pala.shtml.

Powell, Jeffrey. Review of Clive Cazeaux's METAPHOR AND CONTINENTAL PHILOSOPHY. NDPR (February 2009).

Cazeaux, Clive. Metaphor and Continental Philosophy from Kant to Derrida. London: Routledge, 2007. Clive Cazeaux's Metaphor and Continental Philosophy: From Kant to Derrida is an ambitious book. It seeks to treat metaphor in a number of selected figures from the historical tradition indicated in the title, but especially in Kant, Nietzsche, Heidegger, Merleau-Ponty, Ricoeur, and Derrida. This is no easy matter, for little is said of metaphor in Kant, Merleau-Ponty, and Heidegger, which leaves one with the task of creating what might be said from out of what has been said. This is an especially difficult task in the case of metaphor, for one is forever tempted to address metaphor as the absence of metaphor, which is to say that one is tempted into providing an account of metaphor in a conceptual, literal discourse. Cazeaux is certainly aware of this difficulty even if he frequently gives in to the temptation. It also seeks, or I assume that it does, to exhibit the relevance of continental philosophy as an historical continuation of the philosophical tradition. What is more, Cazeaux attempts to show that the continental tradition is not only tied to its historical constitution, but that it has also been concerned with the development of strategies for transforming that tradition, strategies that he collects under the name of metaphor. Additionally, Cazeaux wants his study of metaphor to gain some traction with the analytic tradition. One of his theses is that the continental treatment of metaphor can provide the analytic tradition with some much needed tools, especially those in the analytic tradition open to the consequences of the study of metaphor for ontology (in particular, Max Black). In my opinion, it is the attempt to serve so many masters that makes the book a rather unsatisfying read. While it is true that in the end Cazeaux argues for a Heideggerian-Derridean view of metaphor as the interweaving of metaphor and metaphysics (metaphor-as-metaphysics, metaphysics-as-metaphor), it is also true that the Heideggerian discourse gets woven into a metaphorical system to which it became increasingly foreign. That is to say, Cazeaux too frequently resorts to a traditional metaphysical language (e.g., perception, sensation, empiricism, realism, subject-object, theory of knowledge, etc.) for the expression of Heideggerian themes, as if we have now moved beyond Heidegger's concern with the language he found to be inadequate, or even counter-productive, for what was developed in Being and Time. Cazeaux seems far too comfortable expressing Heideggerian themes and concerns in the language of conceptuality, as if Heidegger might be grouped in with a certain epistemological school. It is as if it is possible to distillate the thought of Heidegger into a few pearls of wisdom and translate that wisdom into the current language of the metaphysical tradition, the analytic tradition, or cognitive psychology. While it might well be problematic that the thought of Heidegger seems to be embedded in the language of Heidegger, it should also be noted that this is a problem, not just for Heidegger, but for any thinking deemed to be historical. . . . Read the rest here: http://ndpr.nd.edu/review.cfm?id=15187.

Cfp: "Semantics and Philosophy in Europe," Second Annual Colloquium, Institute of Philosophy, University of London, April 16-18, 2009.

The purpose of the colloquium is to enhance the dialogue between linguists and philosophers and to provide a new forum for presenting research in the interface between linguistic semantics and the various related areas of philosophy (philosophy of language, epistemology, metaphysics, philosophy of mathematics, and philosophy of mind). The colloquium is to take place every year, alternating between Paris, London, St Andrews, Barcelona and Oslo. The first colloquium took place in Paris, in May 2008. We invite submissions on any of the interface areas of linguistics, semantics and philosophy for 40 minute talks. Two-page abstract of 1000 words maximum should be sent by email by February 12th, 2009. Submitted abstracts will be evaluated by the SPE Scientific Committee, consisting of: Herman Cappelen (Arché/CSMN) Thomas Hofweber (UNC) Chris Kennedy (Chicago) Peter Ludlow (Toronto) Josep Maciá (Logos) Robert May (UC Davis) Friederike Moltmann (Université Paris 1) Stephen Neale (CUNY) Peter Pagin (Stockholm) Barry Smith (Institute of Philosophy) Philipe Schlenker (UCLA/Institut Jean-Nicod) Jason Stanley (Rutgers) Zoltán Szabó (Yale) Crispin Wright (Arché) Notification of acceptance will be sent by March 6th, 2009. Visit the conference homepage here: http://www.philosophy.sas.ac.uk/spe_cfp.php.

Cfp: SPR-09: International Workshop on Semantics, Pragmatics, and Rhetoric, ILCLI, University of the Basque Country, May 6-8, 2009.

This Workshop seeks to examine and explore issues concerning the semantics, pragmatics and rhetoric of ordinary language, both from a linguistic and a philosophical viewpoint. Perspectives are sought from those engaged in the fields of philosophy of language, philosophy of mind, linguistics, cognitive science, applied logic, action theory, epistemology, communication theory, discourse theory, and specially in formal semantics, pragmatics, and rhetoric, as well as in the history of those disciplines and in the history of philosophy connected with those fields. These disciplines are indicative only as papers are welcome from any area taking into account the following Main Topics: 1. Action Theory for Pragmatics and Aesthetics. 2. Linguistic Contents: Utterances, Sub-utterances, Discourse. 3. Semantics, Pragmatics, and Rhetoric of Questions. 4. Topoi in the Rhetoric of Argumentation. Abstracts between 3,500 and 4,000 words should be submitted by February 6, 2009 (e-mail only). Notification of acceptance/rejection: February 23, 2009. If selected for presentation, whole papers (between 9,000 and 12,000 words) should be submitted by March 5, 2009. Papers will be blind reviewed by the Programme Committee. The Proceedings including Invited lectures, Tutorials and Contributed Papers will be published by The University of the Basque Country Press (EHU Press), before the beginning of the Workshop. Further information is here: http://www.ilcli.ehu.es/p287-content/en/contenidos/evento/ilcli_spr_09/en_spr_09_1/spr_1.html.

"Philosophy of Language and Linguistics," University of Łódź, Poland, May 14-15, 2009.

The Department of English and General Linguistics at University of Łódź announces the first International Conference on Philosophy of Language and Linguistics. The title of the Conference is deliberately ambiguous: we wish to investigate the relation between 'philosophy of language' and 'linguistics', but we also want to focus on 'philosophy of language' as opposed to 'philosophy of linguistics'. Are the two in opposition, or do they perhaps complement one another? We also intend to question and verify 'the myths and dogmas' current in contemporary philosophy of language. The principal aim of our Conference is to bring together philosophers and linguists; we would like the papers to address the following issues (the list is not exhaustive): - what are the new problems and issues in the philosophy of language in the 21st century? - have any traditional problems been successfully solved? - how does research in linguistics influence the philosophy of language and philosophy of linguistics? - how does philosophy influence modern linguistics? We also invite papers investigating the relation between philosophy of language and literature and literary theories. The following scholars have accepted our invitation to address the conference as plenary speakers: *Eros Corazza & Kepa Korta (Carleton University, Ottawa & ILCLI, Donostia-San Sebastian) on "Two Dogmas of Philosophical Linguistics" *Katarzyna Jaszczolt (Department of Linguistics, University of Cambridge) on "Time in Language and Thought" *Barbara Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk (Department of English Language and Applied Linguistics, University of Łódź) on "Events as they are" *Michael Morris (Department of Philosophy, University of Sussex) on "The Myth of the Sign" *Jaroslav Peregrin (Department of Logic, Charles University, Prague) on "The Myth of Semantic Structure" Abstracts of papers of max. 500 words should be forwarded by e-mail to philang2009@uni.lodz.pl and to piotrst@uni.lodz.pl. Deadline for submission is 31 December 2008. Presentations should last max. 30 minutes (including discussion and questions). Notification of acceptance will be sent by 1 March 2009. A volume of conference proceedings will be published with an international publisher. The conference fee is 150 EUR (100 EUR for PhD students). It covers the cost of participation, conference materials and conference dinner. Accommodation will be provided at the University of Łódź Conference Center (Łódź, Kopcińskiego 16/18). Single and double rooms are available. The cost of a single room per night is 140 PLN, double 210 PLN, breakfast is included in the price. Mail and questions concerning registration and accommodation should be directed to philang2009@uni.lodz.pl and to rasinski@uni.lodz.pl Organizing committee: prof. dr hab. Piotr Stalmaszczyk ( piotrst@uni.lodz.pl ) prof. dr hab. Krzysztof Kosecki ( kosecki@uni.lodz.pl ) dr Janusz Badio ( jbadio@uni.lodz.pl ) Jerzy Gaszewski ( jgaszewski@op.pl ) Ryszard Rasiński ( rasinski@uni.lodz.pl )

CFP: "Philosophy of Language and Linguistics," Department of English and General Linguistics, University of Łódź, Poland, May 14-15, 2009.

The title of the conference is deliberately ambiguous: we wish to investigate the relation between ‘philosophy of language’ and ‘linguistics’, but we also want to focus on ‘philosophy of language’ as opposed to ‘philosophy of linguistics’. Are the two in opposition, or do they perhaps complement one another? The principal aim of our conference is to bring together philosophers and linguists; we would like the papers to address the following issues (the list is not exhaustive):

• what are the new problems and issues in the philosophy of language in the 21st century?
• have any traditional problems been successfully solved?
• how does research in linguistics influence the philosophy of language and philosophy of linguistics?
• how does philosophy influence modern linguistics?

The following scholars have accepted our invitation to address the conference as plenary speakers:

• Prof. Eros Corazza (Institute of Cognitive Science, Carleton University)
• Prof. Katarzyna Jaszczolt (Department of Linguistics, University of Cambridge)
• Prof. Barbara Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk (Department of English Language and Applied Linguistics, University of Łodź)
• Prof. Michael Morris (Department of Philosophy, University of Sussex)
• Prof. Jaroslav Peregrin (Department of Logic, Charles University, Prague)

Abstracts of papers of max. 500 words should be forwarded by e-mail to philang2009@uni.lodz.pl. Deadline for submission is 31 December 2008. Presentations should last max. 30 minutes (including discussion and questions). Notification of acceptance will be sent by 1 March 2009. A volume of conference proceedings will be published with an international publisher.

Kenneally, Christine. "When Language Can Hold the Answer." NEW YORK TIMES April 22, 2008.

In stark form, the debate was: Does language shape what we perceive, a position associated with the late Benjamin Lee Whorf, or are our perceptions pure sensory impressions, immune to the arbitrary ways that language carves up the world? Naming, Dr. Lupyan concluded, helps to create mental categories. . . . Read the whole article here: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/22/science/22lang.html?_r=2&oref=slogin&oref=slogin.

CFP: "Usage, Application and Development of the Languages of the Caribbean and Guianas," 17th Conference, SCL, French Guiana, July 28-31, 2008.

The Society for Caribbean Linguistics (SCL) and the Society for Pidgin and Creole Linguistics (SPCL) will host their 17th Biennial Conference, entitled “Usage, Application and Development of the Languages of the Caribbean and the Guianas” at the Chambre de Commerce et d’Industrie de la Guyane; in Cayenne, French Guiana, from Monday 28 to Thursday 31 July, 2008. Abstracts on all types of Caribbean languages are invited. Caribbean languages include: Amerindian languages, Creole languages, standard, official and non-standard language varieties, and immigrant languages. As this is a joint conference with the SPCL, papers on non-Caribbean Creole languages are also welcome. For Cayenne 2008, abstracts on all aspects of Antillean and Guianese languages are especially invited and strongly encouraged. Abstracts pertaining to any of the following panel themes are invited (in any sub-discipline of linguistics): 1. Language description: Amerindian languages 2. Language description: Creole languages 3. Language contact: diachronic and synchronic 4. Sociolinguistic contexts and settings 5. Language and education 6. Language and migration 7. Linguistic practices and new technologies 8. Postcolonial pragmatics Deadlines: Submission of abstracts: Friday 15th February, 2008; Notification of acceptance: Tuesday 15th April, 2008; and Submission of full papers: Tuesday 1st July, 2008.

For further information please visit: http://www.scl-online.net/.