{"id":851,"date":"2018-01-17T10:18:52","date_gmt":"2018-01-17T09:18:52","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/iwoda.es\/?page_id=851"},"modified":"2021-10-01T11:40:28","modified_gmt":"2021-10-01T10:40:28","slug":"plenary-speakers","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/iwoda.es\/index.php\/previous-editions\/2016-2\/plenary-speakers\/","title":{"rendered":"Plenary Speakers IWoDA 2016"},"content":{"rendered":"

[et_pb_section fb_built=\u00bb1″ inner_shadow=\u00bbon\u00bb fullwidth=\u00bbon\u00bb _builder_version=\u00bb3.22″ background_color=\u00bb#002565″ global_colors_info=\u00bb{}\u00bb][et_pb_fullwidth_header title=\u00bbPlenary Speakers IWoDA 2016″ _builder_version=\u00bb3.16″ background_color=\u00bbrgba(255, 255, 255, 0)\u00bb background_image=\u00bbhttp:\/\/iwoda.es\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/01\/skyline_compostela_lineazul_V8.svg\u00bb background_size=\u00bbcontain\u00bb background_position=\u00bbbottom_right\u00bb max_width_tablet=\u00bb50px\u00bb global_colors_info=\u00bb{}\u00bb button_one_text_size__hover_enabled=\u00bboff\u00bb button_two_text_size__hover_enabled=\u00bboff\u00bb button_one_text_color__hover_enabled=\u00bboff\u00bb button_two_text_color__hover_enabled=\u00bboff\u00bb button_one_border_width__hover_enabled=\u00bboff\u00bb button_two_border_width__hover_enabled=\u00bboff\u00bb button_one_border_color__hover_enabled=\u00bboff\u00bb button_two_border_color__hover_enabled=\u00bboff\u00bb button_one_border_radius__hover_enabled=\u00bboff\u00bb button_two_border_radius__hover_enabled=\u00bboff\u00bb button_one_letter_spacing__hover_enabled=\u00bboff\u00bb button_two_letter_spacing__hover_enabled=\u00bboff\u00bb button_one_bg_color__hover_enabled=\u00bboff\u00bb button_two_bg_color__hover_enabled=\u00bboff\u00bb][\/et_pb_fullwidth_header][\/et_pb_section][et_pb_section fb_built=\u00bb1″ disabled_on=\u00bbon|on|on\u00bb _builder_version=\u00bb3.22″ disabled=\u00bbon\u00bb global_colors_info=\u00bb{}\u00bb][et_pb_row _builder_version=\u00bb3.25″ background_size=\u00bbinitial\u00bb background_position=\u00bbtop_left\u00bb background_repeat=\u00bbrepeat\u00bb global_colors_info=\u00bb{}\u00bb][et_pb_column type=\u00bb4_4″ _builder_version=\u00bb3.25″ custom_padding=\u00bb|||\u00bb global_colors_info=\u00bb{}\u00bb custom_padding__hover=\u00bb|||\u00bb][et_pb_text _builder_version=\u00bb3.27.4″ global_colors_info=\u00bb{}\u00bb]<\/p>\n

\n
\n

Biber, Douglas<\/h3>\n

How to express evaluation without stance: Informational persuasion on the web
\n<\/span><\/h4>\n
\n<\/div>\n<\/section>\n
\n
\n

Boas, Hans<\/h3>\n

On the borrowing of English discourse markers into Texas German and Texas Spanish
\n<\/span><\/h4>\n
\n<\/div>\n<\/section>\n
\n
\n

Taboada, Maite<\/h3>\n

Evaluation and subjectivity in the round: From lexis to discourse<\/span><\/h4>\n<\/div>\n<\/section>\n

[\/et_pb_text][\/et_pb_column][\/et_pb_row][\/et_pb_section][et_pb_section fb_built=\u00bb1″ _builder_version=\u00bb3.22″ global_colors_info=\u00bb{}\u00bb][et_pb_row _builder_version=\u00bb3.25″ global_colors_info=\u00bb{}\u00bb][et_pb_column type=\u00bb4_4″ _builder_version=\u00bb3.25″ custom_padding=\u00bb|||\u00bb global_colors_info=\u00bb{}\u00bb custom_padding__hover=\u00bb|||\u00bb][et_pb_text _builder_version=\u00bb3.27.4″ global_colors_info=\u00bb{}\u00bb]<\/p>\n

\n

Biber, Douglas<\/h3>\n

How to express evaluation without stance: Informational persuasion on the web<\/span><\/h4>\n<\/section>\n

[\/et_pb_text][et_pb_toggle title=\u00bbRead more\u00bb _builder_version=\u00bb3.0.101″ global_colors_info=\u00bb{}\u00bb]\"\"<\/p>\n

Previous corpus-based research on lexico-grammatical stance features has documented marked patterns of register variation (see, e.g., Biber and Finegan 1989; Biber et al. 1999; Gray and Biber 2014). For example, spoken registers generally use stance features to a greater extent than written registers. Within writing, personal registers (e.g., letters or email messages) and overtly opinionated registers (e.g., editorials) employ stance features to a greater extent than registers with a primary informational purpose (e.g., newspaper reportage or academic research articles).<\/p>\n

The focus of the present study is on a specialized type of register that emerged from a project that analyzed register variation on the searchable web (see Biber et al. 2015, Biber and Egbert in press). In that project, end-users determined both the set of possible register categories as well as the register of each individual document. This approach resulted in a taxonomy with eight general register categories (e.g., narration, opinion, informational description, interactive discussion) as well as several \u00abhybrid\u00bb registers (e.g., informational-opinion).<\/p>\n

In this talk, I will argue that learner corpus research needs to re-focus its epistemology and strengthen the use of what I call general corpus research methods. Traditional CIA-related findings and, in particular, an over-reliance on analysis of errors or \u201cnon-native\u201d speaker underperformance need to be re-examined so as to go beyond the limitations of CIA and contribute to the body of data of interest to SLA researchers outside the corpus linguistics community.\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n

One especially interesting web register to emerge from this analysis is \u00abinformational-persuasion\u00bb, which also occurs in several \u00abhybrid\u00bb combinations (e.g., opinionated-informational-persuasion). What makes this register especially noteworthy for the study of lexico-grammatical stance is the disconnect between our prior expectations and the actual linguistic characteristics typically found in these documents. Our expectation was that the documents classified by end-users as \u00abinformational persuasive\u00bb would employ lexico-grammatical stance features, similar to \u00abopinion\u00bb web registers. However, corpus analysis challenges these preconceptions: while \u00abopinion\u00bb documents regularly employ lexico-grammatical stance features, most lexico-grammatical stance features are relatively rare in \u00abinformational persuasion\u00bb documents. Hybrid documents with an \u00abopinion\u00bb component (e.g., opinionated-information and opinionated-informational-persuasion) also regularly employ frequent lexico-grammatical stance devices.<\/p>\n

These patterns are documented through quantitative corpus-based analyses of lexico-grammatical stance devices across the range of web registers. Then, based on keyword analyses, together with detailed discourse analyses of representative documents, we attempt to answer the specific question of how informational-persuasion documents express evaluation without frequent lexico-grammatical stance devices?<\/p>\n

References<\/strong><\/p>\n