Languages for Specific Purposes and the Popularization of Science in Pop Culture – International Conference
We are pleased to announce this international conference, which will be held at the FTI-EII of the University of Mons. Further information can be found below and in the downloadable document on the right.
Languages for specific purposes (LSP), commonly defined as the use of language (by native and non-native speakers) to meet specific needs in specialized domains, have always been ingrained into popular culture. Johns (1994, p.4) posits LSP practices in spoken and written discourses as “cultural artifacts,” possibly even “genres that serve communicative purposes within groups of individuals who think and speak of themselves as community members”.
As a result, discourse markers that are characteristic of LSP such as putting forth theories or hypotheses, using scientific jargon and terminology, or resorting to charts and formulas can be observed in literature, science-fiction films or even on fandom forums. Though typically assuming a form closer to that of layman’s terms, such markers seek to convey scientific factual information while complying with the genres’ and media’s entertainment imperatives.
To name a few examples, let us consider Donald in Mathmagic Land (1959), a Disney Studio animated short that explains to children how core mathematical theories can be applied in real life; The Queen’s Gambit (1983), a coming-of-age novel built around game theory, chess and chess openings more specifically (after some unsuccessful attempts the novel was adapted into an eponymous series released on Neflix in 2020); or The Big Bang Theory (2007-2019), a sitcom showcasing a group of young scientists working at Caltech. The series’ ensemble cast centers on three physicists and an engineer whose interactions involve copious amounts of references and nods to scientific theories. Science-fiction, as a literary or cinematic genre, also relies heavily on LSP to convey real or realistic ideas: in Interstellar (2014), for example, further explorations of Einstein’s theory of relativity enable astronauts to travel through time and space.
We welcome paper proposals for a two-day international conference on languages for specific purposes or their translation in the popularization of science in pop culture. Proposals may address but are not limited to the following:
- Language and Terminology: how do jargon and terminology fit in fictional narratives? How is science popularization linguistically achieved in fictional narratives (and why)? Can linguistic processes deliberately target a scientific community? Science popularization is notably achieved through metaphors (Fries, 2011; Rossi, 2015), questions, personalization, humor and contingency (Giannoni, 2008). Can we therefore assume that literary or filmic narratives centered on scientific theories turn to storytelling? If so, what are the underling storytelling processes to consider (Resche, 2016)? What discourse markers reflect the use of languages for specific purposes (Babaii and Asadnia, 2021)? Where do LSP and popularization processes fit in communication practices and genres (novels, comics, movies, science fiction, subtitling, advertising, post on social media, etc.)?
- Language or LSP Teaching: As recalled by Kirby (2014) and Vidal (2018), the “deficit model” still is the dominant outlook on science communication in academia. Though criticized (Pouliot and Godbout, 2014), this model emphasizes scientific illiteracy and the need to educate the public. From such a perspective, popularization and LSP seem inseparable. What are the inter- or intralinguistic phenomena at stake in such practices? Is there, for example, a difference in registers when experts and laymen interact? Assuming a pedagogical standpoint, numerous scholars (Johns, 1994; Petit, 1999; Isani, 2009; Whyte, 2016; Cartron, 2022) established the use of popular fiction (literary, cinematic or televised) as authentic material for LSP teaching. How can such texts open the way to LSP for language learners?
- Reception: In Kirby’s view (2014), popular science and science fiction influence “people’s belief structures by shaping, cultivating, or reinforcing the ‘cultural meanings’ of science”. But what exactly can be said of the reception of such works? Do members of the audience identify to specific communities (scientific community, laymen, fandoms, etc.)? Or do such works induce a form of rejection? Screenwriters and filmmakers often rely on scientists or scientific organizations as consultants during film production to ascertain the accuracy of their depiction of scientific concepts. How are such approaches perceived by the public (and by scientists)? Can the use or translation of LSP be approached from the perspective of audience studies (Esquenazi, 2009a)? Starting from premises borrowed from fan studies, and with the rise of geek culture, should science specialists be considered an audience in their own right (Clark, 2008)?
- Adaptation and Intermediality: How are scientific concepts and theories represented using different semiotic systems – images, language and LSP, dialogue, musique, etc.? Is popularization necessarily facilitated by intersemiotic relations? How does the representation of “scientific systems” (Kirby, 2008, 2014) influence adaptation – be it from text to screen, from cinema to television or from film to novel? Does adaptation necessarily reveal “a tension not only between the narrative forms of media and those of science, but also between the needs of the entertainment industry and those of the scientific community” (Kirby, 2008, p. 42)? Or can adaptation testify to the existence of “vast narratives” or transmedia genres, like science fiction (Van Parys and Hunter, 2013, p. 3)?
- Referentiality: When a detailed understanding of the scientific content is required, what references or background knowledge does it presuppose? As mentioned before, Kirby (2008) emphasizes the tension between the needs of the entertainment industry and the scientific community. Where scientists need to claim authenticity of scientific depictions, filmmakers wish to attain “an acceptable level of verisimilitude” (p. 42). How does referentiality, i.e. references to the external world, and more specifically to scientific factual
information, influence the authenticity of the depicted storyworld? Where does scientific truth fit in translation or adaptation? Can popularization processes serve “the truth of fiction” (Esquenazi, 2009b)?
Proposals should include a title, 5 keywords, a 500-word abstract (and added references), the names of contributors and a short bionote including the contributors’ affiliation and position. Proposals can be written in English or French, and should be .doc or .docx documents. Proposals must be sent to LSP2025@umons.ac.be by October 15, 2024. Proposals will be selected by the scientific committee through double-blind evaluation. Selected papers will be 20-minute presentations and will be followed by a 10-minute Q&A.
The conference will take place in the main building of the Faculty of Translation and Interpretation.
Faculté de Traduction et d’Interprétation
Campus de la Plaine de Nimy – Université de Mons
Avenue du Champ de Mars 17
7000 Mons
Belgium
The ‘Plaine de Nimy’ campus is in walking-distance of Mons station.
May 6-7 2025
Registration for the conference is free of charge, but presenters and attendants are required to register here by March 1, 2025.
Lunch will be provided at the university restaurant. If you wish to take part, please indicate your choice in the Google form, you may also indicate dietary restrictions. Lunch is €15/day for doctoral candidates and €20/day for all other participants. We kindly ask you to pay the total amount by March 1, 2025 on account BE36 0910 0987 0181 (BIC : GKCCBEBB). Please mention LSP2025 – T210PC001 – Your name.
- Call for papers launched: June 15, 2024
- Call for papers closes: October 15, 2024
- Notification of acceptance or rejection: November 30, 2024
- Registration deadline (conference and lunch): March 1, 2025
- Conference: May 6-7, 2025
Audrey Louckx (audrey.louckx@umons.ac.be) – Université de Mons
Charlène Meyers (charlene.meyers@umons.ac.be) – Université de Mons
Tiffany Jandrain (tiffany.jandrain@uclouvain.be) – Université catholique de Louvain
Kiara Giancola – Université de Mons / Université catholique de Louvain
Eponine Moreau – Université de Mons
Marine Valverde – Université de Mons
Romuald Dalodière (Université de Mons)
Christophe Den Tandt (Université Libre de Bruxelles)
Fanny Domenec (Université Paris 2)
Pascaline Dury (Université Lumière Lyon 2)
Lobke Ghesquière (Université de Mons)
Emilie Gobeil-Roberge (Université Laval)
Catherine Gravet (Université de Mons)
Marie-France Guénette (Université Laval)
Tiffany Jandrain (Université catholique de Louvain)
Gwen Le Cor (Université Paris 8)
Audrey Louckx (Université de Mons)
Evgueniya Lyu (Université Grenoble-Alpes)
Charlène Meyers (Université de Mons)
Christine Michaux (Université de Mons)
Sabrina Mittermeier (Universität Kassel)
Philippe Millot (Université Lumière Lyon 2)
Jessy Neau (Centre Universitaire de Mayotte)
Lucie Ons (Université Laval)
Marie Pascal (King’s University College, University of Western Ontario)
Joëlle Popineau (Université de Tours)
Micaela Rossi (Università degli Studi di Genova)
Francesca Strik Lievers (Università degli Studi di Genova)
Faye Troughton (Université de Mons)
Gudrun Vanderbauwhede (Université de Mons)
Marie-Hélène Fries (Université Grenoble-Alpes)
Mie Hiramoto (National University of Singapore)
Paul Wells (Loughborough University)
7000 Mons, Belgium