New approaches to evaluative discourse

What distinguishes evaluative discourse from non-evaluative discourse? By virtue of what meaning mechanisms are specific terms and phrases evaluative? What are the similarities and differences between different types of evaluative terms? 

The last twenty years have given rise to a host of new approaches to these issues. For instance, in the discussion of predicates of personal taste, assessment relativism has been developed to accommodate phenomena such as faultless disagreement. In metaethics, a variety of new formal semantic and metasemantic theories have been put forth as a response to embedding problems for expressivism about moral terms. In the surging discussion of slurring terms, socio-linguistic aspects of meaning have been appealed to in order to explain their evaluative force. The aim of the conference is to explore how such new approaches to evaluativity in language can be developed, criticized or generalized to other evaluative domains. 

For questions: 

[email protected]

[email protected]