Refine
Document Type
- Article (3)
- Working Paper (3)
Has Fulltext
- yes (6) (remove)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (6) (remove)
Keywords
- Verwandtschaftsbezeichnung (6) (remove)
Institute
- Extern (1)
This paper deals with German kinship terms ending with the form "n" (Muttern, Vatern). Firstly, data from newspapers are presented that show that especially Muttern denotes very special meanings that can only be derived to a limited extent from the lexical base: a) Muttern referring to a home where mother cares for you, b) Muttern standing for overprotection, and c) Muttern representing a special food style (often embedded in prepositional phrases and/or comparative constructions like wie bei or wie von Muttern). Secondly, it is argued that the addition of n to kinship terms is not a word-formation pattern, but that these word forms are instead lexicalized and idiomatized in contemporary German. Hence, a diachronic scenario is applied to account for the data. It is argued in the present paper that the n-forms have been borrowed from Low German dialects, especially from constructional idioms of the type ‘X-wie bei Muttern’ and that forms were enriched by semantic concepts associated with the dialect.
V prispevku je predstavljeno slovensko narečno besedje za pomen ‘sinova žena’ v Slovenskem lingvističnem atlasu (SLA) v primerjavi s kajkavskim narečnim besedjem za ta pomen, zbranim za Hrvaški jezikovni atlas (HJA). Narečno gradivo, zbrano za ta dva temeljna nacionalna dialektološka projekta je namreč zanimivo tudi za raziskovanje slovensko-hrvaškega jezikovnega stika, saj zlasti v Pomurju in Medžimurju, v Posotelju, Beli krajini, na Kostelskem in v Gorskem kotarju ter v Istri jezika in njuna obmejna narečja bolj postopoma prehajajo eden v drugega in imajo zato mnoge skupne značilnosti tako na fonološki in morfološki kot tudi na leksikalni ravnini. Na primeru narečnega gradiva za vprašanji SLA-V614 snaha in HJA-V548 snaha, nevjesta je skupaj z morfonološko analizo in kartografskim prikazom prostorske razširjenosti narečnih leksemov predstavljen tudi način komentiranja narečnega gradiva v SLA.
Rad je detaljan nazivoslovni opis iz područja rodbinskih veza. Obuhvaća pregled naziva za bratova sina u trima komponentama hrvatskoga jezika: narječnoj građi, koja je raščlanjena, opisana i kartografirana; leksikografskoj građi, dijakronijskim pregledom priručnika od početka 17. stoljeća pa sve do suvremenih rječnika hrvatskoga standardnog jezika; te korpusu književnih djela pisanih hrvatskim jezikom. Pronađeno je desetak naziva: sinovac, bratanac, bratanić, braten, bratić, nećak, neput, nevodo. Izloženo je bogatstvo hrvatske leksičke baštine uz kartografski uvid u arealnu distribuciju pojedinih leksema na hrvatskome jezičnom prostoru.
In my Cahuilla Grammar (Seiler 1977:276-282) and in a subsequent paper (Seiler 1980:229-236) I have drawn attention to the fact that many kin terms in this language, especially those that have a corresponding reciprocal term in the ascending direction – like niece or nephew in relation to aunt – occur in two expressions of quite different morphological shape. The following remarks are intended to furnish an explanation of this apparent duplicity.
The language of the Cahuillas shows two systems of expressions referring to kinship, which could be termed, respectively, as labeling-relational and as descriptive-establishing. […] Descriptive terms show two properties: 1. They are analysable into constituent elements so as to recognize the connection between the term and the proposition. 2. They are distinguishable from the proposition: a. by a special formal element […], in Cahuilla the absolutive suffix. b. by a narrowing or specialization in the meaning. A term which is not descriptive, i.e. which is not connected with a proposition, I shall call "label", "1abeling": It does not say anything about the object but is assigned to it just as a label is attached to a thing […].
Most systematic discussion of dyad morphemes has focussed on Australian languages, owing to a combination of their relative prevalence there, and the development of a descriptive tradition that investigates them in some depth. In the course of researching this paper, however, I became aware of functionally and semantically similar morphemes in many other parts of the world, almost invariably described in isolation from any typological reference point. I have incorporated such data as far as I am aware of it, in the hope that a systematic study will encourage other investigators to identify, and investigate in detail, similar constructions in a range of languages. The current state of our research, however, as well as some interesting geographical skewings that I discuss below, such that outside Australia dyad constructions almost exclusively employ reciprocal morphology, means that most of this paper will focus on Australian languages.