Linguistik
Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Article (24) (remove)
Language
- English (10)
- German (8)
- Portuguese (3)
- Croatian (2)
- French (1)
Has Fulltext
- yes (24)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (24)
Keywords
- Syntax (24) (remove)
Institute
Intimität und Geschlecht : zur Syntax und Pragmatik der Anrede im Liebesbrief des 20. Jahrhunderts
(2000)
Die Trennung der Lebenswelt in Privatsphäre und Öffentlichkeit käme der Verortung von Intimität entgegen. Es scheint aber, als ob Intimität nicht einem klar abgegrenzten Bereich zugeordnet werden kann, sondern nunmehr als relationale Kategorie zu fassen ist. Gerade der historische Vergleich (Vgl. CORBIN 1992) erlaubt weder einheitlich räumliche oder körperliche noch ästhetische Kriterien zur Abgrenzung von Intimität. ...
„Ich mach dich Messer“ ist eine jugendsprachliche Wendung, die als ritualisierte Drohung im Sinne von „Ich greife dich mit einem Messer an.“ zu verstehen ist. Diese Wendung, bei der sowohl die semantische Bleichung („semantic bleaching“) des Verbs als auch das Fehlen des Determinierers in der NP auffällt, verweist auf Merkmale morpho-syntaktischer Reduktion, wie man sie häufig in Kontaktsprachen findet. Wie ich zeigen werde, handelt es sich hierbei jedoch nicht um eine bloße sprachliche Simplifizierung, sondern um ein komplexes und produktives grammatisches Phänomen: In „Ich mach dich Messer“ manifestiert sich ein spezifisches Zusammenwirken syntaktischer und semantischer Phänomene, das ich im folgenden als sprachliche Arbeitsteilung nach dem Muster von Funktionsverbgefügen beschreiben werde.
J. Melvinger u radu o supstandardnome prijedložnom infinitivu (1982.) ne spominje mogućnost infinitivne kondenzacije posljedičnih ustrojstava, ni prijedložnog ni besprijedložnog infinitiva, iako donosi primjere u kojima je riječ o infinitivnoj prijedložnoj konstrukciji koja je priložna oznaka posljedice, a ne priložna oznaka načina, kako ona tvrdi: Kožnata jakna smiješna, a šal oko vrata škaklja za poludjeti. Tu mogućnost ne spominje ni u svojoj disertaciji (iako navodi primjere koje mi razumijevamo kao posljedične konstrukcije), a ne navodi je ni M. Ivić.
The relation between word-formation and syntax and whether they form distinct domains of grammar or not has been discussed controversially in different theoretical frameworks. The answer to this question is closely connected to the languages under discussion, among other things, because languages seem to differ considerably in this regard. The discussion in this paper focuses on nominal compounds and phrases. On the basis of a great variety of data from a total of 14 European languages, it is argued that the relation between compounds and phrases, and, more generally, between word formation and syntax, should be characterized not in terms of a categorical but instead in terms of a gradient distinction.
This paper addresses the syntax and semantics plurals, and then applies it to reciprocal expressions. In the course of this investigation, I address two problems for the conventional view that a reciprocal makes essentially the same semantic contribution to the sentence as other noun phrases, but has an interesting internal structure. I will show that both problems are properties of plurality in general, and can be successfully explained along these lines. As a result, the paper is more about plurality in general than reciprocals though the goal of the paper is to account for the two problems relating to reciprocals.
Why variables?
(1999)
This paper addresses the question of how sentence-internal semantic dependencies are computed? The kind of semantic dependency I am looking at is that between a so called "bound (variable) pronoun" and its binder illustrated in (1), where the dependency is indicated by a connecting line. With all the literature on the topic (see for example Partee 1973, Percus 1998), I assume that this case is the prototype of all semantic dependencies, and therefore any result for this case generalizes to all types of sentence-internal semantic dependencies.
The late physicist Carl Sagan, whom I quote in the first part of my title, skillfully phrased the common sense view on evidence in the mature sciences. In linguistics, however, evidence has become a controversial issue, especially so when it comes to the investigation of less well studied languages. In this paper, I argue that Sagan's principle should be applied to linguistics. The growing accessibility of a wide array of experimental techniques and computational tools to analyze such data makes it feasible to back up extraordinary claims with evidence from a variety of sources. At the same time, it is in many cases possible to agree on what constitutes an ordinary claim and focus the extra effort on extraordinary claims. For non-controversial claims no more than the minimum effort to establish the claim and properly document the evidence is necessary.
Early features
(1995)