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
The structure of natural languages as studied by linguists is connected in several ways with phenomena outside this domain. Problems of this kind are, to mention only three: (a) the acoustical and physiological interpretation of the primitive elements in which the sound structure is represented; (b) the conceptual or referential interpretation of the primitive elements that build up the meanings of the utterances; (c) the structural relationships that go beyond the single sentences, usually taken as the largest units to be analyzed linguistically, i.e., the question as to the conditions that two or more sentences must meet in order to form a connected text. ...
In his magnum opus (Syntax and Semantics, Leiden 1978, henceforth: S&S) C.L. Ebeling makes a distinction between temporal gradation (pp 301-308 and 337-339) and temporal limitation (pp 311-315). In the case of temporal gradation “p , q”, the meaning “q” specifies the time during which the referent carries the mean-ing “p”.
Early features
(1995)
German particles usually bring great difficulties to German students. One of these particles, doch, is very often used, especially in conversation. In this paper its various uses are discussed, as well as eases where it can be replaced by other particles, adverbs or conjunctions, without changing the illocution (that is, the intention of the speaker). This study is based on the work of HELBIG, who differentiates eight varieties of doch. Each of them is discussed here according to syntactic, semantic and pragmatic criteria and made explicit through examples.
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.
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. ...