Linguistik
Refine
Year of publication
- 2003 (113) (remove)
Document Type
- Part of a Book (39)
- Article (34)
- Conference Proceeding (11)
- Working Paper (7)
- Preprint (6)
- Report (6)
- Book (3)
- Review (2)
- Bachelor Thesis (1)
- Doctoral Thesis (1)
Language
- English (85)
- German (25)
- Portuguese (2)
- Croatian (1)
Has Fulltext
- yes (113)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (113)
Keywords
- Morphologie (15)
- Phonologie (13)
- Deutsch (12)
- Aspekt (10)
- Englisch (9)
- Semantik (9)
- Phonetik (8)
- Kindersprache (7)
- Optimalitätstheorie (5)
- Sinotibetische Sprachen (5)
Institute
On the basis of perceptual experiments we show that alveolo-palatal fricatives and palatalized post-alveolars are two separate sounds which are distinguished not only by Polish native speakers but also by German ones. This claim is partly attested by centre of gravity measurements of the two sibilants. In this paper we revise the claim made by Halle & Stevens [1] and Maddieson & Ladefoged [2] that the Polish alveolo-palatal fricatives [˛, ¸] are palatalized postalveolars [SJ, ZJ]. On the basis of perceptual experiments we show that alveolo-palatal fricatives and palatalized post-alveolars are two separate sounds which are distinguished not only by Polish native speakers but also by German ones. This claim is partly attested by centre of gravity measurements of the two sibilants.
In this article I reanalyze sibilant inventories of Slavic languages by taking into consideration acoustic, perceptive and phonological evidence. The main goal of this study is to show that perception is an important factor which determines the shape of sibilant inventories. The improvement of perceptual contrast essentially contributes to creating new sibilant inventories by (i) changing the place of articulation of the existing phonemes (ii) merging sibilants that are perceptually very close or (iii) deleting them. It has also been shown that the symbol š traditionally used in Slavic linguistics corresponds to two sounds in the IPA systemsystem: it stands for a postalveolar sibilant (ʃ) in some Slavic languages, as e.g. Bulgarian, Czech, Slovak, some Serbian and Croatian dialects, whereas in others like Polish, Russian, Lower Sorbian it functions as a retroflex (s). This discrepancy is motivated by the fact that ʃ is not optimal in terms of maintaining sufficient perceptual contrast to other sibilants such as s and ç. If ʃ occurs together with s and sj there is a considerable perceptual distance between them but if it occurs with ç in an inventory, the distance is much smaller. Therefore, the strategy most languages follow is the change from a postalveolar to a retroflex sibilant.
In this artiele I reanalyze sibilant inventories of Slavic languages by taking into consideration acoustic. perceptive and phonological evidence. The main goal of this study is to show that perception is an important factor which determines the shape of sibilant inventories. The improvement of perceptual contrast essentially contributes to creating new sibilant inventories by (i) changing the place of articulation of the existing phonemes (ii) merging sibilants that are perceptually very close or (iii) deleting them.
It has also been shown that the symbol s traditionally used in Slavic linguistics corresponds to two sounds in the IP A system: it stands for a postalveolar sibilant (ʃ) in some Slavic languages, as e.g. Bulagarian, Czech, Slovak, some Serbian and Croatian dialects, whereas in others like Polish, Russian, Lower Sorbian it functions as a retroflex (ʂ). This discrepancy is motivated by the fact that ʃ is not optimal in terms of maintaining sufficient perceptual contrast to other sibilants such as s and ɕ. If ʃ occurs together with s (and sʲ) there is a considerable perceptual distance between them but if it occurs with ɕ in an inventory, the distance is much smaller. Therefore, the strategy most languages follow is the change from a postalveolar to a retroflex sibilant.
In this paper I discuss the properties of particle verbs in light of a proposal about syntactic projection. In section 2 I suggest that projection involves functional structure in two important ways: (i) only functional phrases can be complements, and (ii) lexical heads that take complements and project must be inflected. In section 3, I show that the structure of particle verbs is not uniform with respect to (i) and (ii). On the one hand, a particle always combines with an inflected verb; in this respect, particle verbs look like verb-complement constructions. On the other hand, the particle is not a functional phrase and therefore is not a proper complement, which makes the combination of the particle and the verb look more like a morphologically complex verb. I argue that syntactic rules can in fact interpret the node dominating the particle and the verb as a projection and as a complex head. In section 4, I show that many of the characteristic properties of particle verbs in the Germanic languages follow from the fact that they are structural hybrids.
How far can language-specific structures influence conceptualisation? After a period of time where the discussion of any ‘Whorfian’ effects tended to be considered of little scientific merit, the recent decade has seen a renewed interest in this question. In particular, studies have aimed to tease apart ‘thinking for speaking’ from general cognition (cf. Slobin 1996, Stutterheim & Nüse 2002) and have shown that language-specific differences can often be observed in verbalisation as well as in the preverbal preparation phase of speech production, rather than in non-linguistic tasks.
This paper presents an account of semantics as a system that integrates conceptual representations into language. I define the semantic system as an interface level of the conceptual system CS that translates conceptual representations into a format that is accessible by language. The analysis I put forward does not treat the make up of this level as idiosyncratic, but subsumes it under a unified notion of linguistic interfaces. This allows us to understand core aspects of the linguistic-conceptual interface as an instance of a general pattern underlying the correlation of linguistic and non-linguistic structures. By doing so, the model aims to provide a broader perspective onto the distinction between and interaction of conceptual and linguistic processes and the correlation of semantic and syntactic structures.
Is language the key to number? This article argues that the human language faculty provides the cognitive equipment that enables humans to develop a systematic number concept. Crucially, this concept is based on non-iconic representations that involve relations between relations: relations between numbers are linked with relations between objects. In contrast to this, language-independent numerosity concepts provide only iconic representations. The pattern of forming relations between relations lies at the heart of our language faculty, suggesting that it is language that enables humans to make the step from these iconic representations, which we share with other species, to a generalised concept of number.
Das System der lateinischen Nominalflexion wird als Beispiel eines komplexen morphologischen Systems untersucht, das alle Symptome des ‚flektierenden Syndroms’ zeigt (homonyme, synonyme und kumulative Exponenten, Genuseinteilung, unterschiedlich strukturierte Deklinationskassen, defektive Paradigmen, usw.; Plank 1991a). Im Mittelpunkt steht die Frage, wie die Form-Funktions-Beziehung in einem derartigen System ‚funktioniert’. Morphembasierte Analysen bieten kaum Einsichten in die ‚Logik’ fusionierender Flexionssysteme: Die Vielfalt der Oberflächenformen kann zwar auf verschiedene Weise reduziert werden (zugrundeliegende Formen, Allomorphie, Morphonologie; Householder 1947). Homonymien, Synonymien und Kumulationen und damit die Tatsache, daß sich das System nicht den Erwartungen einer morphemischen Perspektive fügt, bleiben jedoch bestehen: Der Gedanke, morphologische Marker als ‚Saussuresche Zeichen’ aufzufassen, erweist sich hier als nicht fruchtbar (Anderson 1992). Aber auch neuere regelbasierte Ansätze halten – trotz der Zulassung ‚indirekterer’ Beziehungen – an einer vergleichbaren Form-Inhalts-Janusköpfigkeit morphologischer Markierungen grundsätzlich fest, wenn sie morphologische Markierungen als ‚Ausbuchstabierungen’ von Merkmalen oder Merkmalsbündeln behandeln. Traditionelle Darstellungen im Rahmen einer Wort-und-Paradigma-Morphologie liefern zwar oft wenig mehr als eine Auflistung von Formen, weisen jedoch den Weg zu einer nicht-zeichenhaften Auffassung morphologischer Markierung, die Saussure (1976: 122) am Beispiel der deutschen Pluralbildung formuliert: „ce n’est pas ‘Gäste’ qui exprime le pluriel, mais l’opposition ‚Gast : Gäste’”. Danach läge die Funktion morphologischer Markierungen in derartigen Fällen nicht darin, als ‚Exponenten’ von ‚Inhalten’ zu fungieren, sondern darin Formen unterschiedlicher Funktion nur zu unterscheiden: Eine funktionale Distinktion wird zum Ausdruck gebracht, indem sie mit einer formalen Differenzierung korreliert wird. In Anwendung dieses Gedankens auf die lateinische Nominalflexion sollen (i) die auszudrückenden funktionalen Distinktionen, (ii) die zur formalen Differenzierung genutzten Ausdrucksmittel und (iii) die Art der Korrelation untersucht werden.