Linguistik
Refine
Year of publication
- 2005 (187) (remove)
Document Type
- Part of a Book (54)
- Conference Proceeding (52)
- Article (51)
- Preprint (13)
- Book (7)
- Working Paper (5)
- Report (3)
- diplomthesis (1)
- Other (1)
Language
Has Fulltext
- yes (187)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (187)
Keywords
- Deutsch (14)
- Artikulation (13)
- Artikulatorische Phonetik (13)
- Phonetik (13)
- Englisch (11)
- Artikulator (9)
- Bedeutungswandel (6)
- Computerlinguistik (6)
- Japanisch (6)
- Akustische Phonetik (5)
Institute
We argue here for a lexicalist analysis of the Korean copula (following Kim, Sells and Wescoat (2004)), on the basis of different properties of sequences of noun-plus-copula, which shows word-like behavior, in contrast to noun and negative copula, which are independent syntactic units. The interactions of these items with various copy constructions brings out their clear differences. The analysis is formalized in HPSG using Lexical Sharing, from Wescoat (2002).
According to the Projection Principle (Chomsky 1981), expletives have no semantic content and thus cannot occur in theta-marked positions. However, there are many examples where expletive it appears as a direct object, in violation of the Projection Principle. The various attempts that have been made to account for such cases (e.g. the case-based analysis of Authier (1991), the predication analysis of Rothstein (1995), and the Specifier analysis of Stroik (1991, 1996)) all posit movement of the expletive from a non-theta marked position to direct object position. However, these analyses have so far been unsuccessful in capturing several important contrasts, e.g. variable optionality of the expletive it. This paper argues that such contrasts (and the complex behavior of expletive it more generally) follow straightforwardly from a lexicalist, constraint-based analysis in which lexical information and independently motivated constraints interact in subtle ways.
Focusing on the examples of multiple degree modification, this paper argues that the class of degree expressions in English is syntactically and semantically diverse, subdivided both according to the semantic effects of its members and according to the extent to which they permit, and participate in, multiple layers of modification. We argue that these two factors are linked, and result in (at least) a three-way distinction between ˋtrue degree morphemes', which map gradable adjectives to properties of individuals and combine with their arguments in a Head-Specifier structure; ˋintensifiers', which are syntactic and semantic modifiers of properties constructed out of gradable adjectives; and ˋscale modifiers', which are also syntactic and semantic modifiers, but which combine with ˋbare' gradable adjectives (relations between individuals and degrees) rather than properties formed out of gradable adjectives.
In order to investigate the empirical properties of focus, it is necessary to diagnose focus (or: “what is focused”) in particular linguistic examples. It is often taken for granted that the application of one single diagnostic tool, the so-called question-answer test, which roughly says that whatever a question asks for is focused in the answer, is a fool-proof test for focus. This paper investigates one example class where such uncritical belief in the question-answer test has led to the assumption of rather complex focus projection rules: in these examples, pitch accent placement has been claimed to depend on certain parts of the focused constituents being given or not. It is demonstrated that such focus projection rules are unnecessarily complex and in turn require the assumption of unnecessarily complicated meaning rules, not to speak of the difficulties to give a precise semantic/pragmatic definition of the allegedly involved givenness property. For the sake of the argument, an alternative analysis is put forward which relies solely on alternative sets following Mats Rooth´s work, and avoids any recourse to givenness. As it turns out, this alternative analysis is not only simpler but also makes in a critical case the better predictions.
Multicomponent Tree Adjoining Grammars (MCTAG) is a formalism that has been shown to be useful for many natural language applications. The definition of MCTAG however is problematic since it refers to the process of the derivation itself: a simultaneity constraint must be respected concerning the way the members of the elementary tree sets are added. Looking only at the result of a derivation (i.e., the derived tree and the derivation tree), this simultaneity is no longer visible and therefore cannot be checked. I.e., this way of characterizing MCTAG does not allow to abstract away from the concrete order of derivation. Therefore, in this paper, we propose an alternative definition of MCTAG that characterizes the trees in the tree language of an MCTAG via the properties of the derivation trees the MCTAG licences.
Face-to-face communication is multimodal. In unscripted spoken discourse we can observe the interaction of several “semiotic layers”, modalities of information such as syntax, discourse structure, gesture, and intonation. We explore the role of gesture and intonation in structuring and aligning information in spoken discourse through a study of the co-occurrence of pitch accents and gestural apices. Metaphorical spatialization through gesture also plays a role in conveying the contextual relationships between the speaker, the government and other external forces in a naturally-occurring political speech setting.