Linguistik-Klassifikation
Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Article (66) (remove)
Language
- English (29)
- German (25)
- Croatian (6)
- Portuguese (6)
Has Fulltext
- yes (66) (remove)
Keywords
- Deutsch (21)
- Syntax (12)
- Sinotibetische Sprachen (6)
- Generative Transformationsgrammatik (5)
- Semantik (5)
- Lexikologie (4)
- Tibetobirmanische Sprachen (4)
- Chinesisch (3)
- Englisch (3)
- Kroatisch (3)
Institute
Podravski kajkavski dijalekt
(2011)
U radu se analiziraju definicije vrsta riječi u gramatici hrvatskoga kajkavskog književnog jezika Josipa Đurkovečkoga (Jezičnica horvatsko-slavinska, Pešta, 1826.). Razmatra se koje se vrste riječi opisuju u gramatici, koje hrvatske nazive autor upotrebljava pri njihovu imenovanju te se propituju načini opisa definicija vrsta riječi s posebnim obzirom na to temelje li se definicije na leksičko-semantičkome, morfološkome ili sintaktičkome planu. Analizom opisa vrsta riječi u gramatici J. Đurkovečkoga pokazuje se način promišljanja o jezičnim spoznajama i obilježja gramatičkoga diskursa u okviru povijesti hrvatske gramatikografije, posebice u domeni gramatika hrvatskoga kajkavskog književnog jezika.
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.
This paper corroborates the interpretability proposal of Chomsky (1995) with evidence from scrambling in Japanese and German. First it is shown that scrambling in Japanese is semantically vacuous, whereas scrambling in German is semantically contentful. Chomsky’s proposal then predicts that the feature driving Japanese scrambling is erased after checking, while the corresponding feature in German remains visible, specifically for the Shortest Attract condition. Looking at patterns of movement that result in overlapping paths, this prediction is seen to be correct.
The interpretation of traces
(2004)
This paper argues that parts of the lexical content of an A-bar moved phrase must be interpreted in the base position of movement. The argument is based on a study of deletion of a phrase that contains the base position of movement. I show that deletion licensing is sensitive to the content of the moved phrase. In this way, I corroborate and extend conclusions based on Condition C reconstruction by N. Chomsky and D. Fox. My result provides semantic evidence for the existence of traces and gives semantic content to the A/A-bar distinction.
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.
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.
Early features
(1995)
Im Folgenden soll kurz geklärt werden, was Genus ist (Kap. 2) und – auch wenn diese Frage nicht mit unserem derzeitigen Wissen beantwortbar ist – woher Genus kommen könnte (Kap. 3). Hauptsächlich stellt sich jedoch die Frage: Was tun mit Genus, das heute das Endstadium einer langen Grammatikalisierung darstellt (Kap. 4)? Hier wird die wichtigste Antwort lauten: Genus hat eine neue, eine syntaktische Nutzung erfahren, indem es maßgeblich daran beteiligt ist, unsere berühmten Nominalklammern zu bauen (4.1). Außerdem gibt es weitere "Recyclingmöglichkeiten" von Genus, nämlich: a) Objekte, die Namen tragen, zu klassifizieren (die Kaiser Wilhelm), b) Beziehungen zwischen namentragenden und namenverwendenden Personen zu qualifizieren (der Peterle, das Anna) oder sogar c) Personen zu degradieren (das Merkel). Mit Punkt a) begebe ich mich in die Onomastik, mit Punkt b) in die Dialektologie, und mit Punkt c) werde ich mit der Genderlinguistik enden.