Linguistik-Klassifikation
Refine
Document Type
- Working Paper (2)
- Part of a Book (1)
Has Fulltext
- yes (3)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (3)
Keywords
- Grammatikalisation (3) (remove)
The purpose of this dissertation is to defend the idea that the empirical responsibilities of binding theory can be handled in a more psychologically and historically realistic way when assigned to the field of pragmatics. In particular, I wish to show that Optimality Theory (OT) (Prince & Smolensky, 1993), the stochastic OT and Gradual Learning Algorithm of Boersma (1998), the Recoverability of OT of Wilson (2001) and Buchwald et al. (2002), and the bidirectional OT of Blutner (2000b) and Bidirectional Gradual Learning Algorithm of Jäger (2003a) can all participate in a formal framework in which one can formally spell out and justify the idea that the distributional behavior of bound pronouns and reflexivs is a pragmatic phenomenon.
The paper investigates the origins of the German/Dutch particle toch/doch) in the hope of shedding light on a puzzle with respect to doch/toch and to shed some light on two theoretical issues. The puzzle is the nearly opposite meaning of the stressed and unstressed versions of the particle which cannot be accounted for in standard theories of the meaning of stress. One theoretical issue concerns the meaning of stress: whether it is possible to reduce the semantic contribution of a stressed item to the meaning of the item and the meaning of stress. The second issue is whether the complex use of a particle like doch/toch can be seen as an instance of spread or whether it has to be seen as having a core meaning which is differentiated by pragmatics operating in different contexts.
We use the etymology of doch and doch as to+u+h (that+ question marker+ emphatic marker) to argue for an origin as a question tag checking a hearer opinion. Stress on the tag indicates an opposite opinion (of the common ground or the speaker) and this sets apart two groups of uses spreading in different directions. This solves the puzzle, indicates that the assumption of spread is useful and offers a subtle correction of the interpretation of stress. While stress always means contrast with a contrasting item, if the particle use is due to spread, it is not guaranteed that the unstressed particle has a corresponding use (or inversely).
The 'de-allative'-pattern (Heine/ Kuteva 2008: 103) gives rise to the French grammaticalized periphrasis aller + INF and the Spanish grammaticalized periphrasis ir a + INF. This construction (anar + INF) also consists in Catalan, but here, however, with the periphrasis expressing a past tense. Concerning the grammaticalization path ir a + INF and aller + INF were formerly used to express a past (historical present), whereas anar + INF also expressed a future (and can still take on this function). This paper discusses possible reasons for the development and the thus exceptional position of the Catalan past-periphrasis. In addition to morphological and normative explanations, language contact between Catalan and Spanish/ French as well as sociolinguistic circumstances are factors which may possibly account for the development of the Catalan construction. After a separate presentation of the development and the former and actual use(s) and forms of the three periphrasis, the cognitive processes which took place during the grammaticalization are presented. Afterward the three periphrasis are compared using the parameters of Lehmann. The second part of this paper consists of a corpus which verifies and illustrates the results of the previous part.