Linguistik-Klassifikation
Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Part of a Book (25)
- Article (21)
- Working Paper (2)
- Conference Proceeding (1)
- Review (1)
Language
- German (30)
- English (17)
- Portuguese (2)
- Turkish (1)
Has Fulltext
- yes (50)
Keywords
- Deutsch (50) (remove)
Institute
This paper gives a survey over the forms that can be used as prepositions in contemporary German. Apart from prototypical prepositions such as an [at, by], auf [on] or in [in], there are prepositions with the form of a content word or the form of a syntactical structure. Prepositions with the form of a content word look like adverbs (e.g. abseits [away], außerhalb [outside]), verbs (entsprechend [corresponding], betreffend [concerning]), adjectives (nahe [near], seitlich [at the side]) or nouns (trotz [despite], kraft [by virtue]); prepositions with the form of a syntactical structure look like prepositional phrases (im Gefolge [in the wake], am Rande [on the brink]). These "atypical" prepositions are of special interest for two reasons: (1) they raise the question of the delimitation of the grammatical category "preposition"; (2) unlike prototypical prepositions, they are often characterized by semantically irrelevant variations in position (preposing vs postposing) and in the choice of the governed case (dative vs genitive). These synchronic variations are documented by authentic examples from a large corpus of written German of the 90s, and are explained on the basis of a diachronic gramrnaticalization rnodel.
In this paper, a class of sentences in German is discussed that are often called whexclamatives. […]
So called wh-exclamatives can be roughly characterized as wh-clauses that are embedded under exclamative predicates like erstaunt sein/to be amazed at [...] or that are used as the basis for an exclamation [...].
One can ask if wh-exclamatives are a clause-type of their own, in particular, whether they are different from wh-clauses in question environments, that is under question predicates like to ask or to wonder or used as questions. It is often assumed that wh-clauses in exclamative contexts, both embedded and unembedded, are indeed different from wh-clauses in interrogative or question environments [...], at least regarding their semantical type, see for example Elliot (1971, 1974), Grimshaw (1979, 1981), Zaefferer (1983, 1984), Altmann (1 987, 1993). […]
I assume with Grimshaw (1979) that so called wh-exclamatives and wh-interrogatives are alike with respect to their syntactical properties. In addition, I think that they are also alike semantically. So, what I like to do here is to evaluate the following hypothesis:
So-called wh-exclamatives are of the same semantical type as wh-interrogatives.
Inhärenz und Etablierung
(1981)
Die folgenden Überlegungen zum Problem der Inhärenz und Etablierung beziehen ihre wesentlichen Anregungen aus dem Aufsatz von H. Seiler "Zum Problem der sprachlichen Possessivität" (1972), wo eben dieses Problem eingebettet wird in den Rahmen von Inhärenz und Etablierung. […] Ziel der Untersuchung ist es, ausgehend von einer vorläufigen Definition der letztgenannten Begriffe […] und angelehnt an eine kasussemantische Methodik, Possessivität als ein sprachliches Phänomen zu beschreiben, das verstanden werden muß im Rahmen allgemeiner relationaler Erscheinungen: Inhärenz und Etablierung ist in meinem Verständnis immer Inhärenz und Etablierung semantischer Relationen, einem Lexem ist immer eine solche Relation (mehr oder weniger) inhärent, es wird stets zwischen Lexemen eine Relation etabliert. Damit ist auch eine Brücke zur Valenz, die man als Inhärenz im verbalen Bereich verstehen könnte, gegeben […]. Nach einer Klärung des Umfeldes wird die Inhärenz zunächst für das Deutsche und Türkische einer genaueren Untersuchung unterworfen, eine weitere Detailanalyse ist dem Nahuatl gewidmet. Untersuchungen zu weiteren Sprachen […] sollen das gewonnene Bild erweitern und modifizieren. Die Untersuchungen zur Etablierung können nur als allererste Ansätze gelten, wie die gesamte Arbeit lediglich den Anspruch stellt, den Bereich nicht etwa erschöpfend abzuhandeln, sondern nur die Richtung aufzuzeigen, in der mögliche Ergebnisse zu suchen sind.
Der Ausdruck von Emotionen in der deutschen und tschechischen Phraseologie am Beispiel von Scham
(2010)
Ĉlánek se zabývá vyjádřením emoce „stud“ v ĉeských a německých frazeologismech. Z nejrozsáhlejších ĉeských a německých frazeologických slovníkŧ byly nejprve vyexcerpovány frazeologismy týkající se studu, které byly následně dohledány v korpusech jednotlivých jazykŧ a poté analyzovány z hlediska jejich konceptu. Výzkum shromáţděných textŧ poukázal i na některé situace, ve kterých se emoce studu u jedince objevuje, např. je-li přistiţen nahý. Analýza ukázala, ţe stud je v obou jazycích spojován s konceptem ĉervené barvy a konceptem neviditelnosti. Realizace posledně zmiňovaného konceptu spoĉívá v tom, ţe se chce osoba ukrýt např. pod zem, popřípadě nechce být jinak viděna ani se sama dívat na ostatní. Několik německých frazeologismŧ navíc poukazuje na koncept smrti, který nebyl v ĉeské frazeologii vázající se ke studu doloţen.
The present investigation steps back to the claims of the 1990s by assuming that there is a functional opposition in the use of P- and D-PRO which affects the status of the pronoun's referent in the mental model of the discourse. We interpret the earlier findings as an indication of an information structural difference which is specifically relevant on the discourse level. The question we address here is twofold. Firstly, we ask whether the assumed opposition in the information status of P- and D-PRO referents has consequences on referent continuation in the ongoing discourse. So far, the effects of P- vs. D-PRO use were determined concerning the status of the pronoun referent in the actual sequence of discourse, i.e. they were determined by a judgement on the salience or the topic/focus status of the pronominal DP. As far as we can see, this determination has not been operationalized further. Since there are contexts in which both P- and D-PRO would fit in with only a feeling of a difference but without clear-cut exclusiveness, the opposition is empirically not well validated. If we could show that there are effects of type of pronoun on the ongoing discourse this would, in our view, provide the lacking empirical validation. Secondly, we ask whether there are effects of the narrator's point of view on P- and D-PRO use. The idea behind this question is that the way of information unfolding in discourse depends on the speaker. S/he decides which pieces of information come next, what is foreground and what is background information. If type of pronoun choice is related to the processes of discourse organization by the speaker – via fore- and backgrounding of information – and if internal or external location of the narrator's point of view influences the organization strategies of the speaker/narrator this might have an ffect on the use of P- and D-PRO.
In anaphora resolution theory, it has been assumed that anaphora resolution is based on a reversed mapping of antecedent salience and anaphora complexity: minimal complex anaphora refer to maximal salient antecedents. In order to ex-amine whether and by which developmental steps German children gain command of this mapping maxim we conducted an experiment on production and comprehension of intersentential pronouns including the three pronoun types zero, personal, and demonstrative pronoun. With respect to antecedent salience, the experiment varied syntactic role (subject/object) and in/animacy. Six age groups of children (age range from 2;0 to 6;0) and an adult control group has been tested. The hypothesis arising from the mapping maxim is that zero pronoun correlates with more salient antecedents than personal and demonstrative pronoun, the latter correlating with the least salient antecedents. The results are: In production, children first establish the opposition of zero pronoun with animate antecedents vs. demonstrative pronoun with inanimate antecedents. In a next step, syntactic role comes into play and a more complex system opposing the three presented pronoun types is established. In comprehension, however, the effect of pronoun type re-mains weak and antecedent features remain a strong factor in reference choice. However, also adults employ pronoun type and antecedent features. The oldest children and the adults show variation in personal pronoun resolution according to the animacy pattern of the potential antecedents. In case of identical animacy features, the subject is the preferred candidate; in case of distinct animacy features, there is a tendency to choose the object antecedent.
Eine wesentliche morpho-syntaktische Eigenschaft pronominaler Formen ist ihre Kongruenz mit dem Nomen. In den Grammatiken werden die pronominalen Paradigmen deshalb anhand der Kategorien des Nomens konstruiert. So wird traditionellerweise im Deutschen für all die verschiedenen pronominalen Elemente wie bestimmter/unbestimmter Artikel, Negationsartikel, Possessiv- und Demonstrativpronomen, starke/schwache Adjektive ein und dieselbe Struktur des Paradigmensystems zugrundegelegt. Die 3 Genusklassen konstituieren je ein Paradigma im Singular sowie ein gemeinsames Pluralparadigma. Jedes dieser 4 Paradigmen hat 4 Kasuspositionen, Nom., Gen., Dat., Akk. Dies ergibt ein Paradigmensystem mit 16 Paradigmenpositionen. Jede Position beschreibt eine der möglichen syntaktischen Umgebungen von nominalen Einheiten auf der Äußerungsoberfläche. Nicht nur im Deutschen existiert nun aber keineswegs für jede dieser Positionen auch eine eigenständige pronominale Form. Die Diskrepanz ist bekanntlich beachtlich. Das Paradigmensystem des bestimmten Artikels - das hier exemplarisch diskutiert werden sol1 - weist mit 6 Formen noch den größten Formenreichtum auf. Das Demonstrativpronomen dies und der Negationsartikel kein z.B. haben 5 distinkte Formen, die schwachen Adjektive schließlich nur 2.
Die Frage, die sich unmittelbar aufdrängt, ist, welche (grammatische) Ratio steckt hinter diesem hohen Maß an Formidentitäten. Inwieweit haben wir es hier mit motivierten Synkretismen, d.h. auf inhaltlich begründeten Neutralisationen beruhenden Formidentitäten, und/oder zufälligen Homonymien zu tun?
The contribution deals with a selected lexical field related to the emotion 'anger'. It is treated from a German-Czech perspective and with respect to its underlying psychological aspects. It begins by investigating the nature of lexical fields, and explains the framework of the chosen field in terms of its content and form. On this basis the author tries to find an answer to the question whether this particular field can in fact be considered to be a lexical field. In conclusion the paper discusses the question of whether psychological findings on emotions generally, and on the emotion of 'anger' in particular, can be of help in establishing both an outer delimitation and an internal structuring of the field.
In my paper, I show that the so-called German right dislocation actually comprises two distinct constructions, which I label 'right dislocation proper' and 'afterthought'. These differ in their prosodic and syntactic properties, as well as in their discourse functions. The paper is primarily concerned with the right dislocation proper (RD). I present a semantic analysis of RD based on the 'separate performative' account of Potts (2004, 2005) and Portner (forthc.). This analysis allows a description of the semantic contribution of RD to its host sentence, as well as explaining certain semantic constraints on the kind of NP in the RD construction.
This paper draws a link between the typological phenomenon of the paradigmatically supported evidentiality evoked by perfect and/or perfectivity and the equally epistemic system of modal verbs in German. The assumption is that, if perfect(ivity) is at the bottom of evidentiality in a wide number of unrelated languages, then it will not be an arbitrary fact that systematic epistemic readings occur also for the modal verbs in German, which were preterite presents originally. It will be demonstrated, for one, how exactly modal verbs in Modem German still betray sensitivity to perfect and perfective contexts, and, second, how perfect(ivity) is prone to evincing epistemic meaning. Although the expectation cannot be satisfied due to a lack of respective data from the older stages of German, a research path is sketched narrowing down the linguistic questions to be asked and dating results to be reached.