Linguistik-Klassifikation
Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Part of a Book (105)
- Article (63)
- Conference Proceeding (24)
- Working Paper (22)
- Report (6)
- Book (2)
- Preprint (2)
- Review (1)
Has Fulltext
- yes (225)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (225)
Keywords
- Phonologie (64)
- Phonetik (54)
- Deutsch (33)
- Intonation <Linguistik> (33)
- Prosodie (26)
- Artikulation (20)
- Artikulatorische Phonetik (14)
- Optimalitätstheorie (13)
- Bantusprachen (12)
- Relativsatz (12)
Institute
Im folgenden Artikel wird der Versuch unternommen, die Hauptmerkmale der phonetischen Forschung in der slowakischen Germanistik (teils aus kontrastiver Sicht) in den letzten zwei Jahrzehnten zu dokumentieren.
Aus verständlichen Gründen verzichten wir dabei auf Vollständigkeit: Die Ergebnisse der phonetischen Arbeiten sind in bibliographischen Abteilungen der Bibliotheken bzw. im Internet zusammengetragen. In unserer Analyse berücksichtigen wir nur diejenigen AutorInnen, die wir aus anderen slowakischen Universitäten kennen und mit denen wir im regelmäßigen Kontakt sind. Es handelt sich um folgende PhonetikerInnen: Viera Chebenová (UKF Nitra), Zuzana Bohušová (UMB Banská Bystrica), Viera Lagerová (Trnavská univerzita) und Anna Džambová (Prešovská univerzita). Es wird sich in der Zukunft sicher die Möglichkeit ergeben, die aktuelle Situation gründlich zu recherchieren (z. B. im Rahmen eines Projektes), die Liste der AutorInnen und ihrer Werke zu vervollständigen, zu analysieren und zu diskutieren. Deren niedrige Zahl beruht auf der Tatsache, dass die deutsche Phonetik nicht zu den bevorzugten Gebieten der germanistischen Linguistik in der Slowakei gehört (auf dieses Problem wiesen wir in unseren Beiträgen der letzten Jahre mehrmals hin). In der Slowakei gibt es zahlreiche GermanistInnen, die sich eher für Gebiete wie Lexikographie, Lexikologie, Phraseologie, Grammatik, Didaktik, Translatologie, Pragmatik interessieren.
Die vorliegende Arbeit soll sich mit dem „Zusammenziehen von Wörtern“ beschäftigen, das als typisch für die „Pottsprache“ […] angesehen wird. Dieses Zusammenziehen soll innerhalb der Klitisierungsforschung anhand zweier Fälle untersucht werden. Zum einen sollen reduzierte Formen der Pronomina und zum anderen reduzierte Artikelformen, nämlich die des bestimmten und des unbestimmten Artikels, als Untersuchungsgegenstand dienen. Dieses soll auf einer empirischen Basis, dass heißt auf der Basis von erhobenen und analysierten Sprachdaten, geschehen. Der erste Schritt soll dabei eine Darstellung der hier behandelten Sprachvarietät sein. […] Der zweite Schritt besteht in einer Darstellung der Theorie der Klitisierung […] Nachdem der Hintergrund dieser Arbeit dargestellt worden ist, folgt die eigentliche Analyse. Zunächst wird die Klitisierung von Pronomina untersucht […], dann die von Artikelformen […]. Beide Phänomene werden nacheinander auf ihre Eigenschaften hin untersucht, um dann zum Schluss zu einer Hypothese aus der bisherigen Forschung, nämlich die der flektierten Präpositionen, Stellung zu beziehen […]. Abschließend soll versucht werden die Ergebnisse dieser Arbeit in den Forschungsstand bei der Erforschung von Klitisierung auf der einen Seite und der Varietät Ruhrdeutsch auf der anderen Seite einzuordnen […].
So-called gender-neutral nouns like Freund*innen, Redakteur_in or AutorInnen are suspected to not fit into the linguistic system. This paper argues that if these forms are pronounced with a glottal stop (e.g. Freund[ʔ]innen), only small changes in the grammar are needed to integrate them. It is shown that the suffix [ʔ ɪn] in these derivatives can be analysed as a phonological word and therefore could be a new suffix that is added to the grammar. The phonological structure of its derivatives is shown to be just like the phonological structure of many native German derived nouns as many suffixes form a phonological word of their own. Also, the insertion of [ʔ] in these derived wordforms can be explained by the status of the suffix as a phonological word. Hence, it is argued that speakers do not ignore the regularities of the grammar when they use gender-neutral nouns with [ʔ ɪn], but rather work with these rules to create new words with new meanings.
After the very well-organized Leiden conference for which we must be grateful to Tijmen Pronk, it seems appropriate for me to review some of the papers, as I did after the previous conferences in Zagreb and Copenhagen. The aim of this review is merely to point out some of the differences of opinion which require further debate.
Introduction
(2006)
The papers in this volume reflect a number of broad themes which have emerged during the meetings of the project as particularly relevant for current Bantu linguistics. [...] The papers show that approaches to Bantu linguistics have also developed in new directions since this foundational work. For example, interaction of phonological phrasing with syntax and word order on the one hand, and with information structure on the other, is more prominent in the papers here than in earlier literature. Quite generally, the role of information structure for the understanding of Bantu syntax has become more important, in particular with respect to the expression of topic and focus, but also for the analysis of more central syntactic concerns such as questions and relative clauses. This, of course, relates to a wider development in linguistic theory to incorporate notions of topic and focus into core syntactic analysis, and it is not surprising that work on Bantu languages and on linguistic theory are closely related to each other in this respect. Another noteworthy development is the increasing interest in variation among Bantu languages which reflects the fact that more empirical evidence from more Bantu languages has become available over the last decade or so. The picture that emerges from this research is that morpho-syntactic variation in Bantu is rich and complex, and that there is strong potential to link this research to research on micro-variation in European (and other) languages, and to the study of morpho-syntactic variables, or parameters, more generally.
Introduction
(2011)
In spite of this long history, most work to date on the phonology-syntax interface in Bantu languages suffers from limitations, due to the range of expertise required: intonation, phonology, syntax. Quite generally, intonational studies on African languages are extremely rare. Most of the existing data has not been the subject of careful phonetic analysis, whether of the prosody of neutral sentences or of questions or other focus structures. There are important gaps in our knowledge of Bantu syntax which in turn limit our understanding of the phonology-syntax interface. Recent developments in syntactic theory have provided a new way of thinking about the type of syntactic information that phonology can refer to and have raised new questions: Do only syntactic constituent edges condition prosodic phrasing? Do larger domains such as syntactic phases, or even other factors, like argument and adjunct distinctions, play a role? Further, earlier studies looked at a limited range of syntactic constructions. Little research exists on the phonology of focus or of sentences with non-canonical word order in Bantu languages. Both the prosody and the syntax of complex sentences, questions and dislocations are understudied for Bantu languages. Our project aims to remedy these gaps in our knowledge by bringing together a research team with all the necessary expertise. Further, by undertaking the intonational, phonological and syntactic analysis of several languages we can investigate whether there is any correlation among differences in morphosyntactic and prosodic properties that might also explain differences in phrasing and intonation. It will also allow us to investigate whether there are cross-linguistically common prosodic patterns for particular morpho-syntactic structure.
Introduction
(2010)
The papers in this volume were originally presented at the Bantu Relative Clause workshop held in Paris on 8-9 January 2010, which was organized by the French-German cooperative project on the Phonology/Syntax Interface in Bantu Languages (BANTU PSYN). This project, which is funded by the ANR and the DFG, comprises three research teams, based in Berlin, Paris and Lyon. [...] This range of expertise is essential to realizing the goals of our project. Because Bantu languages have a rich phrasal phonology, they have played a central role in the development of theories of the phonology-syntax interface ever since the seminal work from the 1970s on Chimwiini (Kisseberth & Abasheikh 1974) and Haya (Byarushengo et al. 1976). Indeed, half the papers in Inkelas & Zec’s (1990) collection of papers on the phonology-syntax interface deal with Bantu languages. They have naturally played an important role in current debates comparing indirect and direct reference theories of the phonology-syntax interface. Indirect reference theories (e.g., Nespor & Vogel 1986; Selkirk 1986, 1995, 2000, 2009; Kanerva 1990; Truckenbrodt 1995, 1999, 2005, 2007) propose that phonology is not directly conditioned by syntactic information. Rather, the interface is mediated by phrasal prosodic constituents like Phonological Phrase and Intonation Phrase, which need not match any syntactic constituent. In contrast, direct reference theories (e.g., Kaisse 1985; Odden 1995, 1996; Pak 2008; Seidl 2001) argue that phrasal prosodic constituents are superfluous, as phonology can – indeed, must – refer directly to syntactic structure.
As has been noted previously, speakers with coronally low "flat" palates exhibit less articulatory variability than speakers with coronally high "domeshaped" palates. This phenomenon is investigated by means of a tongue model and an EPG experiment. The results show that acoustic variability depends on the shape of the vocal tract. The same articulatory variability leads to more acoustic variability if the palate is flat than if it is domeshaped. Furthermore, speakers with domeshaped palates show more articulatory variability than speakers with flat palates. The results are explained by different control strategies by the speakers. Speakers with flat palates reduce their articulatory variability in order to keep their acoustic variability low.