Linguistik-Klassifikation
Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Article (108)
- Part of a Book (73)
- Working Paper (41)
- Conference Proceeding (37)
- Report (6)
- Part of Periodical (4)
- Preprint (3)
- Review (2)
- Book (1)
- Periodical (1)
Language
- English (181)
- German (77)
- Croatian (9)
- Multiple languages (4)
- Portuguese (3)
- French (2)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (276)
Keywords
- Morphologie (29)
- Deutsch (28)
- Verb (27)
- Wortbildung (24)
- Spracherwerb (19)
- Morphologie <Linguistik> (16)
- Nominalisierung (15)
- Syntax (12)
- Aspekt <Linguistik> (11)
- Morphosyntax (11)
Institute
Objavljene gramatike hrvatskoga kajkavskog književnog jezika pokušaj su, prije svega, olakšavanja učenja toga jezika strancima s njemačkoga govornog područja. Iako imaju opisni karakter, one su i ogledalo stupnja normiranosti hrvatskoga kajkavskog književnog jezika. U ovom radu donosi se opis i sistematizacija tvorbe komparativa u kajkavskim gramatikama.
This article examines French Verb-Noun compounds with Means value (couvre-pied 'blanket', lit. cover-feet), derived from stative bases. It shows that they are generally ambiguous between Means and Instrument reading. The regularity of this double value discards an analysis relying on verbal homonymy, in favor of Rothmayr's (2009) hypothesis of bi-eventive verbs. We assume that the presence of an agentive as well as a stative component in the verbal bases accounts for the double Means/Instrument value of the VNs studied here. We also examine "pure" Instrument VNs, available with similar verbal bases. We show that the distribution of the Instrument vs. Means/Instrument values relies on the state of the referent of the noun involved in the compound after the event described by the verbal base occurred. A permanent state entails a "pure" Instrument reading, whereas Means/Instrument reading obtains if the state of N is reversible (Fábregas & Marín 2012).
The indigenous languages of North America have played a critical role in discussions of the universality of part-of-speech distinctions. In this paper, we show that Oneida does not include a grammatical distinction between nouns and verbs. Rather, Oneida inflecting lexical items are subject to two cross-cutting semantic classifications, one that concerns the sort of entities they describe, the other the sort of semantic relation they include in their content. Labels such as ‘noun' and ‘verb' can still be used for cross-linguistic comparison, as the semantic partition of lexical items corresponds to canonical nouns and verbs according to morphologists and some typologists. But the meta-grammatical status of these labels is quite distinct from the status of corresponding labels in Indo-European languages like English.
We will observe which stem allomorph the affixes, the so-called 'non-past' affix, the past affix, the imperative affix, the negative affix and the voice affix-like verbs, select between the longer and the shorter in Japanese-Yanagawa dialect on the assumption that verbal lexemes may be associated with more than one stem. Observing the phenomenon more closely, we found that the verbal stem forms entertain default implicative relations in the stem dependency hierarchy. We will propose i) an implemented analysis of the past affix and ii) an implementation of the allomorph selections by the 'non-past' affix in Koga and Ono, 2010 as two examples.
This paper studies the morphological productivity of German N+N compounding patterns from a diachronic perspective. It argues that the productivity of compounds increases due to syntactic influence from genitive constructions ("improper compounds") in Early New High German. Both quantitative and qualitative productivity measures are adapted from derivational morphology and tested on compound data from the Mainz Corpus of (Early) New High German (1500–1710).
In her discussion of the Japanese adversative passive, Anna Wierzbicka writes (1988: 260): “The problem is extremely interesting and important both for intrinsic reasons and because of its wider methodological implications. It can be formulated like this: if one form can be used in a number of different ways, are we entitled to postulate for it a number of different meanings or should we rather search for one semantic common denominator (regarded as the MEANING of the form in question) and attribute the variety of uses to the interaction between this meaning and the linguistic or extralinguistic context?” Though it “may seem obvious” that the second stand is “methodologically preferable” (261), she takes the first position and concludes that “the Japanese passive has to be recognized as multiply ambiguous” (286). In the following I intend to show that this view is both wrong and fruitful.
The Germanic weak preterit
(2007)
The main difficulty with the Germanic weak preterit is that one cannot endeavor an explanation of its origin without taking into account almost every aspect of the historical phonology and morphology of the Germanic languages. In the following I intend to show how a number of problems receive a natural explanation in a unified treatment on the basis of earlier studies. The theory presented here is not revolutionary, but aims at integrating earlier findings into a coherent whole. There is no reason to give a detailed account of the scholarly literature, which is easily accessible (cf. Tops 1974, Bammesberger 1986).
The Germanic perfect presents (Präteritopräsentien) form a past tense by adding the endings of the weak preterit to the stem of the past participle, e.g. Go. wissa ‘knew’. This is a recent formation (cf. Kortlandt 1989). We may therefore ask ourselves if we can reconstruct the earlier formation which was ousted by the weak preterit. We may also try to recover the motivation for the replacement.
A correct interpretation of the genitive plural forms in Slavic and related languages requires a detailed chronological analysis of the material. At every stage of development we have to reckon with both phonetically regular and analogical forms. Analogy operates quite often along the same lines in different periods. Explaining an analogic change amounts to indicating a model, a motivation, and a stage of development for its effectuation. If one of these cannot be indicated, we must look for a phonetic explanation.