Linguistik-Klassifikation
Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Part of a Book (12)
- Article (8)
- Conference Proceeding (5)
- Report (2)
Language
- English (14)
- German (12)
- Portuguese (1)
Has Fulltext
- yes (27)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (27)
Keywords
- Lexikologie (27) (remove)
Institute
- Extern (1)
Aufgrund ihres spezifischen Verhaltens stellen Numeralia häufig ein Problem für die Wortartenklassifikation dar: Einerseits stimmen sie in Kernaspekten ihrer Bedeutung überein - alle Numeralia referieren wesentlich auf Zahlen -, andererseits bestehen zwischen den einzelnen Numeralklassen trotz enger lexikalisch-phonologischer Zusammengehörigkeit zum Teil große morpho-syntaktische Diskrepanzen. Es gibt im wesentlichen zwei Möglichkeiten, diesem Problem zu begegnen: Entweder nimmt man eine spezifische Wortart „Numeralia“ für diese Lexeme an, oder man subsumiert die einzelnen Numeralklassen unter verschiedene andere Wortarten. Beide Ansätze sind letztlich etwas unbefriedigend. Klassifiziert man Numeralia aufgrund morpho-syntaktischer Merkmale als Elemente unterschiedlicher Wortarten, so scheint der enge Zusammenhang der verschiedenen Numeralklassen nicht genügend berücksichtigt zu werden. Im anderen Fall, bei der Postulation einer eigenen Wortart, wird dagegen die morphosyntaktische Heterogenität von Numeralia kaum erfaßt. Aufgrund des charakteristischen Aufbaus von Numeralsequenzen ist darüber hinaus die Anzahl der Elemente einer solchen Wortart möglicherweise stark reduziert: Anders als andere Ausdrücke bilden Numeralia eine Reihe, deren Elemente eng auf einander bezogen sind; höhere Elemente bauen auf niedrigeren auf und erlangen ihre Bedeutung wesentlich erst durch diese. Man könnte daher argumentieren, daß Elemente einer Numeralklasse, beispielsweise die Kardinalia, keine Menge, sondern nur ein (komplexes) Element bilden, nämlich die Sequenz „ein-, zwei, drei,...“. Eine eigenständige Wortart „Kardinalia“, wie etwa Schmid (1987) sie vorschlägt, hätte dann streng genommen nur ein einziges Element.
Die vorliegende Untersuchung behandelt ein spezifisches Problem aus dem Bereich des Bruchunterrichts, nämlich das Problem der Bezeichnungsweise sogenannter „gemischter Zahlen“. Wir werden – nach der Klärung der Terminologie – zunächst die relevanten Daten vorstellen, die wir den Bruchalben von Schüler(innen) einer 6.Klasse entnommen haben (Abschnitt 3). Nach der Darstellung des Fehlerphänomens werden wir dann die kognitiven Fehlerursachen analysieren:2 Die aufgefundenen Normabweichungen werden als Folge eines spezifischen „Interpretationsproblems“ diskutiert, das wir mithilfe linguistischer Analysen auf verbalsprachliche Parallelen der betreffenden Bruchzahlbezeichnungen mit Anzahlangaben zurückführen (Abschnitt 4); auf dieser Basis skizzieren wir Vorschläge für den Mathematikunterricht, die zur Bewältigung des diskutierten Problems beitragen sollen (Abschnitt 5).
This paper examines four German transportation verbs with the prefix weg-, concentrating on their syntax and their semantic and pragmatic interpretations. The empirical data investigated are from across-linguistic Corpus of German and Brazilian Portuguese as foreign languages. The analysis is based on the concept of focus, which is defined as a point on the path along which the patient of the process moves. The focus must be either mentioned or contextually evident. Each transportation verb will be able to establish a typical focus. German prefix-verbs with weg- are characterized by a focus-conflict that can be resolved through different interpretation strategies.
What role does language play in the development of numerical cognition? In the present paper I argue that the evolution of symbolic thinking (as a basis for language) laid the grounds for the emergence of a systematic concept of number. This concept is grounded in the notion of an infinite sequence and encompasses number assignments that can focus on cardinal aspects ("three pencils"), ordinal aspects ("the third runner"), and even nominal aspects ("bus #3"). I show that these number assignments are based on a specific association of relational structures, and that it is the human language faculty that provides a cognitive paradigm for such an association, suggesting that language played a pivotal role in the evolution of systematic numerical cognition.
I give a unified account of numeral classifiers as lexical items that are reduced to the function of individuation in cardinal counting constructions with transnumeral nouns. I argue that individuation is a lexical-semantic phenomenon that triggers a focus shift from a whole set to its individual elements, but does not affect the conceptual representation. The semantic reduction of numeral classifiers to individuation functions is, on the one hand, reflected by a morpho-syntactic reduction; numeral classifiers do not project to full NPs, but occur as headadjuncts in QPs. On the other hand, it leads to a loss of conceptual features. As a result, nouns that are used as numeral classifiers are conceptually divorced from their NP counterparts. They integrate the nominal concept not as part of their interpretation, but via agreement features that govern the distribution of nouns in classifierconstructions. I show that the selection of conceptual features relevant for the distribution of numeral classifiers and nouns is lexically, not conceptually governed, supporting a model that distinguishes lexical-semantic and conceptual aspects in the generation of meaning.
In linguistics and the philosophy of language, the mass/count distinction has traditionally been regarded as a bi-partition on the nominal domain, where typical instances are nouns like "beef" (mass) vs."cow" (count). In the present paper, we argue that this partition reveals a system that is based on both syntactic features and conceptual features, and present experimental evidence suggesting that the discrimination of the two kinds of features has a psychological reality.
Cross-linguistically, numerals differ from other linguistic expressions in various aspects of their grammatical behavior and their acquisition. What is so special about them? I will show that a closer look at the status of numbers and numerals not only gives an answer to this question, but can also shed some light onto the syntax-semantics interface. Taking into account philosophical approaches from the foundations of mathematics, I will set forth a definition of number as a function that can be fulfilled by certain sequences. This will lead us (i) to dispense with abstract entities “numbers“ and (ii) to regard numeral sequences as sets that can function as numbers. I will show that this OCCAMiam view captures the peculiar features of numeral sequences as a reflex of their “number function”. On the other hand, the integration of number words into complex syntactic structures leads to a morpho-syntactic behavior of cardinals, ordinals and numerals in “#”-constructions that comes close to that of different word classes, depending on parallels in their semantic-conceptual structure.
Sprachvermögen und Zahlbegriff : zur Rolle der Sprache für die Entwicklung numerischer Kognition
(2004)
In welchem Zusammenhang stehen Sprache und Zahl als kognitive Domänen? Welche Rolle spielt das menschliche Sprachvermögen für die Entwicklung des Zahlbegriffs? In den letzten Jahrzehnten haben verschiedene Disziplinen aus dem Gebiet der Kognitionswissenschaft – darunter Psycholinguistik, Entwicklungspsychologie, Ethologie und kognitive Neurowissenschaft – wesentlich zu unserem Verständnis der Beziehung zwischen Sprache und numerischer Kognition beigetragen. Die unterschiedlichen Ergebnisse liefern Evidenz für eng verknüpfte ebenso wie für autonome Bereiche in den beiden Domänen.
This article analyses the German discourse particle wohl 'I suppose', 'presumably' as a syntactic and semantic modifier of the sentence types declarative and interrogative. It is shown that wohl does not contribute to the propositional, i.e. descriptive content of an utterance. Nor does it trigger an implicature. The proposed analysis captures the semantic behaviour of wohl by assuming that it moves to SpecForceP at LF, from where it can modify the sentence type operators in Force0 in compositional fashion. Semantically, a modification with wohl results in a weaker commitment to the proposition expressed in declaratives and in a request for a weaker commitment concerning the questioned proposition in interrogatives. Cross-linguistic evidence for a left-peripheral position of wohl (at LF) comes from languages in which the counterpart of wohl occurs in the clausal periphery overtly. Overall, the analysis sheds more light on the semantic properties of the left periphery, in particular of the functional projection ForceP.
This paper focuses on different subtypes of constructions involving temporally bounded quantification, e.g. sequences like David visited Rome three times followed by temporal phrases as different as (i) last year, which defines a time interval; (ii) in less that two months, which defines an amount of time; and (iii) per month, which refers to a time unit. As for the first two types of temporal phrases, data will be presented which shows that they have specific linguistic properties in these quantifying contexts, and do not behave exactly as the locating or duration adverbials they are superficially identical with. The third type of phrases will receive special attention. Structures with frequency adverbials like n times per month will be analysed compositionally, separating the quantified component n times from the temporally binding phrase per month (whose role is comparable to that of adverbials (i) and (ii) in the relevant constructions). The data presented is mainly from Portuguese, although the issues at stake – the linguistic properties of temporally bounded quantification – are obviously relevant to parallel constructions in other languages.