Linguistik-Klassifikation
Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Article (38) (remove)
Language
- English (16)
- German (14)
- Croatian (5)
- Portuguese (3)
Has Fulltext
- yes (38)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (38)
Keywords
- Deutsch (14)
- Generative Transformationsgrammatik (5)
- Englisch (4)
- Informationsstruktur (4)
- Grammatik (3)
- Grammatiklehrbuch (3)
- Grammatische Kategorie (3)
- Linguistik (3)
- Syntax (3)
- Türkisch (3)
Institute
The interpretation of traces
(2004)
This paper argues that parts of the lexical content of an A-bar moved phrase must be interpreted in the base position of movement. The argument is based on a study of deletion of a phrase that contains the base position of movement. I show that deletion licensing is sensitive to the content of the moved phrase. In this way, I corroborate and extend conclusions based on Condition C reconstruction by N. Chomsky and D. Fox. My result provides semantic evidence for the existence of traces and gives semantic content to the A/A-bar distinction.
This paper addresses the syntax and semantics plurals, and then applies it to reciprocal expressions. In the course of this investigation, I address two problems for the conventional view that a reciprocal makes essentially the same semantic contribution to the sentence as other noun phrases, but has an interesting internal structure. I will show that both problems are properties of plurality in general, and can be successfully explained along these lines. As a result, the paper is more about plurality in general than reciprocals though the goal of the paper is to account for the two problems relating to reciprocals.
Early features
(1995)
This paper presents the analyses of transitivity and questions about transitivity in two languages (Rawang and Qiang) that have been described using very different definitions of transitivity, with a view to showing that each language must be analysed on its own terms, and so the criteria used for identifying transitivity, if it is to be identified at all, might be different between languages. In the case of these two languages it is at least partly due to the two languages differing in terms of the degree of systematicity of the marking, with the Rawang marking being more systematic.
On transitivity
(2011)
This paper critically discusses and contrasts some of the different conceptualisations of transitivity that have been presented in the literature, and argues that transitivity as a morphosyntactic phenomenon and effectiveness of an event as a semantic concept should be separated in discussions of transitivity, and also, like many other aspects of grammar, transitivity should be seen as a constructional phenomenon, and so each construction in a language needs to be examined separately, in natural contexts. An Appendix presents some general questions one can consider when analysing language data.
Using arguments based on the data on verb agreement (pronominalization) in Tibeto-Burman, LaPolla 1989 (see also LaPolla 1992) argues that Proto-Tibeto-Burman should be reconstructed as a language with no inflectional morphology. In that paper it is argued that the Proto-Tibeto- Burman system of grammatical relations1 was closer to the typical 'role-dominated' (Van Valin & Foley 1980) Burmese-Yipho system (epitomized by Lahu—see Matisoff 1973). That is, a system where there is no definable 'subject' or 'direct object'; a system where semantic and pragmatic principles govern the organization of discourse, not syntactic functions. In this paper we look at the nature of 'objects' in Tibeto-Burman languages, and here also find support for this view of Proto-Tibeto-Burman grammatical relations. From a survey of ninety-five reliable grammars or descriptions of languages in the Tibeto-Burman family, I found eleven languages with no nominal object marking, twenty languages with nominal morphology consistently marking the patient as object, regardless of clause type, and sixty-four languages with a type of marking where the patient in monotransitve clauses is often or always marked with the same postposition as the goal or beneficiary (dative) in ditransitve clauses. This type of marking is discussed in Dryer 1986 as Primary Object marking. I argue that this type of marking in the Tibeto-Burman languages reflects the semantically based nature of grammatical relations in Proto-Tibeto-Burman.
Bu çalışmada, Türkçedeki emir kipinin bir alt ulamı olan ve Almancada Jussiv terimiyle karşılanan 3. kişilere yönelik emir-istek1 biçimleri ve bunların Almancaya nasıl aktarılabileceği konulaştırılmaktadır. Bu amaçla Yaşar Kemal’in Kuşlar da Gittiromanındaki söz konusu emir-istek biçimleri aynı kitabın Almanca çevirisi Auch die Vögel sind fort’taki çevirileriyle karşılaştırılmaktadır. Karşılaştırmanın amacı çeviri eleştirisi değildir; yalnızca durum saptaması yapılmaktadır. Saptanan çeviri olanaklarının Alman dili eğitimi öğrencilerinde nasıl yansıma bulacağını görebilmek için bir de dar kapsamlı bir çeviri anketi uygulanmıştır. Türk dilinin bu dolaylı emir-istek için somut dilbilgisel bir ulam (Ali gelsin!) geliştirmişken, Almancada bire bir karşılaştırılabilir dilbilgisel bir eşdeğerlilik saptanmamıştır. Bu ulamın işlevi Almancada özellikle 3. kişi dolaylı anlatımla (Jeder kehre vor seiner eigenen Haustür!) ve yardımcı eylemlerle (Das Feuer soll von hier mitgenommen werden) karşılanmaktadır. Anlamsal bir ulam olan kipselliğin Türkçe ifadesindeki birçok örtüşmezlik, bu konunun Almanca öğretiminde daha çok dikkate alınması gerektiğini göstermiştir. Öğrencilerle yaptığımız çeviri uygulamasındaki diğer saptamamız, çevirilerdeki yetersizliğin sözlük kullanımındaki yetersizliğe dayandığıdır.