Arbeiten des Kölner Universalien-Projekts : akup
Institut für Sprachwissenschaft, Universität zu Köln. Hrsg. der Reihe: H. Seiler
Year of publication
- 1976 (6) (remove)
- Measuring nominal descriptivity (1976)
- Using Ultan's theory of descriptivity grading as a starting point, I will attempt to capture this differential utility in terms of [...] criteria of literalness, explicitness and syntactic complexity. I will first briefly present his System and investigate some generalizations which he has proposed on the basis of his study of body part terminologies in numerous languages. I will apply his theory to nouns in this and four other semantic domains, in three North American Indian languages. I will test his generalizations and propose some new ones. I will then present an alternative system of descriptivity grading and compare the results of its application with those of Ultan's system. In the final section I will suggest another methodology for quantification. An appendix at the end of the paper lists all of the descriptive lexical items mentioned, graded according to both systems.
- Introductory notes to a grammar of Cahuilla : [to appear in Linguistic Studies offered to Joseph Greenberg on the occasion of his 60th birthday] (1976)
- These notes grew out of my preoccupation with writing a grammar of a particular language, Cahuilla, which is spoken in Southern California and belongs to the Uto-Aztecan family. [...] The Introduction to the Grammar as a whole – of which two sections are reproduced here in a modified version – tries to integrate the synoptic views of the different chapters into a series of comprehensive statements. The statements cluster around two topics: 1. A presentation of Cahuilla as a type of language. 2. Remarks on writing a grammar.
- Determination: a universal dimension for inter-language comparison : (preliminary version) (1976)
- The basic idea I want to develop and to substantiate in this paper consists in replacing – where necessary – the traditional concept of linguistic category or linguistic relation understood as 'things', as reified hypostases, by the more dynamic concept of dimension. A dimension of language structure is not coterminous with one single category or relation but, instead, accommodates several of them. It corresponds to certain well circumscribed purposive functions of linguistic activity as well as to certain definite principles and techniques for satisfying these functions. The true universals of language are represented by these dimensions, principles, and techniques which constitute the true basis for non-historical inter-language comparison. The categories and relations used in grammar are condensations – hypostases as it were – of such dimensions, principles, and techniques. Elsewhere I have outlined the theory which I want to test here in a case study.
- Descriptivity in the domain of body-part terms (1976)
- In an earlier paper, I proposed a system for evaluating the relative descriptivity of lexical items in a consistent manner in terms of the interrelations of three metrics. The first of these, including five possible degrees of descriptivity, is based on the premise that the sum of the meaningful parts of a given form is or is not equal to the meaning of the whole. The second, also composed of five degrees, is based on paraphrase-term relations in which the logical quantifiers: all, some and no, are applied to the terms of the paraphrase in one test and to the meaningful parts of the term (linguistic form) in the reversibility test. Both tests are applied in the form of logical propositions. The third metric, with three degrees, deals with the relative explicitness of the meaningful parts of a given form: explicit, implicit or neither. […] This system was then tested in a pilot study involving the fairly limited and semantically homogeneous lexical domain of body-part terms in a specific language, Finnish. The purpose of the present paper is to subject comparable data from other languages to the same kind of analysis and compare the results in order to ascertain whether the generalizations arrived at with the Finnish data also hold for the other languages or, more specifically, which of these generalizations are more or less universal and which language or language-type specific? The additional languages to be examined here are: French, German, Ewe, Maasai and Swahili.
- Zum Problem der Deskriptivität am Beispiel deutscher Verbalderivation (1976)
- Eine ausführliche Analyse der Prinzipien der etikettierenden und der deskriptiven Benennung findet sich in Seiler 1975 a. [...] Wesentlich ist; daß der Term gegenüber der Paraphrase; die vermittels der Proposition, zu der er in Beziehung steht, formuliert werden kann (Lehrer = einer, der lehrt), eine Bedeutungsverengung erfährt, die in diesem Falle durch eine zusätzliche semantische Komponente 'professionell' oder 'habituell' o.ä. erfaßt werden kann. Der deskriptiven Benennung, auch charakterisierbar als "Benennen durch Aussagen", dienen diverse sprachliche Mittel oder Techniken wie Derivation, Komposition (mit der Subtechnik der Inkorporation), Absolutivbildung usw. Nicht alle Techniken kommen in jeder Sprache zur Anwendung und auch in den Sprachen, in denen sie zur Anwendung gelangen, ist diese in vielen Fällen auf bestimmte morpho-syntaktische Bereiche beschränkt. [...] Betrachten wir nun unter diesem Gesichtspunkt der Distribution deskriptiver Techniken die Verteilung von Komposition und Derivation im Deutschen. [...] Gegenstand der folgenden Überlegungen soll […] die verbale Wortbildung, und zwar im Vergleich zur nominalen, sein.