Linguistik-Klassifikation
Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Part of a Book (63)
- Article (62)
- Working Paper (17)
- Conference Proceeding (3)
- Preprint (3)
- Report (2)
- Part of Periodical (1)
Language
- English (151) (remove)
Has Fulltext
- yes (151)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (151)
Keywords
- Morphologie (25)
- Verb (18)
- Spracherwerb (17)
- Nominalisierung (13)
- Morphologie <Linguistik> (12)
- Aspekt (10)
- Deutsch (9)
- Morphosyntax (9)
- Syntax (9)
- Englisch (8)
- Semantik (8)
- Kindersprache (7)
- Russisch (7)
- Aspekt <Linguistik> (6)
- Phonologie (6)
- Thema-Rhema-Gliederung (6)
- Griechisch (5)
- Sprachtypologie (5)
- Bantusprachen (4)
- Intonation <Linguistik> (4)
- Japanisch (4)
- Kompositum (4)
- Kontrastive Linguistik (4)
- Optimalitätstheorie (4)
- Sinotibetische Sprachen (4)
- Verbalnomen (4)
- Wortbildung (4)
- Ableitung <Linguistik> (3)
- Französisch (3)
- Genitiv (3)
- Linguistik (3)
- Lokativ (3)
- Mittelenglisch (3)
- Morphem (3)
- Morphonologie (3)
- Neugriechisch (3)
- Perfekt (3)
- Possessivität (3)
- Prosodie (3)
- Suffix (3)
- Syntaktische Kongruenz (3)
- Tagalog (3)
- Tibetobirmanische Sprachen (3)
- Valenz <Linguistik> (3)
- Vergleichende Sprachwissenschaft (3)
- Affix (2)
- Argumentstruktur (2)
- Austronesische Sprachen (2)
- Baskisch (2)
- Deklination (2)
- Denominativ (2)
- Deverbativ (2)
- Flexion (2)
- Fremdsprachenlernen (2)
- Hypotaxe (2)
- Informationsstruktur (2)
- Interrogativsatz (2)
- Kanuri-Sprache (2)
- Konjugation (2)
- Konjunktiv (2)
- Konversion <Linguistik> (2)
- Kroatisch (2)
- Niederländisch (2)
- Nomen (2)
- Nominalkompositum (2)
- Parataxe (2)
- Phrasenkompositum (2)
- Possessivkonstruktion (2)
- Pronomen (2)
- Proto-Tibetobirmanisch (2)
- Prädikation (2)
- Rumänisch (2)
- Satz (2)
- Spanisch (2)
- Sprachstatistik (2)
- Tempus (2)
- Tibetobirmanische Sprachen ; Sinotibetische Sprachen (2)
- Verben (2)
- Verwandtschaftsbezeichnung (2)
- Wortstellung (2)
- (Morpho)syntactic focus strategy (1)
- Affigierung (1)
- Akan-Sprache (1)
- Allomorph (1)
- Altenglisch (1)
- Amerikanisches Englisch (1)
- Anapher <Syntax> (1)
- Antikausativ (1)
- Antonym (1)
- Aufsatzsammlung (1)
- Australische Sprachen (1)
- Bahasa Indonesia (1)
- Bantu (1)
- Baushi (1)
- Belharisch (1)
- Binarismus (1)
- Broad focus (1)
- Cahuilla-Sprache (1)
- Clitic-Doubling (1)
- Consecutio temporum (1)
- Distribution <Linguistik> (1)
- Drung (1)
- Epenthese (1)
- Ergativ (1)
- Evidentialität (1)
- Finite Verbform (1)
- Finnisch (1)
- Focus ambiguity (1)
- Focus marker (1)
- Formale Semantik (1)
- Frühneuenglisch (1)
- Frühneuhochdeutsch (1)
- Generative Transformationsgrammatik (1)
- Geschehensverb (1)
- Gradpartikel (1)
- Grammatiktheorie (1)
- Grammatische Kategorie (1)
- Gur (1)
- Hebräisch (1)
- Herero-Sprache (1)
- Hilfsverb (1)
- Inchoativ (1)
- Indogermanische Sprachen (1)
- Indogermanistik (1)
- Infix (1)
- Inkorporation <Linguistik> (1)
- Inuktitut (1)
- Inversion <Grammatik> (1)
- Irisch (1)
- Juxtaposition (1)
- Kasus (1)
- Katalanisch (1)
- Kausativ (1)
- Keltische Sprachen (1)
- Kiranti (1)
- Koartikulation (1)
- Konditionalsatz (1)
- Konstruktion <Linguistik> (1)
- Konstruktionsgrammatik (1)
- Kontamination <Wortbildung> (1)
- Kontrastive Morphologie (1)
- Kontrolle <Linguistik> (1)
- Kutenai (1)
- Kwa-Sprachen (1)
- KwaNdebele (1)
- Körperteil (1)
- Lexikalisierung (1)
- Litauisch (1)
- Logische Partikel (1)
- Makua-Sprache (1)
- Malagassi-Sprache (1)
- Malawi (1)
- Manx (1)
- Marker <Linguistik> (1)
- Markiertheit (1)
- Maya-Sprache (1)
- Mehrworteinheit (1)
- Modalverb (1)
- Modus (1)
- Mohawk (1)
- Move-alpha (1)
- Nama-Sprache (1)
- Natürliche Morphologie (1)
- Newari (1)
- Niger-Kongo-Sprachen (1)
- Nilosaharanische Sprachen (1)
- Nomen actionis (1)
- Nullmorphem (1)
- Nungisch (1)
- Oberflächenstruktur <Linguistik> (1)
- Palatalisierung (1)
- Palaung (1)
- Partikelverb (1)
- Partizip (1)
- Plural (1)
- Plusquamperfekt (1)
- Polnisch (1)
- Portugiesisch (1)
- Pro-Form (1)
- Produktivität <Linguistik> (1)
- Präfix (1)
- Raising (1)
- Reduplikation (1)
- Relativsatz (1)
- Resultativ (1)
- Romanische Sprachen (1)
- Semantische Kongruenz (1)
- Slawische Sprachen (1)
- Spaltsatz (1)
- Stativ <Grammatik> (1)
- Suffixbildung (1)
- Suppire (1)
- Suppire-Sprache (1)
- Swahili (1)
- Tharaka (1)
- Thematische Relation (1)
- Tiefenstruktur (1)
- Tone language (1)
- Tongaisch (1)
- Tonologie (1)
- Topikalisierung (1)
- Tschechisch (1)
- Tswana (1)
- Tswana-Sprache (1)
- Tätigkeitsverb (1)
- Verbalisierung (1)
- Vergangenheitstempus (1)
- Wortverbindung (1)
- Yoruba-Sprache (1)
- Zusammenbildung (1)
- Zustandsverb (1)
- ge <Morphem> (1)
- Österreichisches Deutsch (1)
Institute
This paper reviews research on English past-tense acquisition to test the validity of the single mechanism model and the dual mechanism model, focusing on regular-irregular dissociation and semantic bias. Based on the review, it is suggested that in L1 acquisition, both regular and irregular verbs are governed by semantics; that is, early use of past tense forms are restricted to achievement verbs—regular or irregular. In contrast, some L2 acquisition studies show stronger semantic bias for regular past tense forms (e.g., Housen, 2002, Rohde, 1996). It is argued that L1 acquisition of the past-tense morphology can be accounted for more adequately by the single-mechanism model.
While both Japanese and English have a grammatic al form denoting the progressive, the two forms (te-iru & be+ing) interact differently with the inherent semantics of the verb to which they attach (Kindaichi, 1950; McClure, 1995; Shirai, 2000). Japanese change of state verbs are incompatible with a progressive interpretation, allowing only a resultative interpretation of V+ te-iru, while a progressive interpretation is preferred for activity predicates. English be+ing denotes a progressive interpretation regardless of the lexical semantics of the verb. The question that arises is how we can account for the fact that change of state verbs like dying can denote a progressive interpretation in English, but not in Japanese. While researchers such as Kageyama (1996) and Ogihara (1998, 1999) propose that the difference lies in the lexical semantics of the verbs themselves, others such as McClure (1995) have argued that the difference lies in the semantics of the grammatical forms, be+ing and te-iru. We present results from an experimental study of Japanese learners’ interpretation of the English progressive which provide support for McClure’s proposal. Results indicate that independent of verb type, learners had significantly more difficulty with the past progressive. We argue that knowledge of L2 semantics-syntax correspondences proceeds not on the basis of L1 lexical semantic knowledge, but on the basis of grammatical forms.
In what follows, I first briefly review Perlmutter (1968, 1970), in which it is argued that aspectual verbs are ambiguous between control and raising. I suggest that while the argument for the raising analysis is solid, the arguments supporting the control analysis of aspectual verbs are less so. As an alternative hypothesis to consider, I introduce the structural ambiguity hypothesis. In Section 3, I review three recent analyses of control and raising. Although there are important differences among them, they all share the basic assumption that the control/raising distinction is due to differences in selectional restrictions that the lexical items impose. Under such an assumption, the lexical ambiguity hypothesis is the only available option. In Section 4, I present evidence for the structural ambiguity hypothesis from studies concerning aspectual verbs in languages from four distinct families, German (Wurmbrand 2001), Japanese (Fukuda 2006), Romance languages (Cinque 2003), and Basque (Arregi Molina-Azaola 2004). These data strongly suggest that across languages aspectual verbs can appear in two different syntactic positions, either below or above vP, or the projection with which an external argument is introduced (Kratzer 1994, 1996, Chomsky 1995). Given these findings, I argue that it is the aspectual verbs' position with respect to vP which creates the control/raising ambiguity. When an aspectual verb appears in a position that is lower than vP, an external argument takes scope over the aspectual verb. Thus, it is interpreted as control. When an aspectual verb appears in a position that is higher than vP, on the other hand, it is the aspectual verb that takes scope over an entire vP, including the external argument. Thus, it is interpreted as raising. In section 5, I extend the scope of this study to include a discussion of want-type verbs in Indonesian, as analyzed in Polinsky & Potsdam (2006). Polinsky & Potsdam argue that the Indonesian want-type verbs must be raising in at least certain cases where they allow a rather peculiar interpretation. Although they assume that there are also control counterparts of the want-type verbs, I argue that applying the proposed analysis to the want-type verbs does away with the need for stipulating two distinct lexical entries for these verbs. Section 6 concludes the paper.
The morpho-syntax of relative clauses in Sotho-Tswana is relatively well-described in the literature. Prosodic characteristics, such as tone, have received far less attention in the existing descriptions. After reviewing the basic morpho-syntactic and semantic features of relative clauses in Tswana, the current paper sets out to present and discuss prosodic aspects. These comprise tone specifications of relative clause markers such as the demonstrative pronoun that acts as the relative pronoun, relative agreement concords and the relative suffix. Further prosodic aspects dealt with in the current article are tone alternations at the juncture of relative pronoun and head noun, and finally the tone patterns of the finite verbs in the relative clause. The article aims at providing the descriptive basis from which to arrive at generalizations concerning the prosodic phrasing of relative clauses in Tswana.
In what follows, we will first put forward the claim that syntactic ergativity results from morphological ergativity by examining relativization and pea-coordination in Tongan (Section 2). In Sections 3 and 4, we compare 'O-constructions with pea-constructions to conclude a) that unlike pea, 'O should be regarded as a complementizer rather than a conjunction; and b) that the gap in 'O-clauses is not an outcome of deletion, but a null anaphor. We will then discuss a Minimalist approach to binding proposed by Reuland (2001) and see how it accounts for the distribution and behavior of proSE in Tongan. Some implications of the current proposal are discussed in Section 6, with section 7 in conclusion.
This contribution is concerned with prefixed forms in western Austronesian languages which have been called a wide variety of names including 'stative', 'accidental', 'involuntary', 'potential', 'coincidence', 'momentary', and so on. Although widely neglected in the literature, these formations are of major import to the grammar of many western Austronesian languages, where for all event expressions there is an obligatory choice between a neutral form and a form marked for 'involuntariness', 'potentiality', 'coincidence', or the like. Furthermore, this distinction has implications for a wide range of theoretical issues, including the nature of unaccusativity and causativity, split-intransitivity, and the grammar of control and complementation.
The main goal of this contribution is to bring some basic order to the fairly broad and, on first sight at least, somewhat heterogeneous range of uses and meanings associated with these forms. I will argue that the different uses can be grouped into two semantically and morphosyntactically quite different construction types, which I will call STATIVE (proper) and POTENTIVE, respectively.
Section 2 presents the major uses of the 'stative' prefix ma- in Tagalog. In section 3, it is shown that despite superficial similarities the various examples with ma-marked predicates presented in section 2 involve two different constructions and that the prefix ma- belongs to two different morphological paradigms. Section 4, finally, provides a systematization of stative and potentive uses and discusses similarities and differences between the Tagalog system and superficially similar systems in so-called split-S languages.
The study presents a first investigation of two different processes in the L1-acquisition of German: The acquisition of definite pronominal forms and the occurence of finite verbs. The aim of the study is to find out if there are inherent relations between both processes. Inherent relations are understood as developmental relations based on the structural properties which demand a correlated emergence of the finite verb and definite pronominal forms.
The unusual development of the PDE [present-day English] s-genitive can be historically motivated, if the 's form is supposed to be not a mere leftover of the Old English (henceforth OE) casemarking, but the outcome of the merging of two patterns: the inflectional genitive ending (levelled to -s) and the construction "John his book" (henceforth 'possessive-linked genitive') during the Middle and the Early Modem English phases.
As my corpus analysis will show, the semantic and syntactic constraints ruling the occurrence of the 's pattern in the time interval of the rise of the 's-pattern (1400 - 1650) are the same ones as those ruling the occurrence of the possessive-linked genitive.
This hypothesis is further confirmed by cross-language comparison (with the other West Germanic languages, especially Afrikaans).
This paper draws a link between the typological phenomenon of the paradigmatically supported evidentiality evoked by perfect and/or perfectivity and the equally epistemic system of modal verbs in German. The assumption is that, if perfect(ivity) is at the bottom of evidentiality in a wide number of unrelated languages, then it will not be an arbitrary fact that systematic epistemic readings occur also for the modal verbs in German, which were preterite presents originally. It will be demonstrated, for one, how exactly modal verbs in Modem German still betray sensitivity to perfect and perfective contexts, and, second, how perfect(ivity) is prone to evincing epistemic meaning. Although the expectation cannot be satisfied due to a lack of respective data from the older stages of German, a research path is sketched narrowing down the linguistic questions to be asked and dating results to be reached.
As a traditional notion of fundamental importance in linguistics and philosophy (logic), "predication" is fraught with controversial issues. It is thus difficult to delimit the scope of this paper without becoming involved in some major issue. The following distinctions seem to me to be plausible on an intuitive basis. Evidence for why they are useful and legitimate will be found in the body of the paper. The discussion will focus on morphosyntactic predication […].
The basic question is whether POSSESSOR and POSSESSUM are on the same level as the roles of VALENCE, two additional roles as it were. My research on POSSESSION has shown (Seiler 1981:7 ff.) that this is not the case, that there is a difference in principle between POSSESSION and VALENCE. However, there are multiple interactions between the two domains, and these interactions shall constitute the object of the following inquiry. It is hoped that this will contribute to a better understanding both of POSSESSION and of VALENCE.
In this study I want to show, above all, that the linguistic expression of POSSESSION is not a given but represents a problem to be solved by the human mind. We must recognize from the outset that linguistic POSSESSION presupposes conceptual or notional POSSESSION, and I shall say more about the latter in Chapter 3. Certain varieties of linguistic structures in the particular languages are united by the fact that they serve the common purpose of expressing notional POS SESSION. But this cannot be their sole common denominator. How would we otherwise be able to recognize, to understand, to learn and to translate a particular linguistic structure as representing POSSESSION? There must be a properly linguistic common denominator, an invariant, that makes this possible. The invariant must be present both within a particular language and in cross-language comparison. What is the nature of such an invariant? As I intend to show, it consists in operational programs and functional principles corresponding to the purpose of expressing notional POSSESSION. The structures of possessivity which we find in the languages of the world represent the traces of these operations, and from the traces it becomes possible to reconstruct stepwise the operations and functions.
In my Cahuilla Grammar (Seiler 1977:276-282) and in a subsequent paper (Seiler 1980:229-236) I have drawn attention to the fact that many kin terms in this language, especially those that have a corresponding reciprocal term in the ascending direction – like niece or nephew in relation to aunt – occur in two expressions of quite different morphological shape. The following remarks are intended to furnish an explanation of this apparent duplicity.
One of the striking features in modern Newari noun phrases is the wide usage of a set of affixes found in combination with the various elements that may expand a noun into an endocentric construction. At first sight such affixation would appear as a linking device by which the subordinate constituents of a noun phrase are tied to their head noun. Closer investigation, however, reveals a more complex picture which I have attempted to outline in the following paragraphs. The results of this inspection lead to the conclusion that the pattern of affixation displayed in Newari mirrors the close interaction of two converse functional principles: both the syntagmatic function of nominal determination on the one hand and a paradigmatic function – the formation of certain types of lexicalized expressions in Newari – formally tie in with each other by the application of one common technique.
Romance suffix rivalry of action nouns from Middle English verbs in the OED textual prototypes
(2007)
It is my intention to make two major points in this paper: 1. The first has to do with finding a frame within which the modal expressions of one particular Ancient IE [Indoeuropean] language – I have chosen Classical Greek – can be best described. I shall try to point out that the regularities which we find in these expressions must depend on an underlying principle, represented by abstract structures. These structures are semanto-syntactic, which means that the semantic properties or bundles of properties are arranged not in a linear order but in a hierarchical order, analogous to a bracketing in a PS structure. The abstract structures we propose have, of course, a very tentative character. They can only be accepted as far as evidence for them can be furnished. 2. My second point has to do with the modal verb forms that were the object of the studies of most Indo-Europeanists. If in the innermost bracket of a semanto-syntactic structure two semantic properties or bundles of properties can be exchanged without any further change in the total structure, and if this change is correlated with a change in verbal mood forms and nothing else, then I think we are faced with a case where these forms can be said to have a meaning of their own. I shall also try to show how these meanings are to be understood as bundles of features rather than as unanalyzed terms. In my final remarks: I shall try to outline the bearing these views have on comparative IE linguistics.
The aim of this paper is to give the semantic profile of the Greek verb-deriving suffixes -íz(o), -én(o), -év(o), -ón(o), -(i)áz(o), and -ín(o), with a special account of the ending -áo/-ó. The patterns presented are the result of an empirical analysis of data extracted from extended interviews conducted with 28 native Greek speakers in Athens, Greece in February 2009. In the first interview task the test persons were asked to force(=create) verbs by using the suffixes -ízo, -évo, -óno, -(i)ázo, and -íno and a variety of bases which conformed to the ontological distinctions made in Lieber (2004). In the second task the test persons were asked to evaluate three groups of forced verbs with a noun, an adjective, and an adverb, respectively, by using one (best/highly acceptable verb) to six (worst/unacceptable verb) points. In the third task nineteen established verb pairs with different suffixes and the ending -áo/-ó were presented. The test persons were asked to report whether there was some difference between them and what exactly this difference was. The differences reported were transformed into 16 alternations. In the fourth task 21 established verbs with different suffixes were presented. The test persons were asked to give the "opposite" or "near opposite" expression for each verb. The rationale behind this task was to arrive at the meaning of the suffixes through the semantics of the opposites. In the analysis Rochelle's Lieber's (2004) theoretical framework is used. The results of the analysis suggest (i) a sign-based treatment of affixes, (ii) a vertical preference structure in the semantic structure of the head suffixes which takes into account the semantic make-up of the bases, and (iii) the integration of socioexpressive meaning into verb structures.
In the last two decades Philippine languages, and of these especially Tagalog, have acquired a prominent place in linguistic theory. A central role in this discussion was played by two papers written by Schachter (1976 and 1977), who was inspired by Keenan's artcle on the subject from 1976. The most recent contributions on this topic have been from de Wolff (1988) and Shibatani (1988), both of which were published in a collection of essays, edited by Shibatani, with the title Passive and Voice. These works, and several works in-between, deal with the focus system specific to Philippine languages. The main discussion centers around the fact that Philippine languages contain a basic set of 5 to 7 affix focus forms. Their exact number varies not only in the secondary literature, but in the primary sources, i.e. Tagalog grammars, as well, where considerable differences in the number of affix focus forms can be found. All of these works, however, do agree on one point: the Philippine focus system basica1ly consists of agent, patient (=goal or object), benefactive, locative, and instrumental affix forms. Schachter/Otanes (1972) list a number of further forms, and in Drossard (1983 and 1984) we tried to show (in an attempt similar to those of Sapir 1917 and Klimov 1977) that the main criterion for a systematization of the Philippine focus system consists in the difference between the active and stative domains, an attempt which in our opinion was largely misunderstood (cf. the brief remarks in Shibatani (1988) and de Wolff (1988). The present paper is thus, on the one hand, an attempt to repeat and clarify our earlier position, and on the other, a further step towards such a systematization. A first step in this direction was an article on resultativity in Tagalog from 1991. In the present paper this approach will be extended to reciprocity. In the process we will show that it is valid to make a distinction between an active (=controlled action) vs. a stative (=limited controlled action) domain. First, however, we will take a brief look at what makes up the active and stative voice systems.