GindokWeimar
Refine
Document Type
- Preprint (7) (remove)
Has Fulltext
- yes (7)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (7)
Keywords
- Optimalitätstheorie (5)
- Syntax (5)
- Semantik (3)
- Deutsch (2)
- Kontrastive Linguistik (2)
- Phonologie (2)
- Prosodie (2)
- Aufsatzsammlung (1)
- Chomsky (1)
- Deutschunterricht (1)
Institute
- Extern (7) (remove)
Seit gut einem Jahrzehnt wird in Deutschland gewartet: Auf Literatur wird gewartet, auf den großen Berlin-Roman, auf den großen Nachwende-Roman. Und trotz diverser Romane, die Wiedervereinigung und Berlin zum Thema erhoben, ob nun von Günter Grass oder Thomas Brussig, wird weiter gewartet, kann es anscheinend kein Autor recht machen, wird unterhaltsames Erzählen begehrt oder eine Darstellung auf der Höhe moderner Erzählkunst verlangt. Doch die Alternative ist vielleicht falsch gestellt: Könnte denn nicht ein kunstvoll geschriebener Roman mit präziser und variantenreicher Sprache, ausgeklügelten Erzählstrukturen auch unterhaltsam sein? Schließlich ist Döblins nicht gerade schlichter Roman "Berlin Alexanderplatz" ja auch ein Lesevergnügen, vergleichbar mit "Joyces Ulysses" oder Pynchons "Gravity’s Rainbow". Nun lassen sich solche Romane schlecht wiederholen, hinge jeder Nachahmung des Stils der Verdacht an, Plagiat oder Kopie zu sein. Etwas Ähnliches wäre also immer etwas Anderes, neuartig, artifiziell und darin genaueres Abbild seiner Zeit als die Vielzahl schlichter Romane, die von Berlin oder der Wiedervereinigung erzählen. Nun, in letzter Zeit mehren sich im deutschen Feuilleton Stimmen, die eine gewisse, dementsprechende Kunst des Erzählens bei Ulrich Peltzer ausmachen, weswegen hier die Gelegenheit ergriffen wird, einen Gang durch seine drei letzten Publikationen ["Stefan Martinez", "Alle oder keiner", "Bryant Park"] zu unternehmen, um die Entwicklung derselben darzustellen - im Hinterkopf die Frage: Liegt hier vielleicht schon einer der erwarteten großen Berlin-Romane vor?
The argument that I tried to elaborate on in this paper is that the conceptual problem behind the traditional competence/performance distinction does not go away, even if we abandon its original Chomskyan formulation. It returns as the question about the relation between the model of the grammar and the results of empirical investigations – the question of empirical verification The theoretical concept of markedness is argued to be an ideal correlate of gradience. Optimality Theory, being based on markedness, is a promising framework for the task of bridging the gap between model and empirical world. However, this task not only requires a model of grammar, but also a theory of the methods that are chosen in empirical investigations and how their results are interpreted, and a theory of how to derive predictions for these particular empirical investigations from the model. Stochastic Optimality Theory is one possible formulation of a proposal that derives empirical predictions from an OT model. However, I hope to have shown that it is not enough to take frequency distributions and relative acceptabilities at face value, and simply construe some Stochastic OT model that fits the facts. These facts first of all need to be interpreted, and those factors that the grammar has to account for must be sorted out from those about which grammar should have nothing to say. This task, to my mind, is more complicated than the picture that a simplistic application of (not only) Stochastic OT might draw.
The aim of this paper is the exploration of an optimality theoretic architecture for syntax that is guided by the concept of "correspondence": syntax is understood as the mechanism of "translating" underlying representations into a surface form. In minimalism, this surface form is called "Phonological Form" (PF). Both semantic and abstract syntactic information are reflected by the surface form. The empirical domain where this architecture is tested are minimal link effects, especially in the case of "wh"-movement. The OT constraints require the surface form to reflect the underlying semantic and syntactic representations as maximally as possible. The means by which underlying relations and properties are encoded are precedence, adjacency, surface morphology and prosodic structure. Information that is not encoded in one of these ways remains unexpressed, and gets lost unless it is recoverable via the context. Different kinds of information are often expressed by the same means. The resulting conflicts are resolved by the relative ranking of the relevant correspondence constraints.
This paper argues for a particular architecture of OT syntax. This architecture hasthree core features: i) it is bidirectional, the usual production-oriented optimisation (called ‘first optimisation’ here) is accompanied by a second step that checks the recoverability of an underlying form; ii) this underlying form already contains a full-fledged syntactic specification; iii) especially the procedure checking for recoverability makes crucial use of semantic and pragmatic factors. The first section motivates the basic architecture. The second section shows with two examples, how contextual factors are integrated. The third section examines its implications for learning theory, and the fourth section concludes with a broader discussion of the advantages and disadvantages of the proposed model.
Weak function word shift
(2004)
The fact that object shift only affects weak pronouns in mainland Scandinavian is seen as an instance of a more general observation that can be made in all Germanic languages: weak function words tend to avoid the edges of larger prosodic domains. This generalisation has been formulated within Optimality Theory in terms of alignment constraints on prosodic structure by Selkirk (1996) in explaining thedistribution of prosodically strong and weak forms of English functionwords, especially modal verbs, prepositions and pronouns. But a purely phonological account fails to integrate the syntactic licensing conditions for object shift in an appropriate way. The standard semantico-syntactic accounts of object shift, onthe other hand, fail to explain why it is only weak pronouns that undergo object shift. This paper develops an Optimality theoretic model of the syntax-phonology interface which is based on the interaction of syntactic and prosodic factors. The account can successfully be applied to further related phenomena in English and German.
This paper is part of a research project on OT Syntax and the typology of the free relative (FR) construction. It concentrates on the details of an OT analysis and some of its consequences for OT syntax. I will not present a general discussion of the phenomenon and the many controversial issues it is famous for in generative syntax.
In der folgenden Darstellung geht es einerseits darum, an Beispielen aufzuzeigen, inwiefern die schweizerdeutschen Mundarten und die deutsche Standardsprache in Lautung, Formenbildung, Satzbau und Wortschatz auseinandergehen können, andererseits aber immer auch um das Aufweisen von Gemeinsamkeiten. Oft werden nämlich bestimmte Erscheinungen des dialektalen Sprachbaus vorschnell als Eigenarten der Mundart verstanden, obwohl dieselben Erscheinungen auch im gesprochenen Hochdeutschen anzutreffen sind. Somit liegen also häufig nicht Unterschiede zwischen Mundart und Standardsprache vor, sondern Unterschiede zwischen gesprochener Sprache und geschriebener Sprache. [vollständige Überarbeitung für eine zweite Auflage]