Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Working Paper (34) (remove)
Language
- English (23)
- German (8)
- French (2)
- Multiple languages (1)
Has Fulltext
- yes (34)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (34) (remove)
Keywords
- Sprachtypologie (34) (remove)
Mit der im Titel dieses Aufsatzes intendierten Gegenüberstellung eines statischen Phänomens (Transitivität) und eines dynamischen (TRANSITIVIERUNG) ergibt sich im Hinblick auf die Dimension der PARTIZIPATION das Postulat einer Interaktion einer indikativischer Sehweise mit einer prädikativischen. Der indikativische Aspekt der Transitivität ist darin begründet, daß auf der Basis von u.U. verschiedenen Definitionen von Transitivität, von Sprache zu Sprache in unterschiedlicher Weise, INITIANTEN-BETROFFENEN-Konfigurationen gesetzt werden, während sich der prädikativische Aspekt (die TRANSITIVIERUNG) darin manifestiert, daß bilaterale Beziehungen etabliert, d.h. INITIANTEN-BETROFFENEN-Relationen durch morphologischen Aufwand am Verb erzeugt werden, und dies zumeist auf der Basis eines intransitiven, meist patiensorientierten Verbs. Letztlich ergibt sich ein typologischer Zusammenhang zwischen der Setzung von Intransitivität/Transitivität (als Input) und der darauf operierenden TRANSITIVIERUNG, wie er von Nichols (1982, 1984a, 1984b) angedeutet ist: Sprachen, deren Verbbestände einen stärker "intransitiven" Charakter haben, werden mehr transitivieren und umgekehrt. Statistische Aussagen über den intransitiven oder transitiven Charakter von Verbbeständen verschiedener Sprachen können dabei auf zweierlei Weise erfolgen. Zum einen kann man die Verteilung von intransitiv vs. transitiv im Rahmen eines international standardisierten Grundwortschatzes ermitteln, zum anderen kann man INITIANTEN-BETROFFENEN-Konfigurationen in eine bestimmte Anzahl von Untergruppen zerlegen, indem man Rollenschemata angibt. Wir werden im folgenden diese an Tsunoda (1981) ausgerichtete Methode erläutern, aber auch an verschiedenen Stellen unserer Ausführungen "grundwortschatzbezogene" Anmerkungen hinzufügen. Im Endeffekt resultiert auf diese Weise bei einem Vergleich verschiedener Sprachen eine intersprachliche Skala, die es erlaubt, Sprachen zwischen den Nicholsschen Polen "fundamentally intransitive" und "fundamentally transitive" einzuordnen und dabei Beobachtungen zur Ausprägung intransitivierender und transitivierender Verfahren ermöglicht. Bei der Aufarbeitung des dazu nötigen Materials wird es einerseits um die Rektion der Verben (und damit auch um Kasusmarkiertheit), andererseits um die Derivation bzw. Nicht-Derivation ("Simplizität") bestimmter Gruppen von Verben gehen. Doch zunächst einige Bemerkungen zum Phänomen "Transitivität".
The aim of this contribution is to embed the question of an antinomy between "integral" vs. "partial typology", inscribed as the topic of this plenary session, into the comprehensive framework of the dimensional model of the research group on language universals and typology (UNITYP). In this introductory section I shall evoke some cardinal points in the theory of linguistic typology, as viewed "from outside", viz. on the basis of striking parallelisms with psychological typology. Section 2 will permit a brief look on the dimensional model of UNITYP. In section 3 I shall present an illustration of a typological treatment on the basis of one particular dimension. In section 4 I shall draw some conclusions with special reference to the "integral vs. partial" antinomy.
Linguistic continua, their properties, and their interpretation – Hansjakob Seiler ; Skala und Kontinuum: Versuch einer Abgrenzung – Fritz Serzisko ; Der Skalenbegriff in der Linguistik mit einer Demonstration am Beispiel der deutschen Adverbien – Paul-Otto Samuelsdorff ; Kasusrollen im Tagalog: ein intrasprachliches Kontinuum der Kontrolle – Werner Drossard ; Zu einigen Skalen bei der Beschreibung sprachlicher Variation – Manfred Ostrowski Sprachliche Skalen im-typologischen Vergleich (erläutert am Beispiel der Dimension "Apprehension") – Ulrike Kölver
The approach outlined in the present paper is based on observations made with African languages. Although the 1000-odd African languages display a remarkable extent of structural variation, there are certain structures that do not seem to occur in Africa. Thus, to our knowledge, an African language having anything that could be called an ergative case or a numeral classifier system has not been discovered so far. It may turn out that our approach can, in a modified form, be made applicable to languages outside Africa. This , however, is a possibility that has not been considered here. The present approach is based essentially on diachronic findings in that it uses observations on language evolution in order to account for structural differences between languages. Thus, it has double potential: apart from describing and explaining typological diversity it can also be material to reconstructing language history.
At the end of last year, I designed an inquiry about the present state of linguistic typology in the form of a questionnaire. It was an attempt to cover the whole field by formulating the questions which seemed most relevant to it. This questionnaire is reproduced, without modifications, following this preface. In the first days of this year, it was sent to 33 linguists who I know are working in the field. The purpose was to form, on the basis of responses received, a picture of convergences and divergences among trends of present-day linguistic typology. The idea was also to get an objective basis for my report on "The present state of linguistic typology", to be delivered at the XIII. International Congress of Linguistics at Tokyo, 1982.
Même dans le domaine de la typologie il est nécessaire de s'interroger sur le type de suppositions et sur le status des operations que l'on conduit pour en comprendre 1a valeur epistemologique, pour – en employant les mots de Ferdinand de Saussure – "montrer au linguistique ce qu'il fait". Car il est hors de doute que – pour le dire encore avec le maître genevois – dans une discipline qui s'occupe d'un phénomène humain si comp1exe et historiquement variable tel que le langage, "c'est le point de vue qui crée l'objet". L'objet d'une analyse n'est pas une chose qui 'va de soi'; il suffit de penser aux changements au cours du developpement de la linguistique du concept même de 'langue', tout comme celui de 'matière' en physique, au fur et à mesure que les connaissances ont avancé. Or, il y a dans les théories linguistiques les plus recentes et aussi à la page des suppositions qui sont suggérées, voire conditionnées, par le cadre theorique choisi, mais dont la réalité empirique reste à vérifier ou, ce qui revient au même, a falsifier.
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.
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.
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.
Recent developments in typology which put the notions of linguistic function and operation into the focus of interest and establish them as the ultimate base on which languages are comparable prove fruitful for contrastive linguistics. The functional approach is illustrated in a contrastive analysis of Persian and German relative clauses. In a sketch of the theory of the relative clause, four grammatical functions to be fulfilled by relative constructions are deduced, and the two languages are compared with respect to the various ways in which they realize them. Learning problems can thus be predicted with greater confidence, be explained more satisfactorily, and be remedied more efficiently, because they are seen as learner's attempts to transfer, beside the underlying functions and operations, which the languages do have in common, the techniques of their realization, which they do not have in common.