Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Article (8)
- Part of a Book (5)
- Working Paper (5)
- Conference Proceeding (4)
- Review (1)
Has Fulltext
- yes (23)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (23)
Keywords
- Valenz <Linguistik> (23) (remove)
Institute
- Extern (1)
Insgesamt zeigen die hier untersuchten Daten, dass die Bildung konversiver Idiome nach bestimmten Prinzipien, jedoch nicht nach produktiven Regeln erfolgt. Die meisten Faktoren, die an der konversiven Transformation in der Phraseologie beteiligt sind, sind konzeptueller Natur und führen zurück auf die semantisch-syntaktischen Eigenschaften des betreffenden Idioms. Aus der Sicht der Syntax ist es entscheidend, dass das betreffende Idiom über zwei aktive Valenzen verfügt. Normalerweise werden diese Valenzen semantisch mit dem Agens sowie mit dem Patiens gefüllt, seltener mit dem Agens und dem Adressaten oder Benefiziär. Syntaktisch gesehen hat das "linke" Mitglied des konversiven Idiom-Paares eine Subjekt-Valenz (entsprechend dem Agens) und eine Valenz des Dativobjekts (entsprechend dem Patiens oder dem Adressaten/Benefiziär).
Together with its central complements, verbs model basic patterns of interaction. The constellations of these complements in turn correspond to central patterns of the argument structure. Nominative and accusative complements formally occupy the first and second positions (subject and object), but they also have certain semantic preferences. The formal function of the dative is less pronounced, where it occurs (ditransitive verbs) the semantic imprint of the frame ("transfer") is very strong. This corresponds to the meaning of a core group of corresponding verbs. Other verbs that allow this pattern are used more often in other valence structures and the ditransitive use appears as a systematic way of personal extension of object‑related activities. This will be discussed with reference to the verbs 'zeigen' and (in a different way) 'lehren'.
Valenz ist eine Zeitbombe, die im Lexikon deponiert ist und in der Grammatik detoniert. Im vorliegenden Beitrag geht es um die Grundlegung einer neuen Valenztheorie, der die Aufgabe zukommt, diese Bombe so empfindlich zu konstruieren, daß sie nicht mehr entschärft werden kann. Dabei möchte ich gleich am Anfang betonen, daß die Valenztheorie – genau und nur im Sinne der obigen Metapher – eine grammatische Teiltheorie darstellt, die nicht an ein bestimmtes Grammatikmodell gebunden ist. Zwar ist die Valenztheorie m enger Verbindung mit der Dependenzgrammatik entstanden, Valenztheorie und Dependenzgrammatik haben jedoch klar unterschiedliche Gegenstände. Auf die Bestimmung dieser Gegenstände komme ich am Ende meiner Erörterungen zu sprechen (vgl. 5.). Es soll von folgenden Arbeitsdefinitionen ausgegangen werden: (I) Valenzpotenz (kurz: Valenz) ist die Potenz relationaler Lexemwörter (Lexemwort' im Sinne von Coseriu), die zu realisierende grammatische Struktur zu prädeterminieren (vgl. auch Welke 1993; zur Relationalität vgl. Lehmann 1992:437f.). Aus dieser Arbeitsdefinition folgt, (a) daß Valenz für einen Teil der grammatischen Realisierung verantwortlich ist, aber auch (b) daß Valenz bei weitem nicht für alles in der grammatischen Realisierung verantwortlich ist. Eine ganze Reihe von morphologischen, syntaktischen, semantischen und konzeptuellen Prozessen wIe z.B. Derivation (verbale Präfixbildung), Konjugationstyp, syntaktische Konversion, Serialisierung, Graduierungen der Transitivität, Determinierung, Fokussierung usw. interagiert mit der Valenz, sobald diese eine grammatische Struktur mitzuerzeugen hat (vgl. auch 3.6).
Dulong/Rawang is a Tibeto-Burman language spoken on both sides of the China/Myanmar (Burma) border just south and cast of Tibet. [...] In this chapter, I will be using data of the Mvtwang (Mvt River) dialect, which is considered the most central of those dialects in Myanmar and so has become something of a standard for writing and intergroup communication, though most of the phenomena we will be discussing are general to dialects in both China and Myanrnar. I will use the short form 'Rawang' in referring to this dialect.
I describe an analysis of valence-changing verbal morphology implemented as a library extending the LinGO Grammar Matrix customization system. This analysis is based on decomposition of these operations into rule components, which in turn are expressed as lexical rule supertypes that implement specific, isolatable constraints. I also show how common variations of these constraints can be abstracted and parameterized by their axes of variation. I then demonstrate how these constraints can be recomposed in various combinations to provide broad coverage of the typological variation of valence change found in the world's languages. I evaluate the coverage of this library on five held-out world languages that exhibit these phenomena, achieving 79% coverage and 2% overgeneration.
Unrealized arguments in SBCG
(2020)
In null instantiation (NI) an optionally unexpressed argument receives either anaphoric or existential interpretation (Fillmore, 1986; Mauner & Koenig, 2000; Kay, 2002; Ruppenhofer & Michaelis, 2010, 2014). Examples include Lexically licensed NI (Nixon resigned.), Contextual accessibility NI (Can I see?), Labelese (Contains alcohol), Diary NI (Got up, got out of bed, dragged a comb across my head), Generic-habitual NI (The police only arrest (people) when there's probable cause). We think of a predicator as having NI potential when one or more of its frame elements may remain unexpressed under certain conditions. While one cannot accurately predict a predicator's NI potential based either on semantic factors (e.g., Aktionsart class of the verb, as in Hovav & Levin (1998)) or pragmatic factors (e.g., relative discourse prominence of arguments, as in Goldberg (2006)), NI potential, while highly constrained, is not simply lexical idiosyncrasy, but is instead the product of both lexical and constructional licensing. In the latter case, a construction can endow a verb with NI potential that it would not otherwise have. Using representational tools of Sign Based Construction Grammar (Sag 2012, a.o), we offer a lexical treatment of null instantiation that covers both distinct patterns of construal of null instantiated arguments and the difference between listeme-based and contextually licensed, thus construction-based, null complementation
Grammatical relations, particularly the notions of transitivity, case marking, ergativity, passive and antipassive have been a favourite subject of typological research during the last decade, but surprisingly, the notion of valency has been of marginal interest in cross-linguistic studies, though the syntactic and semantic status of participants is, to a great extent, determined by the relational properties of the verb. Valency is the property of the verb which determines the obligatory and optional number of its participants, their morphosyntactic form, their semantic class membership (e.g. ± animate, ± human) ,and their semantic role (e.g. agent, patient, recipient). The valency inherently gives information on the nature of the semantic and syntactic relations that hold between the verb and its participants. If a verb is combined with more participants than allowed or less than required, or if the participants do not show the required morphosyntactic form or class membership, the clause is ungrammatical. In other words, it is not sufficient to consider only the number of actants as a matter of valency, but it is only acceptable if all semantic and morphosyntactic properties of the relation between a verb and its participants that are predictable from the verb are included. The predictability of these properties results from their inherent givenness, and it does not seem reasonable to count some inherently given relational properties as a matter of valency, but not others (compare Helbig (1971:38f) and Heidolph et ale (1981:479) who distinguish between the quantitative, syntactic and semantic aspect of valency).
It is the aim of this paper to evaluate the various types of sentential complementation available in terms of complement control cross-linguistically. I will propose a lexical classification of control classes on the basis of the instantiated subordination patterns. I want to focus on an important distinction, namely that of structural vs. inherent control. Structural control is found with predicates that select a clausal complement whose structure requires argument identification and thus 'induces' control. Infinitival complements are prototypical cases for this kind of control because in most languages infinitival complements can only 'survive' in structures of control or raising. The interesting question is which predicates license structural control and which cross-linguistic differences emerge between potential licensors. Inherent control is found with predicates that require control readings independent of the instantiated structure of sentential complementation (e.g. a directive predicate such as zwingen 'force'). In addition, I will recapitulate and add arguments for the dual lexical-syntactic nature of complement control.
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.
The collection of papers in this volume presents results of a collaborative project between the School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS) in London, the Zentrum für allgemeine Sprachwissenschaft, Typologie und Universalienforschung (ZAS) in Berlin, and the University of Leiden. All three institutions have a strong interest in the linguistics of Bantu languages, and in 2003 decided to set up a network to compare results and to provide a platform for on-going discussion of different topics on which their research interests converged. The project received funding from the British Academy International Networks Programme, and from 2003 to 2006 seven meetings were held at the institutions involved under the title Bantu Grammar: Description and Theory, indicating the shared belief that current research in Bantu is best served by combining the description of new data with theoretically informed analysis. During the life-time of the network, and partly in conjunction with it, larger externally funded Bantu research projects have been set up at all institutions: projects on word-order and morphological marking and on phrasal phonology in Leiden, on pronominal reference, agreement and clitics in Romance and Bantu at SOAS, and on focus in Southern Bantu languages at ZAS. The papers in this volume provide a sampling of the work developed within the network and show, or so we think, how fruitful the sharing of ideas over the last three years has been. While the current British Academy-funded network is coming to an end in 2006, we hope that the cooperative structures we have established will continue to develop - and be expanded - in the future, providing many future opportunities to exchange findings and ideas about Bantu linguistics.