Refine
Document Type
- Working Paper (4)
- Article (2)
- Part of a Book (2)
- Report (1)
Has Fulltext
- yes (9) (remove)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (9) (remove)
Keywords
- Nomen (9) (remove)
Institute
Chinese is often taken as a prime example of an isolating language. Most relation marking takes the form of particles rather than affixes or inflections. Possibly relevant to the facts that are presented below, Chinese has been argued to not have grammaticalized the sort of pivot constructions normally associated with grammatical relations. That is, it has been argued to not have any particular alignment, as there are no grammatical relations, and the clause pattern is simply topic-comment (Chao 1968, Lü 1979, LaPolla 1993, 1995, 2009; LaPolla & Poa 2005, 2006). We will first talk more generally about structures found in Sino-Tibetan languages, and then focus on Modern Mandarin Chinese.
U radu će biti riječi o imenicama koje označuju mjeru i koje se redovito pojavljuju u akuzativu iako bi sintaktički na tome mjestu trebao doći koji drugi oblik. Učestalom upotrebom u akuzativnome obliku te imenice gube svoje osnovno morfološko obilježje – promjenjivost, a time i svoju nedvojbenu pripadnost imenicama kao vrsti riječi i nameću pitanje kako ih obraditi u rječniku.
Children […] growing up with highly inflected languages such as Modern Greek will frequently hear different grammatical forms of a given lexeme used in different grammatical and semantic-pragmatic contexts. In spite of the fact that the Greek noun is not as highly inflected as the verb, acquisition of nominal inflection of this inflecting-fusional language is quite complex, comprising the three categories of case, number, and gender. As is usual in this type of language, the formation of case-number forms obeys different patterns that apply to largely arbitrary classes of nominal lexemes partially based on gender. Further, frequency of the occurrence of the three gender classes and case-number forms of nouns greatly differs in spoken Greek, regarding both the types and tokens. […] [A] child learning an inflecting-fusional language like Greek must construct different inflectional patterns depending not only on parts of speech but also on subclasses within a given part of speech, such as gender classes of nouns and inflectional classes within or (exceptionally) across genders. It is therefore to be expected that the early development of case and number distinctions will apply to specific nouns and subclasses of nouns rather than the totality of Greek nouns. The two main theoretical approaches of morphological development that will be discussed in the present paper are the usage-based approach and the pre- and protomorphology approach.
Außerhalb der indoeuropäischen Sprachen [erfreut sich] [d]ie Kategorie „Adjektiv“ […] einer geringeren Verbreitung als man als Laie vermuten würde, und es zeigen sich in nicht-indoeuropäischen Sprachen von den europäischen Sprachen stark verschiedene Aufteilungen der Welt in Nomina und Verba. Eine bisher nicht beschriebene Verteilung von Konzepten auf Wortarten in der Sprache Guarani, welche hauptsächlich in Paraguay gesprochen wird, ist das Thema dieser Arbeit.
Specificity distinction
(2001)
This paper is concerned with semantic noun phrase typology, focusing on the question of how to draw fine-grained distinctions necessary for an accurate account of natural language phenomena. In the extensive literature on this topic, the most commonly encountered parameters of classification concern the semantic type of the denotation of the noun phrase, the familiarity or novelty of its referent, the quantificational/nonquantificational distinction (connected to the weak/strong dichotomy), as well as, more recently, the question of whether the noun phrase is choice-functional or not (see Reinhart 1997, Winter 1997, Kratzer 1998, Matthewson 1999). In the discussion that follows I will attempt to make the following general points: (i) phenomena involving the behavior of noun phrases both within and across languages point to the need of establishing further distinctions that are too fine-grained to be caught in the net of these typologies; (ii) some of the relevant distinctions can be captured in terms of conditions on assignment functions; (iii) distribution and scopal peculiarities of noun phrases may result from constraints they impose on the way variables they introduce are to be assigned values.
Section 2 reviews the typology of definite noun phrases introduced in Farkas 2000 and the way it provides support for the general points above. Section 3 examines some of the problems raised by recognizing the rich variety of 'indefinite' noun phrases found in natural language and by attempting to capture their distribution and interpretation. Common to the typologies discussed in the two sections is the issue of marking different types of variation in the interpretation of a noun phrase. In the light of this discussion, specificity turns out to be an epiphenomenon connected to a family of distinctions that are marked differently in different languages.
Wortformen wie Berliner und Potsdamer treten in pränominaler attributiver Funktion auf: eine Position, in der sowohl Adjektive als auch Substantive stehen können. Substantive kommen in der Position vor als sächsische Genitive (Leos Auto), als vorangestellte Genitivattribute (des Vaters Pflicht) oder als Bestandteile einer engen Apposition (Bundeskanzler Schröder). Adjektive stehen an dieser Stelle als adjektivische Attribute (rotes Auto). Gegen jede dieser Interpretationen von Berliner sprechen jeweils formale Argumente, die im wesentlichen darauf hinauslaufen, daß Berliner in Berliner Ballen niemals flektiert wird - weder wie ein Substantiv noch wie ein Adjektiv.
Welcher Wortart sind Wortformen wie Berliner in Berliner Ballen also zuzuordnen? Zur Beantwortung dieser Frage folgen zunächst einige (kommentierte) Literaturstellen, anschließend werde ich die Bezeichnung 'Stadtadjektive' einführen, ich nehme also zum Zwecke der Benennung eine Entscheidung vorweg. Darauf folgt die Untersuchung: das Verhalten der Stadtadjektive in Bezug auf Flexion, Derivation, Komposition und Syntax.
The present article is a crosslinguistic discussion of the distinction between a word class of nouns and a word class of verbs in the UNI TYP framework of the dimension of PARTICIPATION (for a first overall sketch of PARTICIPATION see Seiler 1984). According to this framework the noun/verb-distinction (henceforth N/V-D) must be regarded as a gradable, continuous phenomenon ranging from the stage of a clear-cut distinction with no overlap to almost a non-distinction. Although there is no question that most, if not all, languages do differentiate between nouns and verbs, it is also quite apparent that the languages do so to a different degree and by different means, and that it only makes sense to use the terms "noun" and "verb" in different languages when one actually has a common functional denominator in mind (see below). After a general introduction to the notion of a noun/verb-continuum (chapter 1) the reader will be presented with a survey of languages as diverse as German. English, Russian, Hebrew, Turkish, Salish. and Tongan (see chapter 2) in support of the continuum hypothesis. In chapter 3 the facts are coordinated in an overall pattern of regularities underlying the Increase or decrease of categorical restrictions between the respective word classes. Also, chapter 3 raises the issue to what degree a N/V-D can be considered a matter of certain lexemes or a matter of the morphosyntactic environment of certain lexical units. Lastly, we shall seek for an answer to the question why it is not a necessary requirement for languages to draw a sharp distinction between a word class of nouns and a word class of verbs.
Bei dieser Arbeit geht es darum, das Funktionieren der Nomen:Verb-Relationierung in ausgewählten Einzelsprachen Nordasiens darzustellen. Es sollen (a) die sprachlichen Kategorisierungen innerhalb des betrachteten Bereichs beschrieben und (b) die Variation bei der Kodifizierung untersucht werden. Drei Sprachen Nordasiens werden herangezogen: Wogulisch, Jurakisch und Jukagirisch. Das Wogulische (7700 Sprecher) ist eine ugrische Sprache; Wogulisch und Ostjakisch werden als obugrische Sprachen zusammengefasst und dem etwas entfernter verwandten Ungarischen gegenübergestellt. Das Wogulische lebt in Westsibirien zwischen Ural und Ob; es zerfällt in vier Dialektgruppen: Nordwogulisch (Sosva, obere Lozva), Südwestwogulisch (Pelymka), Tavda-Wogulisch und Südostwogulisch (Konda). Das Jurakische (oder Nenzische) ist eine samojedische Sprache. Es bildet mit dem Enzischen und dem Nganassanischen die nordsamojedische Gruppe; die nordsamojedische Gruppe steht als eine Untereinheit der samojedischen Sprachen dem Selkupischen einerseits und dem Kamassinischen andererseits gegenüber. Das Jurakische wird in einem weiten Gebiet im äußersten Norden der Sowjetunion von der Halbinsel Kanin im Westen bis zum Mündungsgebiet des Jenissej im Osten gesprochen. Es zerfällt in zwei deutlich voneinander geschiedene Dialektgruppen, das Tundrajurakische (etwa 27 000 Sprecher) und das Waldjurakische (etwa 1000 Sprecher). Das Jukagirische (600 Sprecher) ist lange als Isolat betrachtet worden, hat sich aber inzwischen als mit den finno-ugrischen und den samojedischen Sprachen genetisch verwandt herausgestellt (vgl. Collinder 1940 u. 1957, Tailleur 1959; Krejnovit 1982, S. 3 f.). Es wird in zwei Dialekten (Tundra- und Kolyma-Jukagirisch) im äußersten Nordosten Sibiriens gesprochen.