Refine
Year of publication
- 2019 (90) (remove)
Document Type
- Article (31)
- Review (31)
- Book (10)
- Doctoral Thesis (10)
- Contribution to a Periodical (4)
- Conference Proceeding (3)
- Bachelor Thesis (1)
Has Fulltext
- yes (90)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (90)
Keywords
- Contact-sheets (2)
- Direct Cinema (2)
- Dokumentarfilme (2)
- Filmgespräche (2)
- Gisela Tuchtenhagen (2)
- Klaus Wildenhahn (2)
- Richard Leacock (2)
- Semantics (2)
- Uncontrolled Cinema (2)
- language production (2)
Institute
- Neuere Philologien (90) (remove)
Three experiments investigated the interpretation and production of pronouns in German. The first two experiments probed the preferred interpretation of a pronoun in contexts containing two potential antecedents by having participants complete a sentence fragment starting either with a personal pronoun or a d-pronoun. We systematically varied three properties of the potential antecedents: syntactic function, linear position, and topicality. The results confirm a subject preference for personal pronouns. The preferred interpretation of d-pronouns cannot be captured by any of the three factors alone. Although a d-pronoun preferentially refers to the non-topic in many cases, this preference can be overridden by the other two factors, linear position and syntactic function. In order to test whether interpretive preferences follow from production biases as proposed by the Bayesian theory of Kehler et al. (2008), a third experiment had participants freely produce a continuation sentence for the contexts of the first two experiments. The results show that personal pronouns are used more often to refer to a subject than to an object, recapitulating the subject preference found for interpretation and thereby confirming the account of Kehler et al. (2008). The interpretation results for the d-pronoun likewise follow from the corresponding production data.
This dissertation deals with the lexical, morphological, syntactic, and semantic properties of (VP )idioms and their behavior in combination with restrictive relative clauses, raising, constituent fronting, wh-movement, VP-ellipsis, pronominalization, the progressive form, verb placement, passivization, conjunction modification, and the N-after-N construction. It provides empirical evidence towards a combinatorial analysis of both semantically non-decomposable idioms (SNDIs) and semantically decomposable idioms (SDIs) and contributes to the (formal) formulation of such an account.
The Introduction (Chapter 1) first motivates why idioms are an exciting and challenging phenomenon and then gives a definition of the term idiom, a classification of idioms, and an overview of the wide spectrum of idiom analyses found in the linguistic literature.
Chapter 2, “Idioms as evidence for the proper analysis of relative clauses”, shows that the Modification Analysis beats the other two major analyses of restrictive relative clauses (RRCs), namely Raising and Matching, as (i) the latter two lead to a loss of numerous empirical generalizations in syntax and morphology, and (ii) contrary to the assumption in the literature, idioms in RRCs can, in fact, be licensed without literal syntactic movement of the RRC-head, which makes modification fully compatible with idiom reconstruction effects.
Chapter 3, “How frozen are frozen idioms?”, presents new empirical observations on the lexical, morphological, and syntactic flexibility of kick the bucket and displays that this idiom is not completely frozen with respect to its NP complement, the progressive form, and, in some contexts, even passivization. The chapter concludes that analyses of kick the bucket as a single lexical entry should be replaced by analyses of this and other SNDIs with a syntactically regular shape as consisting of individual word-level lexical entries that combine according to the standard rules of syntax.
This idea is taken up in Chapter 4, “The syntactic flexibility of semantically non-decomposable idioms”, which – based on the differences between English and German with regard to verb placement, constituent fronting, and passivization as well as a short outlook on Estonian and French – spells out a combinatorial analysis of SNDIs and augments it with a semantic analysis formulated in Lexical Resource Semantics, according to which some idiom parts make identical semantic contributions to the overall meaning of the idiom. The analysis further suggests that the syntactic flexibility of idioms is due to the semantic and pragmatic constraints on the involved constructions, rather than the syntactic encoding of the idioms.
Chapter 5, “Modification of literal meanings in semantically non-decomposable idioms”, reviews Ernst’s (1981) classical three types of idiom modification (internal, external, and conjunction) to then closely investigate the most challenging type, namely conjunction modification, in SNDIs. Based on naturally occurring examples of four SNDIs (two English, two German), it sketches an analysis in terms of two or more conjoined independent propositions, each of which can be the result of figurative reinterpretation. One of the propositions contains the idiomatic meaning, in (one of) the other(s), the meaning of the modifier applies to the literal meaning of the idiom’s noun.
Chapter 6, “Semantically decomposable idioms in the N-after-N construction”, offers a formal syntactic and semantic account of SDIs like pull strings in the N-after-N construction, as in Kim pulled string after string to get Alex into a good college. While the idiom contributes the type of entity at stake (‘string’ in the case of pull strings), N-after-N contributes that there are several instantiations of that type of entity and that these are subject to temporal or spatial succession. The chapter first summarizes the empirical properties of N-after-N, then provides an account of N-after-N in Head-driven Phrase Structure Grammar (HPSG), presents an updated version of the account of SDIs suggested in Chapter 2 within HPSG, and combines it with the HPSG account of N-after-N.
Wer sich mit Kinderliteratur aus wissenschaftlicher Perspektive befasst, kommt nicht umhin, über age nachzudenken. Age spielt in seinen vielen Formen und Facetten im gesamten System Kinderliteratur eine entscheidende Rolle. In Fundamental Concepts of Children’s Literature Research beschreibt Hans-Heino Ewers den Beginn der Kinderliteratur als den Moment, in dem Kinder als die Adressaten eines Textes benannt werden (vgl. Ewers 2009, S. 10). Perry Nodelman geht in seinem Buch The Hidden Adult der Frage nach, warum Texte an Kinder adressiert werden und rückt Konstruktionen von Kindern als besonderer, literarischer Nachrichten bedürfend in den Fokus.
German free relative constructions allow for case requirement mismatches under two types of circumstances. The first is when the case required in the embedded clause is more complex (NOM < ACC < GEN < DAT) than the case required in the main clause, and the relative pronoun takes the form of the embedded clause case. The second type of circumstance is when the form that corresponds to the two required cases is syncretic. I propose an analysis that combines Caha’s (2009) case hierarchy in Nanosyntax with Van Riemsdijk’s (2006a) concept of Grafting. By placing case features as separate heads in the syntax, a less complex case can be Grafted into a different clause, explaining the first type of circumstance. The second type makes reference to the fact that syncretic forms are inserted via the same lexical entry (Superset Principle). A cross-linguistic comparison shows that it is language-specific whether a more complex case requirement in the main or embedded clause causes non-matching non-syncretic free relatives to be grammatical. For all languages it holds that the relative pronoun appears in the most complex case required, which provides additional evidence for case being complex and more complex cases being able to license less complex cases.
Lange Zeit herrschte im Forschungsdiskurs die Meinung vor, dass Kinder- und Jugendliteratur »aus sich selbst heraus verständlich sei und keiner literaturwissenschaftlichen Interpretationskunst bedürfe« (Gansel / Korte 2009, S. 7). Aus diesem Grund standen Fragen nach der Machart der Texte im Verhältnis zu Fragen nach ihren »Inhalte[n], Themen, pädagogische[n] Strategien und so genannte[n] ›Botschaften‹« (ebd.) häufig im Hintergrund. Diese Vorstellung hat sich mittlerweile jedoch gewandelt, was nicht zuletzt auf eine grundlegende Veränderung in der literarischen Landschaft seit Ende des 20. Jahrhunderts zurückzuführen ist...
Alles Fake, reine Konstruktion. Oder? : narrativierte Unsicherheit in Tamara Bachs "Marienbilder"
(2019)
Im Strukturalismus wird Literatur verstanden als ein sekundäres modellbildendes System (vgl. Titzmann 1977, S. 69). Sekundär bedeutet, dass Literatur ein neues zeichentheoretisches System konstituiert, in dem die Signifikate der normalsprachlichen Zeichen eine neue Bedeutung bekommen; der Text erschafft folglich das Modell einer Welt und entspricht demnach nicht nur nicht der Realität, sondern soll es auch erst gar nicht (vgl. ebd., S. 65– 85). Dieses erschaffene Modell einer Welt meint das, was im Folgenden als Konstruktion bezeichnet wird. Was geschieht jedoch, wenn nicht einmal auszumachen ist, ob dem, was in der erzählten Welt geschieht, ein diegetischer Wahrheitsgehalt zugesprochen werden kann oder nicht? Und wie wird diese Unsicherheit narrativ erzeugt? ...
Cette communication a pour but de révéler l'implication du personnage dans des discours hégémoniques qui mettent en scène une société de la diversité par une apparente absence de la ligne de couleur. Deux générations seront confrontées existentiellement- et ontologiquement avec des imaginaires interchangeables autour de la notion de « Noir de France ». Les deux romans Blues pour Élise (2010) et Ces âmes chagrines (2011) offrent un parallélisme dans leur description similaire, tant sur le plan diachronique que dans la variation des significations des points de vue.
L'auteur sénégalaise Ken Bugul focalise dans son oeuvre surtout des destins féminins. Dans le cas du roman La Folie et la Mort les mouvements des héroïnes se réalisent dans un paysage urbain et rural centralisé par le pouvoir d'un parti unique. En subissant constamment la violence, les deux femmes se métamorphosent. À travers leurs changements intérieurs et extérieurs le récit réalise la mise en scène d'une dictature qui ne laisse guère une lueur d'espoir. Cette conversation propose une lecture qui perçoit l'ouverture d'un discours critique par un tiers espace littéraire, voyant la métamorphose autant comme destruction que comme point de départ.
Rebecca Walkowitz’s observation that contemporary novels tend to be “born translated” involves the notion that they equally tend to be “born in motion”; they are often already, conceptually, on the road to faraway readers during their moments of conception. A first, more narrowly defined objective of my essay is to examine the narrative strategies used in Dave Eggers’s What Is the What (2007) and Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie’s Half of a Yellow Sun (2007) that facilitate and respond to this dimension of motion in particular travels of memory. In a broader scope, this analysis will be embedded into an appraisal of the potentials of recent theorizing both in narratology (i.e. the study of narrative) and in memory studies to understand the dynamics at play in the reception of far-travelled narrative memory media. It is a central proposition of this essay that the two research fields share an amplitude of common concerns with regard to questions of reception and should therefore be brought into a close dialogue. The present study explores how some of these intersections between narratology and memory studies can be approached through the notions of “distance” and “proximity.”
This introduction outlines new developments in the field of cultural and media memory studies in the wake of the transcultural turn. It pays specific attention to the twofold dynamics of memory’s travel and locatedness. While in recent memory studies discourse there has been a tendency to see travel as the inspiration for innovative research, locatedness has become associated with old-fashioned, bounded approaches. Rather than reproduce the positive charging of travel and negative charging of locatedness, this special issue aims to emphasise the complexity of memory dynamics resulting from the interaction of the two poles and to make visible that the production, (re)mediation, and reception of the past in the present is constituted by both travel and locatedness.
Variation in enclitic possessive constructions in Southern Italian dialects: a syntactic analysis
(2019)
This thesis investigates enclitic possessive constructions (EPCs) that are a widespread and frequently used construction among Southern Italian dialects (SIDs). In general, EPCs display the structure N-EP where the N is a (singular) kinship noun and the EP the enclitic possessive directly attached to the kinship noun. However, there is a huge variation among SIDs as well as within the system of a specific dialect. The aim of the present work is twofold. The empirical part contributes new data to this topic as well as a detailed and organized overview of (micro-) variational observations from data of different sources including for example the linguistic maps of the AIS (Atlante Italo-Svizzero). The main aspects of variation are (a) the presence or absence of an obligatory article (D – N-EP vs. N-EP), (b) the possibility of plural kinship noun-EPCs and (c) the compatibility of a specific person-EP with a specific kinship noun within a dialect. Based on the empirical findings, the syntactic part proposes a syntactic analysis for EPCs focusing on the following research questions: 1) In some dialects, singular kinship noun-EPCs display an obligatory article with the 3SG.EP. What is the reason for this article-based person split (1st and 2nd vs. 3rd)? And further, how are both structures, with and without an article, represented in the syntax, i.e. in DP and PossP? 2) In some dialects, plural kinship nouns are allowed to occur in EPCs, and in others, they are disallowed. With respect to this dichotomy, what is the role of NumP? 3) Kinship nouns are relational and express inalienability. How can this property be captured in the syntax? I argue that the article-based person split is due to the deictic properties of the possessor-persons, meaning that 1SG.EPs and 2SG.EPs need to be bound by the speaker’s coordinates in the left periphery of the clause, whereas 3SG.EPs do not. As a consequence, 1SG and 2SG EPCs move to the highest position, i.e. to D°, and 3SG EPCs can stay lower in the structure, i.e. in Poss°. Based on this dichotomy, I argue that both D° and Poss° can host EPCs. In order to capture the (im)possibility of plural kinship nouns-EPCs, I argue that NumP, as a parametrised position, can block or allow further movement of the kinship noun to Poss° (and to D°). With respect to the relational nature of kinship nouns I propose that they are base-generated within the complement position of a relator phrase (RP), and EPs in Poss°. In order to derive EPCs, the kinship nouns must move out of their position. The kinship noun lands in NumP, the position where further movement is probably blocked. If further movement is allowed, the kinship noun merges to the left of the EP, resulting in a complete EPC in Poss°. The last leg of the movement to D° depends on the presence of absence of an obligatory article. The phenomenon of EPCs displays a huge variation among SIDs and needs to be investigated from different perspectives and different linguistic areas. The present work contributes to the puzzle of EPCs new data and a syntactic analysis.