Linguistik
Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Article (1213)
- Part of a Book (784)
- Working Paper (254)
- Review (181)
- Conference Proceeding (166)
- Preprint (122)
- Book (108)
- Part of Periodical (64)
- Report (58)
- Doctoral Thesis (23)
- Periodical (10)
- Other (4)
- Magister's Thesis (3)
- magisterthesis (3)
- Contribution to a Periodical (2)
- Bachelor Thesis (1)
- Course Material (1)
- Diploma Thesis (1)
- diplomthesis (1)
- Habilitation (1)
- Lecture (1)
Language
- English (1397)
- German (1061)
- Croatian (298)
- Portuguese (120)
- Turkish (43)
- Multiple languages (25)
- French (21)
- mis (16)
- Spanish (7)
- Polish (4)
Keywords
- Deutsch (437)
- Syntax (151)
- Linguistik (129)
- Englisch (123)
- Semantik (112)
- Spracherwerb (96)
- Phonologie (85)
- Rezension (77)
- Kroatisch (68)
- Fremdsprachenlernen (67)
Institute
- Extern (438)
- Institut für Deutsche Sprache (IDS) Mannheim (113)
- Neuere Philologien (43)
- Sprachwissenschaften (43)
- Universitätsbibliothek (4)
- Sprach- und Kulturwissenschaften (3)
- Gesellschaftswissenschaften (2)
- Medizin (2)
- Präsidium (2)
- SFB 268 (2)
The present paper is an attempt to describe a particular semantic domain in Thai, that of local relations, in terms of a gradual interconnection of what traditional descriptions usually regard as distinct and isolated categories. It is based on the well-known observation that isolating languages like Thai typically display a high degree of 'multifunctionality', or else of syntactic 'versatility' of very many lexical items. […] The semantic area studied in the following pages yields a clear systematic interconnection of three different categories, viz. that of nouns – as the focal instance of maximum syntactic independence –, that of verbs – as, conversely, the focal instance of maximally relational concepts –, and, as an intermediary category between these two, that of prepositions which the system lexically feeds from both these opposite ends. The examples given in the course of this paper have been obtained from published grammatical literature, from Thai texts, and from informants.
Zum "prädikativen" Infinitiv
(1984)
Als eine der grundlegenden Systematisierungen im Bereich der Kausativität und damit – aus der Sicht des Kölner Universalienprojekts – der Technik KAUSATIVIERUNG – hat sich meines Erachtens die von Comrie (1981:165ff) eingeführte – und von H. Seiler wiederaufgenommene (1984:67) – und als Kontinuum angeordnete, Dreiteilung in analytische (= periphrastische), morphologische und lexikalische Bildungen erwiesen. Im Mittelpunkt des folgenden Aufsatzes steht der Versuch, im Tagalog, der wichtigsten philippinischen Sprache, diese drei Erscheinungsformen der Kausativierung zu untersuchen und systematisch aufeinander zu beziehen. Dabei ist von besonderer Relevanz, daß in diesem Zusammenhang der semanto-syntaktischen Eigenheit des Tagalog als Vertreter des aktiscischen Sprachbaus wesentliche Bedeutung zukommt. Weiterhin ist zu berücksichtigen, daß aus der Sich der Gesamtdimension PARTIZIPATION Phänomene aus anderen Techniken (z .B. aus der TRANSITIVIERUNG) nicht unerwähnt bleiben dürfen. Auf diese Weise führt die vorliegende Arbeit letztlich dazu, Zusammenhänge zwischen TRANSITIVIERUNG und KAUSATIVIERUNG in Form von kontinuierlichen Übergängen aufzuzeigen.
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).
The genetic code, the primary manifestation of life, and, on the other hand, language, the universal endowment of humanity and its momentous leap from genetics to civilization, are the two fundamental stores of information transmissible from the ancestry to the progeny, the molecular succession, which ensures the transfer of hereditary messages from the cells of one generation to the next generation, and the verbal legacy as a necessary prerequisite of cultural tradition. Divergent terminologies direct attention to different pattemings; and finding a logically convincing test, acceptable all around, that can determine whether one such system of terms is superior to its rivals, is often impossible. Yet the slow processes of evolution presumably apply to human societies and their symbolic systems as much as to human bodies, so that when logic cannot decide, survival eventually will.
The present paper is devoted to the old and always vexing problem of the linguistical ethnogenesis of the Slavs. The theme of the fate of the Indo-Europeans ancestors of the Slavic people is by its very nature broad and complex, too broad actually for a short essay. That is the reason why we have resigned ourselves to a detailed regular treatment, while presenting only some of the more interesting results and observations based mostly on new etymological studies of words and proper names. The major purpose is to combine linguistic and ethnic history and to proceed to its (fragmentary) reconstruction. Accordingly, our purpose is as simple as it can be for such a wide scope topic: to reconstruct the form, meaning and origin of the Old Slavic lexicon and to extract, if possible, more information about the history of the Slavic people from these linguistic data. The work of reconstructing the Common Slavic lexicon is being carried out in Moscow and Cracow, as far as the major new etymological dictionaries are concerned. A considerably larger number of scholars are concerned with these problems in Russia than in other countries. A reliable reconstruction of words and meanings is the key to any reconstruction of the culture. Why did the Slavs replace the IE name of the 'harrow' by a new word? How did the Ancient Slavs get a term for the process of 'paying'? What are we to think about the case of 'the Slavs and the sea'? How did a word for 'ship' appear among the Slavs? We now know how to answer these and many other questions (we shall revert later to the case of the sea), but the motivation of many other words remains as obscure as before. Others have fallen into oblivion and survive at best on the onomastic level - hence, our keen interest for onomastics and such new works as the Dictionary of Ukrainian waternames [2] that expand our knowledge of the Old Slavic common lexicon and provide new insights into onomastics proper, e.g. the Slavic toponymic 'superdialect,' the existence of genuine Slavic waternames (i.e. those without appellative stage, e.g. *morica and its continuations in different areas of Slavic hydronymy). It is not possible to determine the earliest area the Slavs occupied or, at least, their original homeland without studying etymology and onomastics. How can this question be solved? There are straightforward ways to do it (e.g. by marking off an area with many or only purely Slavic placenames and waternames), but there must also be subtler, more accurate ways. What happened to the lexicon and the onomastics of an ancient people at the time of migration? Did it name only what it saw and knew itself? Our studies show that "a people's vocabulary transcends its actual experience" [3, p. XLVII] ; thus, it preserves not only its own fossilized experience, but a foreign "hearsay" experience as well. The Slavic written tradition begins at a relatively late date - from the IXth century. But any Slavic word or name, although unwritten, can be a record, a memento reflected at some time in another language. Thus, the personal name of a king of the Antae - rex Boz. (in Jordanes [Vlth century] usually interpreted as Bozi 'God's), reflects an early Slavic vozi or vozi, Russian dial. voz (a calque of rex = voh), learned vozd?'chief, leader', already palatalized in the IVth century (the time of the described events and of the person named) - practically an up-to-date form!
Sommaire Le sujet est de retour CL. NORMAND : Le sujet dans la langue CHR. PUECH: La langue, le sujet et l'institué: la linguistique dans la philosophie (Merleau-Ponty) CL. NORMAND : Linguistique et philosophie : un instantané dans l'histoire de leurs relations P. CAUSSAT : La subjectivité en question D. SAVATOVSKY : Le cogito est-il un énoncé performatif? CL. NORMAND, M.-F. TROLLEZ: Du pragmatisme à la pragmatique: Charles Morris J.-L. CHISS: La stylistique de Charles Bally: de la notion de "sujet parlant" à la théorie de l'énonciation J. MÉDINA: Charles Bally: de Bergson à Saussure M. ARRIVÉ: Signifiant saussurien et signifiant lacanien A. RADZINSKI : Lacan/Saussure: les contours théoriques d'une rencontre
Das Ziel dieser Arbeit ist es, die Kausativierung im Türkischen zu beschreiben. Dabei sind folgende formale Gesichtspunkte zu berücksichtigen: Wie werden die kausativen Verbformen gebildet? Wie werden die Partizipanten in der Kausativkonstruktion enkodiert? An funktionalen Aspekten kommen in Betracht: Welche Bedeutungen können bei kausativen Verbformen vorliegen? Besteht der (für andere Sprachen) viel diskutierte Unterschied "lexikalisches" vs. "nicht-lexikalisches Kausativ", und welche Rolle spielt er? Inwieweit sind semantische Faktoren für die Partizipanten-Enkodierung relevant, und umgekehrt, welche Bedeutungsimplikationen sind mit einer bestimmten Enkodierung gegeben? Schließlich ist es interessant, zu zeigen, in welcher Beziehung das Kausativ zu den verwandten Kategorien Passiv, Reflexiv und Reziprok steht.