Linguistik
Refine
Year of publication
- 2009 (169) (remove)
Document Type
- Article (100)
- Review (16)
- Part of a Book (15)
- Preprint (13)
- Conference Proceeding (7)
- Report (7)
- Book (5)
- Part of Periodical (3)
- Doctoral Thesis (2)
- Working Paper (1)
Language
Has Fulltext
- yes (169) (remove)
Keywords
- Deutsch (39)
- Linguistik (26)
- Rezension (24)
- Phraseologie (9)
- Pragmatik (6)
- Tschechisch (6)
- Deutsch als Fremdsprache (5)
- Deutschunterricht (5)
- Kajkavisch (5)
- Optimalitätstheorie (5)
Institute
Red surečenica
(2009)
Pitanje reda surečenica u posljedičnim rečenicama, tj. mogućnost njihova premetanja (obrtanja), jedno je od onih nerijetkih pitanja u hrvatskome jezikoslovlju koje se smatra riješenim, a da se nitko njime nije valjano i sustavno bavio. Jednodušno se i beziznimno naime smatra da je red surečenica u posljedičnim rečenicama (i red surečenica u nekim drugim zavisnosloženim rečenicama) glavna surečenica – zavisna surečenica stalan i neobratljiv. Nije međutim točna tvrdnja da zavisnosložene rečenice za razliku od nezavisnosloženih mogu premetati red surečenica i da to ne vrijedi samo za posljedične i neke druge rečenice. Naime u nekim tipovima posljedičnih i drugih rečenica, pokazuje se to u ovome radu, zavisna surečenica može prethoditi glavnoj, tj. njezine sastavnice mogu zamijeniti mjesta.
Tema je ovoga rada raščlamba kategorije prijelaznosti u hrvatskim gramatikama. Pri raščlambi je proučen odnos subjekta i (auto)objekta. Prikazan je način na koji je prijelaznost opisana u gramatikama te su obrađena ova pitanja: Kako prijelazni glagoli mogu postati neprijelazni i što se događa s njihovim značenjem? Kako gramatike dijele glagole prema prijelaznosti? Kako se tumači neprava povratnost? Što znači da radnja proizlazi sama od sebe? Na koji je način moguća dodatna interpretacija prijelaznosti kod pravih povratnih glagola s obzirom na razine proučavanja?
A cognição pode ser definida como um processo de aquisição de conhecimento que tem como material a informação do meio em que vivemos e o que já está registrado na nossa memória. Este processo envolve percepção, atenção, memória e ação, e nem sempre acontece de forma consciente. Mais do que simplesmente a aquisição de conhecimento, é um processo de conversão de tudo o que é captado pelo aprendiz de acordo com sua identidade e suas experiências. Com base nesse conceito, propõe-se um modelo teórico para o processamento cognitivo relacionado à produção em língua estrangeira, fundamentado em teorias recentes da neurociência sobre memória, aprendizagem e processamento de representações de seqüências freqüentes na língua (chunks) e ilustrado com dados referentes ao alemão como língua estrangeira. Como resultado, nota-se que o conhecimento teórico sobre a língua estrangeira e a capacidade de utilizá-la são habilidades complementares que interagem na aprendizagem da mesma, mas como saberes distintos, e não estágios do mesmo conhecimento determinados pelo tempo de aprendizagem ou armazenamento na memória, como sugerem alguns teóricos da área.
U ovome se radu nastoji dati pregled mnogobrojnih i raznolikih odraza svetačkog imena Ivan u hrvatskome antroponimijskom fondu s osobitim naglaskom na područje južne Dalmacije (uključujući Boku kotorsku) i Donje Hercegovine. U uvodnome se dijelu rada donose odrazi hebrejskoga muškog osobnog imena Jehochánán u raznim indoeuropskim i neindoeuropskim jezicima, potom se tumači postanje hrvatskoga svetačkog imena Ivan i njegovi odrazi u hrvatskome antroponimijskom fondu s posebnim naglaskom na sličnosti i razlike s antroponimijskim fondovima bliskih južnoslavenskih jezika.
U radu se raspravlja o prefiksu ne- u kajkavskome književnom jeziku. Proučavaju se rječotvorbeni procesi u kojima sudjeluje, tvorbeni načini u kojima se javlja te se ispituje njegova frekventnost u tvorbi pojedinih vrsta riječi. Istražuju se i rječotvorbene i semantičke veze tvorenica s predmetkom ne- i riječi koje su ih motivirale.
Výzkumy ukazují, že v novinových nadpisech se s oblibou používají frazémy. Otázkouje, zda to platí i pro internetové texty, jejichž nadpisy by měly obsahovat klíčová slova z textu a být tedy spíše informativní. Článek seznamuje s výsledky analýzy nadpisů v internetové verzi rakouského deníku Die Presse, která se zaměřila na rozsah použití frazémů v nadpisech textů jednotlivých rubrik, na typy použitých frazémů a na způsob jejich použití (normální nebo modifikované).
Článek seznamuje s výsledky analýzy nadpisů na úvodnì stránce 16 rakouských internetových novin. Analýza se zaměřila na rozsah pouņitì frazémů v nadpisech, na typy pouņitých frazémů a na způsob jejich pouņitì (normálnì nebo modifikované) v souvislosti s tìm, zda se dané frazémy vyskytujì jen v nadpise nebo i v textu. Výsledky jsou porovnány se závěry dřìvějńìho obdobného výzkumu týkajìcìho se internetové verze rakouského denìku 'Die Presse'.
Parsing coordinations
(2009)
The present paper is concerned with statistical parsing of constituent structures in German. The paper presents four experiments that aim at improving parsing performance of coordinate structure: 1) reranking the n-best parses of a PCFG parser, 2) enriching the input to a PCFG parser by gold scopes for any conjunct, 3) reranking the parser output for all possible scopes for conjuncts that are permissible with regard to clause structure. Experiment 4 reranks a combination of parses from experiments 1 and 3. The experiments presented show that n- best parsing combined with reranking improves results by a large margin. Providing the parser with different scope possibilities and reranking the resulting parses results in an increase in F-score from 69.76 for the baseline to 74.69. While the F-score is similar to the one of the first experiment (n-best parsing and reranking), the first experiment results in higher recall (75.48% vs. 73.69%) and the third one in higher precision (75.43% vs. 73.26%). Combining the two methods results in the best result with an F-score of 76.69.
Papers on pragmasemantics
(2009)
Optimality theory as used in linguistics (Prince & Smolensky, 1993/2004; Smolensky & Legendre, 2006) and cognitive psychology (Gigerenzer & Selten, 2001) is a theoretical framework that aims to integrate constraint based knowledge representation systems, generative grammar, cognitive skills, and aspects of neural network processing. In the last years considerable progress was made to overcome the artificial separation between the disciplines of linguistic on the one hand which are mainly concerned with the description of natural language competences and the psychological disciplines on the other hand which are interested in real language performance.
The semantics and pragmatics of natural language is a research topic that is asking for an integration of philosophical, linguistic, psycholinguistic aspects, including its neural underpinning. Especially recent work on experimental pragmatics (e.g. Noveck & Sperber, 2005; Garrett & Harnish, 2007) has shown that real progress in the area of pragmatics isn’t possible without using data from all available domains including data from language acquisition and actual language generation and comprehension performance. It is a conceivable research programme to use the optimality theoretic framework in order to realize the integration.
Game theoretic pragmatics is a relatively young development in pragmatics. The idea to view communication as a strategic interaction between speaker and hearer is not new. It is already present in Grice' (1975) classical paper on conversational implicatures. What game theory offers is a mathematical framework in which strategic interaction can be precisely described. It is a leading paradigm in economics as witnessed by a series of Nobel prizes in the field. It is also of growing importance to other disciplines of the social sciences. In linguistics, its main applications have been so far pragmatics and theoretical typology. For pragmatics, game theory promises a firm foundation, and a rigor which hopefully will allow studying pragmatic phenomena with the same precision as that achieved in formal semantics.
The development of game theoretic pragmatics is closely connected to the development of bidirectional optimality theory (Blutner, 2000). It can be easily seen that the game theoretic notion of a Nash equilibrium and the optimality theoretic notion of a strongly optimal form-meaning pair are closely related to each other. The main impulse that bidirectional optimality theory gave to research on game theoretic pragmatics stemmed from serious empirical problems that resulted from interpreting the principle of weak optimality as a synchronic interpretation principle.
In this volume, we have collected papers that are concerned with several aspects of game and optimality theoretic approaches to pragmatics.
In this paper, we outline the foundations of a theory of implicatures. It divides into two parts. The first part contains the base model. It introduces signalling games, optimal answer models, and a general definition of implicatures in terms of natural information. The second part contains a refinement in which we consider noisy communication with efficient clarification requests. Throughout, we assume a fully cooperative speaker who knows the information state of the hearer. The purpose of this paper is not the study of examples. Our concern is the framework for doing these studies.
The main concern of this article is to discuss some recent findings concerning the psychological reality of optimality-theoretic pragmatics and its central part – bidirectional optimization. A present challenge is to close the gap between experimental pragmatics and neo-Gricean theories of pragmatics. I claim that OT pragmatics helps to overcome this gap, in particular in connection with the discussion of asymmetries between natural language comprehension and production. The theoretical debate will be concentrated on two different ways of interpreting bidirection: first, bidirectional optimization as a psychologically realistic online mechanism; second, bidirectional optimization as an offline phenomenon of fossilizing optimal form-meaning pairs. It will be argued that neither of these extreme views fits completely with the empirical data when taken per se.
The article aims to give an overview about the application of Optimality Theory (OT) to the domain of pragmatics. In the introductory part we discuss different ways to view the division of labor between semantics and pragmatics. Rejecting the doctrine of literal meaning we conform to (i) semantic underdetermination and (ii) contextualism (the idea that the mechanism of pragmatic interpretation is crucial both for determining what the speaker says and what he means). Taking the assumptions (i) and (ii) as essential requisites for a natural theory of pragmatic interpretation, section 2 introduces the three main views conforming to these assumptions: Relevance theory, Levinson’s theory of presumptive meanings, and the Neo-Gricean approach. In section 3 we explain the general paradigm of OT and the idea of bidirectional optimization. We show how the idea of optimal interpretation can be used to restructure the core ideas of these three different approaches. Further, we argue that bidirectional OT has the potential to account both for the synchronic and the diachronic perspective on pragmatic interpretation. Section 4 lists relevant examples of using the framework of bidirectional optimization in the domain of pragmatics. Section 5 provides some general conclusions. Modeling both for the synchronic and the diachronic perspective on pragmatics opens the way for a deeper understanding of the idea of naturalization and (cultural) embodiment in the context of natural language interpretation.
Der vorliegende Beitrag gibt zunächst einen Überblick über die sprachwissenschaftlichen Zugänge zur Onomatopöie und den derzeitigen Forschungsstand. Danach wird dargestellt, dass Onomatopoetika insbesondere für den Sprachvergleich ein lohnendes, aber bislang noch unzureichend behandeltes Forschungsthema darstellen. Dabei zeigen sich zahlreiche Fragestellungen, die auch für die Sprachdidaktik relevant sind. Auf dieser Grundlage zeigt der Beitrag, wie und warum Onomatopoetika sprachdidaktisch nutzbringend thematisiert werden können.
If we want to develop a semantic analysis for explicit performatives such as I promise you to free Willy, we are faced with the following puzzle: In order to account for the speech act expressed by the performative verb, one can assume that the so-called performative clause is purely performative and provides the illocutionary force of the speech act whose content is given by the semantic object denoted by the complement clause. Yet under this perspective, the performative clause that is, next to the performative verb, the indexicals I and you that refer to the speaker and to the addressee of the utterance context is semantically invisible and does not contribute compositionally its meaning to the meaning of the entire explicit performative sentence. Conversely, if we account for the truth conditional contribution of the performative clause and deny that the meaning of the performative verb is purely performative, then we have to find a way to account for the speech act expressed by the performative verb. Of course, there is already the widely accepted and very appealing indirectness account for explicit performative utterances developed by Bach & Harnish (1979). Roughly, Bach and Harnish solve this puzzle in deriving the performativity by means of a pragmatic inference process. According to them, the important speech act performed by means of the utterance of the explicit performative sentence is a kind of the conventionalized indirect speech act. However, the boundary between semantics and pragmatics can be drawn in many various ways. Therefore, I think there could be other perspectives regarding the interface between the truth-functional treatment of the declarative explicit performative sentences and the speech acts performed with their utterances and which are expressed by the performative verbs. Hence, this thesis consists in the experiment to develop a further analysis and to check out its consequences with respect to the semantics and pragmatics of explicit performative utterances and the new interface emerged. Briefly, the experiment runs as follows: First, I develop an analysis for explicit performative sentences framed by parenthetical structures such as in (1)(a). In a second step, this parenthetical analysis is applied to the proper Austinian explicit performative sentences in (1)(b). (1) a. Tomorrow, I promise you this, I will teach them Tyrolean songs. b. I promise you that I will teach them Tyrolean songs. To analyze at first explicit performatives framed by parenthetical structures bears the convenience that we are faced with two utterances of two main clauses. In (1)(a) there is the utterance of the host sentence Tomorrow I will teach them Tyrolean songs, and the utterance of the explicit parenthetical I promise you this, where the demonstrative this refers to the utterance of Tomorrow I will teach them Tyrolean songs. Since speakers perform speech acts with utterances of main clauses, I assume that the meaning of the explicit parenthetical I promise you this specifies that the actual illocutionary force of the utterance of Tomorrow I will teach them Tyrolean songs is the illocutionary force of a promise. Hence, instead of deriving an indirect illocutionary force by means of a pragmatic inference schema, we can deal with an ordinary direct speech act that is performed with the utterance of the host sentence. This kind of analysis stresses the particular discourse function of explicit performative utterances. Performative verbs are used whenever the contextual information is not sufficient to determine the illocutionary force of the corresponding implicit speech act. The resulting consequences of the parenthetical analysis are interesting since they cast a different light on performative verbs. Surprisingly, the performative verbs are not performative at all. They do not constitute the execution of a speech act, but are execution supporting. Instead of constituting the particular illocutionary force, they merely specify the illocutionary force of the utterance of the host sentence. For instance, the speaker utters the explicit parenthetical I promise you this for specifying what he is simultaneously doing. Hence the speaker does not succeed in performing the promise simply because he is uttering I promise you this. Rather, by means of the information conveyed by the utterance of I promise you this, the potential illocutionary forces of the utterance of the host sentence are disambiguated. Thus, it is not the case that explicit parentheticals are trivially true when uttered. Their function is more complex. Their self-verifying property (‘saying so makes it so’) is explained by means of disambiguation. Furthermore, according to the parenthetical analysis, instead of being purely performative, the performative verbs contribute compositionally their meanings to the truth conditions of the entire explicit performative sentence. Together with its consequences, this analysis is applied to the proper Austinian performatives, which display subordination. I assume that regardless of their structure, explicit performatives always semantically and pragmatically behave as the parenthetical analysis predicts.
The focus of this paper is the perspectivization of thematic roles generally and the recipient role specifically. Whereas perspective is defined here as the representation of something for someone from a given position (Sandig 1996: 37), perspectivization refers to the verbalization of a situation in the speech generation process (Storrer 1996: 233). In a prototypical act of giving, for example, the focus of perception (the attention of the external observer) may be on the person who gives (agent), the transferred object (patient) or the person who receives the transferred object (recipient). The languages of the world provide differing linguistic means to perspectivize such an act of giving, or better: to perspectivize the participants of such an action. In this article, the linguistic means of three selected continental West Germanic languages –German, Dutch and Luxembourgish– will be taken into consideration, with an emphasis on the perspectivization of the recipient role.