Linguistik
Refine
Year of publication
- 1992 (16) (remove)
Document Type
- Article (5)
- Working Paper (5)
- Part of a Book (3)
- Book (1)
- Doctoral Thesis (1)
- Preprint (1)
Has Fulltext
- yes (16)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (16)
Keywords
- Lokalisation (3)
- Präposition (3)
- Proto-Tibetobirmanisch (2)
- Deixis (1)
- Ergativ (1)
- Grammatik (1)
- Grammatikalisation (1)
- Grammatiktheorie (1)
- Historische Syntax (1)
- Kaukasische Sprachen (1)
Institute
- Sprachwissenschaften (5)
- Extern (1)
This paper is part of an ongoing investigation into the nature of grammatical relations in the Sino-Tibetan language family. The ultimate goal of this investigation is to develop a hypothesis on the typological nature of word order and grammatical relations in the mother language which gave rise to all of the many languages within the Sino Tibetan language family. As the verb agreement (pronominalization) systems of Tibeto-Burman have been said to be a type of ergative marking, and to have been a part of Proto-Tibeto-Burman grammatical relations, the questions of the dating and nature of the agreement systems in Tibeto-Burman are relevant to the discussion of the nature of grammatical relations in Proto-Sino-Tibetan.
Using arguments based on the data on verb agreement (pronominalization) in Tibeto-Burman, LaPolla 1989 (see also LaPolla 1992) argues that Proto-Tibeto-Burman should be reconstructed as a language with no inflectional morphology. In that paper it is argued that the Proto-Tibeto- Burman system of grammatical relations1 was closer to the typical 'role-dominated' (Van Valin & Foley 1980) Burmese-Yipho system (epitomized by Lahu—see Matisoff 1973). That is, a system where there is no definable 'subject' or 'direct object'; a system where semantic and pragmatic principles govern the organization of discourse, not syntactic functions. In this paper we look at the nature of 'objects' in Tibeto-Burman languages, and here also find support for this view of Proto-Tibeto-Burman grammatical relations. From a survey of ninety-five reliable grammars or descriptions of languages in the Tibeto-Burman family, I found eleven languages with no nominal object marking, twenty languages with nominal morphology consistently marking the patient as object, regardless of clause type, and sixty-four languages with a type of marking where the patient in monotransitve clauses is often or always marked with the same postposition as the goal or beneficiary (dative) in ditransitve clauses. This type of marking is discussed in Dryer 1986 as Primary Object marking. I argue that this type of marking in the Tibeto-Burman languages reflects the semantically based nature of grammatical relations in Proto-Tibeto-Burman.
In literary translation 'correctness' is rarely ratified by linguistic rules; it is more often a question of what a sensitive translator feels to be correct. Intuition will therefore play a major part. This intuition is seen here neither as instinctive reaction prompted by experience, nor as native competence, but as an inquiring, self-moderating influence inspired by the language itself. It is treated in this respect as an informed intuition, that is, as having a linguistic base for sensitive judgement. This assumes that the literary translator is both a creative writer and his own critical reader as well as a fine judge of language potential. This line is applied to translating meaning and sense, transferring the very language, imitating the form and style, re-creating the features, and above all, to capturing those unique qualities of the original. After dealing with word-accuracy, the question of literary input demanded by form and style is examined. The treatment of language used for effect features in a section on Kafka. The merits and the problems of translating dialect as dialect for its own sake are looked at closely and in a positive way as are the possibilities of reproducing 'oddities' of language. The immense task of translating the language of Joyce ('Ulysses ') with all its vagaries and skilful manipulation of words is examined for the possibility of providing an accurate copy. The ultimate test of reproducing a uniqueness of artistic creation together with the profound thought which inspired it, is reserved for a section on Hopkins. While it is recognized that, owing to the constrictions imposed by the extreme and sensitive use of language, no translation can fully include all that there is in his poems, it might be possible to capture enough of their essence to give an impression of a 'German' Hopkins at work. A major objective throughout is the establishment of a linguistic base for the part played by intuition in literary translation.
Gegenstand dieses Aufsatzes ist das Verhältnis zwischen der Wahrnehmung einer Anordnung im Raum und der Kategorisierung grammatischer Information. Bei der Diskussion unterschiedlicher Ansätze zu diesem Thema (Metapherntheorie , Gestalttheorie u.a.) stehen die Fragen nach der Existenzberechtigung und dem Erklärungspotential eines lokalistischen Ansatzes im Vordergrund. Während eine direkte Beziehung zwischen räumlicher und grammatischer Kategorisierung abzulehnen ist, liegt ein gemeinsamer Nenner in übergreifenden Prinzipien der Mustererkennung. In einer Theorie der Mustererkennung "vereinen sich wesentliche Gedanken aus Wahrnehmungs- und Lernbarkeitstheorien und deren Formulierung mittels "berechenbarer" geometrisch-topologischer Modelle. Als Illustration dienen u.a. Beispiele zur Kasusmarkierung und zur sprachlichen Kategorisierung von Aspekt und Tempus.
Remarks on deixis
(1992)
The prevailing conception of deixis is oriented to the idea of 'concrete' physical and perceptual characteristics of the situation of speech. Signs standardly adduced as typical deictics are I, you, here, now, this, that. I and you are defined as meaning "the person producing the utterance in question" and "the person spoken to", here and now as meaning "where the speaker is at utterance time" and "at the moment the utterance is made" (also, "at the place/time of the speech exchange"); similarly, the meanings of this and that are as a rule defined via proximity to speaker's physical location. The elements used in such definitions form the conceptual framework of most of the general characterisations of deixis in the literature. [...] There is much in the literature, of course, that goes far beyond this framework . A great variety of elements, mostly with very abstract meanings, have been found to share deictic characteristics although they do not fit into the personnel-place-time-of-utterance schema. The adequacy of that schema is also called into question by many observations to the effect that the use of such standard deictics as here, now, this, that cannot really be accounted for on its basis, and by the far-reaching possibilities of orienting deictics to reference points in situations other than the situation of speech, to 'deictic centers' other than the speaker. [...] Analyses along the lines of the standard conception regularly acknowledge the existence of deviations from the assumed basic meanings. One traditional solution attributes them to speaker's "subjectivity", or to differences between "physical" and "psychological" space or time; in a similar vein, metaphorical extensions may be said to be at play, or a distinction between prototypical and non-prototypical meanings invoked. Quite apart from the question of the relative merits of these explanatory principles, which I do not wish to discuss here, the problem with all such accounts is that the definitions of the assumed basic meanings themselves are founded on axiom rather than analysis of situated use. The logical alternative, of course, is to set out for more abstract and comprehensive meaning definitions from the start. In fact, a number of recent, discourse-oriented, treatments of the demonstratives proceed this way; they view those elements as processing instructions rather than signs with inherently spatial denotation (Isard 1975, Hawkins 1978, Kirsner 1979, Linde 1979 , Ehlich 1982.)
Studien zur Lokalisation: Teil: 2.: Verbgebundene Lokalisation vs. Lokalisation von Propositionen
(1992)
Der vorliegende Aufsatz gliedert sich in zwei Unterabschnitte. In Abschnitt I geht es um verbgebundene, von der Valenz geforderte Lokalisation. Die einzelsprachlichen Beispiele zeigen, daß es sich konstant um Verben der Position oder Positionsveränderung (Bewegungs - und Transferverben) handelt, die lokale Relationen wie LOK (Ortsruhe), SOURCE oder GOAL fordern. Unter Bezugnahme auf die Erkenntnisse zur Dimension der PARTIZIPATION (H. Seiler/W. Premper 1991) können die Varianten, wie sie in der einzelsprachlichen Kodierung zu beobachten sind, zwischen den Polen zentralisiert und dezentralisiert (peripher) angeordnet werden . Dies bedeutet, daß lokale Relationen (als verbgebundene Entitäten) einerseits am Partizipatum selbst und andererseits im Bereich der Partizipanten in Gestalt verschiedener grammatischer Relationen in Erscheinung treten können. Im ersteren Fall kann die Inkorporation einer lokalen Ergänzung ins Partizipatum als optimal zentralisiert betrachtet werden, während eine Kodierung als Präpositionalphrase das andere Extrem darstellt. Dazwischen liegt eine Kodierung als "Subjekt"- bzw. "Objekt"-Relation, für die sich, wie auch für die anderen Fälle, eine Reihe von Beispielen finden lassen. Somit schwankt die Skala der Kodierungsmöglichkeiten für verbgebundene lokale Relationen zwischen Inkorporation und Präpositional-/Postpositionalphrasen, was letztlich eine Differenzierung in markierte und unmarkierte, im letzteren Falle gar prototypische Instanzen bedeutet. Im II . Abschnitt geht es darum, so weit dies möglich erscheint, Varianten zu beschreiben, die funktional die Aufgabe einer Situierung einer Gesamtproposition bewerkstelligen.
This paper is concerned with developing Joan Bybee's proposals regarding the nature of grammatical meaning and synthesizing them with Paul Hopper's concept of grammar as emergent. The basic question is this: How much of grammar may be modeled in terms of grammaticalization? In contradistinction to Heine, Claudi & Hünnemeyer (1991), who propose a fairly broad and unconstrained framework for grammaticalization, we try to present a fairly specific and constrained theory of grammaticalization in order to get a more precise idea of the potential and the problems of this approach. Thus, while Heine et al. (1991:25) expand – without discussion – the traditional notion of grammaticalization to the clause level, and even include non-segmental structure (such as word order), we will here adhere to a strictly 'element-bound' view of grammaticalization: where no grammaticalized element exists, there is no grammaticalization. Despite this fairly restricted concept of grammaticalization, we will attempt to corroborate the claim that essential aspects of grammar may be understood and modeled in terms of grammaticalization. The approach is essentially theoretical (practical applications will, hopefully, follow soon) and many issues are just mentioned and not discussed in detail. The paper presupposes a familiarity with the basic facts of grammaticalization and it does not present any new facts.
Speakers of various Southern german dialects may be heard to use two syntactic variants of subordinate clauses which are represented by the following Swabian examples: (1) daß er den net will komme lasse (2) daß er den net komme lasse will Of these two variants of the three-element verbal complex, only the non-dialect counterpart of (2) is accepted as standard modern written German: (3) daß er ihn nicht kommen lassen will In earlier periods of the German language, however, both variants were used by authors of written texts.