Linguistik
Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Part of a Book (54)
- Article (23)
- Working Paper (15)
- Preprint (7)
- Review (5)
- Conference Proceeding (3)
- Doctoral Thesis (2)
- Book (1)
- Lecture (1)
- Report (1)
Language
- English (71)
- German (35)
- Portuguese (4)
- Croatian (2)
Has Fulltext
- yes (112)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (112)
Keywords
- Semantik (112) (remove)
Institute
This dissertation investigates a special class of anaphoric form, yè, in Ewe known as the logophoric pronoun. This research makes a number of novel observations.
In the first chapter, I introduce the reader to the phenomenon under investigation as well as provide information on Ewe and its dialects and, methodology. In Chapter 2, I present the pronominal system of Ewe which is categorised into strong and weak forms following Cardinaletti & Starke (1994) and Agbedor (1996). The distribution of pronouns is outlined which sets the tone for an overview of logophoric marking. In this respect, I present variations in logophoric marking strategies cross linguistically and show that Ewe differs significantly from other pronouns in this category. In an effort to explain the deviant case of yè, I entertain the idea that yè is a pure logophoric pronoun in the sense of Clements (1975) and thus, its additional de re and strict interpretation does not imply non-logophoricity.
Chapter 3 demonstrates that yè is sensitive to contexts which portray the intention of an individual. Following Sells (1987), the antecedent of yè must have an intention to communicate. I broadly categorize logophoric contexts into reportative (direct-indirect speech) or non-reportative (speaker’s mental attitude, reporter’s observation or background knowledge of a situation). Based on this categorization, indirect speech report (Clements 1975), dis- course units such as a paragraph or an episode (Clements 1975), and sentential adjuncts such as purpose, causal and consequence clauses (Culy 1994a) are reviewed. The logophoric pro- noun occurs in the complement of attitude verbs (Clements 1975), also termed logocentric (à la (Stirling 1994)) or logophoric predicates (à la (Culy 1994a)) as well as with non-attitudinal verbs (e.g. va ‘come’ or wO ‘do’ as in sentential adjuncts). I argue contra Clements (1975) and Culy (1994a) that yè can occur with perception predicates. I further provide three new instances of non-reportative contexts which are compatible with yè namely, as-if clauses, benefactive na clauses and alesi ‘how’ clauses. I show, corroborating previous studies that contexts which are necessary for the licensing of yè include all of the aforementioned except causal clauses. Among these contexts, the complementizer be or regarding cases where there is no be, an element in C (due to the Doubly-Filled-Comp Filter (DFCF) c.f. Chomsky & Lasnik (1977)), is sufficient to license yè. Following Bimpeh & Sode (2021), yè is licensed by feature checking (in the spirit of von Stechow (2004)): be bears the interpretatble [log] feature which checks the uninterpretable [log] feature of yè. I include a redefinition of logophoricity as pertaining to Ewe.
Given the disparity found in the literature concerning the interpretation of yè: Ewedome (pronounce EVedome) has only de se readings (Bimpeh 2019); while ‘pure’ Ewe, Mina (variety of Ewe spoken in Togo) Pearson (2015), Danyi (O’Neill 2015) and Anlo (pronounced ANlO) (Satık 2019) has de re readings; chapter 4 aims at lending empirical support to the ungoing discussion by verifying the interpretation of yè. Two acceptability judgment tasks were conducted namely, truth value judgment task and binary forced choice task. The results corroborates Pearson (2012, 2015) and others’ discovery that yè has a de re interpretation in the Ewedome (contra Bimpeh (2019); Bimpeh et al. (2022)), Anlo and Tonu (pronounced TONu) dialects of Ewe.
In chapter 5, I discuss the relation between logophoricity (yè, yè a) and Control (PRO). I show that yè may be restricted to a set of verbs which obligatorily require the morpheme a ‘potential marker’ (Essegbey 2008), in subject position. This set of verbs are those that are known as control verbs c.f. (Landau 1999) in English. As a result of this restriction, research such as Satık (2019) claims that yè a is the overt instantiation of PRO in English. According to the Ewe facts, it appears as though on one hand, yè and PRO share similar properties in logophoric contexts and on the other hand, yè in combination with the potential marker, a also share properties with PRO in subject control environments. Against this background, I discuss the relation between yè, yè a and PRO and show that neither yè in isolation nor yè in combination with a, contrary to Satık (2019), is the overt instantiation of PRO. I clarify that the potential morpheme a is not cliticised or combined with the logophoric yè. The two forms are seperate morphemes. The potential marker a only shows up in control environments because a sub-class of verbs require it for grammaticality purposes. As such, the property of de se-ness does not come from yè by itself, yè a or a but rather from the sub-class of verbs which require the potential marker a...
This paper deals with German kinship terms ending with the form "n" (Muttern, Vatern). Firstly, data from newspapers are presented that show that especially Muttern denotes very special meanings that can only be derived to a limited extent from the lexical base: a) Muttern referring to a home where mother cares for you, b) Muttern standing for overprotection, and c) Muttern representing a special food style (often embedded in prepositional phrases and/or comparative constructions like wie bei or wie von Muttern). Secondly, it is argued that the addition of n to kinship terms is not a word-formation pattern, but that these word forms are instead lexicalized and idiomatized in contemporary German. Hence, a diachronic scenario is applied to account for the data. It is argued in the present paper that the n-forms have been borrowed from Low German dialects, especially from constructional idioms of the type ‘X-wie bei Muttern’ and that forms were enriched by semantic concepts associated with the dialect.
The paper explores factors that influence the distribution of constituent words of compounds over the head and modifier position. The empirical basis for the study is a large database of German compounds, annotated with respect to the morphological structure of the compound and the semantic category of the constituents. The study shows that the polysemy of the constituent word, its constituent family size, and its semantic category account for tendencies of the constituent word to occur in either modifier or head position. Furthermore, the paper explores the degree to which the semantic category combination of head and modifier word, e.g., x=substance and y=artifact, indicates the semantic relation between the constituents, e.g., y_consists_of_x.
French suffixations in -age, -ion and -ment are considered roughly equivalent, yet some differences have been pointed out regarding the semantics of the resulting nominalizations. In this study, we confirm the existence of a semantic distinction between them on the basis of a large scale distributional analysis. We show that the distinction is partially determined by the degree of technicality of the denoted action: -age nominals tend to be more technical than -ion ones. We examine this hypothesis through the statistical modeling of technicality. To this end, we propose a linguistic definition of technicality, which we implement using empirical, quantitative criteria estimated in corpora and lexical resources. We show to what extent the differences with respect to these criteria adequately approximate technicality. Our study indicates that this definition of technicality, while amendable, provides new perspectives for the characterization of action nouns.
Obwohl die moderne deutsche Wortbildungslehre im verhältnismäßig kurzen Zeitraum eine rasante Entwicklung mit bemerkenswerten Forschungsergebnissen und interdisziplinären Bindungen (zu Syntax, Text, Pragmatik) zu verzeichnen vermag und zu einem festen Bestandteil der universitären DaF-Curricula in fast ganz Europa wurde, konnte sie hierzulande erst etwa seit den 80er Jahren des 20. Jh. als eine eigenständige Disziplin oder im Verbund mit der Lexikologie (vorher in die formale Morphologie integriert) Eingang in das DaF-Studium finden. Die Hintergründe sind in einer durch die damals herrschende Sprachtheorie (der Generativen Grammatik/Syntax der 60er Jahre) mit einer Überbetonung der Sprachproduktion (der Erzeugung von Sätzen) und zum Nachteil der rezeptiven, die Analyse der sprachlichen Erscheinungen anstrebenden Ansätze, zu sehen. Unsere (tschecho-slowakischen) didaktischmethodischen Theorien des Fremdsprachenlehrens und -lernens hatten diese asymmetrische Auffassung der sprachlichen Kommunikation (d. h. Sprachkompetenz = Sprachproduktion) damals ziemlich unkritisch übernommen. Die Überbewertung und die damit einhergehende fälschliche Gewichtung der Erzeugungsphase von Sätzen und Texten beeinträchtigten u. a. die Prozesse der verstehenden Verarbeitung von fertigen Sprach-, folglich auch von Wortbildungsprodukten. Die Wortbildungslehre kam dabei zu kurz, sie wurde zeitweilig aus den Curricula verbannt, weil die Ausländer auch bei guter Kenntnis von Bildungsmitteln, -modellen und -regeln einer Fremdsprache meist nur noch nicht-usuelle, nichtübliche, wenn auch vom System her "richtige" Wörter zu komplettieren vermochten. Diese Argumentation ist stichhaltig: Nichtmuttersprachler bilden wirklich meist defekte Wörter in einer Fremdsprache und die Wortbildungslehre soll eben deshalb nicht als ein Instrumentarium zur selbstständigen Bildung unbekannter Wörter dienen. Bei vielen Gemeinsamkeiten von Wortbildung und Flexion bzw. Satzbildung ist die Wortbildung ja doch anders beschaffen als die Bildung von Sätzen oder Wortformen, vgl. u. a. die Unvollständigkeit/Defektivität des Wortbildungsparadigmas, verschiedene, nichtprädiktable Benennungsmotive in einer Fremdsprache, die Wahl einer Benennungsart aus dem Inventar mehrerer Möglichkeiten, einschließlich der Entlehnung, die Besonderheiten der jeweiligen sprachspezifischen onomatologischen Verarbeitung einer Einwortbenennung u. a. m.
Die Ausarbeitung einer semantisch-funktionalen Syntax des komplexen Satzes erfordert in erster Linie eine Satzbautypologie, die eine Vorstellung davon vermittelt, welche Konstruktionen dieses oder jenes Semantikfeld im syntaktischen System der gegebenen Sprache gewährleisten. In zweiter Linie erfordert die Orientierung auf die Kommunikation, Bedingungen für die Auswahl der entsprechenden Einheit aus der in der gegebenen Sprache vorhandenen Variantenreihe zu schaffen. Mit Rücksicht auf die genannten Umstände erscheint es zweckmäßig, bei der Erforschung von komplexen syntaktischen Konstruktionen die Methodik der polyaspektuellen (aspektuellen) Analyse zu verwenden. Das Wesen der polyaspektuellen Analyse besteht in der konsequenten Betrachtungsweise der Besonderheiten des semantischstrukturellen und funktionalen Satzbaus.
Die Anwendung dieser Methode bei der Beschreibung von Satzgefügen zeigt, dass die Niveaucharakteristiken der Kompositionsglieder (der linguistischen Einheiten) mutmaßlich ihr subordinatives Funktionieren im komplexen Satz bestimmen. Auch die Auswahl der Kompositionsglieder, die zum allgemeinen lexikalisch-semantischen Bereich gehören, vollzieht sich mit Rücksicht auf die syntaktischen Eigenschaften der Subordination. Demzufolge zeichnen sich die Satzgefüge durch eine qualitativ stabile Bestimmtheit aus, die mithilfe eines Komplexes von Differenzierungsmerkmalen gebildet wird.
Decomposing coordination
(2014)
Natural languages display a surprising diversity of expression of elementary logical operations. The study of this variation is emerging as an important topic of cross-linguistic semantics. In this paper, we address the expression of coordination from this perspective, especially coordination of individual denoting expressions such as "John and Mary". We argue that there is an underlying universal structure for individual coordination, and that the cross-linguistic variation can be explained by assuming that languages pronounce different morphemes of this universal structure. In particular, we argue that there two main types of system for the expression of individual coordination: the J-type and the μ-type. In μ-type languages the morpheme used for individual coordination also has uses a quantificational or focus particle, while in the J-type languages it doesn't. Instead at least in many J-type languages the same morpheme is used for individual and propositional coordination. The evidence we present for our model comes from two sources: new data from specific data of the J-type and μ-type languages, and from a study of the historical development of the expression of individual coordination in Indo-European which switched from a μ-type to a J-type system.
The late physicist Carl Sagan, whom I quote in the first part of my title, skillfully phrased the common sense view on evidence in the mature sciences. In linguistics, however, evidence has become a controversial issue, especially so when it comes to the investigation of less well studied languages. In this paper, I argue that Sagan's principle should be applied to linguistics. The growing accessibility of a wide array of experimental techniques and computational tools to analyze such data makes it feasible to back up extraordinary claims with evidence from a variety of sources. At the same time, it is in many cases possible to agree on what constitutes an ordinary claim and focus the extra effort on extraordinary claims. For non-controversial claims no more than the minimum effort to establish the claim and properly document the evidence is necessary.
Irene Heim in unpublished work proposed a new syntax-semantics interface for propositional attitude reports based on an ontology without transworld individuals, but counterpart functions instead. We show that the approach can capture the 'de re'/'de dicto' distinction, but makes different predictions from accounts with transworld individuals. Specifically, the account uses a non-invertible counterpart functions: a single individual in an alternative world can be the counterpart of many individuals of the real world. The directionality of counterpart functions predicts that a 'de dicto' interpreted DP cannot be an argument of a 'de re' interpreted predicate. We show that the predicted restriction is corroborated by existing work on restrictions on 'de re' interpretation. The derivation of constraints on 'de re' interpretation argues empirically for the counterpart ontology and Heim’s implementation thereof.
The paper presents an additional argument for a specific account of semantic binding: the flat-binding analysis. The argument is based on observations concerning sloppy interpretations in verb phrase ellipsis when the binder is not the subject of the elided VP. In one such case, it is important that one of the binders belong to the domain of the other. This case can be derived from the flat-binding analysis as is shown in the paper, while it is unclear how to account for it within other analyses of semantic binding.
This paper addresses the syntax and semantics plurals, and then applies it to reciprocal expressions. In the course of this investigation, I address two problems for the conventional view that a reciprocal makes essentially the same semantic contribution to the sentence as other noun phrases, but has an interesting internal structure. I will show that both problems are properties of plurality in general, and can be successfully explained along these lines. As a result, the paper is more about plurality in general than reciprocals though the goal of the paper is to account for the two problems relating to reciprocals.
"Je suis Charlie" was used over 619.000 times in the two days that have followed the attack of the editorial team of Charlie Hebdo (Le Progrès, The Huffington Post) and has regularly been taken up in both written and spoken form since. In this paper, we argue that the structure of this sentence actually clashes with its meaning. More specifically, whereas its word order and default rightmost sentence stress are compatible either with an all-focus reading or a narrow focusing of Charlie, the context of use of this sentence as well as the solidarity/empathy message it intends to communicate suggest that its subject is narrowly focused. We will propose that two strategies have emerged to solve this conflict: (i) various alternative forms have appeared that allow proper subject focusing and (ii) speakers have reinterpreted the structure so as to pragmatically retrieve the (additive) focused nature of the subject.
Im folgenden Beitrag handelt es sich um die Entwicklung eines semantischen Wörterbuches der deutschen Sprache für maschinelle Sprachverarbeitungssysteme im Rahmen des Projektes "Compreno" bei dem russischen IT-Unternehmen ABBYY. Es wird eine kurze Übersicht über andere elektronische Quellen zur deutschen Sprache gegeben, ferner werden ihre Unterschiede im Vergleich zum Projektwörterbuch analysiert. An einigen Beispielen werden aktuelle Probleme der Computerlexikografie (Bedeutungsunterscheidung, Komposita-Analyse u.a.) und ihre mögliche Lösung in Bezug auf das Projektwörterbuch betrachtet.
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.
The method of the lexical field – which was initially used to capture lexical units – established itself gradually in various grammatical concepts as an onomasiological and functionally motivated model for the description of grammatical categorical meanings. The concept of a field allows for a complex description of a grammatical system, where the focus lies not on the particular grammatical categories and forms, but on the semantic-functional categories in their relationship with the total inventory of linguistic means.
The paper starts with a semantic differentiation between the notions of sentence topic and discourse topic. Sentence topic is conceived of as part of a semantic predication in the sense of Y. Kim's work. Discourse topic is defined, as in N. Asher's Segmented Discourse Representation Theory, as a discourse constituent that comprises the content of (part of) the larger discourse.
The main body of the paper serves to investigate the intricate connection between the two types of topic. For restricting the context of investigation, a specific relation between discourse constituents, Elaboration, is chosen. If Elaboration holds between two discourse constituents, one of them can be identified as the explicit discourse topic with respect to the other one. Whereas an elaborating sentence - with or without a sentence topic - is used to infer a 'dimension' for extending the discourse topic, the role of the sentence topic if it occurs is to mark an 'index' for predication along that dimension. The interaction of elaborating sentences and their topics is modelled by means of channel theoretic devices.'