Linguistik
Refine
Year of publication
- 2009 (171) (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)
- Periodical (2)
- Working Paper (1)
Language
Keywords
- Deutsch (40)
- Linguistik (27)
- Rezension (24)
- Phraseologie (9)
- Deutschunterricht (6)
- Pragmatik (6)
- Tschechisch (6)
- Deutsch als Fremdsprache (5)
- Kajkavisch (5)
- Literatur (5)
Institute
Multicomponent Tree Adjoining Grammars (MCTAGs) are a formalism that has been shown to be useful for many natural language applications. The definition of non-local MCTAG however is problematic since it refers to the process of the derivation itself: a simultaneity constraint must be respected concerning the way the members of the elementary tree sets are added. Looking only at the result of a derivation (i.e., the derived tree and the derivation tree), this simultaneity is no longer visible and therefore cannot be checked. I.e., this way of characterizing MCTAG does not allow to abstract away from the concrete order of derivation. In this paper, we propose an alternative definition of MCTAG that characterizes the trees in the tree language of an MCTAG via the properties of the derivation trees (in the underlying TAG) the MCTAG licences. We provide similar characterizations for various types of MCTAG. These characterizations give a better understanding of the formalisms, they allow a more systematic comparison of different types of MCTAG, and, furthermore, they can be exploited for parsing.
This article discusses the divergent status of the two particles lé and lá in the grammar of Konkomba, a Gur language (Niger-Congo) of the Gurma subgroup. While previous studies claim that both particles are focus markers, this author argues that only the particle lá should be analyzed as a pure pragmatic device. Distributional studies suggest that the use of particle lé, on the other hand, is only required under specific focus conditions, and primarily represents a syntactic device.
Die drei Bereiche, die hier verglichen werden sollen, entsprechen in etwa der überkommenen Trias von Literatur, Musik und bildender Kunst, einer Gliederung, die im Medienzeitalters mit Videos, CDs, Installationen oder Happenings eigentlich obsolet ist. Allerdings geht es hier nur um die Eigenart der Zeichensysteme, auf denen die verschiedenen Bereiche beruhen, nicht um die Werke, die dadurch möglich werden, obgleich natürlich auch die Kunstwerke im emphatischen Sinn, die bedeutenden und die banalen, die großen und die misslungenen Gestaltungen nur möglich und verstehbar sind aufgrund der Zeichen, auf denen sie beruhen.
The main tenet of the present paper is the thesis that nominalization – like other cases of derivational morphology – is an essentially lexical phenomenon with well defined syntactic (and semantic) conditions and consequences. More specifically, it will be argued that the relation between a verb and the noun derived from it is subject to both systematic and idiosyncratic conditions with respect to lexical as well as syntactic aspects.
Experimental data shows that adult learners of an artificial language with a phonotactic restriction learned this restriction better when being trained on word types (e.g. when they were presented with 80 different words twice each) than when being trained on word tokens (e.g. when presented with 40 different words four times each) (Hamann & Ernestus submitted). These findings support Pierrehumbert’s (2003) observation that phonotactic co-occurrence restrictions are formed across lexical entries, since only lexical levels of representation can be sensitive to type frequencies.
We show that loanword adaptation can be understood entirely in terms of phonological and phonetic comprehension and production mechanisms in the first language. We provide explicit accounts of several loanword adaptation phenomena (in Korean) in terms of an Optimality-Theoretic grammar model with the same three levels of representation that are needed to describe L1 phonology: the underlying form, the phonological surface form, and the auditory-phonetic form. The model is bidirectional, i.e., the same constraints and rankings are used by the listener and by the speaker. These constraints and rankings are the same for L1 processing and loanword adaptation.
The present study argues that variation across listeners in the perception of a non-native contrast is due to two factors: the listener-specic weighting of auditory dimensions and the listener-specic construction of new segmental representations. The interaction of both factors is shown to take place in the perception grammar, which can be modelled within an OT framework. These points are illustrated with the acquisition of the Dutch three-member labiodental contrast [V v f] by German learners of Dutch, focussing on four types of learners from the perception study by Hamann and Sennema (2005a).