Linguistik
Refine
Year of publication
- 2018 (65) (remove)
Document Type
- Part of a Book (65) (remove)
Has Fulltext
- yes (65)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (65) (remove)
Keywords
- Deutsch (5)
- Korpus <Linguistik> (4)
- focus (4)
- alternative semantics (3)
- counterfactuals (3)
- relative clauses (3)
- tense (3)
- Japanese (2)
- Konzessivsatz (2)
- Nebensatz (2)
- Neuhochdeutsch (2)
- Sprachwandel (2)
- Syntax (2)
- comparatives (2)
- discourse particles (2)
- double access (2)
- kinds (2)
- lexical semantics (2)
- maximize presupposition (2)
- negation (2)
- presupposition projection (2)
- presuppositions (2)
- reconstruction (2)
- scalar implicature (2)
- type composition logic (2)
- uniqueness (2)
- (un)conditionals (1)
- -tari (1)
- -toka (1)
- Ableitungsvokal (1)
- Affix (1)
- Altnordisch (1)
- Aspekt <Linguistik> (1)
- Aymara (1)
- Cantonese (1)
- Computergestützte Kommunikation (1)
- Dativ (1)
- Deutsches Referenzkorpus (1)
- Estonian (1)
- Farbadjektiv (1)
- Gegenwartssprache (1)
- Genderlinguistik (1)
- Genitiv (1)
- Genus (1)
- Genuszuweisung (1)
- Geschlechterforschung (1)
- Hilfsverb (1)
- Indeklinabile (1)
- Italienisch (1)
- Kasus (1)
- Kausalsatz (1)
- Komitativ (1)
- Komma (1)
- Konzessivität (1)
- Lautsymbolik (1)
- Lautwandel (1)
- Lehnwort (1)
- Mandarin Chinese (1)
- MaxElide (1)
- Mittelhochdeutsch (1)
- Mittelniederdeutsch (1)
- Männervorname (1)
- Namengebung (1)
- Namenkunde (1)
- Nebensilbe (1)
- Negation (1)
- Nominalkompositum (1)
- Perfekt (1)
- Plusquamperfekt (1)
- Politische Kommunikation (1)
- Prototyp <Linguistik> (1)
- Prototypentheorie (1)
- Rechtschreibung (1)
- Referenzkorpus Mittelhochdeutsch (1)
- Referenzkorpus Neuhochdeutsch (1)
- Silbe (1)
- Skandinavistik (1)
- Slovenian (1)
- Social Media (1)
- Soziolinguistik (1)
- Sozioonomastik (1)
- Sprachdaten (1)
- Sprachgebrauch (1)
- Sprachkontakt (1)
- Sprachkritik (1)
- Sprachverfall (1)
- Stellungsfeld (1)
- Substantiv (1)
- Thai (1)
- Tiwa (1)
- Topologisches Satzmodell (1)
- Transderivation (1)
- Tsapaeva, Sabina (1)
- Twitter <Softwareplattform> (1)
- Verb (1)
- Verwaltung, Fachsprache (1)
- Vokal (1)
- Vollvokal (1)
- Vorname (1)
- Wortstellung (1)
- Zeichensetzung (1)
- acquisition (1)
- adjectival antonyms (1)
- adjectives (1)
- adjectives of completeness (1)
- alternative questions (1)
- amounts (1)
- appositives (1)
- as-phrases (1)
- aspect (1)
- assertion (1)
- assertions (1)
- at-issue content (1)
- atomicity (1)
- attitude reports (1)
- binding (1)
- bridge principles (1)
- causal dependence (1)
- causal sufficiency (1)
- causality (1)
- change of state verbs (1)
- choice functions (1)
- co-reference (1)
- coercion (1)
- coercions (1)
- coherence relations (1)
- common ground (1)
- comparative constructions (1)
- conditionals (1)
- conjunction (1)
- contemplation (1)
- conventional implicatures (1)
- conversational implicatures (1)
- cornering (1)
- counteridenticals (1)
- creation predicate (1)
- crosslinguistic semantics (1)
- dance semantics (1)
- de dicto (1)
- decomposition, (1)
- defaults (1)
- definite descriptions (1)
- definiteness (1)
- degree achievement (1)
- degrees (1)
- deixis (1)
- deontic modals (1)
- depiction verbs (1)
- differential verbal comparatives. (1)
- direct vs. indirect causation (1)
- discourse (1)
- discourse coherence (1)
- disjoint reference (1)
- disjunction (1)
- domain restriction (1)
- donkey sentences (1)
- dream reports (1)
- ellipsis (1)
- embedded clauses (1)
- embedded implicature (1)
- embedding (1)
- enough (1)
- entailment (1)
- epistemic 'modals' (1)
- epistemic indefinites (1)
- events (1)
- ever free relatives (1)
- exhaustivity (1)
- experiments (1)
- extreme nouns (1)
- factivity (1)
- familiarity (1)
- felicity conditions (1)
- frame semantics (1)
- frame theory (1)
- free choice (1)
- future (1)
- gestures (1)
- gradable adjectives (1)
- habitual (1)
- hard cases (1)
- hierarchy (1)
- higher-order quantification (1)
- iconic semantics (1)
- imperatives (1)
- imperfective (1)
- implicated presupposition (1)
- implicatives (1)
- implicature (1)
- imprecision (1)
- individual variation (1)
- inferencing task (1)
- infinitives (1)
- information structure (1)
- intensional quantifiers (1)
- intensional transitives (1)
- interrogatives (1)
- kind reference (1)
- language acquisition (1)
- lexical causative verbs (1)
- linear order (1)
- local context (1)
- logical form (1)
- manner implicature (1)
- maximality (1)
- maximizers (1)
- mention-some (1)
- miners puzzle (1)
- modal flavor (1)
- modal inferences (1)
- modification (1)
- monotonicity (1)
- movement (1)
- natural language metaphysics (1)
- necessary (but not necessarily sufficient) causes (1)
- negative strengthening (1)
- negative-islands (1)
- nominal nominal (1)
- non-intersective adjectives (1)
- non-restrictive relative clause (1)
- non-specific transparent (1)
- not-at-issue content (1)
- number neutrality (1)
- numerals (1)
- optional classifiers (1)
- parsing (1)
- performative modality (1)
- personal reference (1)
- perspective (1)
- picture semantics (1)
- plurality (1)
- pragmatic inference (1)
- pragmatics (1)
- preference predicates (1)
- presuppositional implicatures (1)
- priming (1)
- probabilistic theories of causation (1)
- probabilities (1)
- probability (1)
- progressive (1)
- projection (1)
- pronoun (1)
- pronoun movement (1)
- pronouns (1)
- properties (1)
- quantification (1)
- quantifier processing (1)
- quantifiers (1)
- quantity (1)
- reaction time (1)
- reasoning errors (1)
- relational adjectives (1)
- responsive predicates (1)
- restrictive relative clause (1)
- resumptive pronouns (1)
- rhetorical relations (1)
- salience (1)
- scalar changes (1)
- scalar diversity (1)
- scalar enrichment (1)
- scalar implicatures (1)
- scalar inferences (1)
- scale structure (1)
- scope (1)
- secondary focus (1)
- semantic types (1)
- semantic variability (1)
- semantics/pragmatics interface (1)
- sentence-final particles (1)
- similarity (1)
- similarity approach (1)
- simplification (1)
- speech acts (1)
- speech reports (1)
- speeded verification (1)
- split antecedent (1)
- standard solution (1)
- subjectivity (1)
- subjunctive conditionals (1)
- sufficient (but not necessarily necessary) causes (1)
- syllogisms (1)
- symmetric predicate (1)
- telicity (1)
- temporal/modal operators (1)
- too (1)
- topic markers (1)
- traces (1)
- type shifting (1)
- type-shifting (1)
- unalternative semantics (1)
- underspecification (1)
- universal presupposition projection (1)
- update semantics (1)
- visusal representations (1)
- weak free adjuncts (1)
- wh-questions (1)
- wide scope indefinites (1)
The verb ‘rise’ can be used both with property-denoting nouns like ‘temperature’ but also with NPs like ‘a Titan’ or ‘China’. Whereas in the former case the change triggered by a rising event is directly related to the subject (its current value increases), this does not hold for ‘a titan’ or ‘China’. In this case it is a property of these objects, say their height or their political power, which increases in value. Furthermore, ‘rise’ does not target a particular property as the examples above show. This data has led Cooper (2010) to the conclusion that it is presumably not possible (i) “to extract a single general meaning of words which covers all the particular meanings of the word in context”, and (ii) “to determine once and for all the set of particular contextually determined meanings of a word”. In this article we present a solution to the two problems raised by ‘rise’ in a frame theory. ‘Rise’ is analyzed as a scalar verb which does not lexicalize a complete scale in its meaning. Rather, it shows underspecification relative to the dimension (property) parameter of a scale. The set of admissible properties is determined by a constraint on the value ranges of properties. If the property is not uniquely determined by the subject, the comprehender uses probabilistic reasoning based on world knowledge and discourse information to defeasibly infer the most likely candidates from this set (2nd problem).
The first problem is solved not by simply introducing objects into the representation of a discourse but instead by pairs consisting of an object and an associated frame component which collects the object information contributed by the discourse. Changes triggered by events like the one denoted by ‘rise’ are modelled as update operations on the frame component while the object component is left unchanged.
"Naming Gender" von Susanne Oelkers (2003) ist die erste Studie, die sich eingehend mit der Geschlechtskennzeichnung von Rufnamen befasst. Für die Herstellung und Darstellung von Geschlecht stellt nicht nur Sprache generell, sondern zuvörderst das Namensystem ein zentrales Zeichensystem zur Verfügung. Namen haben damit beträchtlichen Anteil an Ordnungsstiftung und Komplexitätsreduktion. Die deutsche Onomastik hat sich bis 2003 kaum für die soziale Differenz Gender interessiert, sie hat die linguistische und soziologische Genderforschung nicht rezipiert. Umgekehrt haben auch Genderlinguistik und Soziologie die Personennamen weitgehend übersehen (von Lindemann 1996 und Gerhards 2003 abgesehen). Dies steht der Relevanz entgegen, die Namen für die Etablierung und Prozessierung der Geschlechterordnung haben. Selbst Sprachen ohne jegliche grammatische Genus- oder Gendermarkierung können mit ihren Rufnamen Geschlecht indizieren (z.B. Finnisch und Estnisch, die nicht einmal bei den Personalpronomen der 3. Person Geschlecht markieren).
This paper presents an exploratory production study of Bharatanatyam, a figurative (narrative) dance. We investigate the encoding of coreference vs. disjoint reference in this dance and argue that a formal semantics of narrative dance can be modeled in line with Abusch’s (2013, 2014, 2015) semantics of visual narrative (drawing also on Schlenker’s, 2017a, approach to music semantics). A main finding of our investigation is that larger-level group-boundaries (Charnavel, 2016) can be seen as triggers for discontinuity inferences (possibly involving the dynamic shift from one salient entity to another).
This paper argues that traces only range over individual semantic types and cannot be type shifted into higher types to circumvent this restriction. The evidence comes from movement targeting positions where DPs must denote properties and the behavior of definite descriptions in these positions. These constraints on possible traces demonstrate that syntactic operations impose active restrictions on permissible semantic types in natural language.
Schlenker (2010) recently provided data from English and French suggesting that, contrary to standard assumptions (McCawley, 1982; Potts, 2005; Arnold, 2007; AnderBois et al., 2011), non-restrictive relative clauses (NRCs) can take narrow scope under operators of the sentence within which they are embedded. This paper presents three experiments in German confirming this claim. The results show that embedded readings are available with NRCs in German and give first insights into the puzzle under which conditions these embedded readings do or do not show up.
This paper presents the results of two experiments in German testing the acceptability of (non-)restrictive relative clauses (NRCs/RRCs) with split antecedents (SpAs). According to Moltmann (1992), SpAs are only grammatical if their parts occur within the conjuncts of a coordinate structure and if they have identical grammatical functions. Non-conjoined SpAs that form the subject and the object of a transitive verb are predicted to be ungrammatical. Our study shows that the acceptability of such examples improves significantly if the predicate that relates the parts of the SpA is symmetric. Moreover, it suggests that NRCs and RRCs behave differently in these cases with respect to the SpA-construal. We can make sense of this observation if we follow Winter (2016) in assuming that transitive symmetric predicates have to be analyzed as unary collective predicates and thus provide a collective antecedent for the RC at the semantic (not the syntactic) level. As we will argue, this accounts for some of the disagreement we found in the literature and gives us new insights into both the semantics of symmetric predicates and the semantics of NRCs.
The proper semantic treatment of the complements of Responsive Predicates (ResPs), those predicates which may embed either declarative or interrogative clauses, is a longstanding puzzle, given standard assumptions about complement selection. In order to avoid positing systematic polysemy for ResPs, typical treatments of ResP complements treat their arguments either as uniformly declarative-like (propositional) or interrogative-like (question).
I shed new light on this question with novel data from Estonian, in which there are verbs think-like meanings with declarative complements and wonder-like meanings with interrogative complements. I argue that these verbs’ meaning is fundamentally incompatible with a proposition-taking semantics for ResPs, and therefore a question-taking semantics is to be preferred.
Generics and typicality
(2018)
Cimpian et al. (2010) observed that we accept generic statements of the form 'Gs are f' on relatively weak evidence, but that if we are unfamiliar with group G and we learn a generic statement about it, we still interpret it in a much stronger way: (almost) all Gs are f .
This paper makes use of notions like 'representativeness' and 'contingency' from (associative learning) psychology to provide a semantics of generics that explains why people accept generics based on weak evidence. We make use of the Heuristics and Biases approach of Tversky and Kahneman (1974) and the Associative Theory of Probability Judgements to explain pragmatically why people interpret generic statements in a much stronger way. The spirit of the approach has much in common with Leslie's (2008) cognition-based ideas about generics, but the semantics is grounded on Cohen's (1999) relative readings of generic sentences. The basic intuition is that a generic of the form 'Gs are f' is true, not because most Gs are (or tend to have) f , but because f is typical for G, which means that f is valuably associated with G.
Schlenker (2012) proposes that when framed within a modern Stalnakerian view of presupposition and common ground (Stalnaker, 1998, 2002), Maximize Presupposition! (Heim, 1991; Sauerland, 2008) can be viewed as a special case of the maxim of Quantity (Grice, 1975).
We provide data suggesting that in some cases, Maximize Presupposition! applies even when speakers are not expected to use a presupposition as vectors of new information. We argue that these data support the view that Maximize Presupposition! is an independent pragmatic principle, distinct from Quantity.
This paper explores Turkish numeral constructions, which have typologically two interesting properties: (i) the existence of an optional classifier, (ii) the incompatibility of plurals with them. I argue that numerals are modifiers of type <<e,t>,<e,t>> defined only for atomic properties (Ionin and Matushansky 2006). The explanation rests on the semantics of bare singulars proposed to denote sets of atoms (contra Bale et al. 2010), and the semantics of the classifier claimed to be a partial identity function presupposing atomic properties.