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) (remove)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (112) (remove)
Keywords
- Semantik (112) (remove)
Institute
Eine allgeneine und theoretische Antwort auf die Frage, ob der Begriff "Possesivität" zur grammatischen Beschreibung einer natürlichen Sprache gehören solle oder nicht, wird je nach Standpunkt verschieden ausfallen. Man kann auch anders vorgehen, indem man in einem vortheoretischen Verständnis einen Begriff "Possesssivität" zunächst annimmt und zusieht, wie die Repräsentationen eines solchen Begriffs in je einer einzelnen Sprache sich gestalten. Die Möglichkeit, dass sich daraus, fast von alleine, eine Bestätigung und Präzisierung für diesen Begriff, ja sogar der eine oder andere Anhaltspunkt für dessen Universalität ergibt, dürfte man nicht ausschliessen. Der .Aufsatz von Hansjakob Seiler scheint schon in Zusammenhangmit diesem Problem nicht nur das Wesentlichste klargemacht zu haben; er stellt auch die Frage nach einem gemeinsamen Prinzip, dem die einzelnen Sprachen gehorchen, wenn sie die Possessivitätsrelation ausdrücken.
Dieser Beitrag ist ein Vorschlag, auf der grammatisch-semantischen Ebene dieses Prinzip in einer konktreten Sprache, dem Polnischen, aufgrund der die Possessivität ausdrückenden Mittel und ihrer Bereiche zu illustrieren. Daher wird hier semantisch davon ausgegangen, dass die Possessivität eine Relation ausdrückt, die den Verhältnis des Teils zum Ganzen entspricht. Ob man nun diese Relation als direkte Zugehörigkeit zur Menge oder als eine Art indirekter Zugehörigkeit, nämlich zum Besitzer der Menge auffasst, wäre eine Frage über die aufgrund der Struktur der betreffenden Sprache entschieden werden sollte, – vorausgesetzt immer, dass die Possessivität ein sprachlich ausgeprägtes und sprachwissenschaftlich beschreibbares Phänomen ist.
U ovom članku razmatraju se dokazi koje posuđenice nude za vrste kontakata između Praslavena i njihovih germanskih susjeda, Gota i različitih zapadnogermanskih naroda. Germanske posuđenice u praslavenskome uglavnom pripadaju određenom skupu semantičkih polja. Posuđene riječi mogu se podijeliti u nekoliko semantičkih polja: vlast i vojska, tehnička terminologija, novac i trgovinska razmjena, mjesta za pohranu (bačve, kutije itd.), kršćanska terminologija i imanje. Tehničke riječi i kršćanske riječi vjerojatno su zapadnogermanskoga podrijetla, dok sve ostale semantičke kategorije sadrže i gotske i zapadnogermanske posuđenice.
This paper is about the semantics of wh-phrases. It is argued that wh-phrases should not be analyzed as indefinites as, for example, Karttunen (1977) and many others have done, but as functional expressions with an indefinite core -their function being to restrict possible focus/background structures in direct or congruent answers. This will be argued for on the basis of observations made with respect to the distribution of term answers in well-formed question/answer sequences. This claim having been established, it will be integrated in a categorial variant of Schwarzschild's (1999) information-theoretic approach to F-marking and accent placement, and – second – its consequences with respect to the focus/background structure of wh-questions will be outlined.
LTAG semantics for questions
(2004)
This papers presents a compositional semantic analysis of interrogatives clauses in LTAG (Lexicalized Tree Adjoining Grammar) that captures the scopal properties of wh- and nonwh-quantificational elements. It is shown that the present approach derives the correct semantics for examples claimed to be problematic for LTAG semantic approaches based on the derivation tree. The paper further provides an LTAG semantics for embedded interrogatives.
Rethinking the adjunct
(2000)
The purpose of the present paper is twofold: first, to show that, when defining the adjunct, it is necessary to distinguish in a strict modular way between the syntactic level and the lexico-semantic level. Thus, the adjunct is a syntactic category on a par with the specifier and the complement, whereas the argument belongs to the same set as does (among others) the modifier. The consequence of this distinction is that there is no direct one-to-one opposition between adjuncts and arguments. Nor is there any direct one-to one relation between adjuncts and modifiers.
The second and main purpose of the paper is to account for the well-known difference between the position of a specific set of modifiers (cause, time, place etc.) in, on the one hand, English and Swedish, on the other, German. In English and Swedish the default position of these modifiers is postverbal, whereas in German it is preverbal. Further, in English and Swedish, these modifiers occur in a mirror order compared with their German counterparts, an order which, from a semantic point of view, is not the expected one. I shall demonstrate that this difference is due to the different settings of the verbal head parameter, the former languages being VO-languages and the latter being OV -languages. I shall further argue that in English and Swedish these modifiers are base generated as adjuncts to an empty VP, which is a complement of the main verb of what I shall call the minimal VP (MVP), whereas in German they are adjuncts on top of the MVP. Finally, I shall argue that the postverbal modifiers move at the latest at LF to the top of the MVP, in order to take scope over it, the restriction being 'Shortest move'. The movement results in the correct scope order of the postverbal modifiers.
The proposed structure also accounts for the binding data, in particular for the binding of a specific Swedish possessive anaphor 'sin'. This pronoun, which may occur within the MVP, must not occur within the postverbal modifiers in the empty VP. This supports the assumption that there is a strict borderline between the MVP and the assumed empty VP. The account is also in accordance with the focus data, the specific set of modifiers being potential focus exponents in a wide focus reading in English and Swedish, but not in German.
Aspektsysteme
(1991)
„Die folgenden Papiere sind im Umfeld eines Hauptseminars "Aspekt und Tempus" entstanden, das im Wintersemester 1989/90 am Institut für Sprachwissenschaft der Universität zu Köln stattfand. In den folgenden Beiträgen werden nicht alle Aspekte des Aspekts gedeckt; im Vordergrund steht hauptsächlich die Frage der Interaktion von lexikalischer Semantik und Aspektmorphologie, so daß sich die Beschreibung der Aspektmorphologie auf aspektrelevante Fälle beschränkt und Nebenfunktionen (z.B. temporale), Konventionalisierungen, Neutralisierungen usw. weitgehend vernachlässigt werden. Kritik und Anregungen sind höchst willkommen.“ ---
Inhalt:
Aspekttheorie (Hans-Jürgen Sasse); Albanisch (Christina Leluda); Spanisch (Olga Chapado Chorro & Luisa Garcia Garcia); Japanisch (Antje Seidel & Helga Weyerts); Maa (Christa König); Modemes Chinesisch (Chor-Shing Li); Samoanisch (Mario Longino)
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.
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 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.
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.