Linguistik
Refine
Year of publication
- 2003 (129) (remove)
Document Type
- Conference Proceeding (54)
- Part of a Book (36)
- Article (23)
- Preprint (6)
- Working Paper (4)
- Book (2)
- Review (2)
- Bachelor Thesis (1)
- Report (1)
Language
- English (129) (remove)
Has Fulltext
- yes (129)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (129)
Keywords
- Morphologie (14)
- Phonologie (12)
- Aspekt (10)
- Englisch (9)
- Koreanisch (8)
- Kindersprache (7)
- Phonetik (7)
- Semantik (7)
- Japanisch (6)
- Nominalphrase (5)
- Optimalitätstheorie (5)
- Sinotibetische Sprachen (5)
- Slawische Sprachen (5)
- Zischlaut (5)
- Deutsch (4)
- Informationsstruktur (4)
- Qiang-Sprache (4)
- Adjektiv (3)
- Aspekt <Linguistik> (3)
- Head-driven phrase structure grammar (3)
- Linguistik (3)
- Metapher (3)
- Palatalisierung (3)
- Passiv (3)
- Quantifizierung <Linguistik> (3)
- Relativsatz (3)
- Russisch (3)
- Adjunkt <Linguistik> (2)
- Argumentstruktur (2)
- Bedeutungswandel (2)
- Beschränkung <Linguistik> (2)
- Bulgarisch (2)
- Determinator (2)
- Extraktion <Linguistik> (2)
- Französisch (2)
- Freier Relativsatz (2)
- Fremdsprachenlernen (2)
- Generative Grammatik (2)
- Gerundium (2)
- Grammatiktheorie (2)
- Griechisch (2)
- Interrogativpronomen (2)
- Kasus (2)
- Klitisierung (2)
- Kontrastive Linguistik (2)
- Koordination <Linguistik> (2)
- Lexicalized Tree Adjoining Grammar (2)
- Niederländisch (2)
- Phonem (2)
- Polnisch (2)
- Prosodie (2)
- Raising (2)
- Retroflex (2)
- Rezension (2)
- Sprachtypologie (2)
- Syntaktische Kongruenz (2)
- Syntax (2)
- Thema-Rhema-Gliederung (2)
- Topikalisierung (2)
- Vergleichende Sprachwissenschaft (2)
- Wortstellung (2)
- 20th century (1)
- Adverbiale (1)
- Afar (1)
- Ainu-Sprache (1)
- Akkusativ mit Infinitiv (1)
- Albanisch (1)
- Alemannic dialects (1)
- Alsace (1)
- Anatolische Sprachen (1)
- Anlaut (1)
- Argument linking (1)
- Auslaut (1)
- Australische Sprachen (1)
- Auxiliarkomplex (1)
- Bedeutungsunterschied (1)
- Binarismus (1)
- Computerlinguistik (1)
- Dialog (1)
- Diskontinuierliches Element (1)
- Doppelter Nominativ (1)
- Drung (1)
- Einbettung <Linguistik> (1)
- Ergänzung <Linguistik> (1)
- Evolutionstheorie (1)
- Expressivität <Linguistik> (1)
- Extraposition (1)
- Fokus <Linguistik> (1)
- Frage (1)
- Galician (1)
- Galicisch (1)
- Genus (1)
- Glossar (1)
- Gradadverb (1)
- Gujarati (1)
- Hakha Chin (Lai) (1)
- Halbvokal (1)
- Hebräisch (1)
- Hirnfunktion (1)
- Ikon (1)
- Inkorporation <Linguistik> (1)
- Insertion <Linguistik> (1)
- Keltische Sprachen (1)
- Kikuyu (1)
- Kiranti (1)
- Kognitionswissenschaft (1)
- Kognitive Linguistik (1)
- Kommunikation (1)
- Kommunikationsanalyse (1)
- Konjunktion (1)
- Konsonant (1)
- Korpus <Linguistik> (1)
- Kroatisch (1)
- Kymrisch (1)
- LTAG (1)
- Lautmalerei (1)
- Lehnwort (1)
- Lerntheorie (1)
- Liaison (1)
- Linguistic change (1)
- Manx (1)
- Mikronesische Sprachen (1)
- Morphologie <Linguistik> (1)
- Nasal (1)
- Neugriechisch (1)
- Nicht-Übersetzbarkeit (1)
- Nomen (1)
- Nominalisierung (1)
- Numerativ (1)
- Parasitic gap (1)
- Partikelverb (1)
- Phrasenstruktur (1)
- Pragmatik (1)
- Psiphänomen (1)
- Regelordnung (1)
- Reibelaut (1)
- Religion (1)
- Resultativ (1)
- Rückfrage (1)
- Satzakzent (1)
- Satzellipse (1)
- Schmerz (1)
- Schottisch (1)
- Silbe (1)
- Skandinavische Sprachen (1)
- Spaltsatz (1)
- Spanisch (1)
- Sprachlehrbuch (1)
- Sprachverstehen (1)
- Substantiv (1)
- Symposium (1)
- Tempus (1)
- Textlinguistik (1)
- Tough-construction (1)
- Tschechisch (1)
- Tschuktschisch (1)
- Type-Token-Relation (1)
- Valenz (Linguistik) (1)
- Velar (1)
- Verb (1)
- Verbalphrase (1)
- Vergangenheitstempus (1)
- Verwandtschaftsbezeichnung (1)
- Vokal (1)
- Vokaldehnung (1)
- Vokativ (1)
- W-Bewegung (1)
- Wirtschaft (1)
- Wortlänge (1)
- Zahlbegriff (1)
- Zweitsprachenerwerb (1)
- computational semantics (1)
- language change (1)
- lexicalized tree-adjoining grammar (1)
- quantifier scope (1)
- sociolinguistics (1)
- sociology of language (1)
- underspecification (1)
- variational linguistics (1)
- Übersetzung (1)
Institute
"Back to basics" : a cognitive analysis of conversion de-adjectival nominalisation in English
(2003)
We present an effort for the development of multilingual named entity grammars in a unification-based finite-state formalism (SProUT). Following an extended version of the MUC7 standard, we have developed Named Entity Recognition grammars for German, Chinese, Japanese, French, Spanish, English, and Czech. The grammars recognize person names, organizations, geographical locations, currency, time and date expressions. Subgrammars and gazetteers are shared as much as possible for the grammars of the different languages. Multilingual corpora from the business domain are used for grammar development and evaluation. The annotation format (named entity and other linguistic information) is described. We present an evaluation tool which provides detailed statistics and diagnostics, allows for partial matching of annotations, and supports user-defined mappings between different annotation and grammar output formats.
Most systematic discussion of dyad morphemes has focussed on Australian languages, owing to a combination of their relative prevalence there, and the development of a descriptive tradition that investigates them in some depth. In the course of researching this paper, however, I became aware of functionally and semantically similar morphemes in many other parts of the world, almost invariably described in isolation from any typological reference point. I have incorporated such data as far as I am aware of it, in the hope that a systematic study will encourage other investigators to identify, and investigate in detail, similar constructions in a range of languages. The current state of our research, however, as well as some interesting geographical skewings that I discuss below, such that outside Australia dyad constructions almost exclusively employ reciprocal morphology, means that most of this paper will focus on Australian languages.
Sino-Tibetan is a prime example of how strongly a language family can typologically diversify under the pressure of areal spread features (Matisoff 1991, 1999). One of the manifestation of this is the average length of prosodic words. In Southeast Asia, prosodic words tend to average on one or one-and-a-half syllables. In the Himalayas, by contrast, it is not uncommon to encounter prosodic words containing five to ten syllables. The following pair of examples illustrates this.
In many languages, clauses can be subordinated by means of case markers. For Bodic languages, a branch of Sino-Tibetan, Genetti (1986) has shown that the meaning of case markers on clauses is in most instances a natural extension of their function on nouns. A dative, for example, which marks a referential goal with a noun, signals a situational goal, i.e., a purpose, when used on a clause. Among the case markers recruited for subordination, we not only get relatively concrete cases like datives, comitatives and various types of locatives, but also core argument relators such as ergatives and accusatives. In this paper, I focus on ergative markers in one subgroup of Bodic, viz. in Kiranti languages spoken in Eastern Nepal, especially in Belhare.
Qiang
(2003)
Evidentiality in Qiang
(2003)
The Qiang language is spoken by about 70,000 (out of 200,000) Qiang people, plus 50,000 people classified as Tibetan by the Chinese government. Most Qiang speakers live in Aba Tibetan and Qiang Autonomous Prefecture on the eastern edge of the Tibetan plateau in the mountainous northwest part of Sichuan Province, China. The Qiang language is a member of the Qiangic branch of the Tibeto-Burman family of the Sino-Tibetan stock. Within Tibeto-Burman, a number oflanguages show evidence of evidential systems, but these systems cannot be reconstructed to any great time depth. The data used in this chapter is from Ranghang Village, Chibusu District, Mao County in Aba Prefecture.
Sperber and Wilson (1996) and Wilson and Sperber (1993) have argued that communication involves two processes, ostension and inference, but they also assume there is a coding-decoding stage of communication and a functional distinction between lexical items and grammatical marking (what they call 'conceptual' vs. 'procedural' information). Sperber and Wilson have accepted a basically Chomskyan view of the innateness of language structure and Universal Grammar.
Twenty years ago I discussed the oldest isoglosses in the South Slavic linguistic area (1982). Subscribing to Van Wijk’s view that the bundle of isoglosses which separates Bulgarian from Serbo-Croatian was the result of an early split in South Slavic and that the transitional dialects originated from a later mixture of Serbian and Bulgarian dialects when the contact between the two languages had been restored (1927), I argued that the shared innovations of Bulgarian and Serbo-Croatian must be dated to a period when the dialects were still spoken in the original Trans-Carpathian homeland of the Slavs. I concluded that there is no evidence for common innovations of South Slavic which were posterior to the end of what I have called the Late Middle Slavic period, which I dated to the 4th through 6th centuries AD. At that time, the major dialect divisions of Slavic were already established.
Twenty years ago (1983), I severely criticized Halle and Kiparsky’s review (1981) of Garde’s history of Slavic accentuation (1976). I concluded that Halle and Ki-parsky’s theoretical framework “rests upon an unwarranted limitation of the available evidence, obscures the chronological perspective, and yields results which are partly not new and partly incorrect. It is harmful because it does not give the facts their proper due and thereby blocks the road to empirical study, giving a free hand to unrestrained speculation” (1983: 40). As Halle has recently returned to the subject (2001), it may be interesting to see if there has been some progress in his thinking over the last two decades. In the following I shall try to avoid repeating what I have said in my earlier discussion.
1. The functionalist’s view: linguistic forms are instruments used to convey meaningful elements. This is the basis of European structuralism. 2. The formalist’s view: linguistic forms are abstract structures which can be filled with meaningful elements. This is the basis of generative grammar. 3. The parasitologist’s view: linguistic forms are vehicles for the reproduction of meaningful elements. This is the view which I advocated twenty years ago in the Festschrift for Werner Winter’s 60th birthday (1985). Here I intend to discuss the evolutionary origin and the physiological nature of the linguistic parasite. My theory of language is wholly consistent with Gerald Edelman’s theory of neuronal group selection.
S.R. Ramsey writes (1979: 162): "The patterning of tone marks in Old Kyoto texts divides the vocabulary into virtually the same classes as those arrived at by comparing the accent distinctions found in the modern dialects. This means that the Old Kyoto dialect had a pitch system similar to that of proto-Japanese. The standard language of the Heian period may not actually be the ancestor of all the dialects of Japan, but at least as far as the accent system is concerned, it is close enough to the proto system to be used as a working model. The significance of this fact is important: It means that each of the dialects included in the comparison has as much to tell, at least potentially, as any other dialect about Old Kyoto accent."
In her discussion of the Japanese adversative passive, Anna Wierzbicka writes (1988: 260): “The problem is extremely interesting and important both for intrinsic reasons and because of its wider methodological implications. It can be formulated like this: if one form can be used in a number of different ways, are we entitled to postulate for it a number of different meanings or should we rather search for one semantic common denominator (regarded as the MEANING of the form in question) and attribute the variety of uses to the interaction between this meaning and the linguistic or extralinguistic context?” Though it “may seem obvious” that the second stand is “methodologically preferable” (261), she takes the first position and concludes that “the Japanese passive has to be recognized as multiply ambiguous” (286). In the following I intend to show that this view is both wrong and fruitful.
The large majority of the isoglosses which can be established in the South Slavic dialectal area date from the time of the disintegration of Common Slavic and from more recent periods (e.g., Ivi´c 1958: 25ff). The isoglosses have often shifted in the course of the centuries, so that their original position cannot always be determined. In this study I shall concentrate upon the dialectal differences which originated before the 10th century. At that time, Slavic was still a largely uniform language, though it was certainly not completely homogeneous.