Neuere Philologien
Refine
Year of publication
- 2017 (96)
- 2020 (84)
- 2019 (83)
- 2018 (82)
- 2021 (70)
- 2015 (48)
- 2008 (40)
- 2016 (36)
- 2012 (31)
- 2005 (25)
- 2014 (24)
- 2009 (22)
- 2013 (21)
- 2022 (21)
- 2007 (20)
- 2006 (19)
- 2004 (18)
- 2024 (17)
- 2010 (15)
- 2002 (13)
- 2011 (13)
- 2023 (12)
- 2003 (11)
- 2000 (9)
- 2001 (8)
- 1997 (6)
- 1999 (6)
- 1998 (5)
- 1992 (4)
- 1994 (4)
- 1991 (3)
- 1996 (3)
- 1980 (2)
- 1984 (2)
- 1987 (2)
- 1988 (2)
- 1989 (2)
- 1990 (2)
- 1995 (2)
- 1931 (1)
- 1968 (1)
- 1970 (1)
- 1973 (1)
- 1981 (1)
- 1982 (1)
- 1983 (1)
- 1986 (1)
- 1993 (1)
Document Type
- Article (237)
- Review (174)
- Book (133)
- Contribution to a Periodical (76)
- Doctoral Thesis (66)
- Report (57)
- magisterthesis (35)
- Part of Periodical (34)
- Magister's Thesis (29)
- Part of a Book (28)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (892) (remove)
Keywords
- Kongress (6)
- German (5)
- Deutsch (4)
- European Portuguese (4)
- Kuba (4)
- Literatur (4)
- Mehrsprachigkeit (4)
- Europa (3)
- Film (3)
- Germanistik (3)
Institute
- Neuere Philologien (892)
- Präsidium (216)
- Rechtswissenschaft (20)
- Erziehungswissenschaften (10)
- Philosophie (4)
- Psychologie (4)
- MPI für empirische Ästhetik (3)
- Medizin (3)
- Akademie für Bildungsforschung und Lehrerbildung (bisher: Zentrum für Lehrerbildung und Schul- und Unterrichtsforschung) (2)
- Geschichtswissenschaften (2)
This afterword addresses the complex temporal and global dynamics of the coronavirus pandemic. After considering some of the new social rhythms that have emerged in the wake of Covid-19 around the world, it turns to the role of collective memory before, during and after corona. The aim is to provide a basic grid for how the Covid-19 pandemic could be addressed using memory studies expertise and concepts such as premediation, memorability, memory (ab)use, national memory, colonial memory, racial stereotypes, the digital archive, generational memory, or Anthropocene time.
Corrigendum zu: Memory studies 13.2020, issue: 5, S. 861-874, doi:10.1177/1750698020943014, ISSN 1750-6999
We aim to understand whether Greek and Italian, two null subject languages, differ in the use and interpretation of null subjects, based on evidence from both a production and a comprehension experiment. The results of the two experiments show that the two languages differ in the extent to which they comply with the Position of Antecedent Strategy as formulated by Carminati (2002). In order to account for this difference, we introduce a principle which defines prominence of sentence constituents in terms of hierarchical height, elaborating on a recent proposal by Rizzi (2018). Then we show that the prominence of subject and object constituents in Greek and Italian reflects word-order differences between the two languages (Roussou & Tsimpli 2006). In more general terms, this paper argues in favour of a multi-factorial approach to reference interpretation, in that syntactic factors interact with discourse factors, leading to a gradient variety of reference possibilities.