420 Englisch, Altenglisch
Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Conference Proceeding (104)
- Article (53)
- Part of a Book (20)
- Review (12)
- Book (3)
- Magister's Thesis (2)
- Working Paper (2)
- Bachelor Thesis (1)
- Contribution to a Periodical (1)
- Doctoral Thesis (1)
Language
- English (186)
- German (9)
- Polish (3)
- Multiple languages (1)
- Portuguese (1)
Has Fulltext
- yes (200)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (200)
Keywords
- Englisch (66)
- Metapher (17)
- Bedeutungswandel (12)
- Formale Semantik (11)
- Rezension (11)
- Polnisch (10)
- Informationsstruktur (8)
- Ellipse <Linguistik> (7)
- Koordination <Linguistik> (7)
- Nominalphrase (7)
Institute
"Back to basics" : a cognitive analysis of conversion de-adjectival nominalisation in English
(2003)
A singular countable noun in English normally needs a determiner and they should agree in number. However, there is a type of noun phrase, such as 'these sort of skills', which does not conform to this generalisation. As a singular countable common noun, the noun 'sort' requires a determiner, but there is an agreement mismat ch here: 'sort' is singular but the determiner is plural. Rather, the determiner agrees with the NP after the preposition 'of'. There are several po ssible analyses that might be proposed, but the best analysis is the one in which 'sort' and the preposition 'of' are 'functors', non-heads selecting heads.
Modifiability by almost has been used as a test for the quantificational force of a DP without stating the meaning of almost explicitly. The aim of this paper is to give a semantics for almost applying across categories and to evaluate the validity of the almost test as a diagnosis for universal quantifiers. It is argued that almost is similar to other cross-categorial modifiers such as at least or exactly in referring to alternatives ordered on a scale. I propose that almost evaluates alternatives in which the modified expression is replaced by a value close by on the corresponding Horn scale. It is shown that a semantics for almost that refers to scalar alternatives derives the correct truth conditions for almost and explains selectional restrictions. At the same time, taking the semantics of almost seriously invalidates the almost test as a simple diagnosis for the nature of quantifiers.
The complement structure of tough constructions containing VP complements with gap sites linked to the tough predicate subject has been subject to considerable discussion in the syntactic literature, with an apparent consensus that in "John is easy for us to please, for us" is a PP constituent which controls the subject specification of the following infinitival constituent. I reexamine the classical arguments for this position, including Bresnan's seminal 1971 paper which first argued for this control structure analysis, and argue that none of these arguments are empirically tenable. In all cases, data exist which convincingly undermine central claims or assumptions, and hence there turns out to be no convincing reason to prefer the control structure over the clausal analysis, introduced in Postal's 1971 monograph on crossover and defended in the Gazdar et al. monograph on generalized phrase structure grammar, in which for us to please is a clausal complement to easy. I then offer a number of arguments for the superiority of the clausal analysis, appealing to data from comparatives, parasitic gap constructions and extraposition. My claim that tough complementation of the kind alluded to is clausal must, if sound, be compatible with standardly assumed semantics for these constructions, in which the subject of the complement clause must also serve as an argument of the tough predicate — a conclusion seemingly at odds with a clausal complement syntax. The difficulty is that a constituent whose denotation is one of the terms in the relation denoted by the tough predicate must be retrieved from with a clause, where it is presumably inaccessible under normal Montegovian compositional assumptions. I offer further cross-linguistic evidence based on Guyanese Creole that such an apparent conflict between syntax and semantics is unavoidable, and then offer a syntactic solution, based on work by Detmar Meurers which posits a HEAD feature for verbs structure-shared with their SUBJspecification. This device, which also can be argued for in English on the basis of the Richard construction and several other phenomena, offers a way for information about the subject to be accessible to specifications of the selecting head in a way which compromises locality to the minimal extent possible.
Bereits im November 2013 verstarb Prof. Dr. phil. Gundi Gompf, die sich große Verdienste um den Fremdsprachenunterricht in der Grundschule erworben hatte. Gundi Gompf wurde 1976 auf eine Professur für „Didaktik der Englischen Sprache und Literatur“ an der Goethe-Universität berufen. Diese Tätigkeit nahm sie bis zu ihrer Pensionierung im Jahre 2005 wahr.
We present an approach to VP ellipsis that allows the direct derivation of source and target sentences (the former need not be unique) during semantic construction. Specific syntactic constituent structures are associated with ellipsis potential, which can then be discharged by pro-verbs like did (too). The determination of source and target sentence, which is done with semantic features in an HPSG framework, is coupled with a comprehensive analysis of ellipsis, which also handles its interaction with scope and anaphora.