Arbeiten des Kölner Universalien-Projekts : akup
Institut für Sprachwissenschaft, Universität zu Köln. Hrsg. der Reihe: H. Seiler
Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Working Paper (64)
Has Fulltext
- yes (64)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (64)
Keywords
- Sprachtypologie (16)
- Sprachliche Universalien (13)
- Linguistik (7)
- Deskriptivität (4)
- Kausativ (4)
- Partizipation (4)
- Possessivität (4)
- Possessivkonstruktion (4)
- Cahuilla-Sprache (3)
- Klassifikator <Linguistik> (3)
- Lokalisation (3)
- Partizipialkonstruktion (3)
- Präposition (3)
- Sprachphilosophie (3)
- Tagalog (3)
- Valenz <Linguistik> (3)
- Verb (3)
- Afrikanische Sprachen (2)
- Arabisch (2)
- Bahasa Indonesia (2)
- Determination <Linguistik> (2)
- Deutsch (2)
- Ergativ (2)
- Finnisch (2)
- Funktionalismus <Linguistik> (2)
- Indianersprachen (2)
- Kasusgrammatik (2)
- Körperteil (2)
- Nomen (2)
- Nominalphrase (2)
- Thai (2)
- Transitivierung (2)
- Verwandtschaftsbezeichnung (2)
- Ableitung <Linguistik> (1)
- Affix (1)
- Akkusativ (1)
- Aktant (1)
- Aktiv (1)
- Anthropologie (1)
- Antonym (1)
- Aspekt <Linguistik> (1)
- Austroasiatische Sprachen (1)
- Baskisch (1)
- Bedeutung (1)
- Chomsky, Noam (1)
- Deixis (1)
- Erkenntnistheorie (1)
- Explikation (1)
- Französisch (1)
- Genus verbi (1)
- Grammatiktheorie (1)
- Hausa-Sprache (1)
- Ikon (1)
- Implikation (1)
- Inhärenz (1)
- Intransitives Verb (1)
- Japanisch (1)
- Jukagirisch (1)
- Kasus (1)
- Kognitive Linguistik (1)
- Kognitive Semantik (1)
- Konstruktivismus <Philosophie> (1)
- Kontrastive Linguistik (1)
- Kuanua (1)
- Lexikalisierung (1)
- Logik (1)
- Lokale Präposition (1)
- Maya-Sprachen (1)
- Melanesische Sprachen (1)
- Modalität <Linguistik> (1)
- Modus (1)
- Morphologie (1)
- Morphologie <Linguistik> (1)
- Morphosyntax (1)
- Nenzisch (1)
- Newari (1)
- Nominalisierung (1)
- Numerus (1)
- Opposition <Linguistik> (1)
- Orientierung (1)
- Ozeanische Sprachen (1)
- Palauisch (1)
- Paradigmenwechsel (1)
- Philosophie (1)
- Progressiv (1)
- Proposition (1)
- Prototyp <Linguistik> (1)
- Prädikation (1)
- Präfixverb (1)
- Referenzwechsel (1)
- Samoanisch (1)
- Saussure, Ferdinand de (1)
- Semantik (1)
- Semiotik (1)
- Serialverb-Konstruktion (1)
- Skalierung (1)
- Sprachvariante (1)
- Sprechakt (1)
- Swahili (1)
- Tempus (1)
- Transitives Verb (1)
- Transitivität (1)
- Türkisch (1)
- Wogulisch (1)
- Wortbildung (1)
- Zahlklassifikator (1)
79
The Stanford Project on Language Universals began its activities in October 1967 and brought them to an end in August 1976. Its directors were Joseph H. Greenberg and Charles A. Ferguson. The Cologne Project on Language Universals and Typology [with particular reference to functional aspects], abbreviated UNITYP, had its early beginnings in 1972, but deployed its full activities from 1976 onwards and is still operating. This writer, who is the principal investigator, had the privilege of collaborating with the Stanford Project during spring of 1976. […] One of the leading Greenbergian ideas is that of implicational generalizations, has been integrated as a fundamental principle in the construction of continua and of universal dimensions as proposed by UNITYP. It is hoped that the following considerations on numeral systems will be apt to bear witness to this situation. They would be unthinkable without Greenberg’s pioneering work on "Generalizations about numeral systems" (Greenberg 1978: 249 ff., henceforth referred to as Greenberg, NS). Further work on this domain and on other comparable domains almost inevitably leads one to the view that generalizations of the Greenberg type have a functional significance and that a dimensional framework is apt to bring this to the fore. This is the view on linguistic behaviour as being purposeful, and on language as a problem- solving device. The problem consists in the linguistic representation of cognitive-conceptual ideas. The solution is represented by the corresponding linguistic structures in their diversity and the task of the linguist consists in reconstructing the program and subprograms underlying the process of problem-solving. It is claimed that the construct of continua and of universal dimensions makes these programs intelligible.
77
The human mind may produce prototypization within virtually any realm of cognition and behavior. A "comparative prototype-typology" might prove to be an interesting field of study – perhaps a new subfield of semiotics. This, however, would presuppose a clear view on the samenesses and differences of prototypization in these various fields. It seems realistic for the time being that the linguist first confine himself to describing prototypization within the realm of language proper. The literature on prototypes has steadily grown in the past ten years or so. I confine myself to mentioning the volume on Noun Classes and Categorization, edited by C. Craig (1986), which contains a wealth of factual information on the subject, along with some theoretical vistas. By and large, however, linguistic prototype research is still basically in a taxonomic stage - which, of course, represents the precondition for moving beyond. The procedure is largely per ostensionem, and by accumulating examples of prototypes. We still lack a comprehensive prototype theory. The following pages are intended, not to provide such, a theory, but to do the first steps in this direction. Section 2 will feature some elements of a functional theory of prototypes. They have been developed by this author within the frame of the UNITYP model of research on language universals and typology. Section 3 will bring a discussion of prototypization with regard to selected phenomena of a wide range of levels of analysis: Phonology, morphosyntax, speech acts, and the lexicon. Prototypization will finally be studied within one of the universal dimensions, that of APPREHENSION - the linguistic representation of the concepts of objects – as proposed by Seiler (1986).
50
According to the present state of research, there seems to be no language which shows possessive classifiers and possessive verbs corresponding to English "to have" at the same time. In classifier languages predicative possession is expressed by verbless clauses, i.e. by existential clauses ("there is my possessed item"), equative clauses ("the possessed item is mine" "that is my possessed item") or by locative expressions ("the possessed item is near me"), in which the classifier in the case of non-inherent possession marks the nature of the relationship. While most Melanesian languages, as for instance Fijian, Lenakel, Pala and Tolai are classifier languages, Nguna, a Melanesian language spoken in Vanuatu, only shows traces of the Melanesian possessive classifier system, but, in contrast to the other Melanesian languages, it has a possessive verb, namely 'peani' "to have". In order to show how the Nguna possessive constructions deviate from the common Melanesian type, we shall start with a brief description of the Melanesian possessive constructions in general, and that of Fijian in particular.
54
Das Ziel der folgenden Betrachtungen besteht weniger in der Lieferung eines prinzipiell neuen Beitrags sei es zur Unterscheidung akkusativischer, ergativischer und aktivischer Konstruktionstypen oder sei es zu derjenigen verschiedener Aktantenfunktionen (cf. Heger 1976 § 4 1.2 ) als vielmehr im Nachweis der Brauchbarkeit der letzteren als eines noematischen – d.h. von je einzelsprachlichen Gegebenheiten unabhängigen – tertium comparationis für den Vergleich der ersteren und ihrer verschiedenen Subtypen Im Rahmen dieser Zielsetzung ist es legitim, die folgenden Betrachtungen auf die Frage nach den Bezeichnungen der Prädikativ-Funktion (die einem Aktanten eine Eigenschaft, einen Zustand oder eine Zustandsveränderung zuschreibt), der Kausal-Funktion (die einen Aktanten als denjenigen theoretischen Ort charakterisiert, von dem die Ursache eines Zustands oder Vorgangs ausgeht) und der Final-Funktion (die einen Aktanten als denjenigen theoretischen Ort charakterisiert, an dem sich die Wirkung eines Zustands oder Vorgangs vollzieht) einzuschränken. Dennoch ist der einleitende Hinweis auf die zumindest theoretisch unbegrenzte Unterscheidbarkeit weiterer Aktantenfunktionen wichtig, da er die naheliegende Frage beantwortet, warum in keiner Sprache eineindeutige Bezeichnungen von Aktantenfunktionen anzutreffen sind: im Fall der Bezeichnung von Aktantenfunktionen durch Kasusgrammeme am Nomen würde eine derartige Lösung kaum mehr handhabbare Flexionsparadigmen entstehen lassen und in Fall ihrer Bezeichnung durch Kongruenzmarkierung am Verb darüber hinaus zu monströsen Konjugationsformen führen.
22
The first question under Consideration is whether it is possible to explicate the meaning of 'meaning' (in the sense of Carnap's 'meaning explication'). It is argued then that we have to distinguish just between meaning1 and meaning2: Meaning1 refers to the proper semantic meaning whereas meaning2 refers to a pragmatic meaning expressed by the form 'S means that p'. The statement follows that there is no possibility of giving an explication of meaning directly based on meaning1. Concerning meaning2, arguments are given which demonstrate the identity of meaning2 with material implication. An explication of meaning2 would show tight resemblances to Tarski's well- known truth-definition.
53
Linguistic continua, their properties, and their interpretation – Hansjakob Seiler ; Skala und Kontinuum: Versuch einer Abgrenzung – Fritz Serzisko ; Der Skalenbegriff in der Linguistik mit einer Demonstration am Beispiel der deutschen Adverbien – Paul-Otto Samuelsdorff ; Kasusrollen im Tagalog: ein intrasprachliches Kontinuum der Kontrolle – Werner Drossard ; Zu einigen Skalen bei der Beschreibung sprachlicher Variation – Manfred Ostrowski Sprachliche Skalen im-typologischen Vergleich (erläutert am Beispiel der Dimension "Apprehension") – Ulrike Kölver
38
Die folgende Studie steht in Verbindung mit einer intersprachlichen Untersuchung zu der Dimension des sprachlichen Erfassens von Gegenständen im Rahmen des Kölner Projekts für Universalienforschung und Typologie (UNITYP). Im ersten Kapitel werden die zugrundeliegenden theoretischen Begriffe der sprachlichen Universalien und Typologie sowie die Dimension des Erfassens von Gegenständen kurz erörtert, um die Ziele dieser Arbeit in Beziehung zum Forschungsplan des UNITYPs zu setzen. Im zweiten Kapitel wird das Phänomen klassifikatorischer Verben zunächst definiert, und dann werden Systeme klassifikatorischer Verben in ausgewählten Einzelsprachen beschrieben. Abschließend wird der Versuch gemacht, zu zeigen, inwieweit die für eine Einzelsprache beschriebene Erscheinung ein typologisches Charakteristikum der betreffenden Sprachfamilie bzw. Sprachgruppe ist, um damit die Verbreitung von klassifikatorischen Verben in nordamerikanischen Indianersprachen vorläufig abzustecken. Im dritten Kapitel werden Verallgemeinerungen aus den im zweiten Kapitel vorgelegten Daten gezogen, um eine vorläufige typologische Beschreibung der Erscheinung "klassifikatorische Verben" zu erzielen und somit ihre Stellung in der Dimension des Erfassens von Gegenständen sowie in einer konzept-orientierten Typologie zu charakterisieren.
16
Three quantificational approaches to the measurement of lexical descriptivity are proposed, based on: the semantic sum of the parts of a lexeme is equal to the whole, paraphrase-term and term-paraphrase congruence, explicitness of semantic elements of a construction. Combination of all possible values into tripartite sets and then into equipollent groups results in a system composed of 12 grades. This system was tested with a semantic domain of the Finnish lexicon: body-part terms. The descriptivity indices for each lexical item were correlated with natural divisions of the body, construction-motivation types (form, function, location), grammatical construction types (endo- and exocentric compounds, derived forms, metaphors), and loanwords. These comparisons result in a number of grade profiles whereby specific descriptivity grades are characteristically associated with one or more types of body section, construction motivation, and grammatical construction. Diachronic and synchronic evidence points overwhelmingly to a process of semantic narrowing in the development of descriptive words and labels from phrases or sentences.
21
In an earlier paper, I proposed a system for evaluating the relative descriptivity of lexical items in a consistent manner in terms of the interrelations of three metrics. The first of these, including five possible degrees of descriptivity, is based on the premise that the sum of the meaningful parts of a given form is or is not equal to the meaning of the whole. The second, also composed of five degrees, is based on paraphrase-term relations in which the logical quantifiers: all, some and no, are applied to the terms of the paraphrase in one test and to the meaningful parts of the term (linguistic form) in the reversibility test. Both tests are applied in the form of logical propositions. The third metric, with three degrees, deals with the relative explicitness of the meaningful parts of a given form: explicit, implicit or neither. […] This system was then tested in a pilot study involving the fairly limited and semantically homogeneous lexical domain of body-part terms in a specific language, Finnish. The purpose of the present paper is to subject comparable data from other languages to the same kind of analysis and compare the results in order to ascertain whether the generalizations arrived at with the Finnish data also hold for the other languages or, more specifically, which of these generalizations are more or less universal and which language or language-type specific? The additional languages to be examined here are: French, German, Ewe, Maasai and Swahili.
23
The basic idea I want to develop and to substantiate in this paper consists in replacing – where necessary – the traditional concept of linguistic category or linguistic relation understood as 'things', as reified hypostases, by the more dynamic concept of dimension. A dimension of language structure is not coterminous with one single category or relation but, instead, accommodates several of them. It corresponds to certain well circumscribed purposive functions of linguistic activity as well as to certain definite principles and techniques for satisfying these functions. The true universals of language are represented by these dimensions, principles, and techniques which constitute the true basis for non-historical inter-language comparison. The categories and relations used in grammar are condensations – hypostases as it were – of such dimensions, principles, and techniques. Elsewhere I have outlined the theory which I want to test here in a case study.