Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Article (166) (remove)
Keywords
- Deutsch (64)
- Konversationsanalyse (21)
- Korpus <Linguistik> (19)
- Interaktion (13)
- Englisch (11)
- Akzent (8)
- Computerlinguistik (8)
- Lexikografie (8)
- Neologismus (8)
- Semantik (8)
Publicationstate
- Postprint (166) (remove)
Reviewstate
- Peer-Review (129)
- (Verlags)-Lektorat (22)
- Peer-review (6)
- Peer-Revied (2)
- Review-Status-unbekannt (1)
- Verlags-Lektorat (1)
Publisher
- Elsevier (14)
- Oxford University Press (14)
- Springer (11)
- Erich Schmidt (10)
- Benjamins (6)
- Buske (6)
- Wiley (6)
- Sage (5)
- Edinburgh University Press (4)
- SAGE (4)
Language attitudes matter; they influence people’s behaviour and decisions. Therefore, it is crucial to learn more about patterns in the way that languages are evaluated. One means of doing so is using a quantitative approach with data representative of a whole population, so that results mirror dispositions at a societal level. This kind of approach is adopted here, with a focus on the situation in Germany. The article consists of two parts. First, I will present some results of a new representative survey on language attitudes in Germany (the Germany Survey 2017). Second, I will show how language attitudes penetrate even seemingly objective data collection processes by examining the German Microcensus. In 2017, for the first time in eighty years, the German Microcensus included a question on language use ‘at home’. Unfortunately, however, the question was clearly tainted by language attitudes instead of being objective. As a result, the Microcensus significantly misrepresents the linguistic reality of different migrant languages spoken in Germany.
In this paper, we present an overview of freely available web applications providing online access to spoken language corpora. We explore and discuss various solutions with which the corpus providers and corpus platform developers address the needs of researchers who are working with spoken language. The paper aims to contribute to the long-overdue exchange and discussion of methods and best practices in the design of online access to spoken language corpora.
Coronaparty, Jo-jo-Lockdown und Mask-have – Wortschatzerweiterung während des Corona-Stillstands
(2021)
Response particles manage intersubjectivity. This conversation analytic study describes German eben (“exactly”). With eben, speaker A locally agrees with the immediately prior turn of B (the “confirmable”) and establishes a second indexical link: A relates B’s confirmable to a position A herself had already displayed (the “anchor”). Through claiming temporal priority, eben speakers treat a just-formulated position as self-evident and mark independence. Further evidence for the three-part structure “anchor-confirmable-eben” that eben sets in motion retrospectively comes from instances where eben speakers supply a missing/opaque anchor via a postpositioned display of independent access. Data are in German with English translation.
As immigration and mobility increases, so do interactions between people from different linguistic backgrounds. Yet while linguistic diversity offers many benefits, it also comes with a number of challenges. In seven empirical articles and one commentary, this Special Issue addresses some of the most significant language challenges facing researchers in the 21st century: the power language has to form and perpetuate stereotypes, the contribution language makes to intersectional identities, and the role of language in shaping intergroup relations. By presenting work that aims to shed light on some of these issues, the goal of this Special Issue is to (a) highlight language as integral to social processes and (b) inspire researchers to address the challenges we face. To keep pace with the world’s constantly evolving linguistic landscape, it is essential that we make progress toward harnessing language’s power in ways that benefit 21st century globalized societies.
KonsortSWD ist das NFDI Konsortium für die Sozial-, Verhaltens-, Bildungs- und Wirtschaftswissenschaften. Für die äußerst vielfältigen Datentypen und Forschungsmethoden bauen die Beteiligten im Rahmen der NFDI eine bereits bestehende Forschungsdateninfrastruktur aus und ergänzen neue integrierende Dienste. Basis sind die heute 41 vom Rat für Sozial- und Wirtschaftsdaten akkreditierten Forschungsdatenzentren (FDZ). FDZ sind Spezialsammlungen zu jeweils spezifischen Forschungsdaten, z.B. aus der qualitativen Sozialforschung, und können so Forschende auf Basis einer ausführlichen Expertise zu diesen Daten beraten. Neben der Unterstützung der FDZ baut KonsortSWD auch neue Dienste in den Bereichen Datenproduktion, Datenzugang und Technische Lösungen auf.
This article deals with three interrelated phenoma in the information structure of German sentences: the focusing of negative markers, of finite verb forms and of the particles ja, doch, wohl and schon. Focusing of the finite verb is the most important marker of verum focus, as described by Höhle (1988). Focusing of particles can be an alternative means for similar purposes, while focusing of negation seems to be the contradictory opposite of verum focus. It is shown that negation- independently of its information structural status - can be interpreted on three distinct levels of sentence meaning: as an indicator of the non-facticity of a state of affairs, the non-truth of a proposition, or the non-desirability of a speech act. Focusing of the negative marker puts contrastive emphasis on the negative value assigned to sentence meaning on one of these levels. Ve rum focus can be interpreted on the same three levels: as a marker of contrastive emphasis on a positive value of facticity, truth or desirability. The particles ja, doch, wohl and schon refer to sufficient epistemic or interactional conditions for the assignment of a positive or negative value. By focusing such a particle, the speaker indicates that (s)he believes the assigned value to be well justified and insists on establishing it as common ground for further interaction.
This paper investigates the use of linking adverbs in adversative constructions in German and Italian. In Italian those constructions are very frequently formulated with adverbs such as invece, while wordings without a lexical connective are more typical of German. Corpus data show that the syntactic und semantic conditions favouring the use of adversative adverbs are by and large the same in both languages. Lexical connectives can increase explicitness when the intended adversative interpretation is not obvious on other grounds. The higher frequency of adversative adverbs in Italian is shown to be a consequence of the more restrictive rules of the placement of prosodic accent.