Refine
Document Type
- Article (4)
- Part of a Book (4)
- Conference Proceeding (1)
Language
- English (9) (remove)
Has Fulltext
- yes (9)
Keywords
- Deutsch (5)
- Verb (2)
- Absentiv (1)
- Darstellungsart (1)
- Englisch (1)
- English (1)
- Ereignis (1)
- European Reference Corpus (EuReCo) (1)
- Festschrift (1)
- Forschungsdaten (1)
Publicationstate
Reviewstate
- Peer-Review (6)
- (Verlags)-Lektorat (1)
Publisher
- De Gruyter (2)
- Buske (1)
- IDS-Verlag (1)
- Niemeyer (1)
- Presses universitaires de Louvain (1)
- Taylor & Francis (1)
- Wiley-Blackwell (1)
- de Gruyter Mouton (1)
This paper reports on recent developments within the European Reference Corpus EuReCo, an open initiative that aims at providing and using virtual and dynamically definable comparable corpora based on existing national, reference or other large corpora. Given the well-known shortcomings of other types of multilingual corpora such as parallel/translation corpora (shining-through effects, over-normalization, simplification, etc.) or web-based comparable corpora (covering only web material), EuReCo provides a unique linguistic resource offering new perspectives for fine-grained contrastive research on authentic cross-linguistic data, applications in translation studies and foreign language teaching and learning.
In many European languages, propositional arguments (PAs) can be realized as different types of structures. Cross-linguistically, complex structures with PAs show a systematic correlation between the strength of the semantic bond and the syntactic union (cf. Givón 2001; Wurmbrand/Lohninger 2023). Also, different languages show similarities with respect to the (lexical) licensing of different PAs (cf. Noonan 1985; Givón 2001; Cristofaro 2003 on different predicate types). However, on a more fine-grained level, a variation across languages can be observed both with respect to the syntactic-semantic properties of PAs as well as to their licensing and usage. This presentation takes a multi-contrastive view of different types of PAs as syntactic subjects and objects by looking at five European languages: EN, DE, IT, PL and HU. Our goal is to identify the parameters of variation in the clausal domain with PAs and by this to contribute to a better understanding of the individual language systems on the one hand and the nature of the linguistic variation in the clausal domain on the other hand. Phenomena and Methodology: We investigate the following types of PAs: direct object (DO) clauses (1), prepositional object (PO) clauses (2), subject clauses (3), and nominalizations (4, 5). Additionally, we discuss clause union phenomena (6, 7). The analyzed parameters include among others finiteness, linear position of the PA, (non) presence of a correlative element, (non) presence of a complementizer, lexical-semantic class of the embedding verb. The phenomena are analyzed based on corpus data (using mono- and multilingual corpora), experimental data (acceptability judgement surveys) or introspective data.
This investigation targets a syntactic phenomenon of German which is commonly referred to as the absentive construction. The absentive is considered a universal grammatical category denoting absence. Its syntax is characterised by the occurrence of an auxiliary or copula verb accompanied by a non‐finite VP containing a main verb. The expression of absence, predicated over the clausal subject, is assumed to be based on a constructional meaning. Reviewing a wide range of syntactic and interpretive properties of this structure in German, we will demonstrate that certain empirical claims about the construction are not well founded and that its seemingly idiosyncratic properties are indeed available for compositional analyses. We will propose a structural analysis of its core syntactic and interpretive properties: The predication expresses the localisation of the subject at the location of the event, denoted by the infinitival verb. The interpretation of absence, then, can be explained by an implicature.
Despite being an official language of several countries in Central and Western Europe, German is not formally recognised as the official language of the Federal Republic of Germany. However, in certain situations the use of the German language, including the spelling rules, is subject to state regulation (by acts of Federal Parliament orby administrative decisions). This article presents the content of this regulation, its scope, and the historical context in which it was adopted.
Introduction
(2017)
Introduction
(2005)
Complement clauses in German can have a lexical complementizer when they are finite, but they must not have one when they are non-finite. I will argue that this distribution follows from the referential properties of the sentential complement. According to Grimshaw, only referential categories extend to functional projections. The status marker zu in German infinitival complements can be shown to block reference. Thus, non-finite complement clauses with zu do not project a left periphery and cannot host a complementizer.
The present investigation targets the phenomenon commonly called control. Many languages including German and Polish employ non-finite clauses (besides finite clauses) as propositional complements. The subject of these complement clauses is left unexpressed and must generally be interpreted co-referentially with the subject or object of the matrix clause (subject or object control). However. there are also infinitive-selecting verbs that do not allow for a co- referential interpretation of the embedded subject - semantically, the embedded infinitives of these anti-control verbs are thus less dependent on or less unifiable with the matrix proposition. In Polish anti-control constructions, non-finite complements are overtly marked with the complementizer zeby, suggesting that they are structurally more complex (namely. containing a C-projection) than the non-finite complements in control constructions lacking zeby (modulo special contexts. viz. 'control switch'). In a comparative perspective, the paper brings corpuslinguistic and experimental evidence to bear on the question whether surface appearances notwithstanding, the infinitival complements of anti-control verbs in German should similarly be analyzed as truly sentential, i.e., C-headed structures.