Refine
Year of publication
- 2015 (101) (remove)
Document Type
- Conference Proceeding (38)
- Part of a Book (33)
- Article (20)
- Book (5)
- Working Paper (2)
- Master's Thesis (1)
- Preprint (1)
- Review (1)
Language
- English (101) (remove)
Keywords
- Korpus <Linguistik> (34)
- Deutsch (21)
- Computerlinguistik (12)
- Annotation (11)
- Englisch (10)
- Automatische Sprachanalyse (6)
- Corpus annotation (6)
- Corpus linguistics (6)
- Corpus technology (6)
- Datenbanksystem (6)
Publicationstate
- Veröffentlichungsversion (49)
- Postprint (11)
- Zweitveröffentlichung (9)
- Preprint (2)
Reviewstate
Publisher
- Institut für Deutsche Sprache (9)
- Springer (7)
- Narr (6)
- De Gruyter (4)
- Benjamins (3)
- Frank & Timme (3)
- Palgrave Macmillan (3)
- de Gruyter (3)
- Association for Computational Linguistics (2)
- Elsevier (2)
The project Referenzkorpus Altdeutsch (‘Old German Reference Corpus’) aims to es- tablish a deeply-annotated text corpus of all extant Old German texts. As the automated part-of-speech and morphological pre-annotation is amended by hand, a quality control system for the results seems a desirable objective. To this end, standardized inflectional forms, generated using the morphological information, are compared with the attested word forms. Their creation is described by way of example for the Old High German part of the corpus. As is shown, in a few cases, some features of the attested word forms are also required in order to determine as exactly as possible the shape of the inflected lemma form to be created.
The availability of electronic corpora of historical stages of languages has been wel- comed as possibly attenuating the inherent problem of diachronic linguistics, i.e. that we only have access to what has chanced to come down to us - the problem which was memorably named by Labov (1992) as one of “Bad Data”. However, such corpora can only give us access to an increased amount ot historical material and this can essentially still only be a partial and possibly distorted picture of the actual language at a particular period of history. Corpora can be improved by taking a more representative sample of extant texts if these are available (as they are in significant number for periods after the invention of printing). But, as examples from the recently compiled GerManC corpus of seventeenth and eighteenth century German show, the evidence from such corpora can still fail to yield definitive answers to our questions about earlier stages of a language. The data still require expert interpretation, and it is important to be realistic about what can legitimately be expected from an electronic historical corpus.
Multi-faceted alignment. Toward automatic detection of textual similarity in Gospel-derived texts
(2015)
Ancient Germanic Bible-derived texts stand in as test material for producing computational means for automatically determining where textual contamination and linguistic interference have influenced the translation process. This paper reports on the results of research efforts that produced a text corpus; a method for decomposing the texts involved into smaller, more directly comparable thematically-related chunks; a database of relationships between these chunks; and a user-interface allowing for searches based on various referential criteria. Finally, the state of the product at the end of the project is discussed, namely as it was handed over to another researcher who has extended it to automatically find semantic and syntactic similarities within comparable chunks.
In this paper we present some preliminary considerations concerning the possibility of automatic parsing an annotated corpus for N-N compounds. This should in prin- ciple be possible at least for relational and stereotype compounds, if the lemmatization of the corpus connects the lemmata with lexical entries as described in Höhle (1982). These lexical entries then supply the necessary information about the argument structure of a relational noun or about the stereotypical purpose associated with the noun’s referent which can be used to establish a relation between the first and the head constituent of the compound.
The relative order of dative and accusative objects in older German is less free than it is today. The reason for this could be that speakers of the direct predecessor of Old High German organized the referents according to the Thematic Hierarchy. If one applies a Case Hierarchy Nom>Acc>Dat to this, the order Nom - Dat - Acc falls out. It becomes apparent that the status of the Thematic Hierarchy is not a factor governing underlying word order, but a factor inducing scrambling. Arguments from binding theory, whose validity is discussed, indicate that the underlying order is ‘accusative before dative’
In a previous article (Faaß et al., 2012), a first attempt was made at documenting and encoding morphemic units of two South African Bantu languages, i.e. Northern Sotho and Zulu, with the aim of describing and storing the morphemic units of these two languages in a single relational database, structured as a hierarchical ontology. As a follow-up, the current article describes the implementation of our part-of-speech ontology. We give a detailed description of the morphemes and categories contained in the database, highlighting the need and reasons for a flexible ontology which will provide for both language specific and general linguistic information. By giving a detailed account of the methodology for the population of the database, we provide linguists from other Bantu languages with a road map for extending the database to also include their languages of specialization.
Preface
(2015)
Russia, its languages and its ethnic groups are for many readers of English surprisingly unknown territory. Even among academics and researchers familiar with many ethnolinguistic situations around the globe, there prevails rather unsystematic and fragmented knowledge about Russia. This relates to both the micro level such as the individual situations of specific ethnic or linguistic groups, and to the macro level with regard to the entire interplay of linguistic practices, ideologies, laws, and other policies in Russia. In total, this lack of information about Russia stands in sharp contrast to the abundance of literature on ethnolinguistic situations, minority languages, language revitalization, and ideologies toward languages and multilingualism which has been published throughout the past decades.
This chapter analyses the impact of political decentralization in a state on the position of ethnic and linguistic minorities, in particular with regard to the role of parliamentary assemblies in the political system. It relates a number of typical functions of parliaments to the specific needs of minorities and their languages. The most important of these functions are the representation of the minority and responsiveness to the minority’s needs. The chapter then discusses six examples from the European Union (and Norway) which prototypically represent different types of parliamentary decentralization: the ethnically defined Sameting in Norway and its importance for the Sámi population, the Scottish Parliament and its role for speakers of Scottish Gaelic, the German regional parliaments of the Länder of Schleswig-Holstein and Saxony and their impact on the Frisian and Sorbian minorities respectively, the autonomy of predominantly German-speaking South Tyrol within the Italian state, and finally the situation of the speakers of Latgalian in Latvia, where a decentralized parliament is missing. The chapter also makes suggestions on comparisons of these situations with minorities in Russia. It finally argues that political decentralization may indeed empower minorities to gain a greater voice in their states, even if much ultimately depends on individual factors in each situation and the attitudes by the majority population and the political center.
This is the first comprehensive volume to compare the sociolinguistic situations of minorities in Russia and in Western Europe. As such, it provides insight into language policies, the ethnolinguistic vitality and the struggle for reversal of language shift, language revitalization and empowerment of minorities in Russia and the European Union. The volume shows that, even though largely unknown to a broader English-reading audience, the linguistic composition of Russia is by no means less diverse than multilingualism in the EU. It is therefore a valuable introduction into the historical backgrounds and current linguistic, social and legal affairs with regard to Russia’s manifold ethnic and linguistic minorities, mirrored on the discussion of recent issues in a number of well-known Western European minority situations.