Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Article (34) (remove)
Has Fulltext
- yes (34) (remove)
Keywords
- Deutsch (15)
- Korpus <Linguistik> (5)
- Rezension (4)
- Konversationsanalyse (3)
- Rechtschreibung (3)
- Computervermittelte Kommunikation (2)
- Englisch (2)
- Ethnolinguistik (2)
- Formale Semantik (2)
- Jugendlicher (2)
Publicationstate
- Veröffentlichungsversion (23)
- Postprint (6)
Reviewstate
- Peer-review (34) (remove)
Publisher
- Elsevier (2)
- Oxford University Press (2)
- de Gruyter (2)
- iudicium (2)
- Brill (1)
- Budrich (1)
- ERCIM EEIG (1)
- Friedrich (1)
- Gesellschaft für deutsche Sprache (1)
- Hempen (1)
Lexicographic meaning descriptions of German lexical items which are formally and semantically similar and therefore easily confused (so-called paronyms) often do not reflect their current usage of lexical items. They can even contradict one’s personal intuition or disagree with lexical usage as observed in public discourse. The reasons are manifold. Language data used for compiling dictionaries is either outdated, or lexicographic practice is rather conventional and does not take advantage of corpus-assisted approaches to semantic analysis. Despite of various modern electronic or online reference works speakers face uncertainties when dealing with easily confusable words. These are for example sensibel/sensitiv (sensitive) or kindisch/kindlich (childish/childlike). Existing dictionaries often do not provide satisfactory answers as to how to use these sets correctly. Numerous questions addressed in online forums show where uncertainties with paronyms are and why users demand further assistance concerning proper contextual usage (cf. Storjohann 2015). There are different reasons why users misuse certain items or mix up words which are similar in form and meaning. As data from written and more spontaneous language resources suggest, some confusions arise due to ongoing semantic change in the current use of some paronyms. This paper identifies shortcomings of contemporary German Dictionaries and discusses innovative ways of empirical lexicographic work that might pave the way for a new data-driven, descriptive reference work of confusable German terms. Currently, such a guide is being developed at the Institute for German Language in Mannheim implementing corpora and diverse corpus-analytical methods. Its objective is to compile a dictionary with contrastive entries which is a useful reference tool in situation of language doubt. At the same time, it aims at sensitizing users of context dependency and language change.
On the basis of a law text corpus which consists of judicial decisions and jurisprudential papers on so-called assisted suicide from 1977 to 2011, agonal centres are determined within the paradigm of corpus-based pragma-semiotic text analysis. Agonal centres are defined as action-guiding concepts that are in conflict with each other concerning the general acceptance of event interpretations, options for actions, claims of validity, contextual knowledge and values. These action-guiding concepts are derived with the help of quantitative and qualitative methods. Discourse linguistic interpretations are thus rendered more objective with the help of semi-automatic methods; furthermore, specific discourse features of the discourse and approaches to interpretation can be derived from (un)expected linguistic significances of occurrence, distribution, frequency etc. at the linguistic surface. Finally, these agonal centres specific to the language of law are compared to agonal centres which are determined on the basis of a media corpus on the same issue. This provides a comparative insight into the constitution of a seemingly identical fact in everyday and special language, which demonstrates the sociopolitical relevance of analysing the constitution of reality as instructed by language.
Dieser Aufsatz präsentiert Ergebnisse, die im Rahmen des binationalen Forschungsprojekts SDiv erarbeitet wurden 1. Im vorliegenden Text mit seinem Schwerpunkt auf den Textsorten innerhalb des Korpus Öffentliche Bekanntmachungen geht es im ersten Schritt um die Bestimmung der kommunikativen Merkmale, den historischen Rahmen, die quantitative Verteilung der Textsorten sowie ihre Klassifikation innerhalb des betreffenden Korpus 2. Im zweiten Schritt wird eine Analyse der sprachlichen Strukturen und Routinen durchgeführt. Das Ziel der textlinguistischen Analyse ist die Rekonstruktion der „Kommunikationsbedürfnisse und Kommunikationsbedingungen“ (Mattheier, 1998: 4), so wie sie im Zusammenhang mit den Öffentlichen Bekanntmachungen im 19. Jh. wirksam gewesen sind. Textsorten und Textsortengeschichte(n) haben den Vorzug, dass sie als „Schaltstellen zwischen Geschichte der Sprache und der Geschichte der Sprachgemeinschaft“ (Mattheier, 1998: 4) fungieren können, insofern leistet die hier realisierte Studie zu den Textsorten innerhalb der Öffentlichen Bekanntmachungen auch einen Beitrag zur Geschichte des Deutschen sowie zur Sozialgeschichte der mehrsprachigen Sprecher des Deutschen in Luxemburg. Der nachfolgende Aufsatz gliedert sich in sechs Abschnitte: 1. Einleitung, 2. Historischer Rahmen, 3. Korpus, 4. Theoretische Einbettung, 5. Sprachexterne Faktoren, 6. Sprachinterne Faktoren (z. B. grammatische Merkmale) sowie 7. Bilanz
Some structures in printed dictionaries also occur in online dictionaries, some do not occur, some need to be adapted whereas new structures may be introduced in online dictionaries. This paper looks at one type of structure, known in printed dictionaries as outer texts. It is argued that the notions of a frame structure and front and back matter texts do not apply to online dictionaries. The data distribution in online dictionaries does not only target the dictionary articles. There are components outside the word list section of the dictionary. These components are not always texts. They could e.g. also be video clips. Consequently the notion of outer texts in printed dictionaries is substituted by the notion of outer features in online dictionaries. This paper shows how outer features help to constitute a feature compound. The outer features in eight online dictionaries are discussed. Where the users guidelines text is a compulsory outer text in printed dictionaries it seems that an equivalent feature is often eschewed in online dictionaries. A distinction is made between dictionary-internal and dictionary-external outer features, illustrating that outer features can be situated in other sources than the specific dictionary. More research is needed to formulate models for online features that can play a comprehensive role in online dictionaries.