Refine
Document Type
- Part of a Book (3)
- Article (2)
Has Fulltext
- yes (5)
Keywords
- Deutsch (5) (remove)
Publicationstate
- Veröffentlichungsversion (2)
- Zweitveröffentlichung (2)
- Postprint (1)
Reviewstate
- (Verlags)-Lektorat (3)
- Peer-Review (2)
Publisher
- de Gruyter (3)
- Buske (1)
- Elsevier (1)
Die vorliegende Arbeit untersucht grammatische Serialisierungsfaktoren und geht auf die semantische Rolle und die Rektion der Verbargumente näher ein. Das sind zwei unabhängige Faktoren der Wortstellung, die zwar gemeinsam auf einen allgemeinen multifaktoriellen Dependenzbegriff zurückgeführt, aber nicht voneinander abgeleitet werden können. Die wortstellungsrelevante Hierarchie von semantischen Rollen kann als Spezialfall semantischer Dependenzasymmetrien ausgewiesen werden. Auf der Grundlage dieses Dependenzbegriffs wird ein allgemeines Serialisierungsprinzip aufgestellt, das mehrere in der Forschung diskutierte Prinzipien zusammenfaßt. Die beiden Parameter der Dependenz können bei der Determination der Abfolge der Verbargumente in Abhängigkeit vom verblexemspezifischen Konstruktionstyp gegeneinander konkurrieren oder miteinander koalieren. Diese Interaktion wird im Rahmen eines Wettbewerbsmodells der Serialisierung präsentiert. Über die koalierende vs. konkurrierende Interaktion wird die konstruktionsspezifische festere vs. freiere Stellung der Verbargumente im Deutschen und im Sprachvergleich erklärt. Im sprachvergleichenden Teil werden ditransitive Konstruktionen mit Rezipient und Patiens in 50 europäischen Sprachen untersucht.
Dieser Beitrag thematisiert semantische Bedingungen des unpersönlichen Passivs im Deutschen und in anderen Sprachen. Traditionellerweise nimmt man an, dass nur atelische und agentivische Verben im unpersönlichen Passiv akzeptabel sind. Ich werde die empirischen Hypothesen der bisherigen Forschung auf der Grundlage von Akzeptabilitätsstudien und einer breiteren korpusbasierten Datenmenge revidieren. Die hier behandelten semantischen Aspekte wurden in einflussreichen Arbeiten als Evidenz für die Überlegenheit einer konstruktionsgrammatischen Herangehensweise gewertet. Ich werde diese Evidenz in Frage stellen und beschränkungsbasierte Alternativen präsentieren.
Telicity and agentivity are semantic factors that split intransitive verbs into (at least two) different classes. Clear-cut unergative verbs, which select the auxiliary HAVE, are assumed to be atelic and agent-selecting; unequivocally unaccusative verbs, which select the auxiliary BE, are analyzed as telic and patient-selecting. Thus, agentivity and telicity are assumed to be inversely correlated in split intransitivity. We will present semantic and experimental evidence from German and Mandarin Chinese that casts doubts on this widely held assumption. The focus of our experimental investigation lies on variation with respect to agentivity (specifically motion control, manipulated via animacy), telicity (tested via a locative vs. goal adverbial), and BE/HAVE-selection with semantically flexible intransitive verbs of motion. Our experimental methods are acceptability ratings for German and Chinese (Experiments 1 and 2) and event-related potential (ERP) measures for German (Experiment 3). Our findings contradict the above-mentioned assumption that agentivity and telicity are generally inversely correlated and suggest that for the verbs under study, agentivity and telicity harmonize with each other. Furthermore, the ERP measures reveal that the impact of the interaction under discussion is more pronounced on the verb lexeme than on the auxiliary. We also found differences between Chinese and German that relate to the influence of telicity on BE/HAVE-selection. They seem to confirm the claim in previous research that the weight of the telicity factor locomotion (or internal motion) is cross-linguistically variable.
Lexikonprojektion und Konstruktion: Experimentelle Studien zu Argumentalternationen im Deutschen
(2020)
Debates on lexicalist vs. constructionist modelling of argument alternations are typically based on data from single constructions, each including different types of verbs. Evidence from constructions with an identical set of verb types that systematically differ in their meaning is lacking, even though such evidence is imperative for specifically investigating the dependence of argument alternations on the interaction between construction and lexical meanings. We present two acceptability studies where verb lexeme meanings and constructions - specifically active voice, impersonal passive and the construction with man 'one' in German - vary systematically. Prima facie our results support a constructionist explanation, because each construction exhibits a unique acceptability cline. However, across constructions, an adequate explanation has to consider verb-based lexical meanings. The most plausible explanation is that the semantic features licensed by the construction are matched with the semantic features provided by the verb lexeme.
The article investigates the hypothesis that prominence phenomena on different levels of linguistic structure are systematically related to each other. More specifically, it is hypothesized that prominence relations in morphosyntax reflect, and contribute to, prominence management in discourse. This hypothesis is empirically based on the phenomenon of agentivity clines, i.e. the observation that the relevance of agentivity features such as volition or sentience is variable across different constructions. While some constructions, including German DO-clefts, show a strong preference for highly agentive verbs, other constructions, including German basic active constructions, have no particular requirements regarding the agentivity of the verb, except that at least one agentivity feature should be present. Our hypothesis predicts that this variable relevance of agentivity features is related to the discourse constraints on the felicitous use of a given construction, which in turn, of course, requires an explicit statement of such constraints. We propose an original account of the discourse constraints on DO-clefts in German using the ‘Question Under Discussion’ framework. Here, we hypothesize that DO-clefts render prominent one implicit question from a set of alternative questions available at a particular point in the developing discourse. This then yields a prominent question-answer pair that changes the thematic structure of the discourse. We conclude with some observations on the possibility of relating morphosyntactic prominence (high agentivity) to discourse prominence (making a Question Under Discussion prominent by way of clefting).