Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Part of a Book (14)
- Article (12)
- Conference Proceeding (9)
Has Fulltext
- yes (35)
Keywords
- Lehnwort (13)
- Deutsch (9)
- Computerunterstützte Lexikographie (5)
- Sprachstatistik (5)
- Wörterbuch (5)
- Sprachphilosophie (4)
- Datenbank (3)
- Lexikografie (3)
- Russisch (3)
- lexical borrowings (3)
Publicationstate
- Veröffentlichungsversion (35) (remove)
Reviewstate
- Verlags-Lektorat (12)
- Peer-Review (11)
- (Verlags)-Lektorat (10)
- Peer-review (1)
Publisher
Referenz und ihre Gegenstände. Bemerkungen zur Pragmatik eines sprachphilosophischen Begriffs
(1998)
According to a widespread conception, quantitative linguistics will eventually be able to explain empirical quantitative findings (such as Zipf’s Law) by deriving them from highly general stochastic linguistic ‘laws’ that are assumed to be part of a general theory of human language (cf. Best (1999) for a summary of possible theoretical positions). Due to their formal proximity to methods used in the so-called exact sciences, theoretical explanations of this kind are assumed to be superior to the supposedly descriptive-only approaches of linguistic structuralism and its successors. In this paper I shall try to argue that on close inspection such claims turn out to be highly problematic, both on linguistic and on science-theoretical grounds.
Physicists look at language
(2006)
Sprachkritik, dahinsickernd
(2007)
Three popular collections of essays concerning correct language use in German are reviewed from a linguist’s point of view. It is claimed that the overall picture of language that Sick conveys to the layperson is inadequate; in addition, the author fails to reflect explicitly on the purpose and consequences of his prescriptive approach to language use.
Open peer commentary on the target article “Who Conceives of Society?” by Ernst von Glasersfeld. Excerpt: I will focus on one crucial step in von Glasersfeld’s argumentation, viz. his view that every individual constructs his own private meanings (understood as conceptual structures or elements thereof) for linguistic expressions, so that linguistic interaction and even communication in general is based on a notion of compatibility between different speakers’ private conceptual schemes. The central question here is: “Just what does it mean that different private conceptual schemes (private meanings) are compatible, or what constitutes a viable criterion to this end?” As von Glasersfeld himself stresses twice (§28, §37), the criteria to be looked for can only be “public,” residing in properties of verbal and non-verbal actions of the interacting individuals, properties that can be sensed and processed by the participating system.
In dem Beitrag präsentieren und diskutieren die Autoren zunächst einige Untersuchungen aus der Benutzungsforschung zu elektronischen Wörterbüchern, die sich mit der nutzerseitigen Beurteilung des Mehrwerts multimedialer und benutzeradaptiver Elemente befassen (Kap. 1. In einem zweiten Teil versuchen sie, ausgehend von den Stärken und Schwächen vorhandener Ansätze in diesem Bereich, Antworten auf die Frage zu finden, welche Anforderungen an Visualisierungstechniken und ‑strategien in elektronischen Wörterbüchern gestellt werden müssen, um einen solchen Mehrwert zu erhalten (Kap. 2). Abschließend stellen sie als praktisches Beispiel für eine mögliche Umsetzung solcher Anforderungen den Prototyp einer Software zur interaktiven Erkundung von Wortbildungsangaben im Wörterbuch vor.
In this paper, the authors use the 2012 log files of two German online dictionaries (Digital Dictionary of the German Language and the German Version of Wiktionary) and the 100,000 most frequent words in the Mannheim German Reference Corpus from 2009 to answer the question of whether dictionary users really do look up frequent words, first asked by de Schryver et al. (2006). By using an approach to the comparison of log files and corpus data which is completely different from that of the aforementioned authors, we provide empirical evidence that indicates - contrary to the results of de Schryver et al. and Verlinde/Binon (2010) - that the corpus frequency of a word can indeed be an important factor in determining what online dictionary users look up. Finally, we incorporate word class Information readily available in Wiktionary into our analysis to improve our results considerably.