Refine
Document Type
- Part of a Book (4)
- Article (1)
Language
- German (5)
Has Fulltext
- yes (5)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (5)
Keywords
- Deutsch (5)
- Adjektiv (2)
- Englisch (2)
- Kontrastive Grammatik (2)
- Syntax (2)
- Adposition (1)
- Französisch (1)
- Grammatische Kategorie (1)
- Kategorialgrammatik (1)
- Nominalphrase (1)
Publicationstate
Reviewstate
Publisher
- Stauffenburg (5) (remove)
In German there are about twenty-five elements (like gemäß, nahe, voll) that seem to be used as a preposition along with their use as an adjective. In former approaches the preposition is interpreted as the product of grammaticalizing (and/or reanalyzing) the adjective. It is argued that the two criteria these approaches rely on, namely change of linear position and change of case government, are insufficient. In this paper, seven criteria for distinguishing adjectives form prepositions in German are put forward. What is most important is that these criteria have to be evaluated on the token level as well as on the level of type and word class/syntactic category. It can be shown that the individual ‘adjective-prepositions' as types possess a specific mixture of adjective-like and preposition-like features. On the token level, occurring as part of a postnominal restrictive attribute is indicative for preposition-like status in German. The comparison of German with English and Italian adjective-prepositions (like near, far, due and vicino, lontano) reveals a lot of differences, which counts as evidence for the language-specific nature of word classes. Nevertheless, Lehmanns functional-typological approach uncovers a fundamental functional similarity between complement governing adjectives and prepositions: the primary function of the phrases, i.e., adjective/preposition + complement, is to modify a nominal or a verbal concept, respectively. This insight explains why adjective-prepositions can be found cross-linguistically. The question whether we should propose one type or two types for gemäß and its cognates is of minor importance only.
In English and French relational adjectives occurring in construction with deverbal nominalizations can be thematically associated with subject as well as object arguments. By contrast, in German object-related readings of relational adjectives seem to be inadmissible. The greater flexibility of English and French in terms of the thematic interpretability of relational adjectives also shows up with respect to "circumstantial" thematic roles like directionals, locatives and instrumentals. It is arguably due to the common Latin heritage of English and French, since in Latin relational adjectives representing subject or object arguments of nominalizations are widely attested. However, even in English and French object-related readings are confined to result nominalizations, a restriction we suggest to account for in terms of the more "noun-like" character of result nominalizations in contrast to process nominalizations. Moreover, since argument-related interpretations of relational adjectives can always be overridden by appropriate agentive/ patientive phrases, relational adjectives cannot be analyzed as occupying an argument position, but rather as modifying the semantic role associated with it.