Refine
Document Type
- Article (5)
- Part of a Book (4)
- Book (2)
Has Fulltext
- yes (11)
Keywords
- Interferenz <Linguistik> (11) (remove)
Publicationstate
Reviewstate
- (Verlags)-Lektorat (4)
- Peer-Review (1)
Publisher
- Narr (3)
- de Gruyter (2)
- Harrassowitz (1)
- Ministerstvo Pros. RSFSR Omskij Gos. Ped. Inst. (1)
- OGPI (1)
- Schmidt (1)
- Universität Tartu (1)
Zunächst werden die linguistisch allgemein akzeptierten Kriterien zur Bestimmung von Interferenz zusammengestellt, und der auch im Zusammenhang mit der Differenzierung von Sprachebenen gewonnene Begriff wird dann auf Phänomene autorsprachlicher Einflüsse beim Übersetzen projiziert. In einem zweiten Teil werden die kommunikativen Bedingungen des (literarischen) Übersetzens untersucht, wobei besonders auf die gemeinsamkeiten von innersprachlicher Redewiedergabe (indirekte Rede) und intersprachlicher Übersetzung eingegangen wird.
Der Beitrag untersucht auf der Grundlage eines zeichentheoretischen Ansatzes verschiedene Verfahren der Benennungsbildung in ihrem Zusammenwirken bei lexikalischen Innovationen. Erörtert werden die Interferenz zwischen natürlicher und künstlicher Benennungsbildung sowie die Interferenz zwischen Wortbildung und Bedeutungsbildung. Welche Interferenztypen auftreten und mit welchen Folgen für Struktur und Bedeutung der lexikalischen Innovation sie in der gegenwärtigen Wortschatzentwicklung wirksam sind, wird an Fallbeispielen illustriert.
Zur Einführung
(1979)
This paper argues that conversation analysis has largely neglected the fact that meaning in interaction relies on inferences to a high degree. Participants treat each other as cognitive agents, who imply and infer meanings, which are often consequential for interactional progression. Based on the study of audio- and video-recordings from German talk-in-interaction, the paper argues that inferences matter to social interaction in at least three ways. They can be explicitly formulated; they can be (conventionally) indexed, but not formulated; or they may be neither indexed nor formulated yet would be needed for the correct understanding of a turn. The last variety of inferences usually remain tacit, but are needed for smooth interactional progression. Inferences in this case become an observable discursive phenomenon if misunderstandings are treated by the explication of correct (accepted) and wrong (unaccepted) inferences. The understanding of referential terms, analepsis, and ellipsis regularly rely on inferences. Formulations, third-position repairs, and fourth-position explications of erroneous inferences are practices of explicating inferences. There are conventional linguistic means like discourse markers, connectives, and response particles that index specific kinds of inferences. These practices belong to a larger class of inferential practices, which play an important role for indexing and accomplishing intersubjectivity in talk in interaction.
Is it possible to undo or reverse language attrition? In other words, has there been, in the case of attrition, a permanent change with respect to the speaker's L1 knowledge, or do we only see temporary effects on the control of that knowledge? It is proposed here that the concept of attrition should include the temporary loss of language skills since it is, so far, not clear whether or to what extent once-acquired linguistic abilities can be permanently lost at all, particularly with respect to an L1. A reversal in the development of attrition after renewed contact with the L1 can support the claim that a decrease in L1 proficiency can be TEMPORARY, and that it is the ACCESSIBILITY of items and structures that is affected by attrition rather than the L1 knowledge (competence) itself. Our primary research interest in the present study is to analyze what skills and features are recoverable and what phenomena persist, (possibly) indicating permanent loss.