Refine
Document Type
- Article (11) (remove)
Has Fulltext
- yes (11)
Keywords
- Deutsch (8)
- Wörterbuch (4)
- Worthäufigkeit (3)
- COVID-19 (2)
- Fremdsprache (2)
- German (2)
- Korpus <Linguistik> (2)
- Lexikostatistik (2)
- Neologismus (2)
- Wortschatz (2)
Publicationstate
- Zweitveröffentlichung (11) (remove)
Reviewstate
- Peer-Review (11)
Publisher
- Oxford University Press (4)
- Erich Schmidt (2)
- Wiley (2)
- de Gruyter (2)
- Benjamins (1)
This replication study aims to investigate a potential bias toward addition in the German language, building upon previous findings of Winter and colleagues who identified a similar bias in English. Our results confirm a bias in word frequencies and binomial expressions, aligning with these previous findings. However, the analysis of distributional semantics based on word vectors did not yield consistent results for German. Furthermore, our study emphasizes the crucial role of selecting appropriate translational equivalents, highlighting the significance of considering language-specific factors when testing for such biases for languages other than English.
In a recent article, Meylan and Griffiths (Meylan & Griffiths, 2021, henceforth, M&G) focus their attention on the significant methodological challenges that can arise when using large-scale linguistic corpora. To this end, M&G revisit a well-known result of Piantadosi, Tily, and Gibson (2011, henceforth, PT&G) who argue that average information content is a better predictor of word length than word frequency. We applaud M&G who conducted a very important study that should be read by any researcher interested in working with large-scale corpora. The fact that M&G mostly failed to find clear evidence in favor of PT&G's main finding motivated us to test PT&G's idea on a subset of the largest archive of German language texts designed for linguistic research, the German Reference Corpus consisting of ∼43 billion words. We only find very little support for the primary data point reported by PT&G.
Dictionary usage research views dictionaries primarily as tools for solving linguistic problems. A large proportion of dictionary use now takes place online and can thus be easily monitored using tracking technologies. Using the data gathered through tracking usage data, we hope to optimize user experiences of dictionaries and other linguistic resources. Usage statistics are also used for external evaluation of linguistic resources. In this paper, we pursue the following three questions from a quantitative perspective: (1) What new insights can we gain from collecting and analysing usage data? (2) What limitations of the data and/or the collection process do we need to be aware of? (3) How can these insights and limitations inform the development and evaluation of linguistic resources?
Die Corona-Pandemie betrifft fast alle Facetten des öffentlichen Lebens und hat nicht nur erhebliche Auswirkungen auf den persönlichen Umgang miteinander, sondern beherrscht auch die Berichterstattung im großen Stil. In unserem Beitrag wollen wir zeigen, welche lexikalischen Spuren oder Trends der Coronakrise wir in der deutschen Online-Nachrichtenberichterstattung beobachten können, obwohl wir uns noch mitten in der Pandemie zu befinden scheinen. „Lexikalische Spuren“ bedeutet, dass wir z.B. die am häufigsten verwendeten Wörter, Wortbildungsprodukte rund um „Corona“ oder Häufigkeitskurven einzelner Wortformen analysieren. Auf der Grundlage von Online-Nachrichtenberichten aus 13 deutschsprachigen Quellen, die seit Anfang 2020 gesammelt wurden, zeigen wir unter anderem, wie über wöchentliche Übersichten der am häufigsten verwendeten Wörter zu sehen ist, wann die Corona-Pandemie zum dominierenden Thema in der Nachrichtenberichterstattung wird; wie eine wahre Explosion von Wortbildungsprodukten mit „Corona“ wie „Vor-Corona-Gesellschaft“ oder „Post-Corona Zukunft“ beobachtet werden kann, wie andere Themen – z.B. der Fußball – durch Corona verdrängt werden, wie sich die Diskussion um Auswege aus dem Lockdown in den Daten widerspiegelt, oder wie prominente Virolog/-innen in die gleiche „Frequenzliga“ wie Politiker/-innen aufsteigen.
The coronavirus pandemic may be the largest crisis the world has had to face since World War II. It does not come as a surprise that it is also having an impact on language as our primary communication tool. In this short paper, we present three inter-connected resources that are designed to capture and illustrate these effects on a subset of the German language: An RSS corpus of German-language newsfeeds (with freely available untruncated frequency lists), a continuously updated HTML page tracking the diversity of the vocabulary in the RSS corpus and a Shiny web application that enables other researchers and the broader public to explore the corpus in terms of basic frequencies.
Are borrowed neologisms accepted more slowly into the German language than German words resulting from the application of word formation rules? This study addresses this question by focusing on two possible indicators for the acceptance of neologisms: a) frequency development of 239 German neologisms from the 1990s (loanwords as well as new words resulting from the application of word formation rules) in the German reference corpus DeReKo and b) frequency development in the use of pragmatic markers (‘flags’, namely quotation marks and phrases such as sogenannt ‘so-called’) with these words. In the second part of the article, a psycholinguistic approach to evaluating the (psychological) status of different neologisms and non-words in an experimentally controlled study and plans to carry out interviews in a field test to collect speakers’ opinions on the acceptance of the analysed neologisms are outlined. Finally, implications for the lexicographic treatment of both types of neologisms are discussed.
Are borrowed neologisms accepted more slowly into the German language than German words resulting from the application of wrd formation rules? This study addresses this question by focusing on two possible indicators for the acceptance of neologisms: a) frequency development of 239 German neologisms from the 1990s (loanwords as well as new words resulting from the application of word formation rules) in the German reference corpus DEREKO and b) frequency development in the use of pragmatic markers (‘flags’, namely quotation marks and phrases such as sogenannt ‘so-called’) with these words. In the second part of the article, a psycholinguistic approach to evaluating the (psychological) status of different neologisms and non-words in an experimentally controlled study and plans to carry out interviews in a field test to collect speakers’ opinions on the acceptance of the analysed neologisms are outlined. Finally, implications for the lexicographic treatment of both types of neologisms are discussed.
In the past two decades, more and more dictionary usage studies have been published, but most of them deal with the question what users appreciate about dictionaries, which dictionaries they use and which information they need in specific situations. These studies presuppose that users indeed consult lexicographic resources. However, language teachers and lecturers of linguistics often have the impression that students use too few high-quality dictionaries in their every-day work. Against this background, we started an international cooperation project to collect empirical data evaluating that impression. Our aim was to evaluate what students (here from the Romance language area) actually do when they correct language problems. We used a new methodological setting to do this (screen recording with a thinking-aloud task). The empirical data we gained offers a broad insight into what language users really do when solving language-related tasks today.
The article presents the results of a survey on dictionary use in Europe, focusing on general monolingual dictionaries. The survey is the broadest survey of dictionary use to date, covering close to 10,000 dictionary users (and non-users) in nearly thirty countries. Our survey covers varied user groups, going beyond the students and translators who have tended to dominate such studies thus far. The survey was delivered via an online survey platform, in language versions specific to each target country. It was completed by 9,562 respondents, over 300 respondents per country on average. The survey consisted of the general section, which was translated and presented to all participants, as well as country-specific sections for a subset of 11 countries, which were drafted by collaborators at the national level. The present report covers the general section.
Der Beitrag widmet sich den Geflüchteten als Teil der deutschlernenden Teilnehmer/innen in den staatlich verordneten Integrationskursen (IKs). Unsere Erhebung unter 305 Geflüchteten aus Syrien und anderen Ländern legt ihren Schwerpunkt auf die sprachlichen Hintergründe. Dabei werden soziodemografische Daten mit Angaben zum Spracherwerb in Beziehung gesetzt und als kollektive Sprachbiografien dargestellt. Des Weiteren beschreiben wir sieben Teilnehmergruppen von Geflüchteten in den IKs, die sich vor allem auf Grund der Faktoren Alter, Bildungsgrad und Arbeitserfahrung unterscheiden, für die aber auch Merkmale im Hinblick auf Herkunft und Mehrsprachigkeit eine Rolle spielen. Ferner werden Angaben zur Sozialsituation in Deutschland mit Einschätzungen zum Deutscherwerb in Beziehung gesetzt. Ein Vergleich mit anderen Studien verdeutlicht die Verschiebungen in der Zusammensetzung des IK. Unser Beitrag kann als Anregung verstanden werden, die Passgenauigkeit im Sinne der Deutschlernenden zu überdenken.