Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Article (483)
- Conference Proceeding (262)
- Part of a Book (193)
- Book (25)
- Review (18)
- Part of Periodical (13)
- Other (6)
- Working Paper (5)
- Image (1)
- Periodical (1)
Language
- English (591)
- German (380)
- French (14)
- Portuguese (6)
- Multiple languages (4)
- Russian (4)
- Ukrainian (3)
- Latvian (2)
- Italian (1)
- Polish (1)
Keywords
- Deutsch (317)
- Korpus <Linguistik> (232)
- Konversationsanalyse (85)
- Computerlinguistik (80)
- Interaktion (79)
- Gesprochene Sprache (61)
- Forschungsdaten (48)
- Annotation (47)
- Kommunikation (43)
- Englisch (41)
Publicationstate
- Veröffentlichungsversion (1007) (remove)
Reviewstate
- Peer-Review (1007) (remove)
Publisher
- IDS-Verlag (91)
- de Gruyter (43)
- Association for Computational Linguistics (34)
- Schmidt (30)
- Institut für Deutsche Sprache (28)
- Verlag für Gesprächsforschung (22)
- Leibniz-Institut für Deutsche Sprache (IDS) (21)
- Zenodo (20)
- European Language Resources Association (ELRA) (19)
- European Language Resources Association (18)
This paper consists of a short analysis of the sources and the treatment of the legal lexicon in the first dictionary published by the Spanish Royal Academy (1726–1739), followed by a longer commentary on the representation and the treatment of the concept of judge, in which the reflection of the extralinguistic factors in the definitions stands in focus. The results highlight the relevance of the legal context of that era for the treatment of the lexicon related to the legal domain, but they also demonstrate the pattern in which the lexicographic data displays peculiarities of legal matters.
This paper reports on the efforts of twelve national teams in building the International Comparable Corpus (ICC; https://korpus.cz/icc) that will contain highly comparable datasets of spoken, written and electronic registers. The languages currently covered are Czech, Finnish, French, German, Irish, Italian, Norwegian, Polish, Slovak, Swedish and, more recently, Chinese, as well as English, which is considered to be the pivot language. The goal of the project is to provide much-needed data for contrastive corpus-based linguistics. The ICC corpus is committed to the idea of re-using existing multilingual resources as much as possible and the design is modelled, with various adjustments, on the International Corpus of English (ICE). As such, ICC will contain approximately the same balance of forty percent of written language and 60 percent of spoken language distributed across 27 different text types and contexts. A number of issues encountered by the project teams are discussed, ranging from copyright and data sustainability to technical advances in data distribution.
The Component MetaData Infrastructure (CMDI) is a framework for the creation and usage of metadata formats to describe all kinds of resources in the CLARIN world. To better connect to the library world, and to allow librarians to enter metadata for linguistic resources into their catalogues, a crosswalk from CMDI-based formats to bibliographic standards is required. The general and rather fluid nature of CMDI, however, makes it hard to map arbitrary CMDI schemas to metadata standards such as Dublin Core (DC) or MARC 21, which have a mature, well-defined and fixed set of field descriptors. In this paper, we address the issue and propose crosswalks between CMDI-based profiles originating from the NaLiDa project and DC and MARC 21, respectively.
Sometimes in interaction, a speaker articulates an overt interpretation of prior talk. Such moments have been studied as involving the repair of a problem with the other’s talk or as formulating an understanding of the matter at hand. Stepping back from the established notions of formulations and repair, we examine the variety of actions speakers do with the practice of offering an interpretation, and the order within this domain. Results show half a dozen usage types of interpretations in mundane interaction. These form a largely continuous territory of action, with recognizably distinct usage types as well as cases falling between these (proto)typical uses. We locate order in the domain of interpretations using the method of semantic maps and show that, contrary to earlier assumptions in the literature, interpretations that formulate an understanding of the matter at hand are actually quite pervasive in ordinary talk. These findings contribute to research on action formation and advance our understanding of understanding in interaction. Data are video- and audio-recordings of mundane social interaction in the German language from a variety of settings.
The present paper explores how rules are enforced and talked about in everyday life. Drawing on a corpus of board game recordings across European languages, we identify a sequential and praxeological context for rule talk. After a game rule is breached, a participant enforces proper play and then formulates a rule with an impersonal deontic statement (e.g. “It’s not allowed to do this”). Impersonal deontic statements express what may or may not be done without tying the obligation to a particular individual. Our analysis shows that such statements are used as part of multi-unit and multi-modal turns where rule talk is accomplished through both grammatical and embodied means. Impersonal deontic statements serve multiple interactional goals: they account for having changed another’s behavior in the moment and at the same time impart knowledge for the future. We refer to this complex action as an “instruction.” The results of this study advance our understanding of rules and rule-following in everyday life, and of how resources of language and the body are combined to enforce and formulate rules.
We examine moments in social interaction in which a person formulates what another thinks or believes. Such formulations of belief constitute a practice with specifiable contexts and consequences. Belief formulations treat aspects of the other person's prior conduct as accountable on the basis that it provided a new angle on a topic, or otherwise made a surprising contribution within an ongoing course of actions. The practice of belief formulations subjectivizes the content that the other articulated and thereby topicalizes it, mobilizing commitment to that position, an account, or further elaboration. We describe how the practice can be put to work in different activity contexts: sometimes it is designed to undermine the other's position as a subjective 'mere belief', at other times it serves to mobilize further topic talk. Throughout, belief formulations show themselves to be a method by which we get to know ourselves and each other as mental agents.
‘Can’ and ‘must’-type modal verbs in the direct sanctioning of misconduct across European languages
(2023)
Deontic meanings of obligation and permissibility have mostly been studied in relation to modal verbs, even though researchers are aware that such meanings can be conveyed in other ways (consider, for example, the contributions to Nuyts/van der Auwera (eds.) 2016). This presentation reports on an ongoing project that examines deontic meaning but takes as its starting point not a type of linguistic structure but a particular kind of social moment that presumably attracts deontic talk: The management of potentially ‚unacceptable‘ or untoward actions (taking the last bread roll at breakfast, making a disallowed move during a board game, etc.). Data come from a multi-language parallel video corpus of everyday social interaction in English, German, Italian, and Polish. Here, we focus on moments in which one person sanctions another’s behavior as unacceptable. Using interactional-linguistic methods (Couper-Kuhlen/Selting 2018), we examine similarities and differences across these four languages in the use of modal verbs as part of such sanctioning attempts. First results suggest that modal verbs are not as common in the sanctioning of misconduct as one might expect. Across the four languages, only between 10%–20% of relevant sequences involve a modal verb. Most of the time, in this context, speakers achieve deontic meaning in other ways (e.g., infinitives such as German nicht so schmatzen, ‚no smacking‘). This raises the question what exactly modal verbs, on those relatively rare occasions when they are used, contribute to the accomplishment of deontic meaning. The reported study pursues this question in two ways: 1) By considering similarities across languages in the ways that modal verbs interact with other (verbal) means in the sanctioning of misconduct.; 2) By considering differences across languages in the use of modal verbs. Here, we find that the relevant modal verbs are used similarly in some activity contexts (enforcing rules during board games), but less so in other activity contexts (mundane situations with no codified rules). In sum, the presented study adds to cross-linguistically grounded knowledge about deontic meaning and its relationships to linguistics structures.
In Beispielen wie
(1) Du hast scheints / Weiß Gott nichts begriffen.
(2) It cost £200, give or take.
(3) Qu’est ce qu’il a dit?
werden verbale Konstruktionen (kurz: VK, hier jeweils die fett gesetzten Teile) in einer Weise gebraucht, die der Grammatik verbaler Konstruktionen zuwiderläuft. In (1) und (2) wird die verbale Konstruktion wie ein Adverb/eine Partikel gebraucht bzw. wie ein Ausdruck in der Funktion eines (adverbialen) Adjunkts/ Supplements. In (3) ist die verbale Konstruktion zum Bestandteil einer periphrastischen interrogativen Konstruktion geworden. Wie sind solche ‘Umfunktionalisierungen’ – wie ich das Phänomen zunächst vortheoretisch bezeichnen möchte – einzuordnen? Handelt es sich um Lexikalisierung oder um Grammatikalisierung? Oder um ein Phänomen der dritten Art? Die Umfunktionalisierung verbaler Syntagmen bzw. Konstruktionen – ich gebrauche die Abkürzung UVK für ‘umfunktionalisierte verbale Konstruktion(en)’ – ist ein bisher weniger gut untersuchtes Phänomen, etwa gegenüber der Umfunktionalisierung von Präpositionalphrasen, die sprachübergreifend zu komplexen, „sekundären“ Präpositionen werden können (man vergleiche DEU auf Grund + Genitiv / von, ENG on top of, FRA à cause de).
Anhand eines grammatischen Details werden deskriptive und generative Beschreibungsansätze miteinander verglichen. Drei verschiedene Typen des nicht-phorischen eswerden im Hinblick auf die grammatischen Dimensionen 'Stellung', 'Festigkeit' und 'Komplement-Assoziation' beschrieben; das jeweilige Profil des Typs wird festgelegt. In generativen Lösungen geht es primär um den Subjektstatus der es-Typen und damit allgemeiner um die umstrittene Annahme einer strukturellen Subjektposition im deutschen Satz. Es wird gezeigt, daß nicht-phorisches es im allgemeinen nicht als Besetzung einer strukturellen Subjektposition in Frage kommt. Entsprechende generative Lösungen stehen im Widerspruch zum deskriptiv ermittelten grammatischen Profil von es.