Refine
Document Type
- Article (2)
- Part of a Book (2)
Has Fulltext
- yes (4)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (4) (remove)
Keywords
- Deutsch (3)
- agentivity (3)
- Korpus <Linguistik> (2)
- Verb (2)
- Agens (1)
- Agentiv (1)
- Argumentstruktur (1)
- DO-cleft (1)
- Diskurs (1)
- Diskursanalyse (1)
Publicationstate
Reviewstate
- (Verlags)-Lektorat (2)
- Peer-Review (2)
Publisher
- de Gruyter (2)
- Buske (1)
- Open Library of Humanities (1)
Die vorliegende Arbeit untersucht grammatische Serialisierungsfaktoren und geht auf die semantische Rolle und die Rektion der Verbargumente näher ein. Das sind zwei unabhängige Faktoren der Wortstellung, die zwar gemeinsam auf einen allgemeinen multifaktoriellen Dependenzbegriff zurückgeführt, aber nicht voneinander abgeleitet werden können. Die wortstellungsrelevante Hierarchie von semantischen Rollen kann als Spezialfall semantischer Dependenzasymmetrien ausgewiesen werden. Auf der Grundlage dieses Dependenzbegriffs wird ein allgemeines Serialisierungsprinzip aufgestellt, das mehrere in der Forschung diskutierte Prinzipien zusammenfaßt. Die beiden Parameter der Dependenz können bei der Determination der Abfolge der Verbargumente in Abhängigkeit vom verblexemspezifischen Konstruktionstyp gegeneinander konkurrieren oder miteinander koalieren. Diese Interaktion wird im Rahmen eines Wettbewerbsmodells der Serialisierung präsentiert. Über die koalierende vs. konkurrierende Interaktion wird die konstruktionsspezifische festere vs. freiere Stellung der Verbargumente im Deutschen und im Sprachvergleich erklärt. Im sprachvergleichenden Teil werden ditransitive Konstruktionen mit Rezipient und Patiens in 50 europäischen Sprachen untersucht.
Lexikonprojektion und Konstruktion: Experimentelle Studien zu Argumentalternationen im Deutschen
(2020)
Debates on lexicalist vs. constructionist modelling of argument alternations are typically based on data from single constructions, each including different types of verbs. Evidence from constructions with an identical set of verb types that systematically differ in their meaning is lacking, even though such evidence is imperative for specifically investigating the dependence of argument alternations on the interaction between construction and lexical meanings. We present two acceptability studies where verb lexeme meanings and constructions - specifically active voice, impersonal passive and the construction with man 'one' in German - vary systematically. Prima facie our results support a constructionist explanation, because each construction exhibits a unique acceptability cline. However, across constructions, an adequate explanation has to consider verb-based lexical meanings. The most plausible explanation is that the semantic features licensed by the construction are matched with the semantic features provided by the verb lexeme.
The article investigates the hypothesis that prominence phenomena on different levels of linguistic structure are systematically related to each other. More specifically, it is hypothesized that prominence relations in morphosyntax reflect, and contribute to, prominence management in discourse. This hypothesis is empirically based on the phenomenon of agentivity clines, i.e. the observation that the relevance of agentivity features such as volition or sentience is variable across different constructions. While some constructions, including German DO-clefts, show a strong preference for highly agentive verbs, other constructions, including German basic active constructions, have no particular requirements regarding the agentivity of the verb, except that at least one agentivity feature should be present. Our hypothesis predicts that this variable relevance of agentivity features is related to the discourse constraints on the felicitous use of a given construction, which in turn, of course, requires an explicit statement of such constraints. We propose an original account of the discourse constraints on DO-clefts in German using the ‘Question Under Discussion’ framework. Here, we hypothesize that DO-clefts render prominent one implicit question from a set of alternative questions available at a particular point in the developing discourse. This then yields a prominent question-answer pair that changes the thematic structure of the discourse. We conclude with some observations on the possibility of relating morphosyntactic prominence (high agentivity) to discourse prominence (making a Question Under Discussion prominent by way of clefting).
The present paper reports two acceptability-rating experiments and a supporting corpus study for Polish that tested the acceptability and frequency of five verb classes (WATCH, SEE, HATE, KNOW, EXHIBIT), entailing different sets of agentivity features, in different syntactic constructions: a) the personal passive (e.g. zachód słońca był oglądany ‘the sunset was watched’), b) the impersonal -no/-to construction (e.g. oglądano zachód słońca ‘people/they/one watched the sunset’), and c) the personal active construction (e.g. niektórzy oglądali zachód słońca ‘some (people) watched the sunset’). We asked whether acceptability ratings would show identical acceptability clines across constructions affected by agentivity, as predicted from Dowty’s (1991) prototype account of semantic roles with feature accumulation as its central mechanism, or whether clines would vary depending on syntactic construction, as predicted from Himmelmann & Primus’ (2015) prominence account that uses feature weighting to describe role-related effects. In contrasting the applicability of these two accounts, we also investigated whether previous research findings from German replicate in Polish, thereby revealing cross-linguistic stability or variation. Our results show that the five verb classes yield different acceptability clines in all three Polish constructions and that the clines for Polish and German passives show cross-linguistic variation. This pattern cannot be explained by role prototypicality, so that the experiments provide further evidence for the prominence account of role-related effects in sentence interpretation. Moreover, our data suggest that experiencer verbs interact differently with the animacy of the subject referent, yielding different results for perception verbs (SEE), emotion verbs (HATE), and cognition verbs (KNOW).