Refine
Year of publication
- 2023 (105) (remove)
Document Type
- Article (48)
- Part of a Book (27)
- Book (10)
- Other (7)
- Review (6)
- Part of Periodical (4)
- Conference Proceeding (2)
- Preprint (1)
Language
- German (73)
- English (30)
- Multiple languages (2)
Keywords
- Deutsch (105) (remove)
Publicationstate
- Veröffentlichungsversion (64)
- Zweitveröffentlichung (34)
- Postprint (15)
- Ahead of Print (1)
Reviewstate
- (Verlags)-Lektorat (55)
- Peer-Review (47)
Publisher
A constructicon, i.e., a structured inventory of constructions, essentially aims at documenting functions of lexical and grammatical constructions. Among other parameters, so-called constructional collo-profiles, as introduced by Herbst (2018, 2020), are conclusive for determining constructional meanings. They provide information on how relevant individual words are for construction slots, they hint at usage preferences of constructions and serve as a helpful indicator for semantic peculiarities of constructions. However, even though collo-profiles constitute an indispensable component of constructicon entries, they pose major challengers for constructicographers: For a constructicographic enterprise it is not feasible to conduct collostructional analyses for hundreds or even thousands of constructions. In this article, we introduce a procedure based on the large language model BERT that allows to predict collo-profiles without having to extensively annotate instances of constructions in a given corpus. Specifically, by discussing the constructions X macht Y ADJP (‘x makes Y ADJ’, e.g. he drives him crazy) and N1 PREP N1 (e.g., bumper to bumper, constructions over constructions), we show how the developed automated system generates collo-profiles based on a limited number of annotated instances. Finally, we place collo-profiles alongside other dimensions of constructional meanings included in the German Constructicon.
This presentation deals with collaborative turn-sequences (Lerner 2004), a syntactically coherent unit of talk that is jointly formulated by at least two speakers, in Czech and German everyday conversations. Based on conversation analysis (e.g., Schegloff 2007) and a multimodal approach to social interaction (e.g., Deppermann/Streeck 2018), we aim at comparing recurrent patterns and action types within co-constructional sequences in both languages. The practice of co-constructing turns-at-talk has been described for typologically different languages, especially for English (e.g., Lerner 1996, 2004), but also for languages such as Japanese (Hayashi 2003) or Finnish (Helasvuo 2004). For German, various forms and functions of co-constructions have already been investigated (e.g., Brenning 2015); for Czech, a detailed, interactionally based description is still pending (but see some initial observations in, e.g., Hoffmannová/Homoláč/Mrázková (eds.) 2019). Although the existence of co-constructions in different languages points to a cross-linguistic conversational practice, few explicitly comparative studies exist (see, e.g., Lerner/Takagi 1999, for English and Japanese). The language pair Czech-German has mainly been studied with respect to language contact and without specifically considering spoken language or complex conversational sequences (e.g., Nekula/Šichová/Valdrová 2013). Therefore, our second aim is to sketch out a first comparison of co-constructional sequences in German and Czech, thereby contributing to the growing field of comparative and cross-linguistic studies within conversation analysis (e.g., Betz et al. (eds.) 2021; Dingemanse/Enfield 2015; Sidnell (ed.) 2009). More specifically, we will present three main sequential patterns of co-constructional sequences, focusing on the type of action a second speaker carries out by completing a first speaker’s possibly incomplete turn-at-talk, and on how the initial speaker then responds to
this suggested completion (Lerner 2004). Excerpts from video recordings of Czech and German ordinary conversations will illustrate these recurrent co-constructional sequence types, i.e., offering help during word searches (see example 1 above), displaying understanding, or claiming independent knowledge. The third objective of this paper is to underline the participants’ orientation to similar interactional problems, solved by specific syntactic and/or lexical formats in Czech and German. Considering the more recent focus on the embodied dimension of co-constructional practices (e.g., Dressel 2020), we will also investigate the multimodal formatting of a started utterance as more or less “permeable” (Lerner 1996) for co-participant completion, the participants’ mutual embodied orientation, and possible embodied responses to others’ turn-completions (such as head nods or eyebrow flashes, cf. De Stefani 2021). More generally, this contribution reflects on the possibilities and challenges of a cross-linguistic comparison of complex multimodal sequences.
Hier sehen Sie neue Wörter sowie bekannte Wörter mit neuen Bedeutungen, die seit Beginn der COVID-19-Pandemie aufgekommen sind, bei denen wir aber noch beobachten, ob sie eine gewisse Verbreitung in die Allgemeinsprache erfahren werden. Zu jedem dieser Wörter geben wir eine (vorläufige, grobe) Bedeutungserläuterung an und illustrieren die Verwendung mit 1-2 Belegen.
Das Duden-Aussprachewörterbuch ist das Standardwerk zu Fragen der Aussprache und Betonung des Deutschen. Die 8. Auflage wurde um über 4000 Stichwörter erweitert und enthält 144.000 Aussprachen zu Wörtern und Namen, inklusive im Deutschen gebräuchlicher Fremdwörter und fremdsprachlicher Namen. Alle Stichwörter wurden vertont und die Audios sind als Download verfügbar. Ein ausführliches Kapitel beschreibt die Regeln der Lautung und in zahlreichen Infokästen finden sich Informationen zu Aussprachephänomenen wie der Sprechpause beim Gendern. Das Wörterbuch entstand in Zusammenarbeit mit dem Leibniz-Institut für Deutsche Sprache in Mannheim.
In this article, we provide an insight into the development and application of a corpus-lexicographic tool for finding neologisms that are not yet listed in German dictionaries. As a starting point, we used the words listed in a glossary of German neologisms surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic. These words are lemma candidates for a new dictionary on COVID-19 discourse in German. They also provided the database used to develop and test the NeoRate tool. We report on the lexicographic work in our dictionary project, the design and functionalities of NeoRate, and describe the first test results with the tool, in particular with regard to previously unregistered words. Finally, we discuss further development of the tool and its possible applications.
Dieser Werkstattbericht zeigt anhand verschiedener korpusbasierter Ressourcen, wie Fragen zu sprachlichen Phänomenen, die für Sprachlernende nicht oder nur unzureichend dokumentiert sind, empirisch beantwortet werden können. Besonderes Augenmerk wird dabei auf OWIDplusLIVE gelegt. Hierbei handelt es sich um ein Werkzeug zur tagesaktuellen Analyse von Token (einzelne Wortformen/Lemmata) und Bi-/Trigrammen (zwei bzw. drei direkt aufeinander folgende Token). Über eine Anbindung an KorAP können zudem Belege aus dem DeReKo (Deutsches Referenzkorpus) abgerufen und analysiert werden.
Seit 1977 wird in Deutschland jedes Jahr ein Wort bzw. eine Wortsequenz zum „Wort des Jahres“ gekürt. Vorgenommen wird die Wahl von einer Jury, die sich aus Mitgliedern der Gesellschaft für deutsche Sprache (GfdS) zusammensetzt. In der deutschsprachigen Schweiz gibt es eine solche Aktion ebenfalls (seit 2003); inzwischen wird das Wort des Jahres aber nicht mehr nur auf Deutsch, sondern auch auf Französisch, Italienisch und Rätoromanisch gewählt. Wenn im Folgenden vom „Schweizer Wort des Jahres“ die Rede ist, ist damit aber immer nur das Deutschschweizer Jahreswort gemeint. Durchgeführt wird die Aktion von einem Forschungsteam, das an der Zürcher Hochschule für Angewandte Linguistik (ZHAW) tätig ist.
Jeden Tag finden weltweit über 40 innerstaatliche Konflikte und Kriege statt. Nach dem letzten Stand (14.11.2022) werden in Subsahara-Afrika 13, im Nahen Osten und in Nordafrika zehn und in Asien ebenfalls zehn Konflikte erwähnt. Aus Europa und Lateinamerika wird jeweils über fünf Konflikte berichtet. 2023 kam es zu neuen Konflikten und Kriegen in der Welt, über die jedoch noch keine Statistik vorhanden ist. Der russische Angriffskrieg gegen die Ukraine ist aber seit Anfang 2022 in den Weltmedien omnipräsent geworden. Somit wurde der Begriff Krieg auf verschiedene Weise in vielen internationalen Kontexten und Textquellen interpretiert und umschrieben, dann aber deutlich zum Ausdruck gebracht.
It is a ubiquitous phenomenon of everyday interaction that participants confront their co-participants for behaviour that they assess as undesirable or in some other way untoward. In a set of video data of informal interaction from the PECII corpus (Parallel European Corpus of Informal Interaction), cases of such sanctions have been collected in English, German, Italian and Polish data. This study presents work in progress and focuses on interrogatively formatted sanctions, in particular on non-polar interrogatives. It has already been shown that interrogatives can do much more than ask questions (Huddleston 1994). They can also function as directives (Lindström et al. 2017) or, more specifically, as requests (Curl/Drew 2008), as invitations (Margutti/Galatolo 2018) or reproaches (Klattenberg 2021), among others. What makes them interesting for cross-linguistic comparison is that the four languages that are considered provide different morphological and (morpho-)syntactical ressources for the realization of interrogative phrases. For example, German provides the option of building in the modal particle denn that reveals a previous lack of clarity and obliges the co-participant(s) to deliver the missing information (Deppermann 2009). Of course, the other three languages have modal particles, too (e.g. allora in Italian or though in English), but they do not seem to convey the same semantic and interactional qualities as denn. From an interactional point of view, one could think that interrogatives are a typical and effective way of solliciting accounts, since formally they open up a conditionally relevant space for an answer or a
reaction. But as the data shows, this does not guarantee that they are actually responded to. Another relevant aspect in the context of sanctions is that the interrogative format seems to carry a certain ‚openness‘ that might be seen as a mitigating effect and thus provides an interesting point of comparison with other mitigating devices. This study uses the methods of conversation analysis and interactional linguistics. It is based on a collection of 148 interrogative sanctions (out of which 84 are non-polar interrogatives) covering the four languages. I draw on coded data from roughly 1000 cases to get a first overall idea of how the interrogative format might differ from other formats, and how it might interrelate with specific features – for example, if subsequently an account is delivered. Going more into depth, the interrogative sanctions will then be analyzed with respect to their formal design (e.g. polar questions vs. content questions vs. tag questions, Rossano 2010; Hayano 2013) and to their pragmatic implications. I also analyze reactions to such sanctions – both formally (cf. Enfield et al. 2019, 279) and, again, from an interactional perspective (e.g. acceptance/compliance vs. challenging/defiance; Kent 2012; Cekaite 2020). A more detailed zooming in on the sequential unfolding of some particularly interesting
instances of sanctioning interrogatives will make the picture complete.