Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Article (429) (remove)
Has Fulltext
- yes (429)
Keywords
- Deutsch (188)
- Rechtschreibung (46)
- Korpus <Linguistik> (45)
- Rezension (37)
- Rechtschreibreform (33)
- Wörterbuch (32)
- Kongressbericht (28)
- Sprachgebrauch (25)
- Gesprochene Sprache (21)
- Konversationsanalyse (21)
Publicationstate
- Zweitveröffentlichung (429) (remove)
Reviewstate
- Peer-Review (292)
- (Verlags)-Lektorat (116)
- Peer-reviewed (2)
- Peer review (1)
Publisher
- Erich Schmidt (58)
- de Gruyter (41)
- Erich Schmidt Verlag (15)
- Verlag für Gesprächsforschung (12)
- Gesellschaft für deutsche Sprache (GfdS) (10)
- Ministerstvo prosveščenija RSFSR; Omskij gosudarstvenny pedagogičeskij institut imeni A. M. Gor´kogo (10)
- Bibliographisches Institut (8)
- Springer (7)
- Steiner (7)
- Buske (6)
Drawing on research from conversation analysis and developmental psychology, we point to the existence of “supporters” of morally responsible agency in everyday interaction: causes of our behavior that we are often unaware of, but that would make goodenough reasons for our actions, were we made aware of them.
This article makes an empirical and a methodological contribution to the comparative study of action. The empirical contribution is a comparative study of three distinct types of action regularly accomplished with the turn format du meinst x (“you mean/think x”) in German: candidate understandings, formulations of the other’s mind, and requests for a judgment. These empirical materials are the basis for a methodological exploration of different levels of researcher abstraction in the comparative study of action. Two levels are examined: the (coarser) level of conditionally relevant responses (what a response speaker must do to align with the action of the prior turn) and the (finer) level of “full alignment” (what a response speaker can do to align with the action of a prior turn). Both levels of abstraction provide empirically viable and analytically interesting descriptive concepts for the comparative study of action. Data are in German.
Dieser Beitrag widmet sich der Beschreibung des Korpus Deutsch in Namibia (DNam), das über die Datenbank für Gesprochenes Deutsch (DGD) frei zugänglich ist. Bei diesem Korpus handelt es sich um eine neue digitale Ressource, die den Sprachgebrauch der deutschsprachigen Minderheit in Namibia sowie die zugehörigen Spracheinstellungen umfassend und systematisch dokumentiert. Wir beschreiben die Datenerhebung und die dabei angewandten Methoden (freie Gespräche, „Sprachsituationen“, semi-strukturierte Interviews), die Datenaufbereitung inklusive Transkription, Normalisierung und Tagging sowie die Eigenschaften des verfügbaren Korpus (Umfang, verfügbare Metadaten usw.) und einige grundlegende Funktionalitäten im Rahmen der DGD. Erste Forschungsergebnisse, die mithilfe der neuen Ressource erzielt wurden, veranschaulichen die vielseitige Nutzbarkeit des Korpus für Fragestellungen aus den Bereichen Kontakt-, Variations-
und Soziolinguistik.
What is the subject of German linguistics? This seemingly simple question has no obvious answer. In the ZGL’s first issue, the editors required contributions to cover the whole of the German language and to be theoretically sound but application-orientated, whereas the current ZGL-homepage defines the German language of present and history in all its differentiations as its subject matter.
Looking through the fifty volumes of ZGL, three relationships can be identified as presumably enlightening the role of language, in particular the German language: language and mind; language and language use; language and culture. Though of a different systematic type, language and data should be added as an increasingly important pairing for conceptualizing language. On this basis, I also discuss the position of linguistic studies of the German language, mirrored in the ZGL-volumes, between social, cultural and natural sciences, as well as the corresponding epistemic approaches – like explaining vs. understanding.
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.
Novel formats of construction-based description hold great potential for phenomena that fall through the cracks in traditional kinds of linguistic reference works. On the example of German verb argument structure constructions with a prepositional object, we demonstrate that a construction-based description of such phenomena is superior to existing lexicographic and grammaticographic treatments, but that it also poses a number of new problems. The most fundamental of these relates to the fact that construction-based analyses can be proposed on different levels of abstraction. We illustrate pertinent problems relating to the precise identification of constructional form and meaning and suggest a multi-layered descriptive format for web-based electronic reference constructica that can accommodate these challenges. Semantically, the proposed solution integrates both lumping and splitting perspectives on constructional grain size and permits users to flexibly zoom in and out on individual elements in the resource. Formally, it can capture variation in the number and marking of realised arguments as found in e.g. passives and transitivity alternations. Aspects of the theoretical controversy between Construction Grammar and Valency Theory are addressed where relevant, but our focus is on questions of description and the practical implementation of construction-based analyses in a suitable type of linguistic reference work.
Construction-based language models assume that grammar is meaningful and learnable from experience. Focusing on five of the most elementary argument structure constructions of English, a large-scale corpus study of child-directed speech (CDS) investigates exactly which meanings/functions are associated with these patterns in CDS, and whether they are indeed specially indicated to children by their caretakers (as suggested by previous research, cf. Goldberg, Casenhiser and Sethuraman 2004). Collostructional analysis (Stefanowitsch and Gries 2003) is employed to uncover significantly attracted verb-construction combinations, and attracted pairs are classified semantically in order to systematise the attested usage patterns of the target constructions. The results indicate that the structure of the input may aid learners in making the right generalisations about constructional usage patterns, but such scaffolding is not strictly necessary for construction learning: not all argument structure constructions are coherently semanticised to the same extent (in the sense that they designate a single schematic event type of the kind envisioned in Goldberg’s [1995] ‘scene encoding hypothesis’), and they also differ in the extent to which individual semantic subtypes predominate in learners’ input
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?
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.
We present an empirical study addressing the question whether, and to which extent, lexicographic writing aids improve text revision results. German university students were asked to optimise two German texts using (1) no aids at all, (2) highlighted problems, or (3) highlighted problems accompanied by lexicographic resources that could be used to solve the specific problems. We found that participants from the third group corrected the largest number of problems and introduced the fewest semantic distortions during revision. Also, they reached the highest overall score and were most efficient (as measured in points per time). The second group with highlighted problems lies between the two other groups in almost every measure we analysed. We discuss these findings in the scope of intelligent writing environments, the effectiveness of writing aids in practical usage situations and teaching dictionary skills.
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.
Anhand eines Fallbeispiels wird gezeigt, dass in der praktischen Arbeit des EuGH Rechtsarbeit und Spracharbeit eng miteinander verflochten sind. Wenn es in einem strittigen Fall um die konkrete Ausarbeitung einer haltbaren Sachverhaltsbeschreibung geht, zeigt sich, dass die Rechtsarbeit und die Spracharbeit des Gerichts eigentlich identisch sind. In einem solchen Fall ist es für das Gericht nützlich und günstig, wenn es auf so viele sprachliche Formulierungen (auch in verschiedenen Sprachen) zurückgreifen kann wie möglich. Das Ziel ist, möglichst viele Interpretationen in Betracht zu ziehen, um das Urteil bestandssicher zu machen. In dieser Situation sind Vorschläge, das Sprachenspektrum, in dem der EuGH arbeitet, im Vorhinein und generell einzuschränken, kontraproduktiv.