Refine
Year of publication
- 2014 (207) (remove)
Document Type
- Part of a Book (207) (remove)
Keywords
- Deutsch (61)
- Institut für Deutsche Sprache <Mannheim> (28)
- Linguistik (21)
- Germanistik (20)
- Institut für Deutsche Sprache (18)
- Computerunterstützte Lexikographie (15)
- Korpus <Linguistik> (14)
- Gastwissenschaftler (13)
- Wissenschaftsgeschichte (13)
- Konversationsanalyse (10)
Publicationstate
- Veröffentlichungsversion (99)
- Zweitveröffentlichung (10)
- Postprint (5)
Reviewstate
- (Verlags)-Lektorat (103)
- Verlags-Lektorat (7)
- Peer-Review (5)
- Peer-review (5)
- (Verlags)Lektorat (1)
Publisher
- Institut für Deutsche Sprache (60)
- De Gruyter (32)
- de Gruyter (32)
- Stauffenburg (12)
- Lang (10)
- Benjamins (5)
- Cambridge Scholars Publ. (4)
- Springer (4)
- Narr (3)
- Olms (3)
Speakers’ dialogical orientation to the particular others they talk to is implemented by practices of recipient-design. One such practice is the use of negation as a means to constrain interpretations of speaker’s actions by the partner. The paper situates this use of negation within the larger context of other recipient-designed uses of negation which negate assumptions the speaker makes about what the addressee holds to be true (second-order assumptions) or what the addressee assumes the speaker holds to be true (third- order assumptions). The focus of the study is on the ways in which speakers use negation to disclaim interpretations of their turns which partners have displayed or may possibly arrive at. Special emphasis is given to the positionally sensitive uses of negation, which may occur before, after or inserted between the nucleus actions whose interpretation is constrained by the negation. Interactional motivations and rhetorical potentials of the practice are pointed out, partly depending on the position of the negation vis-à-vis the nucleus action. The analysis shows that the concept of ‘recipient design’ is in need of distinctions which have not been in focus in prior research.
Cette contribution s’intéresse aux co-constructions d’un tour de parole en interaction, plus spécifiquement, à la manière dont la complétion d’un énoncé de la part d’un co-participant est ensuite réceptionnée par le locuteur dont le tour a été complété. Malgré l’intérêt certain porté par l’analyse conversationnelle et la linguistique interactionnelle à la co-énonciation, l’évaluation de cette pratique par le premier locuteur n’a pas fait l’objet d’analyses approfondies. Dans ce qui suit, nous nous focalisons plus particulièrement sur les pratiques interactionnelles qui permettent aux participants de valider une co-construction. Ce travail est issu du projet ANR SPIM (« L’imitation dans la parole »), dans le cadre duquel nous nous sommes interrogée sur la fonction de l’hétéro-répétition (le fait de répéter un énoncé d’un autre locuteur ou une partie de celui-ci, opposée à l’auto- répétition) dans des séquences de co-construction d’un tour de parole.
Annotating Spoken Language
(2014)
In this paper, we present the concept and the results of two studies addressing (potential) users of monolingual German online dictionaries, such as www.elexiko.de. Drawing on the example of elexiko, the aim of those studies was to collect empirical data on possible extensions of the content of monolingual online dictionaries, e.g. the search function, to evaluate how users comprehend the terminology of the user interface, to find out which types of information are expected to be included in each specific lexicographic module and to investigate general questions regarding the function and reception of examples illustrating the use of a word. The design and distribution of the surveys is comparable to the studies described in the chapters 5-8 of this volume. We also explain, how the data obtained in our studies were used for further improvement of the elexiko-dictionary.
Bezugsnomen
(2014)
In recent minimalist work, it has been argued that C-agreement provides conclusive support for the following theoretical hypotheses (cf. Carstens 2003; van Koppen 2005; Haegeman & van Koppen 2012): (i) C hosts a separate set of phi-features, a parametric choice possibly linked to the V2 property; (ii) feature checking/valuation is accomplished under (closest) c-command (i.e. by the operation Agree, cf. Chomsky 2000 and subsequent work). This paper reviews the significance of C-agreement for syntactic theory and argues that certain systematic asymmetries between regular verbal agreement and complementizer agreement suggest that the latter does not result from operations that are part of narrow syntax. The case is based on the observation that at least in some Germanic varieties (most notably Bavarian), the realization of inflectional features in the C-domain is sensitive to adjacency effects and deletion of the finite verb in right node raising and comparatives. The fact that C may not carry inflection when the finite verb has been elided is taken to suggest that complementizer agreement does not involve a dependency between C and the subject, but father between C and the finite verb (i.e. T). More precisely, it is argued that inflectional features present in the C-domain are added postsyntactically via a process of feature insertion (cf. e.g. Embick 1997; Embick & Noyer 2001; Harbour 2003) that creates a copy of T’s (valued) <J)-set. It will then be shown that this account can also capture phenomena like first conjunct agreement (FCA) and external possessor agreement, which are often presented as crucial evidence of the syntactic nature of complementizer agreement (cf. van Koppen 2005; Haegeman & van Koppen 2012).
Content analysis provides a useful and multifaceted, methodological framework for Twitter analysis. CAQDAS tools support the structuring of textual data by enabling categorising and coding. Depending on the research objective, it may be appropriate to choose a mixed-methods approach that combines quantitative and qualitative elements of analysis and plays out their respective advantages to the greatest possible extent while minimising their shortcomings. In this chapter, we will discuss CAQDAS speech act analysis of tweets as an example of software-assisted content analysis. We start with some elementary thoughts on the challenges of the collection and evaluation of Twitter data before we give a brief description of the potentials and limitations of using the software QDA Miner (as one typical example for possible analysis programmes). Our focus will lie on analytical features that can be particularly helpful in speech act analysis of tweets.
Das 50-jährige IDS
(2014)
Dependenzstruktur
(2014)
Der Blick zurück nach vorn
(2014)
In diesem Beitrag wird an einigen Beispielen aus der nominalen Morphologie bzw. der Morphosyntax der deutschen Substantivgruppe gezeigt, wie sich in den Veränderungen in diesem Bereich, die sich über das 20. Jahrhundert hin beobachten lassen, Fragen eines langfristigen Systemwandels mit Regularitäten des Sprachgebrauchs überlagern. Im Mittelpunkt soll die Frage der Markierung der Kasus – insbesondere in den allgemein als „kritisch“ angesehenen Fällen von Genitiv und Dativ – stehen. Wenn man die Daten dazu betrachtet, sieht man, dass in den meisten Fällen schon zum Anfang des 20. Jahrhunderts eine weitgehende Anpassung an die Regularitäten der Monoflexion erfolgt war, auch, dass dieser Prozess über das Jahrhundert hin fortschreitet. Bemerkenswert ist, dass insgesamt die als „alt“ angesehenen Fälle in den untersuchten Korpora geschriebener Sprache (sehr) selten auftauchen, dass aber in zunehmendem Ausmaß die daraus folgende Markiertheit in der einen oder anderen Weise funktional genutzt wird. Einen Fall eigener Art stellt in diesem Zusammenhang der Genitiv dar, der sich bei den starken Maskulina und Neutra bekanntlich dem Trend zur „Einmalmarkierung“ der Kasus an den flektierten, das Substantiv begleitenden Elementen widersetzt. Das führt zu der bekannten Orientierung dieser Formen auf die Nicht-Objekt-Verwendungen und auch zu einem auffälligen Maß an Variation in der Nutzung der entsprechenden Flexionsformen.
In this paper, the authors use the 2012 log files of two German online dictionaries (Digital Dictionary of the German Language and the German Version of Wiktionary) and the 100,000 most frequent words in the Mannheim German Reference Corpus from 2009 to answer the question of whether dictionary users really do look up frequent words, first asked by de Schryver et al. (2006). By using an approach to the comparison of log files and corpus data which is completely different from that of the aforementioned authors, we provide empirical evidence that indicates - contrary to the results of de Schryver et al. and Verlinde/Binon (2010) - that the corpus frequency of a word can indeed be an important factor in determining what online dictionary users look up. Finally, we incorporate word class Information readily available in Wiktionary into our analysis to improve our results considerably.
Die Abteilung Pragmatik
(2014)