Refine
Year of publication
- 2008 (235) (remove)
Document Type
- Part of a Book (114)
- Article (57)
- Conference Proceeding (34)
- Book (17)
- Part of Periodical (6)
- Doctoral Thesis (3)
- Working Paper (2)
- Master's Thesis (1)
- Review (1)
Keywords
- Deutsch (113)
- Wörterbuch (29)
- Korpus <Linguistik> (21)
- Internet (15)
- Mehrsprachigkeit (12)
- Gesprochene Sprache (10)
- Konversationsanalyse (9)
- Computerunterstützte Lexikographie (8)
- OWID (8)
- Sprachgeschichte (8)
Publicationstate
- Veröffentlichungsversion (103)
- Zweitveröffentlichung (19)
- Postprint (9)
- Preprint (2)
Reviewstate
- (Verlags)-Lektorat (90)
- Peer-Review (21)
- Verlags-Lektorat (4)
- Qualifikationsarbeit (Dissertation, Habilitationsschrift) (3)
- (Verlag)-Lektorat (1)
- (Verlags-) Lektorat (1)
- (Verlags-)Lektorat (1)
- Abschlussarbeit (Bachelor, Master, Diplom, Magister) (Bachelor, Master, Diss.) (1)
- Peer-Revied (1)
- Peer-review (1)
Publisher
- Institut für Deutsche Sprache (29)
- de Gruyter (26)
- Narr (24)
- European Language Resources Association (ELRA) (7)
- iudicium (7)
- Lang (5)
- Stauffenburg (5)
- Dudenverlag (4)
- Olms (4)
- BBAW (3)
Using different constructions with the German item vcrstchcn (engl. understand), the current study addresses the relationship between lexical and constructional meaning. Construction grammar and cognitive grammar reject the theoretical distinction between (a semantic) lexicon and (a formal) syntax (e.g., Langacker: 2000). Instead, they take constructions to be the units of linguistic competence. It is claimed that constructions consist of form-meaning-pairings (e.g. Goldberg: 1995; Croft: 2001). From this view, it follows that formal variation should result in functional variation. Lexical items should therefore acquire different meanings depending on the constructions in which they occur. To test this claim, 300 instances of uses of the German lexical item verstehen in talk-in-interaction were inspected for the local meanings verstehen acquires in each case. The article compares the semantics of verstehen in two different constructions: The discourse marker verstehst du? (engl. do you understand?) and the negative construction [NP] nicht verstehen [COMP], The data show a poly- semic spectrum of meanings of verstehen, which is similar for both constructions. The precise local meaning of verstehen in most cases depends on pragmatic and discursive factors and is not provided for by the constructions themselves. There are, however, subtypes of the two constructions that satisfy the condition of being a form-meaning-pair. As a conclusion, some prospects for the conceptualization of different sources of meaning within a construction grammar approach are suggested.
Emotionale Kommunikation
(2008)
This article examines the interrelation between communicative behavior and emotion. First, it clarifies the notions of emotion as a concept (section 2) and the concept of communication (section 3). Then, it outlines the need to develop a model for emotions in communicative interaction (section 4). The interrelation between communicative behavior and emotion is interdependent — on the one hand, communicative behavior can influence a person’s own emotions and those of another person and, on the other hand, emotions can affect a person’s own and another person’s communicative behavior (section 5).
EuroGr@mm
(2008)
This paper presents the Kicktionary, a multilingual (English - German - French) electronic lexical resource of the language of football. In the Kicktionary, methods from corpus linguistics and two approaches to lexical semantics - the theory of frame semantics and the concept of semantic relations - are combined to construct a lexical resource in which the user can explore relationships between lexical units in various ways. This paper explains the theoretical background of the Kicktionary, sketches the data and methods which were used in its construction, and describes how the resulting resource is presented to users via a set of hyperlinked webpages.