Grammatik
Refine
Document Type
- Article (3)
- Part of a Book (3)
- Other (1)
- Review (1)
Has Fulltext
- yes (8)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (8) (remove)
Keywords
- Syntax (8) (remove)
Publicationstate
- Veröffentlichungsversion (5)
- Postprint (2)
- Zweitveröffentlichung (2)
Reviewstate
- (Verlags)-Lektorat (4)
- Peer-Review (3)
Publisher
We argue that properties with a nominal origin get transferred regularly in certain Gentian particle verb constructions to properties that are propositional insofar as they characterize the temporal structure of eventualities, understood to be described by propositional (= truth-assessable) representations of state changes. Accordingly, the oft-noted perfectivizing function of certain verbal particles like ein- in einfahren ('pull in', cf. Kühnhold 1972) is the effect of redressing a conflict at the syntax-semantics interface: On the one hand, constructions like in [die Grube]acc einfahren ('pull into the mine’) exhibit transitive syntax (Gehrke 2008), requiring that the syntactic arguments be mapped onto well-distinguished or DIFFERENT referents in the semantics (Kemmer 1993). On the other hand, in/ein codes a spatio-temporal inclusion relation between its relata, contradicting the requirement imposed by the transitive syntax. Following Brandt (2019), we submit that the interface executes a manoeuvre that delays the interpretation of part of the contradiction-inducing DIFFERENCE feature. It is not locally interpreted (semantically represented) in toto but in part passed on to the next syntactic-semantic computational cycle. Here, the passed-on meaning is interpreted in the locally customary terms, in the case at hand, as a temporal index where the post-state of the depicted eventuality does not hold.
The special issue opens up a construction-grammatical perspective on (German) word formation phenomena and goes back to a DFG-funded conference of the same name, which we held at the University of Düsseldorf in December 2020. The aim is to bundle up for the first time research from the field of German linguistics that is oriented towards construction grammar, and thus to lay the foundation for a 'Construction Word Formation' (cf. Booij 2010) also in the German-speaking world. Furthermore, ‘Construction Word Formation’ as a discipline shall hereby be sharpened. In this context, construction grammar should not be seen as a radical alternative to traditional word formation approaches that completely reinvents the wheel, but rather as a further development that builds on traditional concepts such as the pattern term with prominent consideration of usage-based aspects.
Dieses Kapitel untersucht die syntaktischen Funktionen von vollen (nicht-pronominalen) Nominalphrasen (NPs) und die Funktionen der vier Kasus des Deutschen aus quantitativer Perspektive. Es wird vorgeschlagen, das Konzept der syntaktischen Funktion in grundlegendere Merkmale zu zerlegen. Dazu gehören der Typ desjenigen Elements, dem die NP untergeordnet ist, und die Art der Beziehung zwischen der NP und dem übergeordneten Element (ganz allgemein: Komplementation vs. Modifikation).
Datensatz Nominalphrasen
(2021)
Der Datensatz Nominalphrasen enthält Belege zu nichtpronominalen (d.h. vollen, lexikalischen) Nominalphrasen (NPs) mit einem Substantiv oder einer Nominalisierung als Kopf. Jeder Beleg ist in Bezug auf eine Reihe linguistisch relevanter Merkmale annotiert. Insgesamt enthält der Datensatz 8.137 Belegstellen. Nach dem Aussortieren von Fehlbelegen (siehe Spalten „valide“ und „nicht-valide_Begründung“) bleiben noch 7.813 einschlägige Belege. Die Suchanfrage erfolgte über das Kopfnomen; für Details zur Datenerhebung siehe Weber (2021a). Das Kopfnomen erscheint in der Spalte „Kopf_der_NP“. In manchen Fällen besteht die NP nur aus dem Kopfnomen, in den meisten Fällen geht sie aber darüber hinaus; sie erstreckt sich dann auf einen Teil des vorangehenden Kontexts (Spalte „Satzkontext_vor_Beleg“) und/oder des nachfolgenden Kontexts („Satzkontext_nach_Beleg“). Der Datensatz dient der Untersuchung der syntaktischen Funktionen von NPs (Weber 2021a) und der Determination in der NP (Weber 2021b).
The present chapter investigates the relative order of attributive adjectives in German. Based on corpus data, our results corroborate previous findings that semantics is the most important factor in accounting for adjective order. Going beyond previous studies, we also consider coordinated structures (such as mit [[großem, verwildertem] Garten] ‘with (a) large, overgrown garden’), where both adjectives are of equal rank. While adjective order in embedded structures (mit [ schwierigem [ familiärem Hintergrund ]] ‘with (a) difficult domestic background’) can be predicted rather accurately on semantic grounds, we show that predictions can also be made for coordinated structures, albeit with lower accuracy. Using regression analysis, we examine how semantic factors interact with a number of other explanatory variables.
Cet article propose un bref aperçu de l’état de l’art en syntaxe de l’allemand. Pour illustrer les évolutions théoriques et méthodologiques majeures, en rupture avec les approches traditionnelles, l’étude a sélectionné cinq points particuliers : la structure du groupe nominal, la syntaxe du verbe en lien avec la valence et les fonctions syntaxiques, les diathèses, les constructions infinitives et la structure de la phrase sous l’angle de la position du verbe et de ses implications syntaxiques.
This paper investigates the syntactic behaviour of adverbial clauses in contemporary German and Italian. It focuses on three main questions: (i) How many degrees of syntactic integration of adverbial clauses are there to be distinguished by an adequate grammatical description of the two languages? (ii) Which linear and hierarchical positions in the structure of the matrix sentence can be occupied by adverbial clauses? (iii) Which is the empirical distribution of adverbial clauses introduced by the conjunctions als, während, wenn, obwohl and weil in German, as well as quando, mentre, se, sebbene and perché in Italian?
Responding to question (i), a distinction is drawn between strongly integrated, weakly integrated and syntactically disintegrated adverbial clauses. There are further degrees on the gradient of syntactic integration, which are not examined in this paper. Responding to question (ii), eight classes of structural positions in the matrix sentence are identified that can be occupied by adverbial clauses. Five of them are positions of syntactic integration, three are positions of disintegration. Responding to question (iii), the distribution of the ten classes of adverbial clauses is described on the basis of a corpus of internet data. Strongly integrated, weakly integrated and disintegrated adverbial clauses show clearly different distributions within the structure of the matrix sentence. Also the semantic classes of adverbial clauses (temporal, adversative, conditional, concessive, causal) are distributed differently.