Grammatik
Refine
Year of publication
- 2020 (16) (remove)
Document Type
- Part of a Book (8)
- Article (3)
- Book (3)
- Other (1)
- Review (1)
Keywords
- Grammatik (7)
- Korpus <Linguistik> (5)
- Deutsch (4)
- Terminologie (3)
- Wortbildung (3)
- Adverb (2)
- Flexion (2)
- Methodik (2)
- Open Data (2)
- Possessivität (2)
Publicationstate
- Veröffentlichungsversion (13)
- Zweitveröffentlichung (3)
- Postprint (1)
Reviewstate
- (Verlags)-Lektorat (14)
- Peer-Review (2)
Publisher
Kommunikative Misserfolge im Deutschen für ukrainische Deutschlerner aus interkultureller Sicht
(2020)
Begriffe, die meist als nulläquivalente Lexik (Lakunen) für ukrainische Deutschlerner gelten und somit Schwierigkeiten bereiten sowie im Allgemeinen zu Misserfolgen zwischen Kommunizierenden führen können, stehen im Mittelpunkt der folgenden Ausführungen. Um sie zu vermeiden, werden einige Themen und Aufgaben zur Erweiterung der sozial-kommunikativen und interkulturellen Kompetenzen vorgeschlagen.
„Bausteine einer Korpusgrammatik des Deutschen“ ist eine neue Schriftenreihe, die am Leibniz-Institut für Deutsche Sprache in Mannheim (IDS) entsteht. Sie setzt sich zum Ziel, mit korpuslinguistischen Methoden die Vielfalt und Variabilität der deutschen Grammatik in großer Detailschärfe zu erfassen und gleichzeitig für die Validierbarkeit der Ergebnisse zu sorgen. Die erste Ausgabe enthält eine Einführung in die Reihe sowie vier als Kapitel einer neuen Grammatik gestaltete Texte: 1. Grundlegende Aspekte der Wortbildung, 2. Bau von und Umbau zu Adverbien, 3. Starke vs. schwache Flexion aufeinanderfolgender attributiver Adjektive und 4. Reihenfolge attributiver Adjektive. Die Ausgabe ist mit einer interaktiven Datenbank zu attributiven Adjektiven verknüpft.
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.
Einleitung
(2020)
A corpus-based academic grammar of German is an enormous undertaking, especially if it aims at using state-of-the-art methodology while ensuring that its study results are verifiable. The Bausteine-series, which is being developed at the Leibniz Institute for the German Language (IDS), presents individual “building blocks” for such a grammar. In addition to the peer-reviewed texts, the series publishes the results of statistical analyses and, for selected topics, the underlying data sets.
This chapter focuses on the formation of adverbs from a corpuslinguistic perspective, providing an overview of adverb formation patterns in German that includes frequencies and hints to productivity as well as combining quantitative methods and theoretically founded hypotheses to address questions that concern possible grammaticalization paths in domains that are formally marked by prepositional elements or inflectional morphology (in particular, superlative or superlative-derived forms). Within our collection of adverb types from the project corpus, special attention is paid to adverbs built from primary prepositions. The data suggest that generally, such adverb formation involves the saturation of the internal argument slot of the relation-denoting preposition. In morphologically regular formations with the preposition in final position, pronominal forms like da ‘there’, hier ‘here’, wo ‘where’ as well as hin ‘hither’ and her ‘thither’ serve to derive adverbs. On the other hand, morphologically irregular formations with the preposition – in particular: zu ‘to’ or vor ‘before, in front of’ – in initial posi-tion show traits of syntactic origin such as (remnants of) inflectional morphology. The pertaining adverb type dominantly saturates the internal argument slot by means of universal quantification that is part and parcel as well of the derivation of superlatives and demonstrably fuels the productivity of the pertaining formation pattern.
This chapter begins with a sketch of the specifics of our approach, an overview of the contents of the chapters on word formation and some methodological notes. It then discusses the general characteristics of word formations and of their overall inventory, comparing word formations to primary words. Furthermore, the chapter explores the relative frequencies of word formations in different vocabulary areas and traces the word formation profiles of individual parts of speech. Finally, it compiles the characteristic word formation rules for different parts of speech.
Usually, weak inflection of an attributive or nominalized adjective occurs if the adjective is preceded by an inflected determiner: mit diesem technischen Aufwand (‘at great technical expense’). Otherwise, the inflection of the adjective is strong: mit technischem Aufwand. Following this rule of thumb, we would expect strong inflection of an adjective following another adjective whenever the determiner is missing: mit hohem technischem Aufwand. But many German speakers opt for a weak dative singular ending -en following the strong ending -em on the first adjective: mit hohem technischen Aufwand. This chapter shows which explanatory variables play a role in this variation within standard German.
This paper analyses the variation we find in the realization of finite clausal complements in the position of prepositional objects in a set of Germanic languages. The Germanic languages differ with respect to whether prepositions can directly select a clause (North Germanic) or not and instead need a prepositional proform (Continental West Germanic). Within the Continental West Germanic languages, we find further differences with respect to the constituent structures. We propose that German strong vs. weak prepositional proforms (e.g. drauf vs. darauf) differ with respect to their syntax, while this is not the case for the Dutch forms (ervan vs. daarvan). What the Germanic languages under consideration share is that the prepositional element can be covert, except in English. English shows only limited evidence for the presence of P with finite clauses in the position of prepositional objects generally, but only with a selected set of verbs. This investigation is a first step towards a broader study of the nature of clauses in prepositional object positions and the implications for the syntax of clausal complementation.