Open Access

The female poets Christiana Mariana von Ziegler and Sidonia Hedwig Zäune­mann were crowned (in 1733 and 1738) with the laurel wreath for their famous poetic works. These honours were given by the universities of Wittenberg and Göttingen even though women were not admitted to universities at the time. Ziegler and Zäunemann wrote poetry of very high quality in the German language of the period. Both women tried to motivate other women to write poetry. In this paper we would like to present the literary discourse around the laureation of the two female poets and consider the disruptive poten­tials these events and the women themselves evoked.

The article outlines the technical, semiotic and discourse-linguistic challenges that arise in the data collection, the data processing and the data analysis of a quite small corpus of current product packaging texts (food/beverages, cleaning agents and hygiene products) of a running DFG-project. These three types of problems are due to the materiality, multimodality and multithematicity of the material analysed. The project which is focused on the German environmental discourse 1990-2020 and which is investigating the tension between individual freedom and social norms expressed in it, thus deliberately leaves the big data level of the originally project context within a bigger research group and switches to the level of hermeneutic-qualitative analyses of selected key texts. The hypothesis underlying this decision is that the environmental discourse is reflected in a condensed form in texts that are committed to corporate sustainability communication and are influencing the discourse space of everyday life in everyone’s household. Initial insights into the material and multimodal nature of the corpus are provided and the first results of the discourse linguistic analysis are offered, whereby the material is always discussed in its special significance "beyond big data". The preliminary results show that the everyday products analysed here are discursive mediators between companies, consumers and the environment, in that responsibility is shifted and displaced several times so that in the end it can to be concluded on all sides: Good for you and good for the planet.

In the article, I propose that considering established concepts from text linguistics, such as propositions and text worlds, more systematically can be fruitful for a discourse pragmatic analysis that aims to describe knowledge constitution. Drawing from the model proposed by Werth (1999) in his text-world theory, I introduce the concept of epistemic architecture and demonstrate its usefulness by closely analyzing two texts from the discourse on pesticide use in Germany. The analysis shows differences in the integration of relevant propositions into the epistemic architecture that can be interpreted as meaningful when trying to understand discursive knowledge constitution.

Corpora with high-quality linguistic annotations are an essential component in many NLP applications and a valuable resource for linguistic research. For obtaining these annotations, a large amount of manual effort is needed, making the creation of these resources time-consuming and costly. One attempt to speed up the annotation process is to use supervised machine-learning systems to automatically assign (possibly erroneous) labels to the data and ask human annotators to correct them where necessary. However, it is not clear to what extent these automatic pre-annotations are successful in reducing human annotation effort, and what impact they have on the quality of the resulting resource. In this article, we present the results of an experiment in which we assess the usefulness of partial semi-automatic annotation for frame labeling. We investigate the impact of automatic pre-annotation of differing quality on annotation time, consistency and accuracy. While we found no conclusive evidence that it can speed up human annotation, we found that automatic pre-annotation does increase its overall quality.

Im vorliegenden Beitrag gehen wir von der Prämisse aus, dass die Angemessenheit sprachlicher Formen nicht pauschal, sondern anhand des jeweiligen Kontexts zu beurteilen ist. Anhand einer Online-Fragebogenstudie mit durch weil eingeleiteten Nebensätzen untersuchen wir die Hypothese, dass Varianten, die nicht dem Schriftstandard entsprechen, in Kommunikationsformen, die sich weniger an standard- und schriftsprachlichen Normen orientieren, als (mindestens) ebenso angemessen oder zumindest unterschiedlich wahrgenommen werden wie eine schriftstandardsprachliche Variante. Wir untersuchen dies anhand von drei Aufgaben: Rezeption, Produktion und Assoziation zu bestimmten Medien und Textsorten. Wir können zeigen, dass die schriftnormgerechte Variante durchweg als am akzeptabelsten eingeschätzt wird. In allen drei Aufgaben finden sich aber auch eindeutige und übereinstimmende Effekte, die nahelegen, dass die verschiedenen Varianten in Abhängigkeit der Textsorte doch unterschiedlich eingeschätzt, produziert und assoziiert werden.