Sprache im 20. Jahrhundert. Gegenwartssprache
Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Part of a Book (31) (remove)
Language
- English (31) (remove)
Has Fulltext
- yes (31)
Keywords
- Deutsch (15)
- Englisch (8)
- Massenmedien (5)
- Gesprochene Sprache (3)
- Konversationsanalyse (3)
- Mediensprache (3)
- Russisch (3)
- Semantik (3)
- Bedeutung (2)
- Deutschland (2)
Publicationstate
- Veröffentlichungsversion (9)
- Postprint (7)
- Zweitveröffentlichung (1)
Reviewstate
- (Verlags)-Lektorat (13)
- Peer-Review (1)
- Verlags-Lektorat (1)
Publisher
- Institut für Deutsche Sprache (7)
- Benjamins (6)
- Lang (3)
- Niemeyer (2)
- Ashgate (1)
- De Gruyter Oldenbourg (1)
- Deutsches Bergbau Museum (1)
- European Language Resources Association (ELRA) (1)
- Europäische Akademie (1)
- German Historical Institute (1)
Following a welcome in Lithuanian and English to the guests and members on the occa- sion of the 10"’ anniversary of EFNIL, the history of this European language Organization is sketched. A brief survey of the sociolinguistic themes treated at previous Conferences and the state of the inajor projects is given, followed by an introduction (in German) to the general topic of the present Conference. The importance that translation and interpretation have for European language diversity and the individual national languages beside foreign language education of all Europeans is being stressed.
The following analysis explores the nature of everyday activities of people in economic leadership positions. It inquires as to the institutions and people they are in contact with, and the way they communicate with them. First, I will present existing studies in this field and the ethnographic procedure of this study. I will then describe the communicative activities of high-level personnel and their communication networks based on observations. These are then linked to their communicative tasks and types of interaction. Finally, I will discuss some characteristics of the communicative style.
We present evidence for the analysis of the vowels in English <say> and <so> as biphonemic diphthongs /ɛi/ and /əu/, based on neutralization patterns, regular alternations, and foot structure. /ɛi/ and /əu/ are hence structurally on a par with the so called “true diphthongs” /ɑi/, /ɐu/, /ɔi/, but also share prosodic organization with the monophthongs /i/ and /u/. The phonological evidence is supported by dynamic measurements based on the American English TIMIT database.
Calculations of F2-slopes proved to be especially suited to distinguish the relevant groups in accordance with their phonologically motivated prosodic organizations.
In spring 2002, we celebrated the inauguration of the first German-Russian-Jewish kindergarten in Berlin. Nowadays, there are seven bilingual German-Russian kindergartens with 4 60 places and 78 bilingual kindergartens with other combinations of languages [SENBWF]. Maybe it is not enough, taking into account the large proportion o f immigrants in the population of Berlin1. And yet, much progress has been achieved, endorsing the fact that German society has begun to change its attitude towards other languages on its territory. The initial request for German monolingualism first changed into societal tolerance of multilingualism and eventually to the recognition o f the value of multilingualism. This process is a very slow one, and it is not yet complete. In my article, I would like to look at the development in the last few years of the political framework that has made possible, on the one hand, the opening of bilingual kindergartens in Berlin, and on the other hand, to consider what has hampered this process until now. I would like to emphasise three most important political spheres: linguistic, educational and integrational.
Discourse analysis in general, and media discourse analysis in particular, are currently attracting increased attention from linguists. This interest can be seen in the tendency to apply the term ‘discourse’ to various sciences and academic disciplines. It is possible to trace its dispersion both horizontally, i.e. in different sciences, and vertically, i.e. on various linguistic levels. Furthermore, the majority of interpretations of the term ‘discourse’ appearing in the works of modern scholars have arisen as a result of the interdisciplinary nature of language study within the cognitive paradigm in linguistics.