Grammatikforschung
Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Part of a Book (20)
- Article (14)
Has Fulltext
- yes (34)
Keywords
- Deutsch (20)
- Grammatik (6)
- Korpus <Linguistik> (5)
- Semantik (5)
- Syntax (5)
- Logische Partikel (4)
- Wortbildung (4)
- Argumentstruktur (3)
- Englisch (3)
- Französisch (3)
Publicationstate
- Postprint (34) (remove)
Reviewstate
- (Verlags)-Lektorat (19)
- Peer-Review (11)
Publisher
- Benjamins (8)
- Erich Schmidt (5)
- Stauffenburg (3)
- Springer (2)
- Buske (1)
- Carocci (1)
- Dr. Kovač (1)
- Edinburgh University Press (1)
- Friedrich H. (1)
- Institut für deutsche Sprache (IDS) (1)
This article deals with three interrelated phenoma in the information structure of German sentences: the focusing of negative markers, of finite verb forms and of the particles ja, doch, wohl and schon. Focusing of the finite verb is the most important marker of verum focus, as described by Höhle (1988). Focusing of particles can be an alternative means for similar purposes, while focusing of negation seems to be the contradictory opposite of verum focus. It is shown that negation- independently of its information structural status - can be interpreted on three distinct levels of sentence meaning: as an indicator of the non-facticity of a state of affairs, the non-truth of a proposition, or the non-desirability of a speech act. Focusing of the negative marker puts contrastive emphasis on the negative value assigned to sentence meaning on one of these levels. Ve rum focus can be interpreted on the same three levels: as a marker of contrastive emphasis on a positive value of facticity, truth or desirability. The particles ja, doch, wohl and schon refer to sufficient epistemic or interactional conditions for the assignment of a positive or negative value. By focusing such a particle, the speaker indicates that (s)he believes the assigned value to be well justified and insists on establishing it as common ground for further interaction.
This paper investigates the use of linking adverbs in adversative constructions in German and Italian. In Italian those constructions are very frequently formulated with adverbs such as invece, while wordings without a lexical connective are more typical of German. Corpus data show that the syntactic und semantic conditions favouring the use of adversative adverbs are by and large the same in both languages. Lexical connectives can increase explicitness when the intended adversative interpretation is not obvious on other grounds. The higher frequency of adversative adverbs in Italian is shown to be a consequence of the more restrictive rules of the placement of prosodic accent.
The paper gives an analysis of productively occurring dative constructions in German, attempting to unify what are known traditionally as Double Object and Experiencer Datives. The datives in question - cipients as we call them - are argued to be licensed under two conditions: One, predicates licensing cipients project a theme and a location argument internally; two, interpretation of the predication as a whole involves reference to two dissociated temporal intervals, or more generally, indexical truth intervals. It is argued that the location argument is needed because it provides the variable that is bound by the cipient argument - the variable in question ranges over superlocations of the location argument referent. Reference to two truth intervals is forced because interpreting the cipient structure involves evaluation of two propositional meanings that would contradict each other in a single context. The first propositional meaning is embedded in the predicate; it encodes that something is at a certain location (in quality space). The second propositional meaning is projected as a presupposition that corresponds just to the negation of the first one. The cipient, functioning as the logical subject of the construction, accommodates this second presuppositional meaning; this makes the construction as a whole interpretable. The analysis applies uniformly to what appear to be the two major contexts licensing cipients: ‘eventive’ and ‘foo-comparative’ predications, thereby accounting for some striking parallels between them.
Eine korpuslinguistische Untersuchung mit umfassender Analyse der häufiger vorkommenenden Adverbbildungsmuster des Deutschen legt nahe, dass die Sättigung des internen Argumentplatzes eines ursprünglich relationalen Ausdrucks eine wichtige Rolle bei der Adverbproduktion spielt (Brandt 2020). Eine genauere Betrachtung der Unterschiede zwischen -ermaßen- vs. -erweise-Adverbien deutet auf eine grammatische Unterscheidung zwischen Satzadverbien und Adverbien der Art und Weise: Im Fall von -ermaßen erfolgt die Sättigung über Token-Reflexivität, während der interne Slot von -erweise- Bildungen über häufigere und möglicherweise expansive Mechanismen geschlossen wird. Darüber hinaus fördert die pleonastische Qualität von Bildungen auf der Basis gerundivaler Partizipien die Produktivität von -erweise Adverbien.
This paper investigates synchronic variation in the lexical and grammatical environments of the German lexical verb verdienen ‘earn’, ‘deserve’. In its lexical uses, verdienen co-occurs with an object noun phrase whose head is either concrete (e.g. Geld ‘money’) or, more commonly, abstract (e.g. Beachtung ‘attention’). When it is used more grammatically with deontic modal meaning, verdienen is followed by a passive or active infinitive. This paper uses collostructional analyses to contrast lexical and grammatical uses in terms of the most strongly attracted lexical items, which are grouped into semantic classes. The results reflect different degrees of host-class expansion (cf. Himmelmann 2004), whereby the collexemes of verdienen expand from concrete to abstract and their morpho-syntactic contexts from nominal to infinitival complement and subsequently from passive to active. Synchronic distribution can thus serve as a window on diachronic development (Kuteva 2001), in this case the rise of a deontic modality marker.
Der Beitrag thematisiert die Märchenformel es war einmal unter konstruktionsgrammatischem Gesichtspunkt. Im Mittelpunkt der Überlegungen stehen zwei Fragen: a) Wie kann man es war einmal im Kontext seines Gebrauchs in Märchen beschreiben? b) Wie Lässt sich diese Märchenformel im Kontext anderer, mit ihr formal und/oder semantisch verwandter Konstruktionen mit es erfassen? Um die erste Frage zu beantworten, wird auf Merkmale der Textsorte ‚Märchen' sowie auf den Begriff des Erzählens zurückgegriffen. Damit im Zusammenhang wird in Anlehnung an die Terminologie in Feilke (1996) von textuell-pragmatischer Prägung gesprochen. Zur Klärung der zweiten Frage sollen vor dem Hintergrund syntaktischer Prägung abstraktere Konstruktionen mit es (Rhematisierungskonstruktionen, Präsentativkonstruktionen und das es impersonate) herangezogen und in Beziehung zu es war einmal gesetzt werden. Die Überlegungen von a) über b) führen zu der Annahme einer auf Ähnlichkeiten basierenden Konstruktionsfamilie mit es als Thetizitätsmarker.
When searching large electronic corpora of the German language, one finds variation at structurally critical points of the grammatical system. Two examples from the grammar of the noun phrase show that in certain cases this variation helps to ensure the function of a standard language, so that a certain amount of variation belongs to a realistic idea of a standard language. This is shown on the one hand by techniques of expanding the central adjective vocabulary and on the other hand by the choice of morphological alternatives in the area between determiners and attributive adjectives