Korpuslinguistik
Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Part of a Book (200)
- Conference Proceeding (161)
- Article (105)
- Book (34)
- Part of Periodical (10)
- Other (9)
- Working Paper (7)
- Review (4)
- Doctoral Thesis (3)
- Preprint (3)
Language
- German (274)
- English (265)
- Multiple languages (1)
Keywords
- Korpus <Linguistik> (457)
- Deutsch (165)
- Gesprochene Sprache (64)
- Annotation (56)
- Forschungsdaten (36)
- Computerlinguistik (33)
- Korpuslinguistik (28)
- corpus linguistics (27)
- Deutsches Referenzkorpus (DeReKo) (25)
- Grammatik (25)
Publicationstate
- Veröffentlichungsversion (322)
- Zweitveröffentlichung (142)
- Postprint (23)
- Erstveröffentlichung (1)
Reviewstate
- (Verlags)-Lektorat (237)
- Peer-Review (202)
- Peer-review (5)
- Qualifikationsarbeit (Dissertation, Habilitationsschrift) (5)
- Zweitveröffentlichung (3)
- Abschlussarbeit (Bachelor, Master, Diplom, Magister) (Bachelor, Master, Diss.) (2)
- Verlags-Lektorat (2)
- Peer-reviewed (1)
- Review-Status-unbekannt (1)
- Verlagslektorat (1)
Publisher
- de Gruyter (81)
- Institut für Deutsche Sprache (58)
- Narr (33)
- European Language Resources Association (ELRA) (25)
- European Language Resources Association (24)
- Leibniz-Institut für Deutsche Sprache (IDS) (20)
- Narr Francke Attempto (15)
- Leibniz-Institut für Deutsche Sprache (11)
- Linköping University Electronic Press (10)
- CLARIN (8)
The relative order of dative and accusative objects in older German is less free than it is today. The reason for this could be that speakers of the direct predecessor of Old High German organized the referents according to the Thematic Hierarchy. If one applies a Case Hierarchy Nom>Acc>Dat to this, the order Nom - Dat - Acc falls out. It becomes apparent that the status of the Thematic Hierarchy is not a factor governing underlying word order, but a factor inducing scrambling. Arguments from binding theory, whose validity is discussed, indicate that the underlying order is ‘accusative before dative’