G1: Beschreibung und Erschließung Grammatischen Wissens
Refine
Document Type
- Part of a Book (56)
- Article (34)
- Book (16)
- Conference Proceeding (6)
- Other (5)
- Review (5)
- Course Material (1)
- Part of Periodical (1)
Keywords
- Deutsch (55)
- Grammatik (45)
- Korpus <Linguistik> (35)
- Syntax (20)
- Nominalphrase (13)
- Kontrastive Linguistik (12)
- Semantik (10)
- Kontrastive Grammatik (9)
- Morphologie <Linguistik> (8)
- Sprachvariante (8)
Publicationstate
- Veröffentlichungsversion (64)
- Zweitveröffentlichung (51)
- Postprint (13)
- Erstveröffentlichung (1)
Reviewstate
- (Verlags)-Lektorat (77)
- Peer-Review (37)
Publisher
- de Gruyter (26)
- Leibniz-Institut für Deutsche Sprache (IDS) (13)
- Heidelberg University Publishing (12)
- Narr Francke Attempto (7)
- Benjamins (5)
- Buske (5)
- IDS-Verlag (4)
- Deutsche Gesellschaft für Sprachwissenschaft (3)
- De Gruyter (2)
- Erich Schmidt (2)
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.
Рассматривается проблема выбора вида подчинительной связи в именных группах, которые состоят из ауксилиара eine Art и распространенного прилагательным или причастием главного существительного (Attr. + Subst.) (eine Art wissenschaftliche Rezension). Исследуется развитие именных групп в немецкоязычных художественных текстах с XVII по XX в. Главная цель показать, что выбор синтаксической организации групп обусловлен падежной формой ауксилиара, родом и числом главного существительного
Control, typically defined as a specific referential dependency between the null-subject of a non-finite embedded clause and a co-dependent of the matrix predicate, has been subject to extensive research in the last 50 years. While there is a broad consensus that a distinction between Obligatory Control (OC), Non-Obligatory Control (NOC) and No Control (NC) is useful and necessary to cover the range of relevant empirical phenomena, there is still less agreement regarding their proper analyses. In light of this ongoing discussion, the articles collected in this volume provide a cross-linguistic perspective on central questions in the study of control, with a focus on non-canonical control phenomena. This includes cases which show NOC or NC in complement clauses or OC in adjunct clauses, cases in which the controlled subject is not in an infinitival clause, or in which there is no unique controller in OC (i.e. partial control, split control, or other types of controllers). Based on empirical generalizations from a wide range of languages, this volume provides insights into cross-linguistic variation in the interplay of different components of control such as the properties of the constituent hosting the controlled subject, the syntactic and lexical properties of the matrix predicate as well as restrictions on the controller, thereby furthering our empirical and theoretical understanding of control in grammar.
Early New High German N+N compounds are notoriously difficult to identify. This is mostly due to formally similar or identical pronominal genitive constructions. Furthermore, what looks like a noun at first glance might sometimes be an affixoid, an adjective or a verb stem. The precise identification of compounds is not only relevant for researchers concerned with word-formation. It has consequences for corpus lemmatisation, lexicography and our understanding of the noun phrase, to name just a few areas. Compound identification has been tackled before (mostly by Pavlov [1983] and NITTA [1987]), but modern corpus linguistics allows for a better assessment of all factors involved. This paper reevaluates and outlines strategies to identify Early New High German compounds, aiming to serve as an easily adaptable guideline for future research.