430 Deutsch
Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Part of a Book (10)
- Book (5)
- Article (4)
- Review (2)
- Conference Proceeding (1)
Keywords
- Kognitive Linguistik (22) (remove)
Publicationstate
- Veröffentlichungsversion (10)
- Zweitveröffentlichung (3)
- Postprint (2)
Reviewstate
- (Verlags)-Lektorat (10)
- Peer-Review (5)
Publisher
- de Gruyter (11)
- Equinox (3)
- Institut für Deutsche Sprache (2)
- Leibniz-Institut für Deutsche Sprache (IDS) (1)
- Lexical Computing CZ s.r.o. (1)
- Steiner (1)
- Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht (1)
- Winter (1)
- de Gryuter (1)
What is the subject of German linguistics? This seemingly simple question has no obvious answer. In the ZGL’s first issue, the editors required contributions to cover the whole of the German language and to be theoretically sound but application-orientated, whereas the current ZGL-homepage defines the German language of present and history in all its differentiations as its subject matter.
Looking through the fifty volumes of ZGL, three relationships can be identified as presumably enlightening the role of language, in particular the German language: language and mind; language and language use; language and culture. Though of a different systematic type, language and data should be added as an increasingly important pairing for conceptualizing language. On this basis, I also discuss the position of linguistic studies of the German language, mirrored in the ZGL-volumes, between social, cultural and natural sciences, as well as the corresponding epistemic approaches – like explaining vs. understanding.
Most linguists believe that the human language capacity has a modular structure: it consists of subcomponents whose inner organisation can be described independent of the organisation of other subcomponents. There is much less agreement on how these „modules“ are to be separated, and how their final interaction is to be described. Elaborating on an earlier proposal by Manfred Bierwisch, the present paper discusses the status of the „speech act module“ within a modular theory of the human mind, and critically evaluates Brandt’s and Rosengren’s recent theory of the illocutional structure of texts.
When collecting linguistic data using translation tasks, stimuli can be presented in written or in oral form. In doing so, there is a possibility that a systematic source of error can occur that can be traced back to the selected survey method and which can influence the results of the translation tasks. This contribution investigates whether and to what extent both of the aforementioned survey methods result in divergent results when using translation tasks. For this investigation, 128 informants provided linguistic data; each informant had to translate 25 Wenker sentences from Standard German into either East Swabian, Lechrain or West Central Bavarian dialect, as the case may be. The results show two tendencies. First, written stimuli lead to a slightly higher number of dialectal translation in segmental variables. Second, when oral stimuli are used, syntactic and lexical variables are translated significantly more often in such a manner that they diverge from the template. The results can be explained in terms of varying cognitive processing operations and the constraints of human working memory. When collecting data in the future, these tendencies should be taken into account.
Pragmalinguistische Untersuchungen, die gänzlich von kognitiven Dimensionen abstrahieren, verlieren zentrale Aspekte ihres Gegenstandsbereichs aus dem Blick. Zugleich müssen auch in kognitionslinguistischen Ansätzen die soziopragmatischen Prägungen kognitiver Prozesse theoretisch modelliert und empirisch anhand von Sprachgebrauchsdaten untersucht werden. Der Band versammelt grundlagentheoretische und empirische Studien aus verschiedenen pragmatischen Disziplinen wie Textlinguistik, Gesprächslinguistik und Diskurslinguistik zu Gegenständen, die einen gleichermaßen pragmalinguistischen und kognitionslinguistischen Zugang erfordern. Klassische Gegenstände der kognitiven Linguistik wie Metaphern oder Frames werden so in pragmatischer Perspektive als kontextgebundene Ressourcen sprachlichen Handelns greifbar.
Den traditionellen Konzeptualisierungen von EMOTION (als einem für die Erklärung der menschlichen Kognition irrelevanten Phänomenkomplex) wird ein integrativer Ansatz gegenübergestellt, demzufolge Kognition und Emotion als zwei mentale Systeme interagieren und sowohl repräsentational als auch prozedural relevante Schnittstellen haben. Emotionen werden als Kenntnis- und Bewertungssysteme, Gefühle als kognitiv erfahrbare Emotionen, definiert. Es wird anhand exemplarischer Beispiele erörtert, inwiefern kognitive Gedanken und emotionale Gefühle (entgegen der vorherrschenden Auffassung) mehr Gemeinsamkeiten als Unterschiede aufweisen.