Open Access

We present zu-excessive structures like Otto ist zu schwer ‘Otto is too heavy’ as instantiations of comparatives that have been reflexivized. Comparatives express asymmetric relations between distinguished referents, but reflexivization identifies argument places (or reduces two argument places to one), leading to a Symmetrie relation. Reflexivization is thus in conflict with the asymmetry property of comparatives and leads to an intermediate semantic representation that is con- tradictory. Two experiments substantiate that zu-excessives share this property with privative adjective and animal-for-statue constructions that similarly give rise to contradictory semantics. The processing of any of the constructions mentioned yields a positivity in the event-related-potential signature characteristic of concep- tual reorganization; however, the observed positivity occurs earlier in the case of zu-excessives than in the other cases. We propose this difference is due to zu signalling the mandatory preparation for an ensuing repair rather than reflecting the repair Operation itself that involves manipulating the Standard of comparison, coded elsewhere in the String (if at all).

Im Rahmen eines Bedeutungsmodells mit zwei Ebenen: einer ausschließlich grammatisch determinierten Bedeutung und einer kontextuell spezifizierten konzeptuellen Interpretation wird in dem Beitrag gezeigt, daß die grammatisch determinierte Bedeutung situativer Ellipsen wie "Einen Tee." unterspezifiziert ist, was die Charakterisierung des durch sie denotierten Sachverhalts angeht. Indem allgemein gültige Kommunikationsprinzipien zugrunde gelegt werden, nach denen davon auszugehen ist, daß es sich bei derartigen Äußerungen um kommunikativ adäquate Diskursbeiträge handelt, ist auf der Ebene der kontextuell determinierten Bedeutung ein Sachverhalt rekonstruierbar. Die Rekonstruktion eines einstellungsbewerteten Sachverhalts unterliegt bestimmten konzeptuellen und kommunikativen Bedingungen. Es wird in diesem Beitrag versucht, diese Sachverhaltsrepräsentationen als Implikaturen aus der grammatisch unterspezifizierten Bedeutung, dem jeweiligen Kontext und bestimmten kommunikativen und konzeptuellen Bedingungen darzustellen.

The present paper explores the change in distribution and potential function as well as the interplay of two phenomena that occur at the internal boundaries of nominal compounds, namely linking elements and hyphenation. About 40% of present-day German compounds contain a linking element, most prominently -s- (e.g. Geburt-s-ort ‘birth place’). Numerous theories have been brought forward to explain its function, two of which are examined here: It will be shown that the linking-s tends to mark morphologically complex constituents while the assumption that it prefers marked phonological words cannot be corroborated. Linked compounds in present-day German use hyphenation, a strategy that is mostly employed with graphematically or phonologically marked constituents, at a much smaller rate than unlinked compounds. In Early New High German (ENHG, 1350-1650), when the linked type arose by reanalyzing prenominal genitive attributes as first constituents of compounds, the reverse held true: Linked compounds underwent a gradual graphematic integration from separate writing into directly connected words which was partly reversed by a century of hyphenation (1650-1750). While hyphenation also occurred with unlinked compounds, the linked compounds show a striking preference with hyphenation rates reaching a peak at around 90%. It will be argued that ENHG hyphenation had the same function it has today, namely structuring constituents that are perceived as marked: The change in spelling between ENHG and today reflects the integration of a formerly syntactic and thereby marked pattern into word-formation.