DOCSLIB.ORG

UNIVERSITY of CALIFORNIA Los Angeles a Contrastive Analysis of the German Particles and : Underlying Meaning and Usage in Germa

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
UNIVERSITY of CALIFORNIA Los Angeles a Contrastive Analysis of the German Particles and : Underlying Meaning and Usage in Germa UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA Los Angeles A Contrastive Analysis of the German Particles and : Underlying Meaning and Usage in German Parliamentary Debate A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree Doctor of Philosophy in Germanic Languages by Patricia Ann Wiley 2018 © Copyright by Patricia Ann Wiley 2018 ABSTRACT OF THE DISSERTATION A Contrastive Analysis of the German Particles and : Underlying Meaning and Usage in German Parliamentary Debate by Patricia Ann Wiley Doctor of Philosophy in Germanic Languages University of California, Los Angeles, 2018 Professor Robert S. Kirsner, Co-Chair Professor Olga Tsuneko Yokoyama, Co-Chair This dissertation critically compares the two German focus particles and . It has been repeatedly noted in the relevant literature that the two display an intriguing yet challenging near-synonymy. However, factors motivating this relationship have not been sufficiently explained to date. This study argues that the particles’ ostensible partial overlap is systematic and non-trivial in nature and that it can be explained by positing two distinct speaker motivations for uttering each particle to mark a constituent in a sentence: While the particle marks a constituent as conform-to-expectation, marks a constituent as counter-to- ii expectation. Each marking is prompted by the discourse situation: If there is (extra)linguistic evidence that the interlocutor is inclined to select the same constituent as the speaker for completing a sentence, then is the appropriate marker. Alternatively, if no contrary evidence exists, may still be the appropriate marker. In the absense of favorable evidence, the speaker relies on assumptions about human communicative strategies and biases for arriving at the constituent choice matching the speaker’s and may still be prompted to utter . Conversely, the speaker utters to mark a constituent as counter-to-expectation when there is (extra)linguistic evidence that a different constituent is more likely to be selected, or has been selected. Alternatively, if at least no (extra)linguistic evidence exists that the identical constituent is selected, assumptions about human communicative strategies and biases for arriving at a different constituent choice as the speaker’s prompt the use of . The hypothesis is supported by two analyses: a minimal pair analysis employing substitution, elimination, and continuation tests as well as a synchronic, large-scale corpus-based analysis of syntactico-semantic features that frequently occur as the particles’ constituents. The former is employed to do away with compartmentalized interpretation suggestions for the particles, contaminated by adjacent elements, and suggests the underlying meanings of the particles to interact with said elements in generating the interpretations. The latter analysis presents a selection of syntactico-semantic features with which each particle frequently occurs in natural language and offers new insights on their functions based on interactions with and . iii The dissertation of Patricia Ann Wiley is approved. John A. McCumber Christopher M. Stevens Robert S. Kirsner, Committee Co-Chair Olga Tsuneko Yokoyama, Committee Co-Chair University of California, Los Angeles 2018 iv 1.1. Object of Inquiry and Goal ............................................................................................................. 1 1.2. Hypothesis ......................................................................................................................................... 2 1.3. Description of Study ..................................................................................................................... 11 1.4. Outline of Dissertation Structure ............................................................................................... 12 2.1. Historical Sketch: The Evolving Status of Particles ................................................................ 16 2.2. Phases and Foci of Particle Research ........................................................................................ 17 2.3. What are Particles? ........................................................................................................................ 20 2.4. Extant Particle Classifications .................................................................................................... 24 2.4.1. Modal Particles .................................................................................................................. 25 2.4.2. Focus Particles ................................................................................................................... 37 2.4.3. Additional Classifications ............................................................................................... 47 2.4.4. Classificatory Challenges and ‘Polyfunctional’ Particles ......................................... 50 2.5. The Relationship of and in Particle Scholarship ............................................. 53 2.5.1. Discussion of Altmann .................................................................................................... 59 2.5.2. Discussion of König ......................................................................................................... 70 2.6. Summary ......................................................................................................................................... 74 4.1. Suggested Interpretation 1: Emphasis .................................................................................... 102 4.2. Suggested Interpretation 2: Weakening Negation ................................................................ 128 4.3. Suggested Interpretation 3: Attenuating Criticism .............................................................. 136 4.4. Suggested Interpretation 4: Expressing Annoyance ............................................................ 145 4.5. Suggested Interpretation 5: Expressing Resignation ........................................................... 157 4.6. Suggested Interpretation 6: Confirmation/Summary .......................................................... 164 4.7. A Proposal for Polyfunctional ......................................................................................... 167 4.8. Summary ....................................................................................................................................... 169 5.1. Data Preparation .......................................................................................................................... 174 5.1.1. Corpus Specifications and Selection .......................................................................... 174 5.1.2. Data Extraction and Tagging ........................................................................................ 179 5.2. Particle Co-occurrence with Negation and Adversative Constructions ........................... 193 5.2.1. Forms and Functions of Negation in German........................................................... 193 v 5.2.2. Adversative Constructions in German ....................................................................... 196 5.2.3. Corpus Data Findings .................................................................................................... 202 5.2.4. Qualitative Analysis ....................................................................................................... 203 5.2.5. Summary ........................................................................................................................... 222 5.3. Particle Co-occurrence with Causal Markers ......................................................................... 226 5.3.1. Forms and Functions of Causal Markers in German ............................................... 227 5.3.2. Corpus Data Findings .................................................................................................... 235 5.3.3. Qualitative Analyses ....................................................................................................... 238 5.3.4. Summary ........................................................................................................................... 264 5.4. Particle Co-occurrence with Temporal and Spatial Expressions ....................................... 269 5.4.1. Forms and Functions of Temporal and Spatial Expressions in German ............ 270 5.4.2. Corpus Data Findings .................................................................................................... 273 5.4.3. Qualitative Analyses ....................................................................................................... 274 5.4.4. Summary ........................................................................................................................... 292 5.5. (Non-)Dialect-geographical Particle Distribution .................................................................. 294 7.1. List of Tokens and Texts of the Cosmas II PP Corpus by Year ......................................... 313 7.2. List of and Occurrences in Cosmas II PP Corpus by Year ........................... 314 7.3. German & [Language] Particle Research: Selected Works ................................................... 315 7.4. Excerpts from Plenary Debate - + and Adversative Constructions ............... 316 7.5. Excerpts from Plenary Debate - + and Adversative Constructions ........... 318 7.6. List of + Co-occurrences .........................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Modal Particles Ja and Doch and Their Interaction with Discourse
    The modal particles ja and doch and their interaction with dis- course structure: Corpus and experimental evidence1 Sophia Döring & Sophie Repp Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin September 2016 To appear in S. Featherston, R. Hörnig, S. von Wietersheim & S. Winkler (eds.), Information Structure and Semantic Processing. Introduction German modal particles have been in the centre of linguistic research for several years, the main focus lying on their semantic and pragmatic properties (e.g. Thurmair 1989; Lindner 1991; Jacobs 1991; Wal- tereit 2001; Karagjosova 2004; Zimmermann 2004, 2012; Gutzmann 2009; Egg 2013; Repp 2013; Ro- jas-Esponda 2014). Modal particles are usually thought to operate at the semantics-pragmatics interface. The meaning contributions that they have been claimed to make, roughly fall into three types. The first is a modification of the sentence type or the illocution(ary operator) of the utterance they occur in (e.g. Lindner 1991; Jacobs 1991; Waltereit 2001; Karagjosova 2004). For instance, in an assertion a particle may indicate that the speaker is uncertain about committing to the proposition that is asserted, i.e. the particle signals that the speaker modifies or cancels a felicity condition of the speech act assertion. The second is that modal particles relate the proposition they scope over to another proposition in the com- mon ground CG (e.g. Karagjosova 2004; Egg 2013; Repp 2013). The other proposition can be a propo- sition that was at issue in the previous utterance, a felicity condition of the previous utterance, or it can be a proposition that was entailed or implicated by earlier discourse.
    [Show full text]
  • The Intensifying Function of Modal Particles and Modal Elements in a Cross-Linguistic Perspective
    RASPRAVE. Časopis Instituta za hrvatski jezik i jezikoslovlje 41/1 (2015.) UDK 811.112.2’367.63:811.163.42’367.63 811.112.2’367.63:811.111’367.63 Izvorni znanstveni rad Rukopis primljen 12. III. 2015. Prihvaćen za tisak 25. V. 2015. Mia Batinić Marijana Kresić Odjel za lingvistiku Sveučilišta u Zadru Anita Pavić Pintarić Odjel za germanistiku Sveučilišta u Zadru Mihovila Pavlinovića 1, HR-23000 Zadar [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] THe inTenSifying funcTiOn Of MOdAl particleS And MOdAl eleMenTS in A cROSS-linguiSTic PeRSPecTiVe The aim of this paper is to analyze the intensifying function of german mo- dal particles and equivalent modal expressions in croatian and english. Our hypothesis is that some modal particles in german and their functional equi- valents in croatian and english can express different degrees of intensity and types of intensification. The presented study comprises two parts. first, the use of intensifying modal particles by a group of speakers of l1 croatian and l2 german/english is investigated. On the basis of the results obtained, and by means of a previously conducted corpus analysis (cf. Kresić and Ba- tinić 2014), an intensification scale with respect to the inventory of german modal particles and corresponding particles in croatian as well as equivalent english expressions is suggested. Some german and croatian modal partic- les and equivalent modal elements in english can be classified on the upper and partially on the lower part of the proposed intensification scale when compared to the norm, i.e. an utterance unmarked by a modal particle.
    [Show full text]
  • German Modal Particles in the Ip-Domain
    Rivista di Grammatica Generativa, 32 – 2007, 3-37 GERMAN MODAL PARTICLES IN THE IP-DOMAIN Marco Coniglio 1. Introduction * German modal particles (MPs) are a group of about twenty words, 1 which are mainly used in spoken language. They have long been neglected by linguistic research, but have recently become an important field of study for many scholars interested in spoken-language phenomena. Their function is to express the speaker’s mental attitude toward or belief about what he or she is saying, i.e. they usually add the speaker’s subjective point of view to the basic meaning conveyed by the utterance. This group of words has mainly been analysed from a narrow perspective, i.e. only from a semantic and pragmatic one. No deep investigation has been made to capture their syntactic behaviour and most scholars limit themselves to the generic and vague statement that these particles can only occur in the Mittelfeld (middle * The present work is a shortened version of some chapters of my M.A. thesis, which was presented at the seminario di ricerca in sintassi avanzata held in Venice on January 30 th 2006. Some parts of sections 2 to 7 have also been presented at the Zweite Tagung Deutsche Sprachwissenschaft in Italien , held in Rome on February 9 th -11 th 2006) and have appeared in the Proceedings (Coniglio 2007). This work has circulated as “German Modal Particles in the Functional Structure of IP” in University of Venice, Working Papers in Linguistics 16. I would like to thank Anna Cardinaletti for her helpful comments and suggestions.
    [Show full text]
  • Inferential Processes in English and the Question Whether English Has Modal Particles
    Open Linguistics 2018; 4: 509–535 Research Article Kerstin Fischer, Maiken Heide Inferential Processes in English and the Question whether English has Modal Particles https://doi.org/10.1515/opli-2018-0025 Received February 9, 2018; accepted July 30, 2018 Abstract: In this paper, we ask whether English pragmatic markers may evoke similar inferential processes in discourse as German modal particles, studying alright/all right, already and then in more detail. Moreover, we investigate whether specific formal features are associated with these uses and thus whether there is any evidence for a productive modal particle category that can serve as a guideline for the creation and interpretation of modal particle uses of English pragmatic markers. Our analysis shows that even though evidence for a schematic modal particle construction is not conclusive, modal particle uses of pragmatic markers may be potentially widespread in English, and the inferential processes involved may be similar across languages. Keywords: modal particles; pragmatic markers; construction grammar 1 Introduction Various suggestions have been made in the literature concerning the equivalents of modal particles in English, and more recently, it has been suggested that English may be developing a modal particle category itself (e.g. Haselow 2013). Indeed, it seems strange that modal particles should play such an important role in some languages and not at all in English, especially if viewed from the perspective of the inferences made in interaction. That is, if modal particles
    [Show full text]
  • Modal Particles and Sentence Type Restrictions: a Construction Grammar
    a journal of Alm, Maria, et al. 2018. Modal particles and sentence type restrictions: general linguistics Glossa A construction grammar perspective. Glossa: a journal of general linguistics 3(1): 133. 1–32, DOI: https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.702 RESEARCH Modal particles and sentence type restrictions: A construction grammar perspective Maria Alm1, Janina Behr2 and Kerstin Fischer1 1 Department of Design and Communication, SDU, Alsion 2, DK-6400 Sonderborg, DK 2 Leibniz School of Education, Leibniz University Hannover, Lange Laube 32, DE-30159 Hannover, DE Corresponding author: Maria Alm ([email protected]) The problem addressed in this study is the sentence type restrictions of modal particles. In the literature on modal particles, it is often noted that these items cannot occur freely in all kinds of sentence types, but are restricted to certain grammatical host structures. In this article, we first discuss previous work on the semantic, formal and functional factors that determine the usage of modal particles in different grammatical configurations. The results of this discussion show that a fine-grained representation on several different levels of both modal particles and their grammatical environments is necessary to account for the usage restrictions, which is why we turn to a construction grammatical description. In particular, we suggest that the sentence type restrictions of modal particles are the result of a complex interaction between the individual modal particle on the one hand and specific grammatical constructions on the other hand. In this paper, we focus on constructions of the kind encoding particular speech act orientations, namely sentence type constructions. We explore this interaction from a construction grammatical perspective.
    [Show full text]
  • German Grammar Articles Table
    German Grammar Articles Table Is Tedd fornicate when Franky swivelling railingly? Douglis plucks his prefigurations promised saucily, but powerless Elwood never faxes so pronto. Traumatic and unassisted See hydrogenized his gatecrasher retrogrades jewel cross-legged. And the gender is it is important to get if available in german grammar table for each noun is spoken among the german article, we have to tell you to In German there's a lawn more to determining which article to crank than just. German Grammar Indefinite articles Vistawide. And crash the nouns with both definite article in the key below as first. German Grammar Songs Accusative and Dative Prepositions. Experienced German teachers prepared easy articles and simple conversations in German for. German grammar Nouns Verbs Articles Adjectives Pronouns Adverbial phrases Conjugation Sentence structure Declension Modal particles v t e German articles are used similarly to the English articles a crawl the film they are declined. Why by a fresh male a fit female exit a window neutral in German Though these might. Because as these might be already discovered German grammar is. General sites Helpful articles about teaching grammar Animated German Grammar Tutorials. The German definite article d- with growing its forms is getting essential tool. A new wrath of making chart German is easy. German Nominative and Accusative cases audio. How To our Understand The Frustrating Adjective Italki. Contracted Preposition-Determiner Forms in German Tesis. German language Kumarika. German Definite Articles Der Die Das Everything may Need. To give table above certain adjectival pronouns also talking like the background article der. You dig insert a 'k-' in front seven any voyage of 'ein-' in the constant of the against to.
    [Show full text]
  • Montague Grammatical Analysis of Japanese Case Particles
    Montague Grammatical Analysis of Japanese Case Particles Mitsuhiro Okada and Kazue Watanabe Keio University Sophia University 1 Introduction The Montague Grammar for English and other Indo-European languages in the literature is based on the subject-predicate relation, which has been the tradition since Aristotle in the Western language analysis. In this sense, for example, an object and a transitive verb are part of a verb phrase, that is, of a predicate, and the types of a transitive verb and of an object are assigned after the type of predicate (verb phrase) is fixed. When we try to construct categorial grammar and denotational semantics following this tradition, we meet the following deficiencies; • The type structure for transitive verbs and objects, hence their denota- tions, becomes very complicated. For example, the type for transitive verbs is; ((e t) —+ t) (e -4 t) • In order to get an appropriate type for a sentence within the ordinary categorial grammar, we first concatenate a transitive verb with an object and then a subject with the result of the first concatenation. Hence, the resulting grammar becomes very much word-order sensitive. It is easily seen that this kind of operation is not suitable for languages which have word-order flexibility like Japanese, where the following sentences are equivalent in meaning "I ate a cake."; (1) a. Watashi ga cake wo tabeta. I NOM cake ACC ate b. Cake wo watashi ga tabeta. cake ACC I NOM ate We employ the following notational convention in this paper. To each ex- ample sentence of Japanese, we append a gloss which shows the corresponding English expression to each Japanese word and an English translation.
    [Show full text]
  • Basic German: a Grammar and Workbook
    BASIC GERMAN: A GRAMMAR AND WORKBOOK Basic German: A Grammar and Workbook comprises an accessible reference grammar and related exercises in a single volume. It introduces German people and culture through the medium of the language used today, covering the core material which students would expect to encounter in their first years of learning German. Each of the 28 units presents one or more related grammar topics, illustrated by examples which serve as models for the exercises that follow. These wide-ranging and varied exercises enable the student to master each grammar point thoroughly. Basic German is suitable for independent study and for class use. Features include: • Clear grammatical explanations with examples in both English and German • Authentic language samples from a range of media • Checklists at the end of each Unit to reinforce key points • Cross-referencing to other grammar chapters • Full exercise answer key • Glossary of grammatical terms Basic German is the ideal reference and practice book for beginners but also for students with some knowledge of the language. Heiner Schenke is Senior Lecturer in German at the University of Westminster and Karen Seago is Course Leader for Applied Translation at the London Metropolitan University. Other titles available in the Grammar Workbooks series are: Basic Cantonese Intermediate Cantonese Basic Chinese Intermediate Chinese Intermediate German Basic Polish Intermediate Polish Basic Russian Intermediate Russian Basic Welsh Intermediate Welsh Titles of related interest published
    [Show full text]
  • D. Using Modal Particles
    Center for Advanced Language Proficiency Education and Research - The Pennsylvania State University German Modal Particles by Nina Vyatkina and Karen E. Johnson D. Using Modal Particles Handout 2: Using Modal Particles Combinations Below are some examples of frequently used modal particle combinations; in particular, those with other uninflected word classes, such as other particles or adverbs. These modal particle combinations are typically conventionalized or idiomatic and prevalent in conversational German. For each modal particle combination below, a brief explanation is given followed by concordance lines that illustrate appropriate usage. NOTE: The word order in these combinations may not be reversed. ja mal The ja mal modal particle combination is used for pointing out shared knowledge between speaker and listener (ja) while at the same time softening a suggestion/command (mal). ja auch The modal particle ja points out shared knowledge between speaker and listener and the logical particle auch ties the sentence to the preceding context. The combination ja auch implies that there is nothing surprising about the facts mentioned in the preceding context. auch mal The logical particle auch ties the sentence to the preceding context, and the modal particle mal makes an expressed intention less determined. © CALPER Publications 2007 Center for Advanced Language Proficiency Education and Research - The Pennsylvania State University German Modal Particles by Nina Vyatkina and Karen E. Johnson NOTE: If the three particles are used in one combination, they follow the order ja auch mal (line 9). doch mal The doch mal modal particle combination is used for softening commands and an expression of anticipated objection on part of the listener.
    [Show full text]
  • A Statistical, Grammar-Based Approach to Microplanning
    A Statistical, Grammar-Based Approach to Microplanning Claire Gardent∗ CNRS and Universit´ede Lorraine Laura Perez-Beltrachini∗∗ CNRS and Universit´ede Lorraine Although there has been much work in recent years on data-driven natural language generation, little attention has been paid to the fine-grained interactions that arise during microplanning between aggregation, surface realization, and sentence segmentation. In this article, we propose a hybrid symbolic/statistical approach to jointly model the constraints regulating these inter- actions. Our approach integrates a small handwritten grammar, a statistical hypertagger, and a surface realization algorithm. It is applied to the verbalization of knowledge base queries and tested on 13 knowledge bases to demonstrate domain independence. We evaluate our approach in several ways. A quantitative analysis shows that the hybrid approach outperforms a purely symbolic approach in terms of both speed and coverage. Results from a human study indicate that users find the output of this hybrid statistic/symbolic system more fluent than both a template-based and a purely symbolic grammar-based approach. Finally, we illustrate by means of examples that our approach can account for various factors impacting aggregation, sentence segmentation, and surface realization. 1. Introduction When generating a text, many choices must be made. The content to be expressed must be selected (content selection) and structured (document planning). Content must be distributed into sentences (sentence segmentation). Words (lexicalization) and syntac- tic structures (surface realization) must be chosen. Appropriate referring expressions must be identified to describe entities (referring expression generation). Coordinated and elliptical constructs may be exploited to omit repeated information (Aggregation).
    [Show full text]
  • Towards a Syntactically Motivated Analysis of Modifiers in German
    Tagset Annotation Experiment Parsing Experiments Towards a syntactically motivated analysis of modifiers in German Ines Rehbein & Hagen Hirschmann KONVENS 2014 October 8, 2014 Tagset Annotation Experiment Parsing Experiments Modifying parts of speech (POS) in the Stuttgart- T¨ubingenTagset (STTS) Relative frequencies of modifying POS in the TIGER corpus Tagset Annotation Experiment Parsing Experiments Modifying parts of speech (POS) in the Stuttgart- T¨ubingenTagset (STTS) Closed classes (e.g. nicht for PTKNEG { negation), relatively infrequent, relatively homogeneous syntax per class z }| { Relative frequencies of modifying POS in the TIGER corpus Tagset Annotation Experiment Parsing Experiments Modifying parts of speech (POS) in the Stuttgart- T¨ubingenTagset (STTS) Closed classes (e.g. nicht for PTKNEG { negation), relatively infrequent, relatively homogeneous syntax per class z }| { prenominal adjectives, fixed syntactic position, easy to parse Relative frequencies of modifying POS in the TIGER corpus Tagset Annotation Experiment Parsing Experiments Modifying parts of speech (POS) in the Stuttgart- T¨ubingenTagset (STTS) Closed classes (e.g. nicht for PTKNEG { negation), relatively infrequent, relatively homogeneous syntax per class z }| { very heterogeneous, open, residual class, hard to parse prenominal adjectives, fixed syntactic position, easy to parse Relative frequencies of modifying POS in the TIGER corpus • Syntactic underspecification (heterogeneity) of many single word modifiers in parser input data • Parsing difficulties: No clues
    [Show full text]
  • The Copula in Arabic: Description and Analysis
    The Copula in Arabic: Description and Analysis Ahmad S. Alotaibi A thesis submitted for the degree of PhD in Linguistics Department of Language and Linguistics University of Essex April 2017 i Dedication To the memory of my father, Samir Alotaibi (1939-1991) (may Allah have mercy on his soul) ii Acknowledgement First and foremost, I have to praise Allah for giving me the opportunity to study here at Essex University and for giving me the strength to accomplish this thesis. My thanks go to my supervisors: Prof Bob Borsley and Dr Doug Arnold for their help and guidance in both academic and non-academic matters. In fact, without them this thesis would not have been completed as it looks now. I would also like to thank my Supervisory Board chairs: Dr Philip Hofmeister, Dr Vineeta Chand and Dr Wyn Johnson for their kindness and advice. Thanks also go to the examiners of my thesis, Prof Louisa Sadler and Prof Ronnie Cann. I am essentially thankful for Prof Turki Alotaibi, Prof Solaiman Aloyuni, Dr Ibrahim Allahim and Dr Solaiman Alzumea for checking part of this thesis’ data. I will never forget to acknowledge the encouragement and support that my family and friends offered to me. I may forget to thank some people who contributed directly or indirectly in this thesis, so I deeply thank everyone who has helped me by any means. iii Abstract This thesis provides a description and analysis of the copula in Arabic. More precisely, it concerns the copula in Modern Standard Arabic (MSA). First, the thesis describes the copula syntactically.
    [Show full text]