Multi-Word Verbs with the Verb 'Make', and Their Croatian Counterparts
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Intermediate German: a Grammar and Workbook / by 2 Anna Miell & Heiner Schenke 3 P
111 INTERMEDIATE GERMAN: 2 3 A GRAMMAR AND WORKBOOK 4 5 6 7 8 9 1011 1 2 13 4111 5 Intermediate German is designed for learners who have achieved basic 6 proficiency and wish to progress to more complex language. Its 24 units 7 present a broad range of grammatical topics, illustrated by examples which 8 serve as models for varied exercises that follow. These exercises enable 9 the student to master the relevant grammar points. 2011 1 Features include: 2 3 • authentic German, from a range of media, used throughout the book to 4 reflect German culture, life and society 5 6 • illustrations of grammar points in English as well as German 7 • checklists at the end of each unit for consolidation 8 9 • cross-referencing to other grammar units in the book 3011 • glossary of grammatical terminology 1 2 • full answer key to all exercises 3 4 Suitable for independent learners and students on taught courses, 5 Intermediate German, together with its sister volume, Basic German, forms 6 a structured course in the essentials of German. 7 8 Anna Miell is University Lecturer in German at the University of Westminster 9 and at Trinity College of Music in Greenwich and works as a language 4011 consultant in London. Heiner Schenke is Senior Lecturer of German at the 1 University of Westminster and has published a number of language books. 2 3 41111 111 Other titles available in the Grammar Workbook series are: 2 3 Basic Cantonese 4 Intermediate Cantonese 5 Basic German 6 7 Basic Italian 8111 Basic Polish 9 Intermediate Polish 1011 1 Basic Russian 2 Intermediate -
On German Verb Syntax Under Age 2
University of Pennsylvania ScholarlyCommons IRCS Technical Reports Series Institute for Research in Cognitive Science December 1994 On German Verb Syntax under Age 2 Bernhard Rohrbacher University of Pennsylvania Anne Vainikka University of Pennsylvania Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.upenn.edu/ircs_reports Rohrbacher, Bernhard and Vainikka, Anne, "On German Verb Syntax under Age 2" (1994). IRCS Technical Reports Series. 170. https://repository.upenn.edu/ircs_reports/170 University of Pennsylvania Institute for Research in Cognitive Science Technical Report No. IRCS-94-24. This paper is posted at ScholarlyCommons. https://repository.upenn.edu/ircs_reports/170 For more information, please contact [email protected]. On German Verb Syntax under Age 2 Abstract Previous research on early child German suggests that verb placement is mastered early on, at least around the age of two; this finding has provided support for the idea that the full syntactic tree is present from the earliest stage of syntactic development. We show that two German children around a year and a half of age already exhibit a clear distinction between finite and non-finite utterances in terms of verb placement and the distribution of empty subjects. Although their verbal paradigms are impoverished, these children clearly already have an inflectional projection (IP) in finite clauses. However, we argue against the idea that a full syntactic tree is available at this point; rather, the data support a reduced representation without a complementizer projection (CP). Furthermore, non-finite matrix clauses, common at this early stage, lack even the inflectional projection. Comments University of Pennsylvania Institute for Research in Cognitive Science Technical Report No. -
Separable Verbs in a Reusable Morphological Dictionary for German
Separable Verbs in a Reusable Morphological Dictionary for German Pius ten Hacken I & Stephan Bopp 2 l lnstitut far Informatik/ASW 2Lexicologie, Faculteit der Letteren Universit~it Basel, Petersgraben 51 Vrije Universiteit, De Boelelaan 1105 CH-4051 Basel (Switzerhmd) NL- 1081 HV Amsterdam (Netherlands) email: [email protected] emaih [email protected] Abstract Separable verbs are verbs with prefixes which, depending on the syntactic context, can occur as one word written together or discontinuously. They occur in languages such as German and Dutch and constitute a problem tbr NLP because they are lexemes whose lbrms cannot always be recognized by dictionary lookup on the basis of a text word. Conventional solutions take a mixed lexical and syntactic approach. In this paper, we propose the solution offered by Word Manager, consisting of string-based recognition by means of rules of types also required for periphrastic inflection and clitics. In this way, separable verbs are dealt with as part of the dolnain of reusable lexical resources. We show how this solution compares favourably with conventional approaches. 1. The Problem (2) a. Claudia auihOrtjctzt. In German there exists a large class of verbs b. Daniel versucht zu aulh6ren. which behave like aufhOren ('stop'), The problem arises in a very similar fashion illustrated in (1). in Dutch, as the Dutch translations (3) of the (1) a. Anna glaubt, dass Bernard aufhSrt. sentences in (1) show. The only difference is ('Anna believes that Bernard stops') that the infinitive in (3c) is not written b. Claudia h6rt jetzt auf. together. ('Claudia stops now PRY') (3) a. -
German Irregular Verbs Chart
GERMAN IRREGULAR VERBS CHART Infinitive Meaning Present Tense Imperfect Participle Tense (e.g. for Passive, & Perfect Tense) to… er/sie/es: ich & er/sie/es: backen bake backt backte gebacken befehlen command, order befiehlt befahl befohlen beginnen begin beginnt begann begonnen beißen bite beißt biss gebissen betrügen deceive, cheat betrügt betrog betrogen bewegen1 move bewegt bewog bewogen biegen bend, turn biegt bog (bin etc.) gebogen bieten offer, bid bietet bot geboten binden tie bindet band gebunden bitten request, ask bittet bat gebeten someone to do... blasen blow, sound bläst blies geblasen bleiben stay, remain bleibt blieb (bin etc.) geblieben braten roast brät briet gebraten brechen break bricht brach gebrochen brennen burn brennt brannte gebrannt bringen bring, take to... bringt brachte gebracht denken think denkt dachte gedacht dürfen be allowed to... darf durfte gedurft empfehlen recommend empfiehlt empfahl empfohlen erschrecken2 be frightened erschrickt erschrak (bin etc.) erschrocken essen eat3 isst aß gegessen fahren go (not on foot), fährt fuhr (bin etc.) gefahren drive fallen fall fällt fiel (bin etc.) gefallen fangen catch fängt fing gefangen finden find findet fand gefunden fliegen fly fliegt flog (bin etc.) geflogen fliehen flee, run away flieht floh (bin etc.) geflohen fließen flow fließt floss geflossen fressen eat (done by frisst fraß gefressen animals) frieren freeze, be cold friert fror (bin etc.) gefroren geben give gibt gab gegeben gedeihen flourish, prosper gedeiht gedieh (bin etc.) gediehen gehen go, walk geht ging (bin etc.) gegangen gelingen4 succeed gelingt gelang (bin etc.) gelungen gelten5 be valid, be of gilt galt gegolten worth 1 Also used as a reflexive verb, i.e. -
Interrogative Words: an Exercise in Lexical Typology
Interrogative words: an exercise in lexical typology Michael Cysouw [email protected] Bantu grammer: description and theory 3; Session on question formation in Bantu ZAS Berlin – Friday 13 Februari 2004 1 Introduction Wer, wie, was? Der, die, das! Wieso, weshalb, warum? Wer nicht fragt, bleibt dumm! (German Sesame Street) This is first report on a study of the cross-linguistic diversity of interrogative words.1 The data are only preliminary and far from complete – for most of the languages included I am not sure whether I have really found all interrogative words (the experience with German shows that it is not do easy to collect them all). Further, the sample of languages investigated (see appendix) is not representative of the world’s languages, though it presents a fair collection of genetically and areally diverse languages. I will not say too much about relative frequencies, but mainly collect cases of particular phenomena to establish guidelines for further research. (1) Research questions a. What can be asked by an interrogative word? Which kind of interrogative categories are distinguished in the world’s languages? Do we need more categories than the seven lexicalised categories in English – who, what, which, where, when, why and how? b. Can all attested question words be expressed in all languages? For example, the German interrogative word wievielte is hardly translatable into English ‘how manieth’. c. How do the the interrogative words look like? – Have all interrogative categories own lexicalised/phrasal forms, or are they homonomous with other interrogative categories? For example, English ‘how did you do it?’ and ‘how long is it?’ use the same interrogative word, but this is not universally so. -
Subject-Verb Word-Order in Spanish Interrogatives: a Quantitative Analysis of Puerto Rican Spanish1
Near-final version (February 2011): under copyright and that the publisher should be contacted for permission to re-use or reprint the material in any form Brown, Esther L. & Javier Rivas. 2011. Subject ~ Verb word-order in Spanish interrogatives: a quantitative analysis of Puerto Rican Spanish. Spanish in Context 8.1, 23–49. Subject-verb word-order in Spanish interrogatives: A quantitative analysis of Puerto Rican Spanish1 Esther L. Brown and Javier Rivas We conduct a quantitative analysis of conversational speech from native speakers of Puerto Rican Spanish to test whether optional non-inversion of subjects in wh-questions (¿qué tú piensas?) is indicative of a movement in Spanish from flexible to rigid word order (Morales 1989; Toribio 2000). We find high rates of subject expression (51%) and a strong preference for SV word order (47%) over VS (4%) in all sentence types, inline with assertions of fixed SVO word order. The usage-based examination of 882 wh-questions shows non-inversion occurs in 14% of the cases (25% of wh- questions containing an overt subject). Variable rule analysis reveals subject, verb and question type significantly constrain interrogative word order, but we find no evidence that word order is predicted by perseveration. SV word order is highest in rhetorical and quotative questions, revealing a pathway of change through which word order is becoming fixed in this variety. Keywords: word order, language change, Caribbean Spanish, interrogative constructions 1. Introduction In typological terms, Spanish is characterized as a flexible SVO language. As has been shown by López Meirama (1997: 72), SVO is the basic word order in Spanish, with the subject preceding the verb in pragmatically unmarked independent declarative clauses with two full NPs (Mallinson & Blake 1981: 125; Siewierska 1988: 8; Comrie 1989). -
The Interrogative Words of Tlingit an Informal Grammatical Study
The Interrogative Words of Tlingit An Informal Grammatical Study Seth Cable July 2006 Contents 1. Introductory Comments and Acknowledgments p. 4 2. Background Assumptions p. 5 3.The Interrogative Words of Tlingit p. 6 4. Simple Questions in Tlingit p. 6 4.1 The Pre-Predicate Generalization p. 7 4.2 The Preference for the Interrogative Word to be Initial p. 10 4.3 The Generalization that Interrogative Words are Left Peripheral p. 13 4.4 Comparison with Other Languages p. 14 5. Complex Questions and ‘Pied-Piping’ in Tlingit p. 16 6. Multiple Questions and the ‘Superiority Condition’ in Tlingit p. 23 7. Free Relatives and ‘Matching Effects’ in Tlingit p. 30 7.1 The Free Relative Construction in Tlingit p. 30 7.2 Matching Effects in Tlingit Free Relatives p. 36 8. Negative Polarity Indefinites in Tlingit p. 38 8.1 Negative Polarity Indefinites (‘NPI’s) and Interrogative Words p. 38 8.2 Tlingit Interrogative Words as Negative Polarity Indefinites p. 42 8.3 The Use of Interrogative Words in Negated Expressions p. 48 9. Tlingit Interrogative Words as Plain Existentials and Specific Indefinites p. 58 1 9.1 Tlingit Interrogative Words as Plain Existentials p. 58 9.2 Tlingit Interrogative Words as Specific Indefinites p. 62 10. Other Uses of Tlingit Interrogative Words in Non-Interrogative Sentences p. 65 10.1 Question-Based Exclamatives in Tlingit p. 65 10.2 Apparent Uses as Relative Pronouns p. 68 10.3 Concessive Free Relatives in Tlingit p. 74 10.4 Various Other Constructions Containing Waa ‘How’ or Daat ‘What’ p. -
GF Modern Greek Resource Grammar
GF Modern Greek Resource Grammar Ioanna Papadopoulou University of Gothenburg [email protected] Abstract whilst each of the syntactic parts of the sentence (subject, object, predicate) is a carrier of a certain The paper describes the Modern Greek (MG) case, a fact that allows various word order Grammar, implemented in Grammatical structures. In addition, the language presents a Framework (GF) as part of the Grammatical dynamic syllable stress, whereas its position Framework Resource Grammar Library depends and alternates according to the (RGL). GF is a special-purpose language for morphological variations. Moreover, MG is one multilingual grammar applications. The RGL 1 is a reusable library for dealing with the of the two Indo-European languages that retain a morphology and syntax of a growing number productive synthetic passive formation. In order of natural languages. It is based on the use of to realize passivization, verbs use a second set of an abstract syntax, which is common for all morphological features for each tense. languages, and different concrete syntaxes implemented in GF. Both GF itself and the 2 Grammatical Framework RGL are open-source. RGL currently covers more than 30 languages. MG is the 35th GF (Ranta, 2011) is a special purpose language that is available in the RGL. For the programming language for developing purpose of the implementation, a morphology- multilingual applications. It can be used for driven approach was used, meaning a bottom- building translation systems, multilingual web up method, starting from the formation of gadgets, natural language interfaces, dialogue words before moving to larger units systems and natural language resources. -
Types of Interrogative Sentences an Interrogative Sentence Has the Function of Trying to Get an Answer from the Listener
Types of Interrogative Sentences An interrogative sentence has the function of trying to get an answer from the listener, with the premise that the speaker is unable to make judgment on the proposition in question. Interrogative sentences can be classified from various points of view. The most basic approach to the classification of interrogative sentences is to sort out the reasons why the judgment is not attainable. Two main types are true-false questions and suppletive questions (interrogative-word questions). True-false questions are asked because whether the proposition is true or false is not known. Examples: Asu, gakkō ni ikimasu ka? ‘Are you going to school tomorrow?’; Anata wa gakusei? ‘Are you a student?’ One can answer a true-false question with a yes/no answer. The speaker asks a suppletive question because there is an unknown component in the proposition, and that the speaker is unable to make judgment. The speaker places an interrogative word in the place of this unknown component, asking the listener to replace the interrogative word with the information on the unknown component. Examples: Kyō wa nani o taberu? ‘What are we going to eat today?’; Itsu ano hito ni atta no? ‘When did you see him?” “Eating something” and “having met him” are presupposed, and the interrogative word expresses the focus of the question. To answer a suppletive question one provides the information on what the unknown component is. In addition to these two main types, there are alternative questions, which are placed in between the two main types as far as the characteristics are concerned. -
Phrasal Imperatives in English
PSYCHOLOGY AND EDUCATION (2021) 58(3): 1639-1655 ISSN: 00333077 Phrasal Imperatives in English 1Prof. Taiseer Flaiyih Hesan ; 2Teeba Khalid Shehab 1,2 University of Thi-Qar/ College of Education/ Department of English Abstract The present study has both theoretical and practical sides. Theoretically, it sheds light on phrasal imperatives (and hence PIs) as a phenomenon in English. That is, phrasal verbs are multi-word verbs that are generally composed of a verb and a particle. These verbs can be used imperatively instead of single-word verbs to form PIs. This study seeks to answer certain research questions: which form of phrasal verb can be allowed to be used as PIs? which type of phrasal verbs can be used “mostly” as PIs? in which function is the PI most frequent? It is hypothesized that certain forms of phrasal verbs can be used imperatively. Another hypothesis is that certain functions can be mostly realized by PIs. Practically speaking, this study is a corpus-based one. In this respect, corpus linguistics like Corpus of Contemporary American English (And hence COCA) can be regarded as a methodological approach since it is empirical and tends to use computers for analyzing. To fulfill the aims of this study, the researcher chooses twenty-three phrasal verbs which are used as PIs in COCA. These verbs are gathered manually through the wordlists of COCA. Using the technique of Microsoft Office Excel in the corpus analysis, it is concluded that PIs of the affirmative form are mostly used in the corpus data. As for the functions of these PIs, it seems that direct command has the highest occurrences there. -
Constructions and Result: English Phrasal Verbs As Analysed in Construction Grammar
CONSTRUCTIONS AND RESULT: ENGLISH PHRASAL VERBS AS ANALYSED IN CONSTRUCTION GRAMMAR by ANNA L. OLSON A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES Master of Arts in Linguistics, Analytical Stream We accept this thesis as conforming to the required standard ............................................................................... Dr. Emma Pavey, PhD; Thesis Supervisor ................................................................................ Dr. Sean Allison, Ph.D.; Second Reader ................................................................................ Dr. David Weber, Ph.D.; External Examiner TRINITY WESTERN UNIVERSITY September 2013 © Anna L. Olson i Abstract This thesis explores the difference between separable and non-separable transitive English phrasal verbs, focusing on finding a reason for the non-separable verbs’ lack of compatibility with the word order alternation which is present with the separable phrasal verbs. The analysis is formed from a synthesis of ideas based on the work of Bolinger (1971) and Gorlach (2004). A simplified version of Cognitive Construction Grammar is used to analyse and categorize the phrasal verb constructions. The results indicate that separable and non-separable transitive English phrasal verbs are similar but different constructions with specific syntactic reasons for the incompatibility of the word order alternation with the non-separable verbs. ii Table of Contents Abstract ........................................................................................................................................... -
Making Sense of Dutch Word Order
Making Sense of Dutch Word Order Dick Grune [email protected] Version 1.2.1 (October 10, 2013) Note: Although Dutch and Flemish are officially the same language, the explanation below does not apply as is to Flemish, which differs in details I do not know enough about. 1 Introduction Word order in a Dutch sentence is a confusing subject, of which many descrip- tions exist. The explanation given below is unconventional, but is the simplest I can come up with and still cover all the facts.1 As to word order, six types of sentences must be distinguished: main clauses start with the subject Type I.1 dependent clauses start with a conjunction Type III inverted clauses like main clauses, but start with something else Type I.2 yes-no questions Type II Wh-questions start with a question word like Who, Where, When Type I.2 commands instructions, not the more usual polite requests Type II where the last column shows the types EDG assigns to the clauses.2 Examples follow below. This list can immediately be simplified, because: 1. a command has the same word order as a main clause from which the subject has been removed; 2. a Wh- question has the same word order as an inverted clause; and 3. a yes-no question has the same word order as an inverted clause from which the \something else" has been removed. The remaining three clause types have different word orders, as can be seen from the following simple examples, which have been grouped by similarity: 1I assume some familiarity with grammatical terms, for example \subject", etc.