Mitteilungen der DGfS Nr. 79, Juni 2014 Inhalt 37. Jahrestagung der DGfS 4 Arbeitsgruppen für die 37. Jahrestagung der DGfS ................. 5 AG 1: Strong versus weak prosodic position: possible variation and relevance for grammar .............................. 7 AG 2: Exact repetition in grammar and discourse ............... 8 AG 3: What drives syntactic computation? Alternatives to formal features .. 9 AG 4: VO OV: Korrelationen der Kopf- Komplement- Abfolge in Grammatik und Lexikon .............................. 11 AG 5: Co- and Subordination in German and Other Languages ........ 12 AG 6: The prosody and meaning of (non-)canonical questions across languages 13 AG 7: Universal biases on phonological acquisition and processing ...... 14 AG 8: Normalität in der Sprache ....................... 15 AG 9: Varieties of Positive Polarity Items ................... 16 AG 10: Perspective- taking ........................... 17 AG 11: Big data: new opportunities and challenges in language acquisition research .................... 18 AG 12: The development of iconic gestures as resources in language acquisition 19 AG 13: Proportions and Quantities ...................... 21 AG 14: Modelling conditionality ........................ 22 36. Jahrestagung der DGfS 23 Berichte der Arbeitsgruppen der 36. Jahrestagung der DGfS ............ 23 Experimental and theoretical approaches to relativeclauses reconciled .... 24 Summary of the DGFS Workshop Demonstratives .............. 30 Clausal complementation and (non)factivity ................. 34 The Syntax and Semantics of Particles .................... 38 Categories and Categorization ......................... 41 Language in Historical Contact situations (LHC) ............... 45 Probleme der syntaktischen Kategorisierung ................. 50 Converging Evidence? ............................. 53 Sichtbare und hörbare Morphologie ...................... 58 Pejoration ................................... 61 Web Data as a Challenge for Theoretical Linguistics and Corpus Design ... 64 Grammatical categories in macro- and microcomparative linguistics ..... 67 2 Inhalt Labels and Roots ............................... 71 Protokoll der DGfS-Mitgliederversammlung am 6. März 2014 in Marburg ..... 75 Kassenbericht .................................... 84 Umstellung auf das SEPA-Basis-Lastschriftverfahren ................ 86 Bericht der Redaktion der Zeitschrift für Sprachwissenschaft ............ 87 Bericht der Sektion Computerlinguistik ....................... 89 Adressen 90 Vorstand ....................................... 90 Beirat ........................................ 90 Programmausschuss ................................. 91 Pressesprecher .................................... 91 Sektion Computerlinguistik ............................. 91 Redaktion der ZS .................................. 92 Kontaktadressen ................................... 93 3 37. Jahrestagung der DGfS vom 4. bis 6. März 2015 an der Universität Leipzig Rahmenthema: Grammatische Modellierung und sprachliche Verschiedenheit Kontakt Informationen zum Programm, Unterkunft, Anmeldung, Prof. Dr. Barbara Stiebels AG-Zeitplan, Doktorandenforum, Lehramtsinitative und Institut für Linguistik Tutorium CL finden Sie in Kürze auf der Internetseite Universität Leipzig der Konferenz. Beethovenstr. 15 04159 Leipzig Tel. +341/97-37604 Webauftritt: conference.uni-leipzig.de/dgfs2015 4 37. Jahrestagung der DGfS Arbeitsgruppen für die 37. Jahrestagung der DGfS Angenommene AGs für die DGfS 2015 in Leipzig AG 1: Renate Raffelsiefen & Marzena Zygis Strong versus weak prosodic position: possible variation and relevance for grammar AG 2: Rita Finkbeiner & Ulrike Freywald Exact repetition in grammar and discourse AG 3: Dennis Ott & Radek Šimík What drives syntactic computation? Alternatives to formal features AG 4: Balthasar Bickel , Walter Bisang , Gisbert Fanselow , Hubert Haider VO OV: Korrelationen der Kopf- Komplement- Abfolgein Grammatik und Lexikon AG 5: Ingo Reich & Augustin Speyer Co- and Subordination in German and Other Languages AG 6: Bettina Braun, Nicole Dehé, Daniela Wochner , Beste Kamali, Hubert Truckenbrodt The prosody and meaning of (non-)canonical questions across languages AG 7: Dinah Baer-Henney , Natalie Boll-Avetisyan Universal biases on phonological acquisition and processing AG 8: Bergische Universität Wuppertal), Franz d’Avis Normalität in der Sprache AG 9: Mingya Liu & Gianina Iordăchioaia Varieties of Positive Polarity Items AG 10: Stefan Hinterwimmer, Petra B. Schumacher, Hanna Weiland Perspective- taking AG 11: Christina Bergmann , Alex Cristia , Sho Tsuji Kurz-AG Big data: new opportunities and challenges in language acquisition research AG 12: Friederike Kern & Katharina Rohlfing Kurz-AG The development of iconic gestures as resources in language acquisition AG 13: Ulrich Sauerland Kurz-AG Proportions and Quantities AG 14: Eva Csipak , Ryan Bochnak Kurz-AG Modelling conditionality 5 37. Jahrestagung der DGfS Nicht angenommene AG-Vorschläge • Can pragmatics take over? – Issues at the syntax-pragmatics interface • Referential Expressions and Discourse Structure • Impairments in oral and written language production • Multiple functions of modifiers • Linguistic representations and processes in bilinguals • Mismatches between syntax and semantics • Discourse–‐related features: what they are, and what they mean 6 37. Jahrestagung der DGfS AG 1: Strong versus weak prosodic position: possible variation and relevance for grammar Renate Raffelsiefen (IDS Mannheim, FU Berlin) and Marzena Zygis (ZAS & HU Berlin) Both phoneticians and phonologists have found reason to distinguish ”strong”and ”weakpp- ositions referring to constituents of the prosodic hierarchy, including higher constituents, whose boundaries align with morphosyntactic boundaries, as well as lower constituents such as foot and syllable. Strength is commonly associated with initial positions and with stress whereas weakness is associated with non-prominent positions. Reference to strong versus weak positions has been invoked in articulatory phonetics (target overshoot, i.e. enhancement of the duration and/or magnitude of articulatory gestures, in strong positions versus target undershoot in weak position) as well as auditory phonetics (lower rate of misperception in strong positions versus higher rate in weak position). It has also been invoked to account for potential contrast, more distinctiveness being associated with strong positions (cf. the notions of positional faithfulness”and positional markedness”in Optimality Theory). Although reference to ”strong”versus ”weakpositions appears to be universally grounded in prominence and although it seems to be taken for granted that positions considered strong for the purpose of one area of phonetics or phonology implies strength for the purpose of others there is evidence for disparity. For instance, the word-initial position is associated with strong potential contrast by Beckman (1998), whereas Trubezkoy links both margin positions of words to low contrastiveness (e.g. neutralization of the voicing contrast for all consonants in word-initial position in Erza-Mordwin, Trubetzkoy 1958: 212ff). Similarly, the word-initial position is associated with target overshoot (e.g. aspiration of voiceless plosives) in English or German, but also exhibits fewer contrasts in fricatives than for instance the foot-internal position. The latter nonetheless exhibits target undershoot (flapping in American English). In view of these discrepancies, the workshop will provide a forum for phonologists and pho- neticians to discuss associations between segmental phenomena and prosodic positions from a cross-linguistic point of view, focusing on questions like: - Which prosodic positions need to be distinguished in terms of weakness versus strength to account for what sort of phenomenon (enhancement of articulatory gestures, perceptual discriminability, potential contrast). - To what extent do these phenomena overlap? - Is there evidence that weak versus strong po- sitions could be language-specific? - What are the implications for the modeling of grammar, e.g. is there a need to distinguish a phonemic level (contrast) from phonetics, the latter modeled as implementation? 7 37. Jahrestagung der DGfS AG 2: Exact repetition in grammar and discourse Rita Finkbeiner Ulrike Freywald FB 05, Deutsches Institut Institut für Germanistik Universität Mainz Universität Potsdam Jakob-Welder-Weg 18 Am Neuen Palais 10 55099 Mainz 14469 Potsdam fi[email protected] [email protected] Tel. 06131-39 25512 / Fax 06131-39 23366 Tel. 0331-977 4221 / Fax 0331-977 4245 Most linguists will agree that iteration is a pervasive phenomenon in language and an im- portant notion for linguistic analysis. Traditionally, the process of repetition is related to the domains of text and discourse, and associated with specific pragmatic effects (e.g., emphasis), while the process of reduplication is restricted to the domains of phonology and morpholo- gy, and associated with specific semantic effects (e.g., intensification). In phonological and syntactic theory, reduplication has mainly been discussed as a local copying process, while in typology, it has been described as a morphological marker of inflection or word formation. Repetition phenomena, in contrast, have been claimed to apply above word level. In interac- tional linguistics, the focus has been on functions of repetition such as marking of agreement and disagreement. In recent years, however, one has come to realize that the borderline