(事实)是…/(Die) Tatsache ist…英语和德语的聚焦结构相似,但受到不同的限制

IF 1.6 2区 文学 N/A LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS International Journal of Corpus Linguistics Pub Date : 2022-01-21 DOI:10.1075/ijcl.17073.hun
M. Hundt, R. Oppliger
{"title":"(事实)是…/(Die) Tatsache ist…英语和德语的聚焦结构相似,但受到不同的限制","authors":"M. Hundt, R. Oppliger","doi":"10.1075/ijcl.17073.hun","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n\n N-is/ist constructions are elements in the left periphery of English/German sentences that have developed pragmatic meaning: they can be used as discourse markers with various functions, depending on the nominal element that is used in the construction. We use evidence from parallel and comparable corpora of English and German to investigate variable article use in these focaliser constructions and model factors that may play a role in article omission/retention (such as modification, choice of head noun, degree of syntactic integration of the focaliser). Our evidence shows that article use largely depends on the lexical head in German but is constrained by different factors in English (notably modification). We interpret our results against the backdrop of construction grammar, arguing that article omission plays a different role in the two languages. From a contrastive point of view, formal syntactic separation in English is easier to achieve than in German and thus facilitates use of English N-is constructions as focalisers.","PeriodicalId":46843,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Corpus Linguistics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"(The) fact is … /(Die) Tatsache ist … focaliser constructions in English and German are similar but subject to different constraints\",\"authors\":\"M. Hundt, R. Oppliger\",\"doi\":\"10.1075/ijcl.17073.hun\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n\\n N-is/ist constructions are elements in the left periphery of English/German sentences that have developed pragmatic meaning: they can be used as discourse markers with various functions, depending on the nominal element that is used in the construction. We use evidence from parallel and comparable corpora of English and German to investigate variable article use in these focaliser constructions and model factors that may play a role in article omission/retention (such as modification, choice of head noun, degree of syntactic integration of the focaliser). Our evidence shows that article use largely depends on the lexical head in German but is constrained by different factors in English (notably modification). We interpret our results against the backdrop of construction grammar, arguing that article omission plays a different role in the two languages. From a contrastive point of view, formal syntactic separation in English is easier to achieve than in German and thus facilitates use of English N-is constructions as focalisers.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46843,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Corpus Linguistics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Corpus Linguistics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.17073.hun\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"N/A\",\"JCRName\":\"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Corpus Linguistics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.17073.hun","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"N/A","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

N-is/ist结构是英语/德语句子左边缘的一些元素,它们已经发展出了语用意义:根据结构中使用的名词性元素,它们可以用作具有各种功能的话语标记。我们使用来自平行和可比较的英语和德语语料库的证据来研究这些聚焦词结构中的可变冠词使用,以及可能在冠词省略/保留中发挥作用的模型因素(如修饰、头名词的选择、聚焦词的句法整合程度)。我们的证据表明,德语中冠词的使用在很大程度上取决于词头,但在英语中受到不同因素的制约(尤其是修饰)。我们在结构语法的背景下解释我们的结果,认为冠词省略在两种语言中扮演着不同的角色。从对比的角度来看,英语中的形式句法分离比德语中更容易实现,因此有助于将英语的N-is结构用作焦点词。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
(The) fact is … /(Die) Tatsache ist … focaliser constructions in English and German are similar but subject to different constraints
N-is/ist constructions are elements in the left periphery of English/German sentences that have developed pragmatic meaning: they can be used as discourse markers with various functions, depending on the nominal element that is used in the construction. We use evidence from parallel and comparable corpora of English and German to investigate variable article use in these focaliser constructions and model factors that may play a role in article omission/retention (such as modification, choice of head noun, degree of syntactic integration of the focaliser). Our evidence shows that article use largely depends on the lexical head in German but is constrained by different factors in English (notably modification). We interpret our results against the backdrop of construction grammar, arguing that article omission plays a different role in the two languages. From a contrastive point of view, formal syntactic separation in English is easier to achieve than in German and thus facilitates use of English N-is constructions as focalisers.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
43
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Corpus Linguistics (IJCL) publishes original research covering methodological, applied and theoretical work in any area of corpus linguistics. Through its focus on empirical language research, IJCL provides a forum for the presentation of new findings and innovative approaches in any area of linguistics (e.g. lexicology, grammar, discourse analysis, stylistics, sociolinguistics, morphology, contrastive linguistics), applied linguistics (e.g. language teaching, forensic linguistics), and translation studies. Based on its interest in corpus methodology, IJCL also invites contributions on the interface between corpus and computational linguistics.
期刊最新文献
Review of Durrant (2023): Corpus linguistics for writing development Assessing the potential of LLM-assisted annotation for corpus-based pragmatics and discourse analysis Case and agreement variation in contact A user-friendly corpus tool for disciplinary data-driven learning Review of Flach & Hilpert (2022): Broadening the spectrum of corpus linguistics: New approaches to variability and change
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1