Refine
Year of publication
- 2018 (46) (remove)
Document Type
- Article (46) (remove)
Keywords
- Alexander von Humboldt (3)
- Berlin (2)
- Korrespondenz (2)
- Mineralogie (2)
- 19. Jahrhundert (1)
- Alexander Mendelssohn (1)
- Alexander von (1)
- American Travel Diaries (1)
- Archipelisches Denken (1)
- Atmosphäre (1)
Institute
- Institut für Romanistik (46) (remove)
This study adopts a cognitive approach to the analysis of the use of the Spanish imperfecto as a construal form for the conceptualization of state of affairs in certain journalistic texts. In doing so, the main focus of the study is to investigate cognitive processes like modalization and subjectivization, which are related to the speaker’s standpoint and to his subjective, not grammatically motivated, decision to use the imperfective instead of the perfective form. By the help of the corpus programmes GlossaNet and CREA (corpus of the Real Academia Española) we analyze the imperfective use of some Spanish verbs, which are semantically perfective in nature so that the normative use would require a perfective form. In other words, we investigate how the speaker/journalist construes a reality or situation to be expressed by means of the imperfecto and show that this use of the imperfect is typical for journalistic discourse.
Immanuel Kant mentions in his Physical Geography the waterfall of the Bogotá River in South America, known today as the Salto de Tequendama, which is located near Bogotá, the capital city of Colombia. Kant claims that this was the highest waterfall in the world, which is not true. Alexander von Humboldt could not know anything about it, but he visited the Salto in 1801, just before the publication of Kant‘s Physical Geography, and went to personally measure the height of the Salto. In this paper we make a comparison of both personalities who, unknowingly, were united by their interest in the Salto de Tequendama.
Languages about Languages
(2018)
In the history of Humboldt research both brothers have been traditionally seen as representing the dichotomy between the humanities and the natural sciences. Today however, their similar approach to using and forming scientific language could be used as a starting point for conceiving a university, museum and even forum under one single Humboldtian science.
El manuscrito “Isle de Cube. Antilles en général” de Alejandro de Humboldt se puede comprender como el título para todo un archipiélago de textos. Su estructuración radicalmente abierta nos proporciona la idea de un modo de escribir y más aún de pensar de este explorador de cultura y naturaleza. Sus miniaturas textuales registran la complejidad política y social del mundo insular del Caribe de forma relacional y polilógica. En combinación con sus mapas cubanos y el Essai politique sur l’île de Cuba, este manuscrito hace de Humboldt un escritor prominente de la literatura cubana del siglo XIX.
TransArea Tangier
(2018)
Александр фон Гумбольдт
(2018)
Научные интересы А. фон Гумбольдта протираются от антропологии и доколумбовой истории Америки до геологии и географии, климатологии и теории культуры; от физики и географии растений до истории языка, вулканологии и зоологии. Будучи ученым, он пересекал дисциплинарные границы и искал новые пути познания. Гумбольдт развивал трансдисциплинарное и, в широком смысле, номадическое знание. Как настоящий кочевник, он не стремился завоевать или разрушить территорию знания. И потому неудивительно, что он стал одним из основоположников экологического и гео-экологического мышления. Гумбольдт публиковал работы на немецком и французском языках. В своих «Американских дневниках», которые были возвращены в Берлин в ноябре 2013 г., но до сих пор не изучены, Гумбольдт постоянно переходит с немецкого на французский, с латинского на испанский. Автор «Космоса» чужд всякого национализма. Гумбольдт – это номад от науки, и в этом смысле – гражданин мира. Первый теоретик глобализации кочевал от слова к слову, от науки к науке, от мира к миру. Для него постоянное перемещение было не просто основой научной программы, а образом жизни. Гумбольдт не стремился к специализации в знании, поскольку она ограничивает диалог с другими областями. Его мышление не укладывается в привычные понятия дисциплинарности или междисциплинарности. Оно взыскует нового мира, в котором человечество будет существовать в согласии и свободе.
The assumption of linguistics relativity and the definition of languages as epiphenomena are certainly known as two contradictory positions from the last century. But I will start my discussion of them in the period of their appearance and then use this as a basis to evaluate the heuristic value of these positions in present day linguistics. I will start with the definition of language as an epiphenomenon and then I will go on with the linguistic relativity.
The notion of ʽepiphenomenon’ is usually used to exclude certain aspects of a scientific object because they are considered to be deduced from others. In linguistics, restrictions of the research object were made, invoking the notion of ʽepiphenomenonʼ, which was partially done with a polemical attitude, and was always responded to polemically.
In this paper evidential and modal adverbs will be studied, such as French apparemment, évidemment, visiblement, Italian apparentemente, evidentemente, ovviamente, and Spanish aparentemente, evidentemente and visiblemente. The development of their signification will be discussed, including German adverbs like offensichtlich. In these means of expression, the functional-semantic categories evidentiality and epistemic modality seem to overlap: on the one hand, they are used if the state of affairs talked about cannot be verified, that is, if there is still a moment of insecurity concerning the transmitted information. Then adverbials with a special structure (preposition + article + nominal form of a verb) will be analysed, and we will examine if they behave in the same way.
Definit oder indefinit?
(2018)
The present paper discusses the relationship between evidentiality and (inter-) subjectivity and argues that the two semantic-functional categories need not be mutually exclusive. In the use of certain means of expression and in certain contexts, both evidentiality and (inter-) subjectivity may be conveyed simultaneously. I thereby differentiate between two meanings of intersubjectivity, namely ‘intersubjectivity1’ and ‘intersubjectivity2’. Intersubjectivity1 refers to the notion of common or general knowledge: certain means of expression are seen as being intersubjectively used when the speaker shares or assumes sharing knowledge with the interlocutor. Intersubjectivity2 is related to particular discourse functions of certain means of expression in interactional settings, paying attention to the speaker-hearer constellation.
In order to substantiate the theoretical part of the paper, I then present a qualitative analysis of Portuguese, Spanish and English examples, which are taken from the Corpus do Português, Corpus del Español and the Corpus of Contemporary American English.
La tesis de esta contribución es que las investigaciones de Alexander von Humboldt ejemplifican un ‘programa de investigación progresivo’ (Imre Lakatos 1978). Examino la propuesta de Adolf Meyer- Abich (1968) de que el método de Humboldt se deriva de un vitalismo inicial y luego desmentido por el científico. Yo propongo, sin embargo, que en realidad es el principio humboldtiano de buscar la unidad en la naturaleza el cual funciona como ‘principio regulativo’, y por consiguiente motiva al investigador a buscar evidencia empírica de relaciones sistémicas entre fenómenos y condicionamientos geográfico-climáticos. Desde este punto de vista es justamente este principio metódico el que empuja a Humboldt a atravesar grandes alturas y latitudes. La visita a Tenerife y al Teide le da una confirmación contundente de la validez de su principio. Concluyo que la influencia de su método en la creación de nuevas ciencias, tales como la biogeografía y la ecología, constituyen razones suficientes para suponer ejemplar el trabajo científico de Humboldt como ‘programa de investigación progresivo’.
Alexander von Humboldts Erläuterungen zu Öfen für die Herstellung von Keramik- und Glaserzeugnissen
(2018)
Der Aufsatz macht den Leser mit einem in der Regel wenig bekannten Aspekt aus Alexander von Humboldts Tätigkeit bekannt, seiner Beschäftigung mit den für das Brennen von Keramik und das Schmelzen von Glas genutzten Öfen. Das erfolgte in der Zeit von 1792–1797 im Zusammenhang mit seiner Tätigkeit als Bergbeamter im Auftrag des preußischen Königs in dessen Fürstentümern Ansbach und Bayreuth. In Gutachten und Berichten äußerte sich Humboldt zu Ofenkonstruktionen und Hilfsmitteln für die Hochtemperaturprozesse. Er analysierte Ursachen für das Misslingen von Bränden sowie Schmelzen und unterbreitete Vorschläge zu ihrer Verbesserung. Verschiedene konstruktive Änderungen bei Reparaturen der vorhandenen Öfen im Steingutwerk Rheinsberg sowie in der Porzellanmanufaktur Bruckberg gingen auf Humboldt zurück. Die Entscheidung zum Bau eines zweietagigen Rundofens in der Königlichen Porzellanmanufaktur Berlin wurde wahrscheinlich durch ihn beschleunigt. Seine Darstellungen werden anhand von Skizzen erläutert.