Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Article (230) (remove)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (230) (remove)
Keywords
- Adverbs (2)
- evidentiality (2)
- modal verbs (2)
- modality (2)
- pragmaticalisation (2)
- Córdoba (1)
- Geschichte (1)
- Grammatik; Syntax; Gebrauch; Universalität; einzelsprachliche Besonderheiten (1)
- Hispanistik (1)
- Humboldt (1)
- Ideologues (1)
- Kongress (1)
- Linguistik (1)
- Linguistique d´intervention (1)
- Orden de las palabras (1)
- Relativisme linguistique (1)
- Series de textos (1)
- Word order (1)
- arbitrariedad (1)
- claridad (1)
- clarity (1)
- deaf-mutes (1)
- enguas artificiales (1)
- filosofía sensualista (1)
- function (1)
- functional unit (1)
- grammar (1)
- grammatography (1)
- inversion (1)
- inversión (1)
- language and abstraction (1)
- language and thought (1)
- lengua hablada (1)
- lenguaje de signos (1)
- lenguaje y abstracción (1)
- meaning (1)
- natural order (1)
- néohumboldtiens (1)
- oppositions (1)
- orden natural (1)
- racionalista (1)
- rationalist (1)
- sensualist philosophy (1)
- sign (1)
- sign language (1)
- signo (1)
- sistema de escritura universal, concepto, signo, nomenclatura. (1)
- sordomudos (1)
- teoría lingüística (1)
- universal writing system, concept, sign, nomenclature (1)
- vision linguistique du monde (1)
Institute
Prólogo
(2008)
Neuere Diskussionen um ein sprachliches Relativitätsprinzip : Innovation und Retrospektionshorizont
(2003)
Aménagement linguistique et normalisation de la langue portugaise : l'Antidoto da Lingua Portugueza
(2003)
Sprache und Evidenz
(2003)
The idea of a linguistic worldview was clearly expressed in German national romantic thought of the early 19th century, where language was seen as the expression of the spirit of a nation. Wilhelm von Humboldt argued that every language shaped the world-view of its speakers, but he also saw a possibility to improve human knowledge in the co-action of languages.
The idea of linguistic relativity can be found in John Locke’s statement that words interpose themselves between our understandings and the truth which it would contemplate and apprehend. In the 18th century, we can find formulations that our language accustoms us to arrange our ideas in a specific way, that some languages are more suitable for certain kinds of thought, or that metaphors have significant influence on peoples’ thought. In the 20thcentury the Neo-Humboldtian school revitalised the idea of an influence of language on thought in a reductionist way. At the end of the 20th century, some authors, for example John J. Gumperz and Stephen C. Levinson, tried to rethink linguistic relativity and to prove it by empirical results.
The name Ideologues refers to a group of philosophers, psychologists, grammarians, educational theorists and medical specialists who for a short period from 1795 to 1805 determined the intellectual climate in France and sought to develop a science of ideas (idéologie). The Ideologues had a rather reserved attitude to Condillac’s (1714–1780) ideas and his sensualist sign theory. They strove for the perfection of language for the needs of thought and of scientific knowledge. The connections with the Ideologues can also be discerned in Russia. In the educational theory, Jean-Baptiste Maudru (1740–1808) was close to the Ideologues and, despite his insufficient knowledge of the Russian language, made some interesting remarks on the connection between the language and the national character. According to Maudru and in agreement with the Ideologues, different typologies of word order are not just an indication of greater or lesser closeness to the natural order. Rather, they indicate differences in national character, which manifest themselves in the specific character of individual languages. Maudru taught at the military academy in Saint Petersburg and published the first Russian grammar in France (Maudru 1802). In his grammar, he sought to link mechanically the specific features of languages and of national characters with the climatic influences. His attempt to revive the theory of climatic influences was criticized by Karamzin. Karamzin also treated the discussion of the metaphoric extension of word meanings as an absurd undertaking, which had no place in grammar.
Le centenaire de la publication du Cours de linguistique générale (1916) de Ferdinand de Saussure nous a invité à reconsidérer l’importance de cet ouvrage et le rôle de son auteur pour la fondation d’une linguistique intégrée dans une sémiologie. Il n’y a aucun doute que cet auteur fut extrêmement important pour le développement de la linguistique structurale en Europe et qu’avec son concept du signe linguistique il a fait œuvre de pionnier pour le tournant sémiologique. Mais l’accueil favorable d’une théorie dans le milieu scientifique ne s’explique pas seulement par sa qualité intérieure, mais par plusieurs conditions extérieures. Ces conditions seront analysées sur trois plans: (1) l’arrivée de la méthode des néogrammairiens à ses limites qui incitait alors à l’étude de l’unité du signifiant et du signifié; (2) la simplification et l’outrance de la pensée structurale dans le Cours, publié en 1916 par Charles Bally et Albert Sechehaye et (3) la préparation de la réception de la pensée sémiologique par plusieurs travaux parallèles.
Meaning and Function
(2022)
The use of the word functional in the most diverse theories and approaches has contributed in no small measure to the confusion in linguistics today. This article does not claim to give an overview of the different directions of functionalism in linguistics. Rather, the aim is to present what Coseriu‘s view characterised as functional in his time and to what extent his theory outlined a path that still makes sense in functional-cognitive linguistics today. This will involve an examination of Coseriu‘s difficult-to-identify concept of function. Furthermore, the article will also show that functional thinking is relevant for current grammatography.
In recent years, the category of evidentiality has also come into use for the description of Romance languages and of German. This has been contingent on a change in its interpretation from a typological category to a semantic-pragmatic category, which allows an application to languages lacking specialised morphemes for the expression of evidentiality. We consider evidentiality to be a structural dimension of grammar, the values of which are expressed by types of constructions that code the source of information which a speaker imparts. If we look at the situation in Romance languages and in German, drawing a boundary between epistemic modality and evidentiality presents problems that are difficult to solve. Adding markers of the source of the speaker’s knowledge often limits the degree of responsibility of the speaker for the content of the utterance. Evidential adverbs are a frequently used means of marking the source of the speaker’s knowledge. The evidential meaning is generalised to marking any source of knowledge, what can be regarded as a result of a process of pragmaticalisation. The use of certain means which also carry out evidential markings can even contribute to the blurring of the different kinds of evidentiality. German also has modal verbs which in conjunction with the perfect tense of the verb have a predominantly evidential use (sollen and wollen). But even here the evidential marking is not without influence on the modality of the utterance. The Romance languages, however, do not have such specialised verbs for expressing evidentiality in certain contexts. To do this, they mark evidentiality – often context bound – by verb forms such as the conditional and the imperfect tense. This article shall contrast the different architectures used in expressing evidentiality in German and in the Romance languages.
Ramón Campos fue un autor muy influenciado por la corriente sensualista del
pensamiento lingüístico francés, el que había incluso llevado a sus extremos más
radicales. Para él, la abstracción se llevaba a cabo por medio de las palabras, del
lenguaje articulado, sin intervención del pensamiento. Los nombres adjetivos son en su
origen sustantivos. La memoria y la formación de las ideas generales son efectos del
don de la palabra, y de ningún modo operaciones del pensamiento. El lenguaje de
acción no es suficiente para la operación de la abstracción. La tendencia del
pensamiento hacia la concretización hace cundir las abstracciones. Ninguna palabra
dependiente o referencial es palabra primitiva. Estas ideas se reafirman también en el
contexto de su obra De la desigualdad personal en la sociedad civil donde sirven de
base para una nueva ética de la comunicación. Estudiaré el concepto de ‘el don de la
palabra’, que en este contexto es el instrumento único de la abstracción o
descomposición, capaz de partir el pensamiento en dos facultades o potencias
diferentes, ‘imaginación’ y ‘memoria’.
En esta contribución estudiaré las denominaciones de las formas verbales espanolas, focalizando la atención en las formas del así llamado pasado y la relación de su potencial conceptual a la función de las formas respectivas. Las denominaciones de las formas verbales en las gramáticas espanolas desde el siglo XVII hasta el siglo XX se determinan por la tradición gramatical latina, pero también por posiciones teoréticas de sus autores.
Las teorías sobre el orden de las palabras del siglo XVII han encontrado mucha repercusión en las investigaciones actuales sobre la estructura de la información. No obstante, estas alusiones tienden a ser inconscientes. ¿Cómo deben evaluar los historiógrafos tales similitudes, mucho más allá de determinar su continuidad? ¿Se pueden derivar tal vez conclusiones sobre este tema complejo, que es relevante en la discusión de hoy en día, tomando en cuenta las diversas posiciones opuestas y el intenso discurso del siglo XVIII?
En esta contribución se explicará la influencia que tuvo el Curso de lingüística general de Ferdinand de Saussure en la lingüística estructural, así como el desarrollo de algunos conceptos prominentes en esta obra antes y después de Saussure. El estructuralismo es un fenómeno que se ha caracterizado por ser una corriente importante de la lingüística europea y americana del siglo XX. Se demostrará que la lingüística estructural no hace más que acentuar una actitud que ya se encontraba presente anteriormente en la lingüística y que todavía sigue estando presente. Esto también se puede ver en España donde la lingüística estructural no se puede explicar solamente como una importación tardía. También se observará, por el otro lado, que el pensamiento de Ferdinand de Saussure, considerado el fundador del estructuralismo, es menos opuesto a todo lo que se considera ajeno al estructuralismo. En esta contribución me propongo hacer una revisión de los conceptos que se consideran iniciadores del estructuralismo. La publicación de los manuscritos de la lingüística general de Saussure (2002) permite adquirir una visión más amplia y más detallada de los conceptos de las teorías lingüísticas en cuestión.
Semiotique et révolution : critique dune explication sémiotique de la continuité des Lumières
(2008)
Die Markierung der Herkunft des Sprecherwissens : ein grammatisches und pragmatisches Problem
(1998)
The term "analysis" came into use in Spanish school grammars during the first half of the nineteenth century. Following a process of simplification still evident today, the teaching of this concept in Spain distinguished between logical analysis and grammatical analysis, i.e. the separation or the division of sentences into clauses and of clauses into their immediate constituents and, on the other hand, the study of the parts of speech. A close perusal of various grammars, however, reveals that analysis is a concept used with different meanings, which minimises the distinction between logic and grammar. The term "analysis" includes elements of scholastic grammar and also aspects of the general grammar of the Port Royal School, which was introduced in Spain rather late, as well as ideological features associated with the impact of French ideas in Spain in the early nineteenth century. This paper shall explore the different concepts of "analysis" in Elementos de gramática c astellana by Juan Manuel Calleja, Análisis lógica y gramatical de la lengua espanola by Juan Calderón and Gramática de la lengua castellana destinada al uso de los americanos by Andrés Bello.
In recent years the category of evidentiality has come into use also for the description of Romance languages. This has been contingent on a change in its interpretation from a typological category to a semantic-pragmatic category, which allows an application to languages lacking specialised morphemes for the expression of evidentiality. In the following we will first describe the theoretical framework in which we use the category of evidentiality for the description of Romance languages. A key question to be elucidated here will be the determination of evidentiality as a deictic phenomenon. This will also be the basis for discussing the distinction between evidentiality and epistemic modality.
It has often been pointed out that there is some overlap between epistemic modality and evidentiality (Chafe & Nichols 1986, Cornillie 2007, De Haan 1999, Dendale & Tasmowski 2001, Plungian 2001, Squartini 2004). In this paper I would like to offer several reflections about the necessity of drawing a boundary between modality and evidentiality. Starting from the typological category of evidentiality - extended here for use in pragmatic studies - I will then explore demarcation problems in Romance languages, which lack grammaticalized forms for expressing evidentiality. The underlying premise of this paper is that evidentiality as marker of the origin of the speaker's knowledge stands in relation to the speaker's pragmatic stance. Because the perspective of the speaker is thus incorporated into the utterance, it seems appropriate to analyse the applicability of the deictic category. Finally, under the aspect of deixis, I shall attempt a demarcation between evidentiality and modality.