Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Article (233)
- Part of a Book (51)
- Review (31)
- Monograph/Edited Volume (11)
- Part of Periodical (4)
- Postprint (2)
- Conference Proceeding (1)
- Doctoral Thesis (1)
- Other (1)
Keywords
- evidentiality (4)
- Geschichte (3)
- modal verbs (3)
- modality (3)
- pragmaticalisation (3)
- Adverbs (2)
- Kongress (2)
- Linguistik (2)
- function (2)
- functional unit (2)
The grammatization of European vernacular languages began in the Late Middle Ages and Renaissance and continued up until the end of the 18th century. Through this process, grammars were written for the vernaculars and, as a result, the vernaculars were able to establish themselves in important areas of communication. Vernacular grammars largely followed the example of those written for Latin, using Latin descriptive categories without fully adapting them to the vernaculars. In accord with the Greco-Latin tradition, the grammars typically contain sections on orthography, prosody, morphology, and syntax, with the most space devoted to the treatment of word classes in the section on “etymology.” The earliest grammars of vernaculars had two main goals: on the one hand, making the languages described accessible to non-native speakers, and on the other, supporting the learning of Latin grammar by teaching the grammar of speakers’ native languages. Initially, it was considered unnecessary to engage with the grammar of native languages for their own sake, since they were thought to be acquired spontaneously. Only gradually did a need for normative grammars develop which sought to codify languages. This development relied on an awareness of the value of vernaculars that attributed a certain degree of perfection to them. Grammars of indigenous languages in colonized areas were based on those of European languages and today offer information about the early state of those languages, and are indeed sometimes the only sources for now extinct languages. Grammars of vernaculars came into being in the contrasting contexts of general grammar and the grammars of individual languages, between grammar as science and as art and between description and standardization. In the standardization of languages, the guiding principle could either be that of anomaly, which took a particular variety of a language as the basis of the description, or that of analogy, which permitted interventions into a language aimed at making it more uniform.
Was ist unbestimmt am indefinido? Antworten aus der Geschichte der spanischen Grammatikographie
(2017)
Philologie und Grammatik bei der Analyse von metasprachlichen Manuskripten des 18. Jahrhunderts
(2017)
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.
El traductor de textos no literarios en los siglos XVIII y XIX: enciclopedista, innovador y mediador
(2017)
Las traducciones de textos científicos jugaban un papel importante
en el desarrollo de las ciencias en España en la segunda mitad del siglo xviii y en la primera del siglo xix. Nos concentraremos en los traductores que contribuyeron a la difusión del saber científico como la publicación de la traducción de la Enciclopedia Metódica a partir de 1788,cuyo objetivo fue promover el desarrollo de España, especialmente en el aspecto económico. Los textos franceses sobre química eran otro objeto muy frecuente de traducción, por
ejemplo, la Memoria sobre la necesidad de perfeccionar y reformar la nomenclatura de la química (1787) de Lavoisier. Los traductores buscaban soluciones traductológicas que se adaptasen mejor al genio de la lengua española y se entendían como enciclopedistas, innovadores y mediadores.
El orden de las palabras era un tema muy discutido en los siglos XVII y XVIII en toda Europa. En el siglo XVIII se multiplicaron las objeciones contra la teoría del orden natural, aducidas por gramáticos, filósofos y literatos, y apoyadas por deliberaciones sobre la interdependencia entre el lenguaje y el pensamiento y reflexiones estéticas.
En esta contribución se describirán las tendencias generales de la discusión europea antes de pasar a su recepción y su desarrollo en España. En esta versión abreviada nos limitaremos al ejemplo de un manuscrito de Luis Marcelino Pereira (1754-1811) para exponer su argumentación sobre el orden de las palabras, pero en la versión
más desarrollada nos ocuparemos del tratamiento del orden de las palabras en varias gramáticas castellanas hasta Andrés Bello (1781-1865). Pereira indica en su manuscrito [1798-1799] que el orden fijo del inglés y del francés dependería del uso obligatorio del pronombre sujeto en estas lenguas. En español se puede omitir este pronombre, es posible invertir el orden de las palabras, teniendo en cuenta la intencionalidad del hablante. Tales ideas se destacan desde la perspectiva actual, pero hay que contextualizarlas y explicar su aparición en su tiempo.
The notion of ‘epiphenomenon’ 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 ‘epiphenomenon’, which was partially done with a polemical attitude, and was always responded to polemically. The best-known definition of languages as an epiphenomenon is that proposed by Chomsky, who declared that the specific realisations of language do not warrant scientific attention, but there were early relegations of properties of individual languages to the domain of an epiphenomenon of grammar, to the domain of an art and not a science. These relegations from a certain point of abstraction did advance theories of language, even though they took a point of abstraction that did not correspond to the complexity of language.
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.
Origine, histoire, évolution : l' actualité d'une histoire notionnelle des sciences du langage
(2001)
'Discours indirect libre', 'erlebte Rede' et autres sources de malentendus en linguistique textuelle
(2001)
Typen von Wörterbüchern
(2001)
Sprachtheorie der idéologues
(1999)
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)
El centenario de la publicación del Curso de lingüística general (1916) de Saussure nos ha invitado a reexaminar la importancia de esta obra para instaurar una lingüística integrada en la semiología. Indudablemente la simplificación de las ideas de Saussure y la exageración de su concepto sistémico del lenguaje llevadas a cabo por los editores Bally y Sechehaye han contribuido a la acogida exitosa de la obra. En esta contribución, se propone, primero, introducir el concepto de ‘series de textos’, antes de analizar una serie “olvidada” y una nueva serie de obras por medio de las cuales se introdujeron conceptos semióticos en la época dominante de la lingüística histórica. En el análisis de estas dos series se pondrá el foco en el concepto de la arbitrariedad del signo.
In 1916, three years after the death of Ferdinand de Saussure, the Cours de linguistique générale (CLG) was published in Geneva. This foundational work marked the beginning of a discipline that has profoundly influenced the development of the humanities ever since.
What sources influenced the CLG? Do the main concepts of this seminal work have the same validity today as they did in 1916? How has the recent development of language sciences influenced its reception? How does this text account for meaning and communication within the context of speech (parole)?
In order to explore these questions, one hundred years after the publication of Ferdinand de Saussure's seminal work on General Linguistics, Polis--The Jerusalem Institute of Languages and Humanities held an interdisciplinary conference that gathered 14 international specialists from various disciplines: general linguistics, pragmatics, philology, dialectology, translation studies, terminology, and philosophy.
The first section of this work reassesses the sources and further influence of the CLG on modern linguistics. The book's second part discusses some of the main concepts and dichotomies of the CLG (constitution of the linguistic method, arbitrariness of sign, main dichotomies), under the light of both the original manuscripts and recent linguistic developments (influence of dialectology or translation studies). The third and last part handles the pragmatic and semantic dimensions of language, suggesting new avenues of reflection that could not yet have been fully taken into account within the CLG itself.
Uniting 14 scholarly articles, together with an introduction, an index locorum and a collective bibliography, this volume hopes to encourage readers with its reappraisal and reinterpretation of Saussure's ground-breaking work and thus contribute to the future development of linguistics and humanities.
Die Beiträge des vorliegenden Bandes tragen der Multidimensionalität und Multifunktionalität parenthetischer Einschübe Rechnung, die die internationale linguistische Forschung in den letzten Jahrzenten herausgearbeitet hat. In mehrheitlich korpusgestützten Untersuchungen wird gesprochenes und geschriebenes Deutsch sowie Deutsch kontrastiv zu romanischen Sprachen analysiert.
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.
Modalité et polyphonie
(2019)
Dans cette étude du grec ancien, nous souhaitons souligner deux particularités peu remarquées de l’adjectif verbal en –τέος, toutes deux liées à la modalité déontique. L’une concerne la possibilité rare de trouver l’adjectif verbal d’obligation avec la négation non assertive μή, alors que la très grande majorité des occurrences négatives comporte la négation assertive οὐ. L’autre est liée à l’emploi au potentiel de cet adjectif verbal d’obligation : dans ces énoncés, se pose la question de la combinaison entre la modalité du potentiel et la modalité déontique de l’adjectif verbal. Il nous semble que ces deux particularités peu fréquentes sont révélatrices du fonctionnement de la modalité déontique dans l’adjectif verbal d’obligation à l’époque classique (Xénophon et Platon en font ainsi un usage abondant).