Motivating an English-German contrast in word-formation

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "Motivating an English-German contrast in word-formation"

Transcription

1 Motivating an English-German contrast in word-formation Florian Haas 2nd April Introduction Speakers of German are all familiar with a small set of words which are derived from the combination of a preposition and the reciprocal pronoun einander one another : Miteinander cooperation 1, Durcheinander chaos, Nebeneinander peaceful co-occurrence. In fact, German speakers are familiar with more words of this type, the ones just mentioned are particularly revealing, however. They are very common and not restricted to a particular text type. For example, in the issues of Mannheimer Morgen from 2009, a regional daily newspaper, the noun Miteinander appears as frequently as Beisammensein get-together, a slightly less abstract noun with a similar meaning (Miteinander 396 hits, Beisammensein 365 hits). We are therefore talking about a formation type that is not peripheral in the sense of sounding non-german. The existence of these nouns is interesting for a number of reasons. First, the reciprocal pronoun einander is not used nominally on its own (*das Einander the one another ). Second, in English we encounter a striking lack of such formations. This is particularly surprising because English possesses all the source expressions that are needed for the respective words (prepositions and reciprocal pronouns comparable to German einander). This lack of words like Durcheinander, Nebeneinander and Miteinander in English will be the riddle that I hope to solve in the remainder of this paper, relating it to more general contrasts between German and English. The structure of the paper is the following: In section 2, I will introduce some background from the study of English and German word-formation. Especially the concept of conversion, treated differently in various traditions, will receive a good deal of attention. With the relevant theoretical distinctions in mind, I will then discuss the status of the complex nouns Durcheinander, Nebeneinander and Miteinander. Section 3 will deal with the English-German contrast introduced above: English does not have such complex nouns, while German does. After discarding an apparent motivation for this contrast, I will motivate it by invoking the notion of analogy. In Section 4, an attempt will be made at relating the rather specific findings of Section 3 to more general questions concerning English and German word-formation. Section 5 sums up the findings of the study. 1 The English translations are rather crude and will be qualified in what follows. 1

2 2 The problem 2.1 Word-formation in German and English It is not surprising that, as two historically related languages, German and English do not differ remarkably in their inventory of word-formation strategies. In fact, although the inflectional morphology of Present-day English is much poorer than modern German inflection, there are no major differences between English and German lexical morphology [cf. König/Gast neue Auflage?]. For our purposes, i.e. explaining the (non-)formation of preposition-reciprocal compounds (henceforth Prep-Recip ), the strategies of compounding and conversion appear to be the most promising wordformation types to look at Compounding Compounding is firmly established in English as well as German lexical morphology. Compounding in German (cf. Fleischer and Barz (2012) for an overview), is described a highly productive process including all kinds of combinations of bases. The same holds of English, where compounding has remained one of the main word-formation processes, despite the fact that, in contrast to Old English, borrowing has become another common strategy of naming new concepts (cf. Kastovsky (2006) on historical aspects). In order to identify contrasts between English and German compounding, we have to go beyond such general statements. The two areas that I consider promising in this respect are: (i) compounds that involve prepositions as first elements, which are (and have been, cf. section 3.3 below for historical remarks) more productive in German than in English; (ii) univerbation, which turns out to be the process giving rise to our three complex words under discussion, seems to have been more readily applied to frequent German syntagms than to English ones in the recent history of the two languages. In this section I elaborate on these two issues, relating them to our case study later. Before I go on treating Durcheinander, Miteinander and Nebeneinander as compounds, it should be made clear that they do not actually qualify as what is classically called compound. Complex words can come about in two ways: (i) speakers consciously combining two (or more) stems on the basis of word-formation patterns (or rules ) available in their language, in order to name a concept; (ii) groups of words that frequently co-occur in speech come to be perceived as single units ( univerbation ). Traditionally, only type (i) is called compounding (on German cf. Eisenberg 2004: ). Fleischer and Barz (2012: 87) consider these cases to be conversions of phrases (see also Donalies 2011: 97). The boundary between these two types of complex words is not always easy to draw, especially if one concentrates on the resulting expressions and their status, as opposed to how they have developed (cf. Eisenberg 2004: 234). The three German nouns we are interested in originate in univerbation of phrases like through each other, with each other, besides each other leading to adverbs (cf. Fleischer and Barz 2012: 372). What looks like the general pattern Prep+X (i.e. a preposition combining with a second element of any word class) in German actually comprises a number of arguably distinct types of structure, especially as far as verbs are concerned. Separable prefixes are commonly distinguished from particles, for instance. But after all, there is a pattern containing prepositions (or particles homonymous to prepositions) that can serve a analogical attractor for the formation of new lexemes. As we see later, this is different 2

3 in English. The following examples show the German structures that involve an initial preposition (Eisenberg 2004: ): (1) a. durch-leiden suffer ; lit. through-suffer b. über-streichen paint over ; lit. over-paint ; durch-fahren drive through ; lit. through-drive c. an-kleben stick (to) ; lit. on-stick ; mit-nehmen take along ; lit. withtake The three types above represent an increase in morphosyntactic independence of the initial preposition from (1a) to (1c). In fact, the first parts of the words in (1a) and (1b) are called often called verbal prefixes and prepositional prefixes respectively, the type in (1c) involving a verbal particle. This is not the place to discuss the grammar of these expressions in any detail. For our purposes, suffice it to say that however we want to call these expressions, they are very often homophonous with prepositions and, together with the second element, therefore serve as an analogical attractor for further complex words beginning with a preposition. Note that this also holds for type (1c); although the particle is separated from the verbal base in its finite form (Ich nehme dich mit I ll take you along, as opposed to Ich kann dich nicht mitnehmen I can t take you along ), all non-finite forms of these verbs feed the large set of verb forms beginning with prepositions which German speakers are exposed to. Many of these verbs are lexicalized, yet some of the prefixes can be transparently combined with verbal bases in a productive way. Many of these complex verbs have given rise to nominalizations, adding to the set of nouns that display a preposition in initial position. A selection of the latter class, involving the prepositions durch through (cf. (2a)), mit with ((cf. (2b)) and neben beside (cf. (2c)) is given in the following: (2) a. Durchblick knowledge, lit. through-view ; Durchblutung circulation (of the blood), lit. through-bleeding ; Durchbruch breakthrough ; Durchfahrt way through, lit. through-ride ; Durchfall diarrhoea, lit. throughfall ; Durchmesser diameter, lit. through-measure Durchreise journey through, lit. through-journey ; Durchsage announcement, lit. throughsay. b. Mitarbeit collaboration, lit. withwork ; Mitbestimmung participation, lit. with-determination, Mitbewohner(in) flatmate, lit. with-occupier ; Mitbürger fellow citizen, lit. with-citizen ; Mitgefühl sympathy, lit. with-feeling, Mitglied member, lit. with-part ; Mitleid compassion, lit. with-sorrow ; Mitschüler(in) classmate, lit. with-student ; Mitverfasser co-author, lit. with-author ; Mitwirkung involvement, lit. witheffect. c. Nebenbedeutung secondary meaning, lit. beside-meaning ; Nebeneingang side entrance, lit. beside-entrance, Nebeneinkünfte supplementary income, lit. beside-income ; Nebenfach minor subject, lit. besidesubject ; Nebenfluss tributary, lit. side-river ; Nebenrolle supporting role, lit. beside-role ; Nebensache trifle, lit. beside-thing, Nebensaison low season, lit. side-season, Nebentätigkeit extra job, lit. sidejob All of the lexemes in (2) are stressed on the first syllable and thus on the prepositional part of the compound. It should also be noted that the prepositions, durch in (2a), mit 3

4 in (2b) and neben in (2c), are always morphologically transparent, i.e. they have not undergone any process of fusion or reduction. It is plausible to assume that this is due to the meaning contribution of the preposition being still rather transparent in many of these cases (on the correlation between morphological and semantic transparency in the case of derivation see Raffelsiefen 1998). For this reason, I expect the ubiquity of lexemes involving the relevant prepositions in first position to contribute to the strength of the representation of the pattern Prep-X in German, irrespective of whether the semantic contribution of the preposition is transparent or not. To sum up, the end-products of all these processes follow a pattern that cannot only be described as a word-formation pattern, but is also likely to be construed as such by speakers of modern German. In other words, speakers of German know hundreds of complex nouns, verbs, adjectives and adverbs that have the structure Prep+X. The fact that many (or all) of these words go back to univerbation and not to regular compounding is not necessarily part of speakers knowledge. As will be discussed in more detail below, English does not offer such a pattern. It is therefore more difficult for English prepositions to become the first elements of lexicalized compounds. 2.2 Conversion Different subtypes of conversion are clearly more productive in English than in German, which is in part due to the availability of derivational affixes fulfilling the corresponding functions in German. In fact, conversion has been described as a specifically English process (Marchand 1969: ). The following examples include some typical patterns of conversion in PDE: (3) a. adjective > verb: brown; to brown the meat b. verb > noun: call; to make a call c. noun > verb: access; You can access this file with following password d. preposition > verb, noun: to up the stakes; ups and downs Descriptions of conversion from adverbs in English rarely go beyond the mentioning of one or two isolated examples such as the ups and downs (cf. Bauer 1983: 230). The possibility of converting adverbs into nouns is thus acknowledged, but the productivity of this process remains unclear. Given the dearth of examples referred to in the literature, it seems, however, that the nominalization of adverbials is not very common. Apart from the lack of documentation in this area, another problem has to be faced: Not any nominal use of a word that does not belong to the word class of nouns (adverbs, adjectives, verbs, prepositions, conjunctions etc.) qualifies as an instance of conversion, assuming that conversion provides us with a new lexical item (cf. Section 2.3). German conversion is not as constrained as the above quote from Marchand (1969) might suggest, however. Since the inflectional morphology of German is much richer than that of English, one could easily overlook examples of conversion where the presence of a word-class specific inflectional affix diverts one s attention from the fact that the stem does not undergo any formal change. The following examples of denominal verbs, for instance, qualify as conversion, irrespective of the presence of the infinitive suffix -(e)n (Lohde 2006: 270; Fleischer and Barz 2012: 88): (4) a. Scherz joke > scherzen to joke b. Salbe salve > salben to anoint 4

5 c. Fessel chain > fesseln to enchain d. Donner thunder > donnern to thunder The literature on conversion in German is not in complete agreement on subtypes. Only those authors with a relatively wide conception of conversion would include word-class changes that are accompanied by vowel changes, as in Kopf head > köpfen behead (cf. Donalies 2011: 94). There is widespread agreement, however, on deverbal nouns based on infinitive forms being a very productive and in fact the most frequent conversion type (cf. e.g. Lohde 2006: 45-46): (5) a. kochen (v.) cook > Kochen (n.) cooking b. verabschieden (v.) say farewell > Verabschieden (n.) saying farewell The type exemplified in (5) is so unconstrained that the question arises of whether we are still dealing with a lexical process. In fact, the option of using words which are not nouns nominally, is not restricted to infinitives. 2.3 Problems of delimitation In both English and German, it is possible in principle to use a lexical item of any word class in a syntactic function typically filled by nominal expressions. In terms of traditional phrase structure analysis, one may say that these items are used as NPs. This process is also available for phrases and even sentences, especially if introduced by a definite determiner. Here are some corpus examples from German newspapers in which the nominalized phrase (printed in bold letters) is introduced by dieses ewige... that everlasting... (IDS corpora): (6) a. Dieses ewige Stirb und Werde finde überall im Raum statt, schlägt der Königsberger Philosoph vor. That everlasting die and become takes place everywhere in the room, the philosopher from Königsberg proposes. [Braunschweiger Zeitung, ] b. Dieses ewige Haar-in-der-Suppe-Suchen, das sollten wir beenden. That everlasting hair-in-the-soup-seek [=look for a fly in the ointment], we should finish it. [Hamburger Morgenpost, ] c. Dieses ewige Blabla über Schiedsrichter kann ich nicht mehr hören. I can t stand that everlasting bla bla about referees anymore [Hamburger Morgenpost, ] d. Die Wellen schaukelten ihn in den Schlaf, und dieses ewige berg- und talwärts auf dem Strom versetzte ihn schon in früher Jugend in kontemplative Stimmungen und Schwingungen. The waves rocked him to his sleep, and that everlasting uphill and downhill on the river caused contemplative moods and vibrations already in the days of his early youth. [Mannheimer Morgen, ] e. Was soll dieses ewige miteinander vergleichen von Berufsbildern, die sich zuweilen einfach nicht wirklich miteinander vergleichen lassen, [... ] What s the use of that everlasting comparing with each other of professions that can sometimes not be compared [... ] [Nürnberger Nachrichten, ] 5

6 f. [... ] dieses ewige Ich will nicht! - das erzeugt schon eine große Reibung. That everlasting I don t want to!, it does cause considerable friction. [Die Presse, ] The examples in (6) include nominalized phrases of all kinds of different sources. Stirb and werde in (6a) contains verbs in the imperative form. The bold-printed string in (6b) involves a transitive verb (suchen) and its object. Its OV word order could either be analyzed as the regular order of German subordinate clauses, but since there is no reason for considering this a subordinate clause, it probably makes more sense to view it as an ad-hoc formation with the structure of a synthetic compound. Blabla in example (6c) is the nominalized use of an expression that is jokingly employed to imitate a conversational contribution perceived as hot air. An example that more clearly shows that the syntactically nominal slot at issue is open to basically any kind of filler is (6d). Here, berg- and talwärts are two conjoined adverbs that are not normally assumed to be members of the German class of nouns. Sentence (6e) is interesting insofar as the nominalized string in this case includes our well-known expression miteinander. It is certainly not a noun in (6e), however. Instead, it fills two argument position of the complex-transitive verb vergleichen compare. The bold-printed string therefore qualifies as a verb phrase, here inserted into a nominal position. The unconstrained nature of this process in German is also nicely illustrated in the last example, (6f), where an entire sentence fits the nominal slot under discussion. What all the cases in (6) have in common, in my view, is that no genuine wordformation process has been involved. We are rather confronted with the spontaneous use of all kinds of linguistic material in a syntactically nominal slot, namely the head position of a noun phrase. For lack of a better term, I will call this process syntactic conversion, as opposed to conversion proper, the latter but not the former taken to be a word-formation process (cf. Vogel 1996: 22-27, et passim on what she calls syntaktische Umkategorisierungen ). Syntactic conversions have the flavour of a (metalinguistic) mention, rather than use. To put it differently, speaker and hearer are aware that the expression at issue is used in a non-conventional way. This property makes syntactic conversion different from word-formation proper, especially conversion. In the latter case, we are not dealing with the spontaneous decision of using something as a NP. Rather, the speaker makes use of an established lexical item, i.e. a word that is part of the lexicon and has in this way become independent of the usage conditions associated with the original lexeme. The expressions under discussion, nominal Durcheinander, Miteinander and Nebeneinander, perhaps started off as syntactic conversions of adverbs. Let us therefore ask how the distinction between syntactic conversion and conversion proper should be drawn. In the literature on German word-formation, the term syntactic conversion (G. syntaktische Konversion ) is also used in a sense similar to the one proposed here, but its extension can also be wider. Lohde (2006: 45), for instance, includes any word-class change that does not include lexical affixes (his preferred term is reine Konversion pure conversion ). As a consequence, he sets up a further type of conversion, Präfixkonversion prefix conversion, which denotes those cases involving derivational affixes. The conception of syntactic conversion that I have in mind here comes closer to what Eschenlohr (1999: 46-50) calls syntaktische Umkategorisierung ( syntactic recategorization ). She lists the following properties of this kind of category change (47): They are productive without restrictions. 6

7 Their semantic interpretation is predictable. They have only a weak tendency to lexicalize ( Usualisierung ) and become established in the speech community. They are accessible to further morphological processes such as compounding and derivation to a limited degree only. Although such criteria suggest a clear-cut distinction, the question of how syntactic conversion and conversion proper should be kept apart has turned out to be difficult one. Lexicalization in the sense of a form becoming part of the lexicon is certainly crucial (cf. Vogel 1996: 237). Lexicalization in this sense is only visible if we break it down to more specific formal and semantic changes that a given form undergoes, therefore. In clear cases of lexicalization, both form and meaning of the lexicalized expression deviate from the source expression. This holds for both compounding and conversion (I ignore derivation here, begin irrelevant to the forms at issue). Inflection often indicates that a given expression has changed its status; assuming the inflectional behaviour of the new class indicates a change that goes beyond syntactic conversion. The latter preserves the original inflectional forms. On the semantic side, a complex lexicalized word has a meaning which is not derivable from the meanings of its parts alone. This does not necessarily imply that there is no relationship whatsoever between the meanings of the components and the meaning of the whole. Often, the resulting meaning is still transparently related to the source elements, but there is an additional semantic component that speakers have conventionally associated with the lexicalized expression Application to Durcheinander, Miteinander and Nebeneinander The three words we are concerned with qualify as lexicalized in the semantic sense. Durcheinander, Miteinander and Nebeneinander have acquired meanings that go beyond the combination of einander and the respective prepositions. The adverbs durcheinander, miteinander and nebeneinander, from which these nouns are derived, are different; they may be used in, but are not restricted to, the lexicalized meaning. 2 Consider miteinander with each other. This adverb is semantically compatible with any kind of relation that is also compatible with the comitative preposition mit ( with ). The noun Miteinander, by contrast, is restricted in its use to a peaceful or cooperative kind of relationship. The 92 instances of the noun Miteinander in the Europarl2 corpus confirm this assumption. Bearing in mind that there is no watertight strategy of operationalising the semantic distinction at issue here, we have found no examples in the corpus where Miteinander is clearly used to refer to a kind of relationship that is viewed negatively or as hostile. Also consider the following pair of examples. (7a) is taken from the IDS corpora and (7b) is made up as to match its real counterpart. (7) a. Zwei Köpenicker Familien mit Kindern liegen wegen angeblich ruhestörenden Lärms seit langem miteinander im Clinch. [IDS corpora] 2 Wiemer and Nedjalkov (2007: 428) (for nominal composition also Fleischer and Barz 2012: 167) name combinations with bis until and seit since as exceptions, but analyze all other combinations of preposition and einander as lexical items (see also Plank 2008). One of their arguments favouring this analysis concerns the combination of some of these complex expressions with verbs, resulting in words like aneinanderreihen string together, lit. string on one another : That these two prefixes have merged into one morphological entity, is partly confirmed by the fact that the particular locative prefix and einander are separated from the stem only jointly, never one without the other. (483) 7

8 Because of allegedly disturbing noises, two families from Köpenick have for long been at loggerheads with each other. b.?das feindliche Miteinander zweier Köpenicker Familien wegen angeblicher Ruhestörung dauert schon Jahre an. The hostile Miteinander of two families in Köpenick, concerning allegedly disturbing noises, has been going on for years now. The examples in (7) illustrate the point made above. As an adverb miteinander retains its compositional meaning, i.e. the preposition mit with may be used in the sense of with, against, as in (7a), straight-forwardly combining with the reciprocal einander one another. As soon as Miteinander is used as a noun, however, this option disappears. Nominal Miteinander is banned from purely reciprocal relationships of a non-cooperative kind. Example (7b) sounds clearly odd therefore. We encounter a similar situation in the case of nebeneinander next to one another. While the adverb can either describe two (or more) concrete objects that are located next to one another or two abstract entities that coexist in a given domain, the noun Nebeneinander is restricted to the second reading. The examples in (8) should make this clear. (8) a. Es erlaubt den Radlern, rechts auf der Straße und sogar nebeneinander zu fahren. [IDS corpora] It [a blue road sign] allow cyclists to drive on the right side of the road, and even side by side. b.?die neue Spur ermöglicht das Nebeneinander von zwei Radfahrern auf der Straße. The new lane makes it possible for two cyclists to drive side by side on that road. It is impossible for Nebeneinander in (8b) to describe the concrete state of two cyclists riding side by side. As mentioned above, it is only coexistence in some abstract domain that goes with this noun. Thus, we could modify (8b) in such a way that two groups of road users and the possibility of their both using the road at the same time are referred to: (9) Die neue Verkehrsführung macht das Nebeneinander von Autofahrern und Radfahrern auf dieser Straße möglich. The new traffic routeing makes it possible for car drivers and cyclists to use the road together. Crucially, the reading of car drivers and cyclists driving side by side in a strictly local sense is excluded for (9). To sum up, what the examples above demonstrate, therefore, is that the nominal expressions under consideration differ from their adverbial source expressions in meaning. As a result, they should (at least synchronically, see section 4.1 below) not be treated as instances of syntactic conversion in the sense introduced above. Instead, from the point of view their synchronic semantics they <qualify as nouns that derive from adverbs via the word-formation process of conversion. In general, nouns based on the pattern Prep-einander appear to have meanings that are more abstract than those of their adverbial counterparts. This may also explain the fact that some combinations are quite common as adverbs, but not at all as nouns. Whereas Durcheinander, Nebeneinander and Miteinander abound, there are hardly any occurrences of Übereinander and Untereinander in the corpora I investigated (Europarl and the written corpora of the Institut für Deutsche Sprache). Taking all public corpora of the IDS archive 8

9 of written corpora as a test case, there are 11 nominal uses of Untereinander and 57 nominal uses of Übereinander, as opposed to 34,478 hits for Miteinander, 7,198 hits for Durcheinander and 4,974 hits for Nebeneinander (see Table 1). 3 The rather concrete local meaning of übereinander does not easily lend itself to developing a more abstract interpretation, at least not as easily as nebeneinander. A reason might be the following: The adverb übereinander over/above one another is typically used with an asymmetric reading, i.e. it does not describe two entities each of which is above the other, but rather one entity A being above another entity B, the use of the reciprocal here abstracting away from the question of who or what is on top as opposed to the bottom. It is hard to conceive of a(n) (abstract) state that a corresponding noun Übereinander could refer to as frequently as to make the conventionalization of the noun possible. It appears more difficult to motivate why untereinander ( mutually, lit. below/among each other ) is hardly ever used nominally. The adverb is used to express reciprocity, an indeed rather abstract meaning. Why do speakers so seldom feel the need to refer to the abstract concept of reciprocity then? Well, they do sometimes, but in these presumably not so common situations speakers have other words at their disposal: Gegenseitigkeit reciprocity and Reziprozität reciprocity. I take it to be plausible to assume that, given the restricted formal contexts where the pure concept of reciprocity has to be named and the availability of nouns for these situations, there is simply no need for a nominalization of untereinander. nominal nominal % nominal miteinander 110,819 34, durcheinander 14,832 7, nebeneinander 15, untereinander 33, übereinander 6, Table 1: Proportion of nominal uses (IDS corpora, Archive W) Moving on to morphosyntactic properties, there are unfortunately not too many morphosyntactic categories we can turn to when we are interested in a change from adverb to noun. Adverbs are, by definition, uninflected. As a consequence, there is no inflectional category that an adverb may lose when it turns into a noun. The morphosyntax of the target class is more revealing in this respect: German nouns inflect for number and case and their determiners also mark gender. Are Durcheinander, Miteinander and Nebeneinander regular nouns as far as these categories are concerned, then? Regarding gender, determiners combining with these expressions are always neuter (one of the three German gender values, the others being masculine and feminine). Some random examples from Europarl illustrate the neuter gender that determiners of einander-nouns have to take: (10) a. Wir müssen dafür sorgen, dass das Nebeneinander von nationalen und europäischen Zeichen koordiniert wird. We must see to it that the coexistence of national and European signs gets coordinated. 3 For Untereinander and Übereinander all hits were checked manually. For the other three expressions, the first 200 instances of all capitalized tokens were checked manually. The percentage of non-nominal uses (adverbial uses in sentence-initial position) calculated on the basis of these 200 hits was then subtracted from the complete set of results. 9

10 b. Es dürfen in Europa keine neuen Barrieren errichtet werden, die das Miteinander und die Zusammenarbeit mit anderen Ländern verhindern. We should not set up new barriers which prevent harmony and collaboration with other countries. c. Herr Präsident, das Durcheinander, das in diesem Hohen Haus vor Abstimmungsbeginn herrscht, droht zu einem moralischen Problem zu werden. Mr President, the chaos that controls this house before the vote is in danger of becoming a moral problem. Case, in general, is also more easily visible on determiners than on the head nouns themselves, apart from the genitive case. Keeping this restriction in mind, all four cases are represented in the Europarl data (Nominative in 11a, Genitive in 11b, Dative in 11c, Accusative in 11d): (11) a. Nun wird das Nebeneinander durch einige extreme Nationalisten gefährdet. Now the peaceful coexistence is being threatened by some extreme nationalists. b. Eine Gruppe verdient tatsächlich Anerkennung, und das sind die Beamten, die in Zeiten des Durcheinander Geduld, Verständnis und Engagement gezeigt haben. One group deserves respect, namely the civil servants who showed patience, understanding and commitment in times of chaos. c. Ich spreche von dem Durcheinander bei den Sitzungs- und Terminkalendern im Parlament in diesem Jahr. I m referring to the chaos resulting from the parliamentary schedule this year. d. Wir wünschen uns ein intelligentes Nebeneinander von Energie und Umweltschutz. We wish for a more intelligent coexistence of energy and protection of the environment. No example of a genitive marked on the noun itself was found in the Europarl data. Such forms are possible, however, as evidenced by the following examples from IDS newspaper corpora: (12) a. Wenn sich Helmstedt nun daran macht, die Mechanik des kalten Nebeneinanders von deutscher und türkischstämmiger Bevölkerung aufzubrechen, [... ] If Helmstedt sets out to break up the mechanics underlying the cold coexistence of the German population and that of Turkish descent, [... ] [Braunschweiger Zeitung, , IDS corpora] b. Fragen der Gegenwart, des multikulturellen Miteinanders würden beleuchtet und zurückprojiziert auf die Zeit [... ]. Questions relating to the present and to the multicultural cooperation are said to be investigated and projected back to the time [... ]. [Mannheimer Morgen, , IDS corpora] c. Die Gassen bieten ein Bild kunterbunten Durcheinanders. The alleys display a picture of a motley confusion. [Oberösterreichische Nachrichten, , IDS corpora] As for number, German nouns (with the exception of one noun class including words like Fenster window, for which the plural is unmarked) are marked for the plural and 10

11 unmarked for the singular. The three nouns under discussion never occur in the plural. In other words, the plural forms *Durcheinanders, *Nebeneinanders and *Miteinanders appear to be impossible. 4 This might be taken as an argument against the full nominal status of these words. Note, however, that the same constraint holds for otherwise unmistakable nouns with similar meanings. Thus, Beisammensein, Zusammenwirken and Zusammenarbeit, which are near-synonymous with Miteinander, are not pluralizable, either. The same situation meets us when we consider Durcheinander, Nebeneinander and their near-synonyms: (13) a. Unordnung, Gewirr chaos ;?Unordnungen,?Gewirre b. Eintracht, Verbundenheit cooperation ;?Eintrachten,?Verbundenheiten Instead of viewing the non-plural constraint as a sign of incomplete nominalization, it might make more sense, therefore, to consider it a result of the relevant words meanings. They refer to abstract states of affairs whose pluralization is not normally required and has therefore not become a morphological option. To be sure, it is not far-fetched, for instance, to think of various places where a state of chaos holds. At the same time, there seem to be few occasions on which it is actually necessary to refer to these states of chaos as a set of two more entities. Returning to the issue of how Durcheinander, Miteinander and Nebeneinander behave in terms of word class membership, their lack of plural forms should thus not necessarily be taken to argue against their being nouns. For our purposes, a crucial conclusion at this point is that Durcheinander, Miteinander and Nebeneinander are lexicalized nouns, based on semantic and to a lesser degree also on morphosyntactic evidence. Even if it can be shown, therefore, that syntactic conversion is more freely available in German than in English, and even if this may play a role for the formations under discussion, it cannot be the whole explanation for the absence of English counterparts to Durcheinander, Miteinander and Nebeneinander, or structurally similar formations. There has to be a reason for why these German expressions have gone beyond the status of syntactic conversions, having developed into genuine nouns. 3 Explaining the contrast 3.1 Why care? Why should we expect some systematic contrast between two languages if all we have to explain seems to be a small set of nouns with a seemingly quirky structure? In the field of lexical morphology, even more than in the areas of inflection or syntax, we should not be surprised to encounter isolated cases with idiosyncratic properties, which will not tell us a lot about systematic contrasts between English and German. Nonetheless, it will be proposed that the contrast is more systematic. Even though only a typological investigation taking into account all potentially relevant factors could provide the ultimate proof, a contrastive analysis should be able to pin down potentially responsible factors. In fact, it will be seen that what I called our small set of nouns with a seemingly quirky structure makes part of a very general compounding pattern in German that has long disappeared from English. 4 To exemplify the impossibility of plural forms I have chosen the default plural suffix -s. Other plural allomorphs are equally excluded, however. 11

12 3.2 Contrasts in the expression of reciprocity Before we turn to the above-mentioned explanation, let us first consider another conceivable scenario. Both German and English allow the combination of prepositions and reciprocal pronouns (Prep+einander in German and Prep+each other/one another in English). Sentence like the following are anything but exceptional: (14) How was it, your initial reaction to each other? [ICE-GB] In fact, most occurrences of reciprocal expressions in English involve a preposition. Table 2 shows that the majority of reciprocals in the ICE-GB corpus follow prepositions: Similar proportions can be found in other corpora of Present-day English (see Synt. function n Prep_ 68 Other functions 49 % Prep_ 58.1 Table 2: Proportion of source construction in English (ICE-GB) Haas 2010: 76): It would go beyond the scope of this paper to discuss the reasons for Synt. function LOB BROWN FLOB Prep_ Other functions % Prep_ Table 3: Proportion of source construction in English (LOB, BROWN, FLOB) why English reciprocals seem to feel at home in the position of prepositional complement (see for instance Plank 2008: ). In the context of this paper it is more interesting to note that the ratio of reciprocals following a preposition in German is even higher than in English. The following are counts from the newspaper Berliner Morgenpost and the Wendekorpus, including various spoken and written texts from the year 1989 (the first 500 instances of each corpus): A comparison of ICE-GB and Synt. function Berl. MoPo Wendekorpus Prep_ Other functions % Prep_ Table 4: Proportion of source construction in German (MoPo and Wendekorpus) MoPo (cf. Table 4, for instance, yields a highly significant contrast: χ 2 = , df = 1, p < 2.2e-16). We may get suspicious at this point. Have the German Prep-Recip combinations discussed above undergone the German-only changes under discussion because they are simply more frequent in this combination than in English? I will return to this issue below. First, however, I will outline where the higher proportion of the respective German structure stems from. In order to understand this asymmetry, one has to take into account that, apart from the reciprocal einander, German uses the reflexive sich x-self 5 in reciprocal contexts 5 German sich is only inaccurately translated by the English reciprocal ending in -self, because its reciprocal use qualifies as a middle use in the sense of Kemmer (1993), rather than as a proper reflexive use (see 12

13 (often causing the ambiguity visible in 15b): (15) a. Sie haben einander fotografiert. They took pictures of each other. b. Sie haben sich fotografiert. They took pictures of each other/themselves. Two further facts have to be noted concerning the reciprocal use of German sich. Firstly, it is not allowed after prepositions, as can be seen in (16a). Secondly, the dedicated reciprocal expression einander is hardly ever used in positions other than prepositional complement in spoken German. (16) a. Sie haben mit-einander gefeiert. They partied with each other. b. *Sie haben mit sich gefeiert. Therefore, there results an almost complementary distribution: sich occurs in the direct or indirect object slot and einander is used after prepositions (see also Plank 2008: 354). No such division of labor is operating in English, such that the reciprocals each other and one another occur in all syntactic positions and thus appear to offer less input to entrenchment in a frame [Prep each other]. Is this the explanation for why German, but not English, has developed the compound expressions under discussion? Although it would be difficult to exclude some role of this factor, it can at most be part of the explanation. It appears that this explanation is not compatible with the historical development that has led to the present-day state. The univerbation of different prepositions and the reciprocal einander occurred relatively early in the history of the language. According to Plank (2008: , ), it can already be found in Old High German ( ). Compared to other Germanic languages including English, German thus features both an early univerbation of the reciprocal einander and the early univerbation of the latter and a number of prepositions. This is notable, even if in general the types and tokens of German compounds have become more and more general throughout the history of German (cf. Erben 2006: ). It does not imply, however, that these expressions were converted to nouns equally early. It is difficult to pin down exactly since when the nouns have been used. Note that Grimm s dictionary does not even mention the nominal uses of Miteinander and Nebeneinander (Durcheinander is listed; Grimm ). Given that their entries on the adverbial uses of these complex expressions are quite detailed, one may suspect that some of the nominal uses are in fact a more recent development. Yet, the univerbation of preposition and reciprocal took place at a time for which it is not clear whether the frequency asymmetry illustrated in (15) had already held. In Old High German the reflexive sich x-self was not yet commonly used reciprocally (Gast and Haas 2008: 325). Therefore it is plausible to assume that einander was not yet as much restricted to the slot after prepositions as it is today. As convincing as it might seem, therefore, to attribute the lack of lexicalized Prep-Recip formations in English to the lack of a German-type frequency asymmetry described above, the historical facts make it clear that the (near) complementary distribution of einander and sich can at most be a strengthening factor being at work in later times. It is for this reason that other possible reasons for the contrast should be searched for. also Gast and Haas 2008). 13

14 3.3 Analogy What I would like to propose in what follows is that the presence or absence of a more general analogical model on which preposition-initial compounds could be formed is ultimately responsible for the contrast in word-formation that we are dealing with in this paper. While such a model exists in German (and has existed for a long time), none such structure is able to support new formations in English. Analogy as it is understood in this paper is a conceptual operation where speakers construct new complex expressions because they see a structural similarity between the latter and an already existing pattern (on the role of analogy in language change see Itkonen 2005, Fischer 2007: and Bybee 2010: 66-75). 6 This idea also lies at the basis of the following quote from Booij (2009: 207): This means that the native speaker s competence to create new compounds and derived words is based on abstractions over sets of existing complex words and the words that are paradigmatically related to them. Let us therefore ask if there has been a pattern on the basis of which German speakers could have interpreted Prep-einander combinations as compounds. Indeed, German wordformation provides exemplars on the basis of which new formations involving prepositions (or particles ) in initial position may be formed. In English, complex words of this type are much less common and thus less likely to trigger new formations. Let us first consider the English situation English In descriptions of English compounding, compound nouns, verbs and adjectives (e.g. Carstairs-McCarthy 2002: 60-62) the type Prep-X, X standing for a second element of any word class, is not normally described as marginal or obsolete (but see Schmid 2005: ). In reality, however, the generality of this pattern is very limited. To be sure, the type Prep-V is common with a restricted group of prepositions: under, over and out; here the preposition has a metaphorical meaning do in excess for over or below the expected limit for under. In fact, some linguists have questioned their status as prepositions, analyzing them as affixes (Lieber 2009: ). The literal counterparts to these uses, as well as a number of other prepositions as first elements of a compound (cf. Marchand 1969: 108ff.), have become unproductive. By the 15th cent. they were largely replaced by phrasal verbs like make up (Marchand 1969: 108; Hiltunen 1983; Kastovsky 2006: 254; Berg 1998; see Schröder 2011: and passim for further discussion and references). As an illustration of the situation in English, consider the following lists. (17) provides the 16 lexemes beginning with through that the Oxford English Dictionary (OED) contains and (18) offers the same result for words beginning with with. (17) through-bear (last attested in 1857); through-gang (obs./rare); through-gird (obs.); through-go (obs.); through-light (obs.); through other (adv. phr. and a.; last attested in early 19th cent.); throughout; through-passage (last attested 6 Traditionally, analogy is conceived of as a relationship between a new formation and one specific existing expression, whereas forming a new word on the model of a general word-formation rule would be described under the heading of productivity. The wider conception of analogy that I am following in this paper has been chosen for the following reasons: Firstly, it is questionable whether a clear-cut distinction between the two types of process mentioned above can be upheld in general for many instances of wordformation. Secondly, I could not tell for the specific case under discussion (Prep-einander) what the degree of abstractness of the analogical model that allows speakers to form these new words is: [Prep-X], [Prep-X] N, [mit-x], [mit-x] N.... The data described in this paper, and also the respective English-German contrasts, would allow for different degrees of abstraction being the model for new formations. 14

15 in 1886); throughpost (obs.); throughput; throughseek (obs.); through-shine (obs.); through-sting (obs.); through-stone (dial., arch.); through-toll (last attested in 1892); throughway (18) withdraw; withgo (obs.); withhold; withsake (obs.); withsave (obs.); withsay (obs.); withstand (arch.); withtake (obs.) German The above lists, which are not long anyway, strike us as including almost only obsolete words. This contrasts with the situation in German, where the corresponding prepositions durch through and mit are frequent first parts in compounds. (19) provides a selection of the 204 lexemes that are listed in the Duden (2000): (19) durchaus absolutely, durchbeißen struggle through, durchblättern to leaf through, Durchblick clear vision, Durchblutung blood circulation, durchboxen push through, Durchbruch breakthrough, durchbrennen burn through, durchdrehen blow a fuse, Durchfahrt crossing, Durchfall diarrhoea, durchforsten comb through, durchführen accomplish, durchgängig continuous, durchgeben announce, durchhalten hang on, durchhängen be in a slump, durchlaufen run through, Durchmesser diameter, Durchreise journey through, Durchsage announcement, durchschnittlich average, durchtanzen dance through, durchziehen go through with For mit with as a first element, the Duden lists 90 lexemes, excluding archaic words. (20) again provides a selection: (20) Mitarbeit, mitbekommen notice, Mitbestimmung participation, Mitbewohner(in) flatmate, mitbringen bring along, Mitbürger fellow citizen, mitdenken to follow somebody s line of argument, miterleben witness, mitfahren go with someone in a car, mitführen carry, Mitgefühl compassion, Mitglied member, mithilfe with the help of, mitkriegen notice, Mitleid pity, mitmachen take part, mitreden take part in a conversation, Mitschüler schoolmate, mitspielen cooperate, mitverantwortlich jointly responsible, Mitverfasser co-author, Mitwirkung contribution. The German pattern is thus much more common than its English counterpart. As stressed in Fleischer and Barz (2012: 84-86; ) and the grammar Duden: Die Grammatik (2005: 771), compounds can contain first elements of all word classes, crucially including prepositions 7. A number of nominal examples were already given in (2). At this point, it should also be noted, however, that adverbs like durchaus absolutely, gegenüber opposite and vorbei over belong to this group. As far as our analogical account is concerned, this means that the formations Miteinander, Nebeneinander and Durcheinander can be associated with analogical models from the group of both nouns and adverbs. I mentioned earlier that the diachrony of German reciprocals and their syntagmatic relation to prepositions argues against an important role of the frequency facts illustrated in (15). These formations are simply to old to be reducible to that factor. The diachronic picture for English is crucially different: As already observed by Plank (2008), English has turned out to be much less progressive than German in terms of 7 The only prepositions which seem to be excluded are bis until, für for, in in, ohne without. 15

16 both the univerbation of the reciprocals themselves and their association with a preceding preposition. More specifically, if we assume that the availability of an analogical model was responsible for the emergence of Prep-einander formations in German, we have to ask for English if a similar model was possible at the appropriate point in time. The answer to this question is negative. The fact that most of the formations in (17) and (18) have long been obsolete suggests that the relevant word-formation pattern was already becoming unproductive at the time when the English reciprocals each other and one another were formed, namely in late Middle English and early Modern English (for an overview see Haas 2010: 63-74). What this implies is that even though Prep-X formations have not always been foreign to the lexical morphology of English, this pattern was probably not anymore available as an analogical model when each other and one another established themselves as lexicalized reciprocal pronouns. Although these reciprocals frequently co-occurred with prepositions, there was not anymore a wordformation pattern that was strong enough to trigger the type of Prep-Recip univerbation that took place in German. 4 English-German contrasts in word-formation: Summary and outlook In this section I will relate the seemingly isolated contrast discussed above to more general tendencies in English and German word-formation. The contrastive study of German and English word-formation is still in its infancy and a comprehensive picture can only be reached when contrastive linguists will have carried out more case studies. In what follows, tendencies of English and German word-formation will be surveyed on the basis of what we have found out about the specific contrast under discussion. 4.1 Conversion The word-formation process of conversion is generally claimed to be more productive in English than in German. A motivating factor here seems to be the competition between derivation and conversion. The ubiquity of proper (as opposed to syntactic) conversion in English is explained to a large extent by the fact that derivational affixes that were responsible for such word-class changes in earlier times have become less productive (for a recent study see Haselow 2011). The latter does certainly not hold for German. Consider noun-to-verb conversion as an example. While the productivity of English noun-to-verb conversion is hardly restricted, the default strategy in German involves affixation (Lohde 2006: 280). (21) a. Interesse interest > interessieren to interested b. Filter filter > filtrieren to filter c. Torpedo torpedo > torpedieren to torpedo As with other directions of conversion, this accounts for the word-formation type under discussion being so more common in English. Nonetheless, if the observations presented in this paper tell us anything about English-German contrasts in the domain of conversion, one finding seems to be the following. Although the view commonly held in the literature according to which conversion is more productive in English than in German remains true, syntactic conversion to nominals, i.e. the spontaneous use of a given word-form or phrase as a 16

17 nominal expression, is productive in German. The general productivity of this process in English has not yet been investigated empirically, but on the basis of morphological descriptions and exploratory corpus searches it appears that German syntax is in fact more willing to accept syntactic conversions. As was shown in (6) above, basically any kind of string can be inserted into a nominal slot like the one following demonstrative determiner. To be sure, this is not word-formation. There is no reason for treating Ich will nicht I don t want to in (6f) as a zero-derived noun, for instance. Nonetheless, the option of using a given string as a nominal expression may be the first step to the development of a new lexeme. And this, besides the analogy process argued for in the above sections, could be a factor that made it easier for Prep-einander phrases to become nouns. In combination with analogy, this reasoning could then explain the apparent paradox that we are here witnessing a conversion process in German, but not in English, although we would normally expect English conversion to be more productive than German conversion. As mentioned above, further research would have to show whether syntactic conversion is generally more restricted in English than in German. If this is the case, a possible reason for the higher productivity of syntactic conversion to nominals in German may be the preservation of gender distinctions in the determiner system of German. Whereas grammatical gender has long been abolished in English, every German noun as well as its modifiers are (overtly or covertly) specified for one of the three gender values masculine, feminine and neuter. Syntactic conversion to nominals always takes neuter case (see the examples in [6]). As pointed out by Lühr (2003), neuter gender in Indo-European languages is generally the preferred gender value in such contexts. One may speculate that the neuter gender offers a niche in which this type of conversion could establish itself more easily than it would be possible in a language without gender distinctions. But is syntactic conversion in the above sense really so clearly distinct from conversion proper? Some recent proposals seem to call this assumption into question. Lehmann (2008) offers an account of the different ways in which lexical items in different languages are categorial, i.e. assigned to a specific word class. (Lehmann examines expressions belonging the conceptual domain of experience, but his findings seem to apply to other conceptual domains, as well.) Languages differ with respect to the level at which categorization takes place: the root, the stem, the word form or the phrase. From this perspective, German exhibits higher degrees of root and stem categoriality than English (Lehmann 2008: ). To put it differently, English words are less tied to specific part-of-speech categories than their German counterparts. This finding ties in nicely with the traditional picture of conversion being more at home in English than in German. The ease with which English stems can change their word classes may thus be reinterpreted as a low degree of categoriality. In this way, these flexible stems can be considered as not being members of predefined word classes, but rather constituting pre-categorial stems which find their eventual role at the syntactic, as opposed to the morphological, level (a similar view is put forward by Bauer 1983: 227). 8 Although it yet remains unclear to me where exactly one should draw the borderline between syntactic conversion and conversion proper, I see no reason for lumping them together straight-away. What keeps them apart is the following: Syntactic conversion to nominals, which I have claimed to be rather unrestricted in German, 8 Bauer (1983) states: The commonness of conversion can possibly be seen as breaking down the distinction between form classes in English and leading to a system where there are closed sets such as pronouns and a single open set of lexical items that can be used as required. Such a move could be seen as part of the trend away from from synthetic structure and towards analytic structure which has been fairly typical of the history of English over the last millenium. (227) 17

18 especially in combination with the neuter demonstrative dieses this.n, does not start with pre-categorial roots or stems in Lehmann s (2008) sense above. The input is rather a fully categorized expression (word, phrase or even sentence), which is then put into a nominal slot. I reckon that the metalinguistic flavour of this operation in fact goes back to the input expressions being fully categorized beforehand. 4.2 Compounding The view of compounding taken in this paper is a product-oriented one (Bauer 2011: 486 calls this final form or Wortgebildetheit, contrasting with Wortbildung.). This means that I abstracted away from the question of whether a lexicalized combination of two bases has arisen from (i) a speaker creatively combining them to name some concept, or (ii) univerbation, i.e. frequent co-occurrence that has led to the lexicalization of the collocation. My focus has rather been on the outcomes of these developments. More specifically, I asked in how far there are patterns in the language which serve as models for the acceptability and establishment of a new formation, irrespective of how the syntagm has first come about. It was shown that there is one pattern that is very clearly more productive in German than in English: Prep-X, i.e. a formation in which a preposition takes the initial position. Little contrastive work has been done on English compounding. It is therefore difficult to say whether the Prep-X asymmetry stands out as a major English-German contrast. Apart from the question of whether a given word-formation pattern is available or not, however, there can be striking contrasts in the productivity of such patterns. A further aspect that we observed in relation to Prep-Recip combinations is the ease with which univerbation creates new lexemes in German. Importantly, this does not only concern the Prep-Recip formations themselves, but in turn also verbs and nouns that these formations become part of (cf. e.g. the lists in Wiemer and Nedjalkov 2007: 483). It is beyond the scope of this paper to determine the degree to which this is a genuine aspect of German lexical morphology, or rather an artefact of (by now partly obsolete) orthographical rules, where compound spelling was maybe less restricted than the actual formation of compounds. Much more contrastive work can probably be carried out in this area of morphology, too. 5 Summary An attempt was made to motivate the availability of a very specific class of complex German nouns and their lack in English by tracing their historical development in the context of more general morphological contrasts between English and German. The major steps in the German development of Prep-einander nouns are sketched in the following: Syntagms of prepositions and the reciprocal einander undergo univerbation. The high type frequency of Prep-X compounds serves as a model on the basis of which these new formations become established. Possibly first as instances of syntactic conversion, some of the new Prep-einander compounds (hitherto adverbs) come to be used nominally. Since the German lexicon also contains nominal compounds with a preposition in initial position, some frequent Prep-einander compounds (esp. Durcheinander, Miteinander and Nebeneinander) can establish themselves as new lexemes of the category noun. 18

19 The English development differs from the aforementioned steps in crucial ways: Syntagms of prepositions and the reciprocals each other and one another cannot be formed as early as their German counterparts, since the reciprocals themselves become lexicalized only in the period spanning from later Middle English to early Modern English. Since the lexicalization of the English reciprocals took place, there has not been an analogical model of Prep-X compounds that was entrenched enough to trigger new formations. Syntactic conversion of non-lexicalized Prep-Recip sequences (e.g. with each other) seems not to have been an alternative either. On the one hand, this particular type of syntactic conversion appears to be less productive in English than in German. On the other hand, even if sentences like I can t stand this with each other anymore. occurred, a spontaneous nominalization of the type [with each other] NP would not have had the chance to establish itself as a full-fledged noun, the reason being that there is no productive word-formation type [Prep-X] N that could serve as analogical model (again in contrast to German; see above). This historical scenario remains speculative in so far as a detailed diachronic study of the relevant expressions is beyond the scope of this paper. What I intended to offer here was rather an attempt at illuminating the motivation behind a specific English- German contrast by bringing together the perspectives of contrastive linguistics, on the one hand, and those of language-specific scholarship in the fields of English and German lexical morphology, on the other. One of the merits of contrastive linguistics is that of leading to insights unattainable by analyzing the two languages separately. (König and Gast 2009: 3). The starting point of this paper, i.e. the question of why there are no nouns of the form Prep-Recip in English, would probably never arise if one were not aware of the corresponding expressions in German. Whether the explanation of the contrast as it has been proposed in the preceding section stands up to a more detailed historical investigation and the inclusion of other possibly relevant language-internal factors is left to further research. References Bauer, Laurie English Word-formation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Bauer, Laurie Compounds and minor word-formation types. In The Handbook of English Linguistics, ed. Bas Aarts and April McMahon, London: Blackwell. Berg, Thomas The incompatibility of morpheme orders and lexical categories and its historical implications. English Language and Linguistics 2: Booij, Geert Compounds and construction morphology. In Lieber and Stekauer (2009), Bybee, Joan Language, Usage and Cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 19

20 Carstairs-McCarthy, Andrew An Introduction to English Morphology. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Donalies, Elke Basiswissen Deutsche Wortbildung. Tübingen: Francke. Dudenredaktion Duden: Die deutsche Rechtschreibung. Dudenverlag, 22nd ed. edition. Dudenredaktion Duden: Die Grammatik. Dudenverlag, 5. edition. Eisenberg, Peter Grundriss der deutschen Grammatik: Das Wort. Stuttgart: Metzler, second edition. Erben, Johannes Einführung in die deutsche Wortbildungslehre. Berlin: Erich Schmidt Verlag, sixth edition. Eschenlohr, Stefanie Vom Nomen zum Verb: Konversion, Präfigierung und Rückbildung im Deutschen. Hildesheim/Zürich/New York: Georg Olms Verlag. Fischer, Olga Morphosyntactic Change: Formal and Functional Perspectives. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Wortbildung der deutschen Gegen- Fleischer, Wolfgang, and Irmhild Barz wartssprache. 4th edition. Berlin: de Gruyter. Gast, Volker, and Florian Haas On reflexive and reciprocal readings of anaphors in German and other European languages. In König and Gast (2008), Grimm, Jacob und Wilhelm Grimm Deutsches Wörterbuch. Leipzig. Haas, Florian Reciprocity in English: Historical Development and Synchronic Structure. London: Routledge. Haselow, A Typological Changes in the Lexicon: Analytic Tendencies in English Noun Formation. De Gruyter. Hiltunen, Risto The Decline of the Prefixes and the Beginning of the English Phrasal Verb: The Evidence from some Old and early Middle English Texts. Turku/Helsinki: Turun Yliopiso. Itkonen, Esa Analogy as Structure and Process. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Kastovsky, Dieter Vocabulary. In A History of the English Language, ed. Richard Hogg and David Denison, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Kemmer, Suzanne The Middle Voice. Amsterdam: Benjamins. König, Ekkehard, and Volker Gast, ed Reciprocity and Reflexivity: Theoretical and Typological Explorations. Berlin: de Gruyter. König, Ekkehard, and Volker Gast Understanding English-German Contrasts, 2nd ed.. Berlin: Erich Schmidt Verlag. Lehmann, Christian Roots, stems and word classes. Studies in Language 32:

The finite verb and the clause: IP

The finite verb and the clause: IP Introduction to General Linguistics WS12/13 page 1 Syntax 6 The finite verb and the clause: Course teacher: Sam Featherston Important things you will learn in this section: The head of the clause The positions

More information

COMPUTATIONAL DATA ANALYSIS FOR SYNTAX

COMPUTATIONAL DATA ANALYSIS FOR SYNTAX COLING 82, J. Horeck~ (ed.j North-Holland Publishing Compa~y Academia, 1982 COMPUTATIONAL DATA ANALYSIS FOR SYNTAX Ludmila UhliFova - Zva Nebeska - Jan Kralik Czech Language Institute Czechoslovak Academy

More information

German Language Resource Packet

German Language Resource Packet German has three features of word order than do not exist in English: 1. The main verb must be the second element in the independent clause. This often requires an inversion of subject and verb. For example:

More information

Ling 201 Syntax 1. Jirka Hana April 10, 2006

Ling 201 Syntax 1. Jirka Hana April 10, 2006 Overview of topics What is Syntax? Word Classes What to remember and understand: Ling 201 Syntax 1 Jirka Hana April 10, 2006 Syntax, difference between syntax and semantics, open/closed class words, all

More information

Stefan Engelberg (IDS Mannheim), Workshop Corpora in Lexical Research, Bucharest, Nov. 2008 [Folie 1]

Stefan Engelberg (IDS Mannheim), Workshop Corpora in Lexical Research, Bucharest, Nov. 2008 [Folie 1] Content 1. Empirical linguistics 2. Text corpora and corpus linguistics 3. Concordances 4. Application I: The German progressive 5. Part-of-speech tagging 6. Fequency analysis 7. Application II: Compounds

More information

Methodological Issues for Interdisciplinary Research

Methodological Issues for Interdisciplinary Research J. T. M. Miller, Department of Philosophy, University of Durham 1 Methodological Issues for Interdisciplinary Research Much of the apparent difficulty of interdisciplinary research stems from the nature

More information

Doctoral School of Historical Sciences Dr. Székely Gábor professor Program of Assyiriology Dr. Dezső Tamás habilitate docent

Doctoral School of Historical Sciences Dr. Székely Gábor professor Program of Assyiriology Dr. Dezső Tamás habilitate docent Doctoral School of Historical Sciences Dr. Székely Gábor professor Program of Assyiriology Dr. Dezső Tamás habilitate docent The theses of the Dissertation Nominal and Verbal Plurality in Sumerian: A Morphosemantic

More information

Modalverben Theorie. learning target. rules. Aim of this section is to learn how to use modal verbs.

Modalverben Theorie. learning target. rules. Aim of this section is to learn how to use modal verbs. learning target Aim of this section is to learn how to use modal verbs. German Ich muss nach Hause gehen. Er sollte das Buch lesen. Wir können das Visum bekommen. English I must go home. He should read

More information

Syntactic and Semantic Differences between Nominal Relative Clauses and Dependent wh-interrogative Clauses

Syntactic and Semantic Differences between Nominal Relative Clauses and Dependent wh-interrogative Clauses Theory and Practice in English Studies 3 (2005): Proceedings from the Eighth Conference of British, American and Canadian Studies. Brno: Masarykova univerzita Syntactic and Semantic Differences between

More information

Testing Data-Driven Learning Algorithms for PoS Tagging of Icelandic

Testing Data-Driven Learning Algorithms for PoS Tagging of Icelandic Testing Data-Driven Learning Algorithms for PoS Tagging of Icelandic by Sigrún Helgadóttir Abstract This paper gives the results of an experiment concerned with training three different taggers on tagged

More information

English Appendix 2: Vocabulary, grammar and punctuation

English Appendix 2: Vocabulary, grammar and punctuation English Appendix 2: Vocabulary, grammar and punctuation The grammar of our first language is learnt naturally and implicitly through interactions with other speakers and from reading. Explicit knowledge

More information

AP WORLD LANGUAGE AND CULTURE EXAMS 2012 SCORING GUIDELINES

AP WORLD LANGUAGE AND CULTURE EXAMS 2012 SCORING GUIDELINES AP WORLD LANGUAGE AND CULTURE EXAMS 2012 SCORING GUIDELINES Interpersonal Writing: E-mail Reply 5: STRONG performance in Interpersonal Writing Maintains the exchange with a response that is clearly appropriate

More information

Using Language Stage Research** and CCEE ELA Language Domain, Standard 1, to Develop Conventions of Standard English

Using Language Stage Research** and CCEE ELA Language Domain, Standard 1, to Develop Conventions of Standard English Using Language Stage Research** and CCEE ELA Language Domain, Standard, to Develop Conventions of Standard English Language Stage CCSS* Supporting Speaking and Writing for Students with Complex Communication

More information

1 Basic concepts. 1.1 What is morphology?

1 Basic concepts. 1.1 What is morphology? EXTRACT 1 Basic concepts It has become a tradition to begin monographs and textbooks on morphology with a tribute to the German poet Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, who invented the term Morphologie in 1790

More information

Honors German 3/ German 3 Curriculum

Honors German 3/ German 3 Curriculum Honors German 3/ German 3 Curriculum Timeline Unit 1 Standards Objectives Content Additional Resources Performance Tasks Assessments 3 weeks Die ACTFL Students will be able Vocabulary: Handouts Students

More information

Checklist Use this checklist to find out how much English you already know. Grundstufe 1 (Common European Framework: A1 Level)

Checklist Use this checklist to find out how much English you already know. Grundstufe 1 (Common European Framework: A1 Level) Der XL Test: Was können Sie schon? Schätzen Sie Ihre Sprachkenntnisse selbst ein! Sprache: Englisch Mit der folgenden e haben Sie die Möglichkeit, Ihre Fremdsprachenkenntnisse selbst einzuschätzen. Die

More information

LEJ Langenscheidt Berlin München Wien Zürich New York

LEJ Langenscheidt Berlin München Wien Zürich New York Langenscheidt Deutsch in 30 Tagen German in 30 days Von Angelika G. Beck LEJ Langenscheidt Berlin München Wien Zürich New York I Contents Introduction Spelling and pronunciation Lesson 1 Im Flugzeug On

More information

Complex Predications in Argument Structure Alternations

Complex Predications in Argument Structure Alternations Complex Predications in Argument Structure Alternations Stefan Engelberg (Institut für Deutsche Sprache & University of Mannheim) Stefan Engelberg (IDS Mannheim), Universitatea din Bucureşti, November

More information

COMPARATIVES WITHOUT DEGREES: A NEW APPROACH. FRIEDERIKE MOLTMANN IHPST, Paris fmoltmann@univ-paris1.fr

COMPARATIVES WITHOUT DEGREES: A NEW APPROACH. FRIEDERIKE MOLTMANN IHPST, Paris fmoltmann@univ-paris1.fr COMPARATIVES WITHOUT DEGREES: A NEW APPROACH FRIEDERIKE MOLTMANN IHPST, Paris fmoltmann@univ-paris1.fr It has become common to analyse comparatives by using degrees, so that John is happier than Mary would

More information

Competing Models of Grammatical Description

Competing Models of Grammatical Description Competing Models of Grammatical Description Computerlinguistik (Seminar SS 2008) PD Dr. Tania Avgustinova Grammar: Overview Kinds of grammars, views on grammar Basic grammatical notions grammatical units:

More information

Index. 344 Grammar and Language Workbook, Grade 8

Index. 344 Grammar and Language Workbook, Grade 8 Index Index 343 Index A A, an (usage), 8, 123 A, an, the (articles), 8, 123 diagraming, 205 Abbreviations, correct use of, 18 19, 273 Abstract nouns, defined, 4, 63 Accept, except, 12, 227 Action verbs,

More information

National Quali cations SPECIMEN ONLY

National Quali cations SPECIMEN ONLY N5 SQ40/N5/02 FOR OFFICIAL USE National Quali cations SPECIMEN ONLY Mark Urdu Writing Date Not applicable Duration 1 hour and 30 minutes *SQ40N502* Fill in these boxes and read what is printed below. Full

More information

Linguistic Universals

Linguistic Universals Armin W. Buch 1 2012/11/28 1 Relying heavily on material by Gerhard Jäger and David Erschler Linguistic Properties shared by all languages Trivial: all languages have consonants and vowels More interesting:

More information

Structure of Clauses. March 9, 2004

Structure of Clauses. March 9, 2004 Structure of Clauses March 9, 2004 Preview Comments on HW 6 Schedule review session Finite and non-finite clauses Constituent structure of clauses Structure of Main Clauses Discuss HW #7 Course Evals Comments

More information

Structure Of Noun Phrases In German W. P. Lehmann University of Texas

Structure Of Noun Phrases In German W. P. Lehmann University of Texas [Eighth Annual Round Table Meeting on Linguistics and Language Studies, Georgetown University, 1957] Structure Of Noun Phrases In German W. P. Lehmann University of Texas Analyzing German materials with

More information

SYNTAX: THE ANALYSIS OF SENTENCE STRUCTURE

SYNTAX: THE ANALYSIS OF SENTENCE STRUCTURE SYNTAX: THE ANALYSIS OF SENTENCE STRUCTURE OBJECTIVES the game is to say something new with old words RALPH WALDO EMERSON, Journals (1849) In this chapter, you will learn: how we categorize words how words

More information

Cross-linguistic differences in the interpretation of sentences with more than one QP: German (Frey 1993) and Hungarian (É Kiss 1991)

Cross-linguistic differences in the interpretation of sentences with more than one QP: German (Frey 1993) and Hungarian (É Kiss 1991) Cross-linguistic differences in the interpretation of sentences with more than one QP: German (Frey 1993) and Hungarian (É Kiss 1991) 1. Quantifier Scope in English (May 1977, 1985) Predictions of May

More information

Satzstellung. Satzstellung Theorie. learning target. rules

Satzstellung. Satzstellung Theorie. learning target. rules Satzstellung learning target Aim of this topic is to explain how to arrange the different parts of a sentence in the correct order. I must admit it took quite a long time to handle this topic and find

More information

Morphology. Morphology is the study of word formation, of the structure of words. 1. some words can be divided into parts which still have meaning

Morphology. Morphology is the study of word formation, of the structure of words. 1. some words can be divided into parts which still have meaning Morphology Morphology is the study of word formation, of the structure of words. Some observations about words and their structure: 1. some words can be divided into parts which still have meaning 2. many

More information

Differences in linguistic and discourse features of narrative writing performance. Dr. Bilal Genç 1 Dr. Kağan Büyükkarcı 2 Ali Göksu 3

Differences in linguistic and discourse features of narrative writing performance. Dr. Bilal Genç 1 Dr. Kağan Büyükkarcı 2 Ali Göksu 3 Yıl/Year: 2012 Cilt/Volume: 1 Sayı/Issue:2 Sayfalar/Pages: 40-47 Differences in linguistic and discourse features of narrative writing performance Abstract Dr. Bilal Genç 1 Dr. Kağan Büyükkarcı 2 Ali Göksu

More information

1003 Inhaltsverzeichnis

1003 Inhaltsverzeichnis 1003 Einführung - Freizeit und Hobbys Springen wir ins Thema 2 How do people spend their freetime? What sorts of hobbies and activities do you enjoy? 1 Vokabelkasten 4 Introduction to the Vokabelkasten

More information

LANGUAGE! 4 th Edition, Levels A C, correlated to the South Carolina College and Career Readiness Standards, Grades 3 5

LANGUAGE! 4 th Edition, Levels A C, correlated to the South Carolina College and Career Readiness Standards, Grades 3 5 Page 1 of 57 Grade 3 Reading Literary Text Principles of Reading (P) Standard 1: Demonstrate understanding of the organization and basic features of print. Standard 2: Demonstrate understanding of spoken

More information

Introduction: Reading and writing; talking and thinking

Introduction: Reading and writing; talking and thinking Introduction: Reading and writing; talking and thinking We begin, not with reading, writing or reasoning, but with talk, which is a more complicated business than most people realize. Of course, being

More information

Stefan Engelberg (IDS Mannheim), Workshop Corpora in Lexical Research, Bucharest, Nov. 2008 [Folie 1]

Stefan Engelberg (IDS Mannheim), Workshop Corpora in Lexical Research, Bucharest, Nov. 2008 [Folie 1] Content 1. Empirical linguistics 2. Text corpora and corpus linguistics 3. Concordances 4. Application I: The German progressive 5. Part-of-speech tagging 6. Fequency analysis 7. Application II: Compounds

More information

PS I TAM-TAM Aspect [20/11/09] 1

PS I TAM-TAM Aspect [20/11/09] 1 PS I TAM-TAM Aspect [20/11/09] 1 Binnick, Robert I. (2006): "Aspect and Aspectuality". In: Bas Aarts & April McMahon (eds). The Handbook of English Linguistics. Malden, MA et al.: Blackwell Publishing,

More information

Year 1 reading expectations (New Curriculum) Year 1 writing expectations (New Curriculum)

Year 1 reading expectations (New Curriculum) Year 1 writing expectations (New Curriculum) Year 1 reading expectations Year 1 writing expectations Responds speedily with the correct sound to graphemes (letters or groups of letters) for all 40+ phonemes, including, where applicable, alternative

More information

Syntactic Theory on Swedish

Syntactic Theory on Swedish Syntactic Theory on Swedish Mats Uddenfeldt Pernilla Näsfors June 13, 2003 Report for Introductory course in NLP Department of Linguistics Uppsala University Sweden Abstract Using the grammar presented

More information

How the Computer Translates. Svetlana Sokolova President and CEO of PROMT, PhD.

How the Computer Translates. Svetlana Sokolova President and CEO of PROMT, PhD. Svetlana Sokolova President and CEO of PROMT, PhD. How the Computer Translates Machine translation is a special field of computer application where almost everyone believes that he/she is a specialist.

More information

One Ring to rule them all, One Ring to find them One Ring to bring them all, and in the darkness bind them In the Land of Mordor where shadows lie

One Ring to rule them all, One Ring to find them One Ring to bring them all, and in the darkness bind them In the Land of Mordor where shadows lie One Ring to rule them all, One Ring to find them One Ring to bring them all, and in the darkness bind them In the Land of Mordor where shadows lie OR, THE RING POEM IN OLD CHURCH SLAVIC by Jussi Halla-aho

More information

Annotation Guidelines for Dutch-English Word Alignment

Annotation Guidelines for Dutch-English Word Alignment Annotation Guidelines for Dutch-English Word Alignment version 1.0 LT3 Technical Report LT3 10-01 Lieve Macken LT3 Language and Translation Technology Team Faculty of Translation Studies University College

More information

Pupil SPAG Card 1. Terminology for pupils. I Can Date Word

Pupil SPAG Card 1. Terminology for pupils. I Can Date Word Pupil SPAG Card 1 1 I know about regular plural noun endings s or es and what they mean (for example, dog, dogs; wish, wishes) 2 I know the regular endings that can be added to verbs (e.g. helping, helped,

More information

Albert Pye and Ravensmere Schools Grammar Curriculum

Albert Pye and Ravensmere Schools Grammar Curriculum Albert Pye and Ravensmere Schools Grammar Curriculum Introduction The aim of our schools own grammar curriculum is to ensure that all relevant grammar content is introduced within the primary years in

More information

are used to show how a text fits

are used to show how a text fits Glossary of terms: Term Definition Example active voice An active verb has its usual pattern of subject and object (in contrast to the passive voice). Active The school arranged a visit. Passive: adverbs

More information

Hybrid Strategies. for better products and shorter time-to-market

Hybrid Strategies. for better products and shorter time-to-market Hybrid Strategies for better products and shorter time-to-market Background Manufacturer of language technology software & services Spin-off of the research center of Germany/Heidelberg Founded in 1999,

More information

Elena Chiocchetti & Natascia Ralli (EURAC) Tanja Wissik & Vesna Lušicky (University of Vienna)

Elena Chiocchetti & Natascia Ralli (EURAC) Tanja Wissik & Vesna Lušicky (University of Vienna) Elena Chiocchetti & Natascia Ralli (EURAC) Tanja Wissik & Vesna Lušicky (University of Vienna) VII Conference on Legal Translation, Court Interpreting and Comparative Legilinguistics Poznań, 28-30.06.2013

More information

Stefan Engelberg (IDS Mannheim), Workshop Corpora in Lexical Research, Bucharest, Nov. 2008 [Folie 1]

Stefan Engelberg (IDS Mannheim), Workshop Corpora in Lexical Research, Bucharest, Nov. 2008 [Folie 1] Content 1. Empirical linguistics 2. Text corpora and corpus linguistics 3. Concordances 4. Application I: The German progressive 5. Part-of-speech tagging 6. Fequency analysis 7. Application II: Compounds

More information

English Descriptive Grammar

English Descriptive Grammar English Descriptive Grammar 2015/2016 Code: 103410 ECTS Credits: 6 Degree Type Year Semester 2500245 English Studies FB 1 1 2501902 English and Catalan FB 1 1 2501907 English and Classics FB 1 1 2501910

More information

LESSON THIRTEEN STRUCTURAL AMBIGUITY. Structural ambiguity is also referred to as syntactic ambiguity or grammatical ambiguity.

LESSON THIRTEEN STRUCTURAL AMBIGUITY. Structural ambiguity is also referred to as syntactic ambiguity or grammatical ambiguity. LESSON THIRTEEN STRUCTURAL AMBIGUITY Structural ambiguity is also referred to as syntactic ambiguity or grammatical ambiguity. Structural or syntactic ambiguity, occurs when a phrase, clause or sentence

More information

Sentence Structure/Sentence Types HANDOUT

Sentence Structure/Sentence Types HANDOUT Sentence Structure/Sentence Types HANDOUT This handout is designed to give you a very brief (and, of necessity, incomplete) overview of the different types of sentence structure and how the elements of

More information

MODERN WRITTEN ARABIC. Volume I. Hosted for free on livelingua.com

MODERN WRITTEN ARABIC. Volume I. Hosted for free on livelingua.com MODERN WRITTEN ARABIC Volume I Hosted for free on livelingua.com TABLE OF CcmmTs PREFACE. Page iii INTRODUCTICN vi Lesson 1 1 2.6 3 14 4 5 6 22 30.45 7 55 8 61 9 69 10 11 12 13 96 107 118 14 134 15 16

More information

PREP-009 COURSE SYLLABUS FOR WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS

PREP-009 COURSE SYLLABUS FOR WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS Coffeyville Community College PREP-009 COURSE SYLLABUS FOR WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS Ryan Butcher Instructor COURSE NUMBER: PREP-009 COURSE TITLE: Written Communications CREDIT HOURS: 3 INSTRUCTOR: OFFICE

More information

Milk, bread and toothpaste : Adapting Data Mining techniques for the analysis of collocation at varying levels of discourse

Milk, bread and toothpaste : Adapting Data Mining techniques for the analysis of collocation at varying levels of discourse Milk, bread and toothpaste : Adapting Data Mining techniques for the analysis of collocation at varying levels of discourse Rob Sanderson, Matthew Brook O Donnell and Clare Llewellyn What happens with

More information

BURSTED WOOD PRIMARY SCHOOL

BURSTED WOOD PRIMARY SCHOOL BURSTED WOOD PRIMARY SCHOOL Year 6 English Medium Term Plans Reading Word Objectives apply their growing knowledge of root words prefixes and suffixes (morphology and etymology), as listed under the spelling

More information

According to the Argentine writer Jorge Luis Borges, in the Celestial Emporium of Benevolent Knowledge, animals are divided

According to the Argentine writer Jorge Luis Borges, in the Celestial Emporium of Benevolent Knowledge, animals are divided Categories Categories According to the Argentine writer Jorge Luis Borges, in the Celestial Emporium of Benevolent Knowledge, animals are divided into 1 2 Categories those that belong to the Emperor embalmed

More information

Support verb constructions

Support verb constructions Support verb constructions Comments on Angelika Storrer s presentation Markus Egg Rijksuniversiteit Groningen Salsa-Workshop 2006 Outline of the comment Support-verb constructions (SVCs) and textual organisation

More information

Comparative Analysis on the Armenian and Korean Languages

Comparative Analysis on the Armenian and Korean Languages Comparative Analysis on the Armenian and Korean Languages Syuzanna Mejlumyan Yerevan State Linguistic University Abstract It has been five years since the Korean language has been taught at Yerevan State

More information

Varieties of specification and underspecification: A view from semantics

Varieties of specification and underspecification: A view from semantics Varieties of specification and underspecification: A view from semantics Torgrim Solstad D1/B4 SFB meeting on long-term goals June 29th, 2009 The technique of underspecification I Presupposed: in semantics,

More information

Bound and referential pronouns

Bound and referential pronouns Bound and referential pronouns *with thanks to Birgit Bärnreuther, Christina Bergmann, Dominique Goltz, Stefan Hinterwimmer, MaikeKleemeyer, Peter König, Florian Krause, Marlene Meyer Peter Bosch Institute

More information

AP GERMAN LANGUAGE AND CULTURE EXAM 2015 SCORING GUIDELINES

AP GERMAN LANGUAGE AND CULTURE EXAM 2015 SCORING GUIDELINES AP GERMAN LANGUAGE AND CULTURE EXAM 2015 SCORING GUIDELINES Identical to Scoring Guidelines used for French, Italian, and Spanish Language and Culture Exams Interpersonal Writing: E-mail Reply 5: STRONG

More information

Comprendium Translator System Overview

Comprendium Translator System Overview Comprendium System Overview May 2004 Table of Contents 1. INTRODUCTION...3 2. WHAT IS MACHINE TRANSLATION?...3 3. THE COMPRENDIUM MACHINE TRANSLATION TECHNOLOGY...4 3.1 THE BEST MT TECHNOLOGY IN THE MARKET...4

More information

Johns Hopkins University 210.161.13 - German Elements I Intersession 2015 MTWTHFR: 1:00 3:30, ROOM TBA

Johns Hopkins University 210.161.13 - German Elements I Intersession 2015 MTWTHFR: 1:00 3:30, ROOM TBA German 210.161, Syllabus Intersession 2014!1 Johns Hopkins University 210.161.13 - German Elements I Intersession 2015 MTWTHFR: 1:00 3:30, ROOM TBA Christiane Ketteler; jbirke1@jhu.edu http://blackboard.jhu.edu

More information

Abstraction in Computer Science & Software Engineering: A Pedagogical Perspective

Abstraction in Computer Science & Software Engineering: A Pedagogical Perspective Orit Hazzan's Column Abstraction in Computer Science & Software Engineering: A Pedagogical Perspective This column is coauthored with Jeff Kramer, Department of Computing, Imperial College, London ABSTRACT

More information

GM0101S HEADSTART STUDENT GUIDE PREPARED IY THE DEFENSE LANGUAGE INSTITUTE FOREIGN LANGUAGE CENTER

GM0101S HEADSTART STUDENT GUIDE PREPARED IY THE DEFENSE LANGUAGE INSTITUTE FOREIGN LANGUAGE CENTER GM0101S HEADSTART PREPARED IY THE DEFENSE LANGUAGE INSTITUTE FOREIGN LANGUAGE CENTER GERMAN PROGRAM Prepared by DEFENSE LANGUAGE INSTITUTE FOREIGN LANGUAGE CENTER SEPTEMBER 1977 CONTENTS Course Description

More information

Morphemes, roots and affixes. 28 October 2011

Morphemes, roots and affixes. 28 October 2011 Morphemes, roots and affixes 28 October 2011 Previously said We think of words as being the most basic, the most fundamental, units through which meaning is represented in language. Words are the smallest

More information

Teaching terms: a corpus-based approach to terminology in ESP classes

Teaching terms: a corpus-based approach to terminology in ESP classes Teaching terms: a corpus-based approach to terminology in ESP classes Maria João Cotter Lisbon School of Accountancy and Administration (ISCAL) (Portugal) Abstract This paper will build up on corpus linguistic

More information

National Curriculum 2014 Literacy Objectives Spoken language Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6

National Curriculum 2014 Literacy Objectives Spoken language Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Spoken language -structured descriptions, explanations and narratives for different purposes, including for expressing feelings ng, hypothesising, imagining and exploring ideas to comments the interest

More information

Efficient Techniques for Improved Data Classification and POS Tagging by Monitoring Extraction, Pruning and Updating of Unknown Foreign Words

Efficient Techniques for Improved Data Classification and POS Tagging by Monitoring Extraction, Pruning and Updating of Unknown Foreign Words , pp.290-295 http://dx.doi.org/10.14257/astl.2015.111.55 Efficient Techniques for Improved Data Classification and POS Tagging by Monitoring Extraction, Pruning and Updating of Unknown Foreign Words Irfan

More information

National Quali cations EXEMPLAR PAPER ONLY

National Quali cations EXEMPLAR PAPER ONLY H National Quali cations EXEMPLAR PAPER ONLY EP42/H/02 Mark Spanish Directed Writing FOR OFFICIAL USE Date Not applicable Duration 1 hour and 40 minutes *EP42H02* Fill in these boxes and read what is printed

More information

Last time we had arrived at the following provisional interpretation of Aquinas second way:

Last time we had arrived at the following provisional interpretation of Aquinas second way: Aquinas Third Way Last time we had arrived at the following provisional interpretation of Aquinas second way: 1. 2. 3. 4. At least one thing has an efficient cause. Every causal chain must either be circular,

More information

Correlation: ELLIS. English language Learning and Instruction System. and the TOEFL. Test Of English as a Foreign Language

Correlation: ELLIS. English language Learning and Instruction System. and the TOEFL. Test Of English as a Foreign Language Correlation: English language Learning and Instruction System and the TOEFL Test Of English as a Foreign Language Structure (Grammar) A major aspect of the ability to succeed on the TOEFL examination is

More information

FOR TEACHERS ONLY The University of the State of New York

FOR TEACHERS ONLY The University of the State of New York FOR TEACHERS ONLY The University of the State of New York REGENTS HIGH SCHOOL EXAMINATION G COMPREHENSIVE EXAMINATION IN GERMAN Friday, June 15, 2007 1:15 to 4:15 p.m., only SCORING KEY Updated information

More information

Language Meaning and Use

Language Meaning and Use Language Meaning and Use Raymond Hickey, English Linguistics Website: www.uni-due.de/ele Types of meaning There are four recognisable types of meaning: lexical meaning, grammatical meaning, sentence meaning

More information

Historical Linguistics. Diachronic Analysis. Two Approaches to the Study of Language. Kinds of Language Change. What is Historical Linguistics?

Historical Linguistics. Diachronic Analysis. Two Approaches to the Study of Language. Kinds of Language Change. What is Historical Linguistics? Historical Linguistics Diachronic Analysis What is Historical Linguistics? Historical linguistics is the study of how languages change over time and of their relationships with other languages. All languages

More information

Strand: Reading Literature Topics Standard I can statements Vocabulary Key Ideas and Details

Strand: Reading Literature Topics Standard I can statements Vocabulary Key Ideas and Details Strand: Reading Literature Key Ideas and Details Craft and Structure RL.3.1 Ask and answer questions to demonstrate understanding of a text, referring explicitly to the text as the basis for the answers.

More information

Level 3 Shirley English

Level 3 Shirley English Level 3 Shirley English SEPTEMBER: Chapter 1 Pages 1-9 Lesson 1 Long- term goals and short- term goals Lesson 2 Beginning setup plan for homeschool, WRITING (journal) Lesson 3 SKILLS (synonyms, antonyms,

More information

The Lexicon. The Lexicon. The Lexicon. The Significance of the Lexicon. Australian? The Significance of the Lexicon 澳 大 利 亚 奥 地 利

The Lexicon. The Lexicon. The Lexicon. The Significance of the Lexicon. Australian? The Significance of the Lexicon 澳 大 利 亚 奥 地 利 The significance of the lexicon Lexical knowledge Lexical skills 2 The significance of the lexicon Lexical knowledge The Significance of the Lexicon Lexical errors lead to misunderstanding. There s that

More information

Local Culture in Global English:

Local Culture in Global English: Local Culture in Global English: a case study of Kultur in Sprache / Sprachwissenschaft in Kulturwissenschaften Josef Schmied Chair English Language & Linguistics Chemnitz University of Technology www.tu-chemnitz.de/phil/english/linguist

More information

Advanced Placement German

Advanced Placement German Instructional Unit 01. Appearance Kapitel 01 - Aussehen: wichtig - The students will be The students will speak and essay writing, class oder? able to express their write in the target language. discussion,

More information

DAYTON CHRISTIAN SCHOOL SYSTEM PROPOSED 4/06 COURSE OUTLINE APPROVED:CURR DIR 8/06 GERMAN 2 AD TEAM 8/31/06 SUPERINTENDENT 8/31/06

DAYTON CHRISTIAN SCHOOL SYSTEM PROPOSED 4/06 COURSE OUTLINE APPROVED:CURR DIR 8/06 GERMAN 2 AD TEAM 8/31/06 SUPERINTENDENT 8/31/06 DAYTON CHRISTIAN SCHOOL SYSTEM PROPOSED 4/06 COURSE OUTLINE APPROVED:CURR DIR 8/06 GERMAN 2 AD TEAM 8/31/06 SUPERINTENDENT 8/31/06 COURSE CONTENT TIME FRAME: Unit 1 Review Unit 2 Bayern Bei den Baumanns

More information

Livingston Public Schools Scope and Sequence K 6 Grammar and Mechanics

Livingston Public Schools Scope and Sequence K 6 Grammar and Mechanics Grade and Unit Timeframe Grammar Mechanics K Unit 1 6 weeks Oral grammar naming words K Unit 2 6 weeks Oral grammar Capitalization of a Name action words K Unit 3 6 weeks Oral grammar sentences Sentence

More information

CHARTES D'ANGLAIS SOMMAIRE. CHARTE NIVEAU A1 Pages 2-4. CHARTE NIVEAU A2 Pages 5-7. CHARTE NIVEAU B1 Pages 8-10. CHARTE NIVEAU B2 Pages 11-14

CHARTES D'ANGLAIS SOMMAIRE. CHARTE NIVEAU A1 Pages 2-4. CHARTE NIVEAU A2 Pages 5-7. CHARTE NIVEAU B1 Pages 8-10. CHARTE NIVEAU B2 Pages 11-14 CHARTES D'ANGLAIS SOMMAIRE CHARTE NIVEAU A1 Pages 2-4 CHARTE NIVEAU A2 Pages 5-7 CHARTE NIVEAU B1 Pages 8-10 CHARTE NIVEAU B2 Pages 11-14 CHARTE NIVEAU C1 Pages 15-17 MAJ, le 11 juin 2014 A1 Skills-based

More information

A comparative analysis of the language used on labels of Champagne and Sparkling Water bottles.

A comparative analysis of the language used on labels of Champagne and Sparkling Water bottles. This research essay focuses on the language used on labels of five Champagne and five The two products are related, both being sparkling beverages, but also have obvious differences, primarily that one

More information

Unit: Fever, Fire and Fashion Term: Spring 1 Year: 5

Unit: Fever, Fire and Fashion Term: Spring 1 Year: 5 Unit: Fever, Fire and Fashion Term: Spring 1 Year: 5 English Fever, Fire and Fashion Unit Summary In this historical Unit pupils learn about everyday life in London during the 17 th Century. Frost fairs,

More information

Curriculum Map. Discipline: Foreign Language Course: German 7-8 Weighted Teacher: Julie Bequette/Tom Neal

Curriculum Map. Discipline: Foreign Language Course: German 7-8 Weighted Teacher: Julie Bequette/Tom Neal Curriculum Map Discipline: Foreign Language Course: German 7-8 Weighted Teacher: Julie Bequette/Tom Neal August/September: 28 A 3a comprehend oral-audio presentations 28 A 3b follow multistep instructions

More information

ICAME Journal No. 24. Reviews

ICAME Journal No. 24. Reviews ICAME Journal No. 24 Reviews Collins COBUILD Grammar Patterns 2: Nouns and Adjectives, edited by Gill Francis, Susan Hunston, andelizabeth Manning, withjohn Sinclair as the founding editor-in-chief of

More information

Core Vocabularies: Same or different for Bilingual Language Learning and Literacy Skill building with Symbols?

Core Vocabularies: Same or different for Bilingual Language Learning and Literacy Skill building with Symbols? Core Vocabularies: Same or different for Bilingual Language Learning and Literacy Skill building with Symbols? Introduction The importance of culturally and linguistically suitable symbol sets for those

More information

What s in a Lexicon. The Lexicon. Lexicon vs. Dictionary. What kind of Information should a Lexicon contain?

What s in a Lexicon. The Lexicon. Lexicon vs. Dictionary. What kind of Information should a Lexicon contain? What s in a Lexicon What kind of Information should a Lexicon contain? The Lexicon Miriam Butt November 2002 Semantic: information about lexical meaning and relations (thematic roles, selectional restrictions,

More information

L130: Chapter 5d. Dr. Shannon Bischoff. Dr. Shannon Bischoff () L130: Chapter 5d 1 / 25

L130: Chapter 5d. Dr. Shannon Bischoff. Dr. Shannon Bischoff () L130: Chapter 5d 1 / 25 L130: Chapter 5d Dr. Shannon Bischoff Dr. Shannon Bischoff () L130: Chapter 5d 1 / 25 Outline 1 Syntax 2 Clauses 3 Constituents Dr. Shannon Bischoff () L130: Chapter 5d 2 / 25 Outline Last time... Verbs...

More information

PTE Academic Preparation Course Outline

PTE Academic Preparation Course Outline PTE Academic Preparation Course Outline August 2011 V2 Pearson Education Ltd 2011. No part of this publication may be reproduced without the prior permission of Pearson Education Ltd. Introduction The

More information

Local Culture in Global English:

Local Culture in Global English: Local Culture in Global English: a case study of Kultur in Sprache / Sprachwissenschaft in Kulturwissenschaften Josef Schmied Chair English Language & Linguistics Chemnitz University of Technology www.tu-chemnitz.de

More information

Notes from Vocabulary Research (Lewis)

Notes from Vocabulary Research (Lewis) Notes from Vocabulary Research (Lewis) Couple of sources Learning Vocabulary in Another Language (Nation, Cambridge University Press, 2001) Vocabulary Size, Text Coverage, and Word Lists (Nation, Waring)

More information

GCE EXAMINERS' REPORTS

GCE EXAMINERS' REPORTS GCE EXAMINERS' REPORTS GERMAN AS/Advanced JANUARY 2014 Grade boundary information for this subject is available on the WJEC public website at: https://www.wjecservices.co.uk/marktoums/default.aspx?l=en

More information

Adoption Date: July 22, 2013

Adoption Date: July 22, 2013 Grade 4 Language Standards : Conventions of Standard English Essential Questions: 1. Why is it important to have command of Standard English conventions? 2. How do I determine the meaning of an unfamiliar

More information

A Beautiful Four Days in Berlin Takafumi Maekawa (Ryukoku University) maekawa@soc.ryukoku.ac.jp

A Beautiful Four Days in Berlin Takafumi Maekawa (Ryukoku University) maekawa@soc.ryukoku.ac.jp A Beautiful Four Days in Berlin Takafumi Maekawa (Ryukoku University) maekawa@soc.ryukoku.ac.jp 1. The Data This paper presents an analysis of such noun phrases as in (1) within the framework of Head-driven

More information

Paraphrasing controlled English texts

Paraphrasing controlled English texts Paraphrasing controlled English texts Kaarel Kaljurand Institute of Computational Linguistics, University of Zurich kaljurand@gmail.com Abstract. We discuss paraphrasing controlled English texts, by defining

More information

研究ノート Binary Structure of English Preterit Subjunctive Shigehiro Hasegawa Ⅰ English is a simplified European language

研究ノート Binary Structure of English Preterit Subjunctive Shigehiro Hasegawa Ⅰ English is a simplified European language English is a European language of which the grammatical structure is considerably simplified. It has lost much of its former complicated structures consisting of declensions and conjugations, which are

More information

Chapter Four: How to Collaborate and Write With Others

Chapter Four: How to Collaborate and Write With Others Chapter Four: How to Collaborate and Write With Others Why Collaborate on Writing? Considering (and Balancing) the Two Extremes of Collaboration Peer Review as Collaboration * A sample recipe for how peer

More information

Quiz name: Wo and Da Compounds Quiz

Quiz name: Wo and Da Compounds Quiz Name: Quiz name: Wo and Da Compounds Quiz Date: 1. Which preposition is used with the verb "sich interessieren"? 2. Which preposition is used with the verb "sprechen"? 3. Which preposition is used with

More information

Electronic offprint from. baltic linguistics. Vol. 3, 2012

Electronic offprint from. baltic linguistics. Vol. 3, 2012 Electronic offprint from baltic linguistics Vol. 3, 2012 ISSN 2081-7533 Nɪᴄᴏʟᴇ Nᴀᴜ, A Short Grammar of Latgalian. (Languages of the World/Materials, 482.) München: ʟɪɴᴄᴏᴍ Europa, 2011, 119 pp. ɪѕʙɴ 978-3-86288-055-3.

More information