Affiliation:
1. Universität Bielefeld , Fakultät für Linguistik und Literaturwissenschaft , Bielefeld , Germany
Abstract
Abstract
This explorative study focuses on grammatical taboos in German, morphosyntactic constructions which are subject to stigmatisation, as they regularly occur in standard languages. They are subjected to systematic experimental testing in a questionnaire study with gradient rating scales on two salient and two non-salient grammatical taboo phenomena of German. The study is divided into three subexperiments with different judgement types, an aesthetic judgement, a norm-oriented judgement and the sort of possibility judgement that comes closest to linguists’ understanding of grammar. Included in the investigated material are also examples of ordinary gradient grammaticality: unmarked, marked and ungrammatical sentences. The empirical characteristics of grammatical taboos are compared to those ordinary cases with the finding that they are rated at the level of markedness, but differ from ordinary markedness in that they produce a different pattern of between-subject variance. In addition, we find that grammatical taboos have a particular disadvantage under the aesthetic judgement type. The paper also introduces the concept of empirical grammaticality as a necessary theoretical cornerstone for empirical linguistics. Methodically, the study applies a mix of parametric and non-parametric methods of statistical analysis.
Subject
Linguistics and Language,Language and Linguistics
Reference63 articles.
1. Antomo, Mailin & Markus Steinbach. 2010. Desintegration und Interpretation: Weil-V2-Sätze an der Schnittstelle zwischen Syntax, Semantik und Pragmatik. Zeitschrift für Sprachwissenschaft 29. 1–37.
2. Bader, Markus & Jana Häussler. 2010. Toward a model of grammaticality judgments. Journal of Linguistics 46. 273–330.10.1017/S0022226709990260
3. Bader, Markus & Tanja Schmid. 2006. An OT-analysis of do-support in Modern German. Online document. Manuscript. http://roa.rutgers.edu/files/837-0606/837-BADER-0-0.PDF (06.02.2019).
4. Barbour, Stephen & Patrick Stevenson. 1998. Variation im Deutschen. Berlin & New York: de Gruyter.
5. Bosch, Peter, Graham Katz & Carla Umbach. 2007. The non-subject bias of German demonstrative pronouns. In Monika Schwarz-Friesel, Manfred Consten & Mareile Knees (eds.), Anaphors in text. Cognitive, formal, and applied approaches to anaphoric reference, 145–164. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Cited by
8 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献