CONTRASTIVE-AND-LINGUISTIC ANALYSIS IN THE CONTEXT OF GERMAN AS A FOREIGN AND TECHNICAL LANGUAGE Part 1)

2021 ◽  
pp. 29-41
Author(s):  
Ф. Кострцева
Keyword(s):  
Technical Communication ◽  
Linguistic Analysis ◽  
Technical Language ◽  
Light Verb Constructions ◽  
Light Verb ◽  
Verb Constructions

Постановка задачи. В предлагаемой статье рассматривается немецкий язык как иностранный и профессиональный язык с контрастивно-лингвистической точки зрения. При этом основное внимание выбранного билингвального сравнения языков уделяется немецкому и корейскому языкам. Специализированные языковые структуры в этих двух языках подвергаются анализу на основе формирования и использования устойчивых глагольно-именных словосочетаний. Также рассматривается вопрос о семантической производительности устойчивых глагольно-именных словосочетаний. Что касается посредничества профессионального языка, то здесь выявляются различия между общеупотребительным и профессиональным языками, а также наблюдается усиление устного профессионального общения. Statement of the problem. The following article focuses on the area of German as a foreign and technical language and is examined by choosing a contrastive perspective. The focus of the selected bilingual approach is on the German and Korean languages. The technical structures of the two languages are analyzed on the basis of the formation and use of light verb constructions. The issue of the semantic performance of light verb constructions is also investigated. With regard to the teaching of languages for special purposes (technical languages) the main differences between general and technical languages are worked out connected with a plea for a consideration of spoken technical communication.

CONTRASTIVE-AND-LINGUISTIC ANALYSIS IN THE CONTEXT OF GERMAN AS A FOREIGN AND TECHNICAL LANGUAGE (Part 2)

2021 ◽  
pp. 26-34
Author(s):  
Ф. Кострцева
Keyword(s):  
Technical Communication ◽  
Linguistic Analysis ◽  
Technical Language ◽  
Light Verb Constructions ◽  
Light Verb ◽  
Verb Constructions

Постановка задачи. В предлагаемой статье рассматривается немецкий язык как иностранный и профессиональный язык с контрастивно-лингвистической точки зрения. При этом основное внимание выбранного билингвального сравнения языков уделяется немецкому и корейскому языкам. Специализированные языковые структуры в этих двух языках подвергаются анализу на основе формирования и использования устойчивых глагольно-именных словосочетаний. Также рассматривается вопрос о семантической производительности устойчивых глагольно-именных словосочетаний. Что касается посредничества профессионального языка, то здесь выявляются различия между общеупотребительным и профессиональным языками, а также наблюдается усиление устного профессионального общения. Statement of the problem. The following article focuses on the area of German as a foreign and technical language and is examined by choosing a contrastive perspective. The focus of the selected bilingual approach is on the German and Korean languages. The technical structures of the two languages are analyzed on the basis of the formation and use of light verb constructions. The issue of the semantic performance of light verb constructions is also investigated. With regard to the teaching of languages for special purposes (technical languages) the main differences between general and technical languages are worked out connected with a plea for a consideration of spoken technical communication.

scholarly journals Paraphrasing of Japanese light-verb constructions based on lexical conceptual structure

2004 ◽  
Author(s):  
Atsushi Fujita ◽  
Kentaro Furihata ◽  
Kentaro Inui ◽  
Yuji Matsumoto ◽  
Koichi Takeuchi
Keyword(s):  
Conceptual Structure ◽  
Light Verb Constructions ◽  
Light Verb ◽  
Lexical Conceptual Structure ◽  
Verb Constructions

Reciprocity in Czech Light Verb Constructions: The Dependency Perspective

2020 ◽  
Vol 71 (1) ◽  
pp. 41-68
Author(s):  
Václava Kettnerová ◽  
Markéta Lopatková
Keyword(s):  
Structure Formation ◽  
Syntactic Structure ◽  
Rule Based ◽  
Light Verb Constructions ◽  
Light Verb ◽  
Verb Constructions ◽  
Complex Mapping

Abstract In this paper, we draw attention to reciprocity in Czech light verb constructions – a language phenomenon, which has not been discussed yet. Reciprocity is contributed to light verb constructions by predictive nouns, as they are the nouns that represent the semantic core of these constructions. Here we focus on reciprocal light verb constructions derived by the syntactic operation of reciprocalization. We show that the complex mapping of semantic participants onto valency complementations, characteristic of reciprocalization, is reflected in reciprocal light verb constructions in the same way as in reciprocal nominal constructions. The main difference between reciprocal nominal constructions and reciprocal light verb constructions lies in the morphosyntactic expression of reciprocalized participants. We demonstrate that surface syntactic changes in reciprocal light verb constructions are regular enough to be described on the rule basis: the rule based generation of reciprocal light verb constructions requires a cooperation of two sets of rules – rules for deep and surface syntactic structure formation of light verb constructions and rules for capturing reciprocity.

Give as a light verb

2020 ◽  
Vol 27 (3) ◽  
pp. 280-306
Author(s):  
Elena Martínez Caro ◽  
Jorge Arús-Hita
Keyword(s):  
Quantitative Analysis ◽  
High Frequency ◽  
Qualitative Approach ◽  
British English ◽  
Light Verb Constructions ◽  
Light Verb ◽  
Frequent Use ◽  
Verb Constructions ◽  
Pragmatic Variation ◽  
Semantic Properties

Abstract Light Verb Constructions (LVCs) have received widespread attention. Research on these constructions, however, has for the most part focused exclusively on their syntactic and lexical-semantic properties. Additionally, studies devoted to specific LVCs tend to neglect the phrasal-semantic and pragmatic variation brought about by the combination of a light verb with different nominal complements. This paper tries to fill those gaps by means of a quantitative and qualitative corpus-based study of Light give Constructions (LgiveCs). The quantitative analysis investigates frequencies of LgiveCs in British English and compares them across spoken and written (fiction) discourse, which reveals a high frequency of this construction in speech, especially in combinations of give with a ring, a kiss and an answer. When these combinations are excluded, LgiveCs are significantly more frequent in writing. In a complementary qualitative approach, we highlight the structural and discursive features of the construction and attempt to explore the factors that motivate the frequent use of the LgiveC in British English.

Light verb constructions in spoken L2 English

2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 181-206 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gaëtanelle Gilquin
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Language ◽  
Native Speakers ◽  
Advanced Level ◽  
Proficiency Levels ◽  
Light Verb Constructions ◽  
Light Verb ◽  
Verb Constructions ◽  
Different Types ◽  
Native Speakers Of English ◽  
The Trinity

Abstract Light verb constructions (LVCs), that is, combinations like take a walk or make a choice, are often claimed to be problematic for non-native speakers of English. In this paper, spoken data from the Trinity Lancaster Corpus are used to explore the use of these constructions across different sections of the corpus, representing different proficiency levels (from lower intermediate to upper advanced) as well as different types of acquisitional contexts, namely English as a Foreign Language (EFL) and English as a Second Language (ESL). The results of the study reveal a tendency towards an increased frequency of LVCs, as well as more complex and abstract uses, as we move from an intermediate to an advanced level and from an EFL to an ESL context. For the EFL speakers, this development corresponds to a better approximation to native English. For the ESL speakers, on the other hand, LVCs seem to have become ‘constructional teddy bears’, used more often than by the native speakers themselves.

Argument Realization and Case in Japanese

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hideki Kishimoto
Keyword(s):  
Exceptional Case ◽  
Case Marking ◽  
Light Verb Constructions ◽  
Light Verb ◽  
Locative Alternation ◽  
Verb Constructions ◽  
Negative Adjective ◽  
Argument Realization ◽  
Embedded Contexts ◽  
Case Markers

Japanese is a language where the grammatical status of arguments and adjuncts is marked exclusively by postnominal case markers, and various argument realization patterns can be assessed by their case marking. Since Japanese is categorized as a language of the nominative-accusative type typologically, the unmarked case-marking frame obtained for transitive predicates of the non-stative (or eventive) type is ‘nominative-accusative’. Nevertheless, transitive predicates falling into the stative class often have other case-marking alignments, such as ‘nominative-nominative’ and ‘dative-nominative’. Consequently, Japanese provides much more varying argument realization patterns than those expected from its typological character as a nominative-accusative language. In point of fact, argument marking can actually be much more elastic and variable, the variations being motivated by several linguistic factors. Arguments often have the option of receiving either syntactic or semantic case, with no difference in the logical or cognitive meaning (as in plural agent and source agent alternations) or depending on the meanings their predicate carry (as in locative alternation). The type of case marking that is not normally available in main clauses can sometimes be obtained in embedded contexts (i.e., in exceptional case marking and small-clause constructions). In complex predicates, including causative and indirect passive predicates, arguments are case-marked differently from their base clauses by virtue of suffixation, and their case patterns follow the mono-clausal case array, despite the fact that they have multi-clausal structures. Various case marking options are also made available for arguments by grammatical operations. Some processes instantiate a change on the grammatical relations and case marking of arguments with no affixation or embedding. Japanese has the grammatical process of subjectivization, creating extra (non-thematic) major subjects, many of which are identified as instances of ‘possessor raising’ (or argument ascension). There is another type of grammatical process, which reduces the number of arguments by virtue of incorporating a noun into the predicate, as found in the light verb constructions with suru ‘do’ and the complex adjective constructions formed on the negative adjective nai ‘non-existent.’

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document