Semiotic Essence of Linguistic Ambiguity in the German Poetic Discourse of the XXI Century

The article deals with the problem of the phenomenon of linguistic ambiguity and methods of its resolution in the context of modern German poetic texts, as well as possible communication failures associated with differences in the sociocultural characteristics of the author and recipient. In particular, there are illustrations of ambiguity of the entire poem, when the analyzed concept has a dualistic origin and certain linguo-stylistic means; lexical ambiguity, which main mechanisms are a language game, polysemantic words, chains of key lexical items, allusions; syntactic ambiguity, that is realized through special punctuation and two-way communication, that allowed two different interpretations of the sentence. In addition, the German poetic text is characterized by temporary and permanent types of ambiguity. As part of the study, it was found that the phenomenon of ambiguity can be resolved due to contextual peculiarities, and situations of communicative failure can be avoided by an increase of the level of linguistic and intercultural competence.

The role of structural ambiguity in sentence comprehension

Being a linguistic phenomenon ambiguity has several types which are realized in speech act. Structural or syntactic ambiguity is of particular importance in the understanding of a sentence and arises through prosodic means such as stress, intonation, pause, and syntagm. The different division of the syntagm leads to the interpretation of the sentence in two or more senses. Transformative grammar also contributed to the study of ambiguity in language. The formation of the sentence, its grammatical structure and the meaning it expresses form the basis for the surface structure. Structural ambiguity has always been the focus of psycholinguists which is also called "sytactic parsing". Parsing affects the auxiliary words and various morphemes used in the sentence and at the same time leads to the deceptive syntactic analysis. Since the deep structure has more meanings and the surface structure is conditioned by the sound of the sentence, the surface and deep structure ambiguity is the V Respublika Elmi Qaynaqlar Konfransının Materialları / 02 noyabr 2021 Materials of the V Republican Conference of Scientific Sources / 02 November, 2021 DOI: https://www.doi.org/10.36719/2663-4619/2021/02/05 6 most reliable form of communication between words in a sentence. Both surfices in ambiguous sentences differ mainly in the information given and this happens when a word performs several grammatical functions in a sentence. Key words: syntactic ambiguity, parsing, syntagm, context, prepositional phrases

The role of structural ambiguity in sentence comprehension

Being a linguistic phenomenon ambiguity has several types which are realized in speech act. Structural or syntactic ambiguity is of particular importance in the understanding of a sentence and arises through prosodic means such as stress, intonation, pause, and syntagm. The different division of the syntagm leads to the interpretation of the sentence in two or more senses. Transformative grammar also contributed to the study of ambiguity in language. The formation of the sentence, its grammatical structure and the meaning it expresses form the basis for the surface structure. Structural ambiguity has always been the focus of psycholinguists which is also called "sytactic parsing". Parsing affects the auxiliary words and various morphemes used in the sentence and at the same time leads to the deceptive syntactic analysis. Since the deep structure has more meanings and the surface structure is conditioned by the sound of the sentence, the surface and deep structure ambiguity is the V Respublika Elmi Qaynaqlar Konfransının Materialları / 02 noyabr 2021 Materials of the VI Republican Conference of Scientific Sources / 02 November, 2021 DOI: https://www.doi.org/10.36719/2663-4619/2021/02/05 6 most reliable form of communication between words in a sentence. Both surfices in ambiguous sentences differ mainly in the information given and this happens when a word performs several grammatical functions in a sentence. Key words: syntactic ambiguity, parsing, syntagm, context, prepositional phrases

Epítetos e insultos de grupo en español: Sobre una ambigüedad y sus implicaciones sintáctico-semánticas

In this paper, we further elaborate on a syntactic ambiguity between slurs and epithets first noticed in Orlando, Eleonora & Andrés Saab. 2020b. A stereotype semantics for syntactically ambiguous slurs. Analytic Philosophy 61(2). 101–129. Here, we discuss in detail the large theoretical implications of such an ambiguity both for the proper analysis of binominal constructions in Spanish (e.g., el idiota de Juan) and for the way in which it is advisable to model the expressive content slurs and certain epithets (those deriving from slurs) have. As for the first aspect, we contend that mainstream approaches in terms of predicate inversion for binominal constructions cannot account for why slurs lose their predicative import when occurring as epithets in binominal environments. In consequence, we propose a new analysis for epithets both in simple occurrences and in binominal constructions. This analysis derives the above-mentioned ambiguity as a type of structural ambiguity, according to which certain slurs can occur in predicative and in non-predicative positions. When they occur as predicates, they have a mixed semantics (McCready, Eric. 2010. Varieties of conventional implicatures. Semantics & Pragmatics 3. 1–57) reflected both in the truth-conditional and the expressive dimensions, but when they occur as epithets, the truth-conditional dimension is lost and only the expressive content survives. As for the second aspect, we defend a stereotype semantics, according to which stereotypes are modeled as Kratzerian modal bases (i.e., set of propositions) in virtue of which stigmatizing theories of human groups are reflected in a parallel, expressive dimension of meaning. This way of modeling some kinds of expressive contents explains how different slurs and epithets manage to communicate different theories about particular human groups, which are the target of derogation.

Problem wieloznaczności składniowej w przepisach zawierających wyliczenia wierszowe

The article addresses the problem of syntactic ambiguity in legal provisions containing linear enumerations (namely such where the elements of enumeration are placed next to each other, without any editorial distinction). There seem to be two types of such ambiguity. The first one stems from the ambiguity of logical relations between the elements of enumeration. This often involves considerations concerning conjunctive words (i.e. and, or). The second one stems from the ambiguity of purely syntactic relations between the elements of enumeration and the modifiers. This type is rarely properly identified by interpreters in the Polish legal practice. The article offers examples from the Polish case law and makes suggestions for legislative drafters how to avoid the described ambiguity.

An Investigation of the Communicative Purposes of Road Signs: How Signs Do Things

This study explores the important communicative roles carried out by road signs both directly and indirectly. The qualitative analysis is based on a corpus of 150 road signs collected from signage on state and local highways and roadways in seven U.S. states. Road signs were identified as either full, grammatical sentences or as block language. They were further analyzed as speech acts and their performativity was briefly explored in three areas: agency, lexis, and emplacement. Road sign ambiguity in regard to punctuation and syntactic ambiguity was also identified. The findings pointed to several areas for future research including drivers’ behavioral reactions, road safety and wayfinding potential.

Syntactic ambiguity resolution and revision processes in complement sentences

Temporarily ambiguous sentences are sometimes misanalysed and require revision during sentence processing. Previous studies have reported that non-syntactic information such as verb subcategorisation information does not always prevent misanalysis. However, there is contradictory evidence about whether non-syntactic information is immediately used to recover the globally correct analysis. Previous studies have also reported that initially assigned misinterpretations linger after disambiguation. Some recent studies have suggested that this lingering misinterpretation does not result from a failure to conduct syntactic revision. However, the current evidence for syntactic revision is scarce, limited to a syntactic structure and eye-movement while reading task, and crucially does not necessarily prove that syntactic revision is successfully conducted. The present study reports three self-paced reading experiments that investigate these issues, using temporarily ambiguous complement sentences. Experiment 1 showed that temporarily ambiguous complement sentences are misanalysed during sentence processing, which subsequently causes garden-path effects and lingering misinterpretation. Experiment 2 suggested that non-syntactic information is immediately used to recover the globally correct analysis. However, there was an indication that the incorrect analysis remains activated. Experiment 3 revealed that syntactic revision is conducted in complement sentences without regressive eye movements. The present study argues that the good-enough account can explain these results if this account assumes that a syntactic processing heuristic such as the Canonical Sentoid Strategy is used during the processing of temporarily ambiguous complement sentences.