marked by -ly
used to modify verbs
3 major exceptions (fast/hard/well)
rich inventory of copula verbs cause problems
-> leaves questions why certain things go against rules
inability to produce English phonemic distinctions (th & v/w) -> replaced by other sound
inability to master distributional/phonotactic regularities in L2 -> final devoicing
inability to produce target-language realisations on the subphonemic/allophonic level -> realisations of l and r
in theoretical-linguistic framework -> moving towards language typology
What are universals of human languages?
What are limits of possible variability within languages?
comprehension difficult -> omitting content
conveys stereotypes (wanted & unwanted) -> communicative atmosphere
everyday grammar really complex
grammatical structures like icebergs -> important part is hidden
as central part of language model
how words combine into higher units
mental representation of speakers’ mostly subconscious linguistic knowledge
prescriptive grammar (good vs. bad) -> sociolinguistic processes of language standardization
most align
/θ/, /ð/
/Ʒ/, /ʤ/
/x/
/pf/, /ts/
/w/, /r/ (different)
/ʏ:/ Mühle, /ø:/ Höhle
/e:/ Mehl, /a/ Matte
/æ/, /Λ/, /ə/ in RP
many raising diphthongs align
systematically organized systems in language usage
words or sounds
word stress: polysyllabic word -> Latin & Greek origin
“weak forms” for grammatical function words -> articles, proouns, prepositions
words run together in connected speech -> no glottal stop in syllable-initial prevocalic position
intonation & rhythm
four universal strategies
linear order of words & constituents (a lot in English)
inflection (more in German)
grammatical function words (slightly more in English)
intonation (slightly more in English)
immense variability across languages
subject
complement of preposition in adverbial adjunct
-> I struck him on his left leg
complement of preposition in NP post-modification
-> … the ulcer on his left leg
noun phrase -> I didn’t see the chair.
finite clause -> I can’t see that you’re tired.
to-infinitive clause -> I want to go home.
ordered hierarchy of phrases / constituents
finite main clause (finite verb & can stand alone)
finite subordinate clause (finite verb & cannot stand alone)
non-finite subordinate clause (non-finite verb, no tense & no subject agreement)
verbless clause -> their hands deep in their pockets
question (ask to get constituent as answer)
movement (restricted to type of constituent)
cleft-sentence (It was the…)
passivation (identifies object only)
substitution (replace constituent with it or so)
count noun -> the, a(n). two, one
non-count noun -> some only plural or singular
determiner -> a
premodification -> very pleasant
head -> apartment
postmodification -> to live in
-> English as right-branching language (different than in German)
English indefinite articles before nouns denote professions -> as a photographer
German definite articles before generic plurals -> women find it vs die Frauen denken…
German definite article with abstract nouns -> life in London vs. das Leben in London
(non) human distinction in wh-set of relative pronouns (who / which)
punctuation -> (non) definiting relative clauses
author whom I know -> author I know
non-finite RC -> participle to shorten or infinitve to shorten & futurate/mpdal semantics
objective time relation: event & moment of speaking
inflectional vs. analytical (present vs. past)
subjective view on internal structure of action, state or process
simple vs. past progressive
grammatical cline: words gradically change from lexical to grammatical items
verbal & nominal ing-phrases (the painting vs. painting smth)
transformation of the clause’s agent structure
active vs. passive vs. middle voice (the poem translates well)
degrees of obligation & necessity
decontic -> permission (can go)
epistemic -> degree of certainty (can’t be sleeping)
dynamic -> ability (can swim)
product, result / process
fact / action
stative / dynamic predication
subconscious / conscious perception & cognition
narrative foreground / background
simple present -> facts, routines (begin)
will-future -> spontaneous decisions (will begin)
going-to future -> planned actions (going to begin)
present progressive -> fixed arrangements (be beginning)
future progressive -> action that will be in progress (will be beginning)
using infinitive instead of ing-form
-> translate into L1 to correct mistakes
gerund: semaantics of fact & habit
infinitive: semantics of possibility & single instance
-> main-verb tense/mood has influence on choice
“auch” vs. “auch nicht”
“etwas” vs. “nicht etwas”
“bother” not used as assertive form
needn’t pay -> musst nicht
must not pay -> darfst nicht
you must pay / gotta pay / supposed to pay in advance
the story must be true / has to be / is bound to be / is sure to be true
typology: classifies & compares many languages
typologically informed contrastive linguistics
spelling out in detail what analytical & sythtic design plans mean
relevant on any pairing
cataloguing contrasts -> unified explanation
Kontaktstellung vs. Distanzstellung
English (fuzzy / implicit) vs. German (clearly defined / explicitly marked)
fundamental contrasts in expression of grammar
English: S before V; V before O
word order essential
less explicit grammatical marking
loose fit of syntactic form & semantic function
German: S marked by nominative; object marked by accusative
more explicit grammatical marking
tight fit of syntactic form & semantic function
English has lower encoding effort for speaker (vague & ambiguous)
-> more decoding effort for listener
German has higher encoding effort for speaker (explicitly marked messages)
-> lower decoding efort for listener
options in German expected to be subset of those available in English
no formal dative-accusative contrast in English -> he was helped
passive from direct & indirect object in English
-> she was given the award / Der Preis wurde ihr gegeben
passives from prepositional degrees -> Can she be relied on?
passive from SVA with implication of transitive SVO semantics
-> this bed has been slept in / das Bett ist drin geschlafen worden
passives from lexical phrases -> people should not be taken advantage of.
subject to subject raising
only for certain verbs -> he turned out to be ok
object to subject raising
limited traces in German but pervasive in English -> she’s pleasant to talk to
subject to object raising
unattested in German but pervasive in English -> I want you to come with me
rules which determine combinatorial possibilities of formal elements of a language make no difference to construct from meaning, discourse & language use
-> autonomy of language faculty
-> assume disruptive stages in evolution of human language
attention to meaning
different sorts of meaning of words
show how various grammatical behaviours of words are consequence of their meaning difference
-> continuity & incremental build up form lower functions
formalist “autonomous” syntax model difficult to defend in extreme forms
usage-based & functional models more sophisticated
role of frequency in language acquisition & use
interdependence between syntax, grammar, semantic & pragamatics
some German sentences not usable in present-tense unless used in subordinate clause
-> no semantic /functional reason why fobidden to formulate this idea in German
-> purely ornamental complexity & useless complication
some English adjectives have similar meaning
likely/probable but Manchester is probable to win
-> no semantic, pragmatic or usage-frequency reasons for why those synonyms should vehave differently in grammar
very flexible way that verb chains are built
mixture of infinitive, gerund, participles
-> multiple translations with AI lead to dinstancing from the original meaning
subject NPs overwhelmingly pronominal
object NPs more complex -> indefinite articles
-> given-before-new as the information order
conjunctions have huge impact on meaning of sentence
-> although, and, but, in contrast , despite
occur primarily in speech -> uh, do you, isn’t it, so, well then
simple sytax at clausal level
complex at level of phrase
mostly postmodification in English -> right-branching
sometimes postmodifiers -> short
linguistic context
grammatical & lexical contrasts -> source vs. target language
typological distance SL & TL -> source of translation difficulty
“Translationese”: typical features of translated language -> more explicit less idiomatic
cultural context
cultural distance -> translation difficulty
political context
precarious or privileged -> translator’s statues
translating between languages of unequal global reach & status
simplification
lower lexical destiny & lower type/token ratios
explication
more explicit coherence relations -> less pronominal reference & fewer general nouns
translated differentlly by machine & human
normalisation
e.g. recasting nonfinite VPs as NPs to bring more in lines with “nominal” syntax of German
convergence
less stylistic variability & creativity
control ≠ kontrollieren -> überprüfen
Jungfrau -> virgin oder virgo
actual ≠ aktuell
Pommes -> chips oder fries
part of analytical structures on word formation, grammar & semantics
to lead ≠ lead role
to up the costs ≠ up
to march ≠ March
assembles ≠ assembles
-> no conversion in German
Dunst, Nebel <-> fog, haze, mist
lächeln, grinsen, schmunzeln <-> smile, grin, sneer
Macht (Gewalt) <-> power (violence)
monkey wrench (Engländer)
tree ≠ arbre ≠ Baum ≠ árbol -> multiple words for same concept
Language structure influences cognition & culture.
typical demonstration cases:
-> orientation in space
-> experience of time
-> colour terms (Russian blue)
-> emotions (Heimweh)
-> evaluations
manifests in historically evolving traditions of writing/speaking
manifests in language production
-> reproducing chunks vs. creating original utterances
doubly subjective vision -> encoding & decoding
create world through language
playing to people’s biases
-> grammatical/lexical categories as off-switches for the mind
semantic primes (universals) to construct language-specific concepts
language-specific concepts explicated by breaking them down into constituents primes
true interface between language, culture & cognition
not decontextualized language system that expresses/determines identitiy
speakers make use of system in specific times & places
connects to culture & cognition
multiple & contradictory world-views can take shape with every single language system
-> world views form part of it
no language good or bad -> only the ways the language is used
post-vocalic /r/ silent
only linking /r/ pronounced
voiceless dental stop /t/ & [ʔ] in salient environment
/l/ realised clearly only [ɫ] as allophone
/r/ pronounced when spelled
flapping of /t/: [ɾ] -> intervocalic following stress
following /r/ & /n/ in stressed syllables
velar [ɫ] in all positions
residual contrast between /w/ & /ʍ/
short back mid vowel /ɒ/ -> hot
/ju:/ -> new, duty
“broad “ /ɑ:/ -> class, dance
corresponding words have long vowels
/u:/ -> duty
/æ/ -> BrE /ɑ:/
-> no contrast in large numbers of /æ/-words
-> neither, leisure, fertil, process, search all pronounced differently in the vowels (no rule)
either-or lists are misleading
-> shop, autumn, post common in BrE & AmE
->store, fall, mail common in AmE & BrE
AmE spreads fast into toher varieties -> only few lexical contrasts
<re> -> centre
<our> -> flavour
<ll> -> traveller
<is> or <iz>-> organise / organize
-> dialogue, cheque, programme, practise/practice, tyres
<er> -> center
<or> -> flavor
<l> -> traveler
<iz> -> organize
-> dialog, check, program, practice/practice, tires
business -> bill/check, deposit account/savings account
education -> class/grade, maths/math
clothing -> dinner jacket/tuxedo, handbag/purse
food & drinks -> aubergine/eggplant, biscuit/cookie, jam/jelly
household -> flat/apartment, toilet/restroom
car & travel -> bonnet/hood, boot/trunk, car park/parking lot
different from (both) / different than (AmE) / different to (BrE)
a new lease of life (BrE, IrE, AU) / a new lease on life (all others)
stand for office (BrE) / run for office (AmE)
1600: no significant ESL, EFL-ELF use
1800: one of competing languages (coloniasation) -> some ESL use
2000: collapse of British EMpire & increasing challenge to US hegemony
-> English as global language
-> unipolar World Language System (1st time)
kicked off by top-down planning
operating as invisible hand process
economi skill -> cultural capital
WLS as efficient, strong ordered -> ties together globally
global communication market free & not fair
-> BUT: niches for peripheral languages
hyper-central variety -> AmE
super-central varieties
standard -> BrE, AustrE, NigE
non-standard -> AAVE, Jamaican Creole
regionally unrestricted science, international law
central varieties
standard -> IrE, NeWZE, CanE
non-standard -> Nigerian Pidgin, US Southern E
regionally unrestricted -> “Euro-English”
peripheral
standard -> Papua New Guinea E, Maltese E
non-standard -> all traditional rural non-standard dialects (pidgins & creoles)
hyper-central language -> only English
super-central language -> <20 (French, German,…)
central language -> <200
peripheral languages -> >6000
pluricentric English not democratic -> hierarchial structure
no more norm.providing authorities -> anonoymous language-engineering in software & AI
variety & territory no longer strongly dependent on each other -> all English everywhere
some non-standard varieties very visible & prestigous now -> more important than standard variety sometimes
winners: online presence, governmental support
-> Spanish, English, German, Japanese, French…
underdogs: active research communities, huge amounts of data
-> Russian, Korean, Vietnamese
rising stars: benefitting from unsupervised pretraining
-> Ukrainian, Afrikaans, Hebrew
hopefuls: playing some role in current NLP research
-> Zulu, Lao, Irish
scaping-bys: no digital future without actions
-> Navajo, Fijian, Greenlandic
left-behinds
-> Dahalo, Warlpiri
extrapolation from offline language use works for few countries -> Japan
measurement by content easier but not without problems
internet multilingualism varies by region, topic, communities
difficult to document multilingual users & content creators
difficult to classify multilingual content
-> Naijá mixed or used with English
hyper-central language -> none
super-central language -> French, German, English
central language -> Japanese, Spanish, Russian,…
peripheral languages -> vast majority
super-central language -> none
central language -> Japanese, SPanish, Russian, Chinese, French, German,
invention to integrate others into own narrative
language used to segregate
not possible wihtout globalisation of English
new linguistic hierarchy
overcoming Eurocentrism by Anglicising everyone
World Englishes as mobile/mediated linguistic resources
English in the multilingual languagescapes of cultural globalisation
postcolonial paradox of English
decolonisation has gone hand in hand withdeeper entrenchment of ENglish in ESL communities
standardisation paradox
global English becoming more homogenous & heterogenous at the same time
-> AmE: global default language
-> all Englishes can turn up everywhere
world-language paradox
world turns to English
-> multilingualism in English will become linguistic & cultural handicap
decision to ignore someone speaking certain language impacts not the right of the someone to do so
foreigners stubbornly use own languages & losers are Anglo-Saxons who don’t want to learn
life-long learning & teaching of English
inspiration from psychology -> ideal selves
SLA & applied linguistics -> ideal , ought-to L2 self
all L2 errors can be predicted by L1 & L2 differences
efficient = scientific description of L2 & parallel description of L1
systematically comparing culture of L1 and L2
-> patterns can be predicted
some predicted errors not made
some errors made but not predicted
some strucutal contrast not difficult to learn
structural differences between L1 & L2 -> learning difficulty
storng predictive version - - - > weak diagnostic version
L1 influence is one factor among many in L2 learning.
errors made from universal learning strategies
L1 transfer
overgeneralization
problems caused by over-reliance on reductionist behaviorist models of learning
-> excessive focus on patterns & drills
-> need for empirical research & “error analysis”
contrastvie comparison of language pairs determine relative difficulty
comparison to more objective typological hierarchies determine absolute difficulty
final devoicing common across languages & found as developmental phase in L1 aquisition of English
-> learning devoicing easier than voicing
symmetrically -> talking about age
non-symmetrically
placement of pronouns E -> F > F -> E
pluralization of nouns E -> G > G -> E
negation of modal verbs G -> E > E -> G
learner language not defective version of L2 but partly autonomous & developing system
learner not highly predictable passive “responder” to external stimulus -> active/creative problem-solver
interlanguage: construct fit to accomodate all relevant phenomena & factors
to wit: interference, overgeneralization, pyercorrection & avoidance strategies
transfer: /i:/, order of attributes, vocab, collocations
interference: /wɔːtə/, /vɔːtɐ/
hypercorrection: /werɪ wel/, progressive overused
avoidance: jemanden unter den Tisch trinken
under/overrepresentation: multiple possibilities to form sentence, idioms shared ealier, question tags
analogical extension
maximising explicitness/transparency
code switching
3,7 million words
essays by intermediate & advanced learners
16 different mother tongue backgrounds (Spanish, French, Chinese, German,…)
1 Million+ words of spoken interview data
800.000 words from 11 mother tongue backgrounds (Spanish, Chinese, French, German, Japanese)
enables study of errors & statistical-stylistical profile of learner as against native-speaker texts
over/underrepresentation of forms
phraseology, collocations & naturalness
repetitive phrasal chunkiness, lexical & phrasal “teddy bears” (in my opinion)
language supports thinking, reasoning & communication
-> all languages function well in practice
form does not follow function all the time
-> grammatical constructions not entirely transparent semantically
-> grammatical/formal complexity but no communicative function
successful communication: following rules
-> violating rules: convention vs. creativity
-> Generative Theory, Formal semantics
language faculty = interaction of separate models
autonomy of syntax
grammatic form to ve explained in own terms
discrete/binary categories
rules as self-contained algorithms
grammaticality jugdgements immune to usage frequency
-> cognitive linguistics, Construction grammar
language faculty embedded in general human cognitive capacities
form & meaning as lexicogrammatical continuum
constructions as conventionalised form-meaning pairings
impossible to live with him vs. impossible to live with
but possible to live with does not exist
probable vs likely
give vs donate
basic SVO -> passive vs mediopassive
SVO(A) -> SVOO
SV-inversing
SV(A)O
categorically/prototypically defined categories
binary choice / gradient transitions
scope for unauthorised moves: no /limited
Last changed15 days ago