- Munich, Bavaria, Germany
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
This chapter investigates patterns of verbal and nominal person marking in Uralic languages. Person is combined with number: there are three persons in singular and plural, in some languages also in dual. Person marking on finite verbs... more
This chapter investigates patterns of verbal and nominal person marking in Uralic languages. Person is combined with number: there are three persons in singular and plural, in some languages also in dual. Person marking on finite verbs (in many Uralic languages, in case of negation it is placed on the negative auxiliary verb) is used in subject agreement, and in Mordvin, Ugric, and Samoyedic there exists an additional paradigm for object agreement (aka objective conjugation). Adnominal person markers, traditionally known as possessive suffixes, can encode possessor person but also a variety of features connected with referentiality or definiteness. With non-finite verbs they mark subject agreement in dependent clauses. The functions, uses and productivity of possessive suffixes vary greatly within Uralic.
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
The following paper is concerned with information structure in the Ob-Ugric languages and its manifestation in reference tracking and its mechanisms. We will show how both knowledge on information structure and on reference tracking... more
The following paper is concerned with information structure in the Ob-Ugric languages and its manifestation in reference tracking and its mechanisms. We will show how both knowledge on information structure and on reference tracking mechanisms can be used to develop a system for a (semi-)automatic annotation of syntactic, semantic and pragmatic functions. We assume that the principles of information structure, i.e., the balancing of the content of an utterance, are indicated by the use of anaphoric devices to mark participants in an on-going discourse. This process in which participants are encoded by the speaker and decoded by the hearer is called reference tracking. Our model distinguishes four important factors that play a role in reference tracking: inherent (linguistic) features of a referent, information structure, referential devices and referential strategies. The interaction between these factors we call reference tracking mechanisms. Here, the passive voice and the dative ...
Research Interests:
Research on possessive suffixes in Ob-Ugric languages, as in most Uralic languages, has primarily viewed them in the light of their terminological denomination – i.e., as markers of possessive relations, traditionally referred to as their... more
Research on possessive suffixes in Ob-Ugric languages, as in most Uralic languages, has primarily viewed them in the light of their terminological denomination – i.e., as markers of possessive relations, traditionally referred to as their prototypic use. Whenever this onomasiology-based approach fails, the usage of possessive suffixes is considered non-prototypical; a secondary or determinative function of possessive suffixes is cited. In my paper, I will claim that the original function of possessive suffixes in Ob-Ugric languages is not to denote a possessive relation and, in consequence, there is no concept of non-prototypical use. Instead, possessive suffixes denote a relation between two entities, whose default interpretation is a possessive one. I will claim that both, the prototypic and the non-prototypic use is an outcome of the very same property of possessive suffixes, which is to establish reference. In consequence, possessive suffixes play an important role in informatio...
Research Interests:
Northern Mansi possessive suffixes Abstract. Research on possessive suffixes in Ob-Ugric languages, as in most Uralic languages, has primarily viewed them in the light of their terminological denomination – i.e., as markers of possessive... more
Northern Mansi possessive suffixes Abstract. Research on possessive suffixes in Ob-Ugric languages, as in most Uralic languages, has primarily viewed them in the light of their terminological denomination – i.e., as markers of possessive relations, traditionally referred to as their prototypic use. Whenever this onomasiology-based approach fails, the usage of possessive suffixes is considered non-prototypical; a secondary or determinative function of possessive suffixes is cited. In my paper, I will claim that the original function of possessive suffixes in Ob-Ugric languages is not to denote a possessive relation and, in consequence, there is no concept of non-prototypical use. Instead, possessive suffixes denote a relation between two entities, whose default interpretation is a possessive one. I will claim that both, the prototypic and the non-prototypic use is an outcome of the very same property of possessive suffixes, which is to establish reference. In consequence, possessive suffixes play an important role in information structure.
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Possessive suffixes in Uralic are often claimed to have a secondary, definiteness-marking function. This talk suggests another approach to possessive suffixes avoiding the distinction of possessive and non-possessive (i.e. definite)... more
Possessive suffixes in Uralic are often claimed to have a secondary, definiteness-marking function. This talk suggests another approach to possessive suffixes avoiding the distinction of possessive and non-possessive (i.e. definite) functions. Instead their referential properties are suggested as the underlying principle for both usages.