Displaying 1 - 20 of 20
-
Klein, W. (2006). On finiteness. In V. Van Geenhoven (
Ed. ), Semantics in acquisition (pp. 245-272). Dordrecht: Springer.Abstract
The distinction between finite and non-finite verb forms is well-established but not particularly well-defined. It cannot just be a matter of verb morphology, because it is also made when there is hardly any morphological difference: by far most English verb forms can be finite as well as non-finite. More importantly, many structural phenomena are clearly associated with the presence or absence of finiteness, a fact which is clearly reflected in the early stages of first and second language acquisition. In syntax, these include basic word order rules, gapping, the licensing of a grammatical subject and the licensing of expletives. In semantics, the specific interpretation of indefinite noun phrases is crucially linked to the presence of a finite element. These phenomena are surveyed, and it is argued that finiteness (a) links the descriptive content of the sentence (the 'sentence basis') to its topic component (in particular, to its topic time), and (b) it confines the illocutionary force to that topic component. In a declarative main clause, for example, the assertion is confined to a particular time, the topic time. It is shown that most of the syntactic and semantic effects connected to finiteness naturally follow from this assumption. -
Klein, W., & Von Stutterheim, C. (2006). How to solve a complex verbal task: Text structure, referential movement and the quaestio. Aquisição de Linguas Estrangeiras, 30/31, 29-67.
-
Wittenburg, P., Broeder, D., Klein, W., Levinson, S. C., & Romary, L. (2006). Foundations of modern language resource archives. In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 2006) (pp. 625-628).
Abstract
A number of serious reasons will convince an increasing amount of researchers to store their relevant material in centers which we will call "language resource archives". They combine the duty of taking care of long-term preservation as well as the task to give access to their material to different user groups. Access here is meant in the sense that an active interaction with the data will be made possible to support the integration of new data, new versions or commentaries of all sort. Modern Language Resource Archives will have to adhere to a number of basic principles to fulfill all requirements and they will have to be involved in federations to create joint language resource domains making it even more simple for the researchers to access the data. This paper makes an attempt to formulate the essential pillars language resource archives have to adhere to. -
Coenen, J., & Klein, W. (1992). The acquisition of Dutch. In W. Klein, & C. Perdue (
Eds. ), Utterance structure: Developing grammars again (pp. 189-224). Amsterdam: Benjamins. -
Klein, W. (1992). Der Fall Horten gegen Delius, oder: Der Laie, der Fachmann und das Recht. In G. Grewendorf (
Ed. ), Rechtskultur als Sprachkultur: Zur forensischen Funktion der Sprachanalyse (pp. 284-313). Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp. -
Klein, W. (1992). Einleitung. Zeitschrift für Literaturwissenschaft und Linguistik; Metzler, Stuttgart, 22(86), 7-8.
-
Klein, W., & Perdue, C. (1992). Framework. In W. Klein, & C. Perdue (
Eds. ), Utterance structure: Developing grammars again (pp. 11-59). Amsterdam: Benjamins. -
Klein, W. (1992). Tempus, Aspekt und Zeitadverbien. Kognitionswissenschaft, 2, 107-118.
-
Klein, W. (
Ed. ). (1992). Textlinguistik [Special Issue]. Zeitschrift für Literaturwissenschaft und Linguistik, (86). -
Klein, W., & Von Stutterheim, C. (1992). Textstruktur und referentielle Bewegung. Zeitschrift für Literaturwissenschaft und Linguistik, 86, 67-92.
-
Klein, W., & Carroll, M. (1992). The acquisition of German. In W. Klein, & C. Perdue (
Eds. ), Utterance structure: Developing grammars again (pp. 123-188). Amsterdam: Benjamins. -
Klein, W. (1992). The present perfect puzzle. Language, 68, 525-552.
Abstract
In John has left London, it is clear that the event in question, John's leaving London, has occurred in the past, for example yesterday at ten. Why is it impossible, then, to make this the event time more explicit by such an adverbial, as in Yesterday at ten, John has left London? Any solution of this puzzle crucially hinges on the meaning assigned to the perfect, and the present perfect in particular. Two such solutions, a scope solution and the 'current relevance'-solution, are discussed and shown to be inadequate. A new, strictly compositional analysis of the English perfect is suggested, and it is argued that the imcompatibility of the present perfect and most past tense adverbials has neither syntactic nor semantic reasons but follows from a simple pragmatical constraint, called here the 'position-definiteness constraint'. It is the very same constraint, which also makes an utterance such as At ten, John had left at nine pragmatically odd, even if John indeed had left at nine, and hence the utterance is true. -
Klein, W., & Perdue, C. (1992). Utterance structure: Developing grammars again. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
-
Perdue, C., & Klein, W. (1992). Conclusions. In W. Klein, & C. Perdue (
Eds. ), Utterance structure: Developing grammars again (pp. 301-337). Amsterdam: Benjamins. -
Perdue, C., & Klein, W. (1992). Introduction. In W. Klein, & C. Perdue (
Eds. ), Utterance structure: Developing grammars again (pp. 1-10). Amsterdam: Benjamins. -
Perdue, C., & Klein, W. (1992). Why does the production of some learners not grammaticalize? Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 14, 259-272. doi:10.1017/S0272263100011116.
Abstract
In this paper we follow two beginning learners of English, Andrea and Santo, over a period of 2 years as they develop means to structure the declarative utterances they produce in various production tasks, and then we look at the following problem: In the early stages of acquisition, both learners develop a common learner variety; during these stages, we see a picture of two learner varieties developing similar regularities determined by the minimal requirements of the tasks we examine. Andrea subsequently develops further morphosyntactic means to achieve greater cohesion in his discourse. But Santo does not. Although we can identify contexts where the grammaticalization of Andrea's production allows him to go beyond the initial constraints of his variety, it is much more difficult to ascertain why Santo, faced with the same constraints in the same contexts, does not follow this path. Some lines of investigation into this problem are then suggested. -
Eggers, H., Klein, W., Rath, R., Rothkegel, A., Weber, H.-J., & Zimmermann, H. (1969). Die automatische Behandlung diskontinuierlicher Konstituenten im Deutschen. Muttersprache, 9/10, 260-266.
-
Klein, W. (1969). Bibliographie zur maschinellen syntaktischen Analyse. In H. Eggers, & R. Dietrich (
Eds. ), Elektronische Syntaxanalyse der deutschen Gegenwartssprache (pp. 165-177). Tübingen: Niemeyer. -
Klein, W., & Kreuzer, H. (
Eds. ). (1969). Literarische und naturwissenschaftliche Intelligenz. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer. -
Klein, W. (1969). Zum Begriff der syntaktischen Analyse. In H. Eggers, & R. Dietrich (
Eds. ), Elektronische Syntaxanalyse der deutschen Gegenwartssprache (pp. 20-37). Tübingen: Niemeyer.
Share this page