Displaying 1 - 20 of 20
-
Klein, W. (2014). Is aspect time-relational? Commentary on the paper by Jürgen Bohnemeyer. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 32(3), 955-971. doi:10.1007/s11049-014-9240-1.
Abstract
Tense is traditionally assumed to express temporal relations between the time of the event and the moment of speech, whereas aspect expresses various views on one and the same event. In Klein (1994), it was argued that the intuitions which underlie this viewing metaphor can be made precise by a time-relational analysis as well. In his article “Aspect vs. relative tense: the case reopened”, Jürgen Bohnemeyer challenges one important point of this analysis, the equation of aspect and relative tense in the English perfect and in temporal forms of few other languages. In the present comment, it is argued that this is indeed a simplification, which does not speak, however, against a time-relational analysis of aspect in general. The main lines of such an analysis for the English perfect are sketched. It is shown that it naturally accounts for differences between the simple past and the present perfect, as well as for the oddity of constructions such as Einstein has visited Princeton or Ira has left yesterday at five. -
Klein, W. (1998). Ein Blick zurück auf die Varietätengrammatik. In U. Ammon, K. Mattheier, & P. Nelde (
Eds. ), Sociolinguistica: Internationales Jahrbuch für europäische Soziolinguistik (pp. 22-38). Tübingen: Niemeyer. -
Klein, W. (1998). Assertion and finiteness. In N. Dittmar, & Z. Penner (
Eds. ), Issues in the theory of language acquisition: Essays in honor of Jürgen Weissenborn (pp. 225-245). Bern: Peter Lang. -
Klein, W. (
Ed. ). (1998). Kaleidoskop [Special Issue]. Zeitschrift für Literaturwissenschaft und Linguistik, (112). -
Klein, W. (1998). The contribution of second language acquisition research. Language Learning, 48, 527-550. doi:10.1111/0023-8333.00057.
Abstract
During the last 25 years, second language acquisition (SLA) research hasmade considerable progress, but is still far from proving a solid basis for foreign language teaching, or from a general theory of SLA. In addition, its status within the linguistic disciplines is still very low. I argue this has not much to do with low empirical or theoretical standards in the field—in this regard, SLA research is fully competitive—but with a particular perspective on the acquisition process: SLA researches learners' utterances as deviations from a certain target, instead of genuine manifestations of underlying language capacity; it analyses them in terms of what they are not rather than what they are. For some purposes such a "target deviation perspective" makes sense, but it will not help SLA researchers to substantially and independently contribute to a deeper understanding of the structure and function of the human language faculty. Therefore, these findings will remain of limited interest to other scientists until SLA researchers consider learner varieties a normal, in fact typical, manifestation of this unique human capacity. -
Klein, W., & Vater, H. (1998). The perfect in English and German. In L. Kulikov, & H. Vater (
Eds. ), Typology of verbal categories: Papers presented to Vladimir Nedjalkov on the occasion of his 70th birthday (pp. 215-235). Tübingen: Niemeyer. -
Klein, W. (1998). Von der einfältigen Wißbegierde. Zeitschrift für Literaturwissenschaft und Linguistik, 112, 6-13.
-
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.
Share this page