68. Formenneutralisationen in den Flexionssystemen deutscher Dialekte

Panzer, Baldur; Besch, Werner; Knoop, Ulrich; Putschke, Wolfgang; Wiegand, Herbert Ernst

doi:10.1515/9783110203332.1170

Cited by 4 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Consider, for example, Shrier's (1965) analysis of case systems in German dialects which investigates the distribution of nominative, accusative, and dative marking. Shrier distinguishes between two broad categories of case syncretism in German dialects: (1) dialects in which the nominative and accusative form a single case vis-à-vis the dative; (2) dialects in which the accusative and dative form a single case vis-à-vis the nominative (see also Lipold 1983;Maak 1983, andPanzer 1983). 2 Returning to the case marking systems found in the Nassau area, we nd three di erent patterns of case syncretism.…”

Section: New Dialect Formation and Development Of The Txg Case Systemmentioning

confidence: 78%

Case loss in Texas German: The influence of semantic and pragmatic factors

Boas

2009

The Role of Semantic, Pragmatic, and Discourse Factors in the Development of Case

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Based on a comparison of data from Gilbert (1972) and data collected by the Texas German Dialect Project between 2001-2006 I demonstrate that dative case marking in Texas German has signi cantly declined over the past 40 years. Applying Trudgill's (2004) model of new-dialect formation to the data I argue that the reduction in dative case is best explained in terms of internal factors, that is, leveling processes taking place in dialect contact situations. I propose that the replacement of the dative by the accusative is triggered by at least three interlaced factors: similarity in phonological form, movement towards unmarked forms (from lexical to structural case), and similarity in semantic contexts.

show abstract

Section: New Dialect Formation and Development Of The Txg Case Systemmentioning

confidence: 78%

Case loss in Texas German: The influence of semantic and pragmatic factors

Boas

2009

The Role of Semantic, Pragmatic, and Discourse Factors in the Development of Case

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The figures below focus 10 The accusativeasthe prevailing form of oblique case marking is widespread in the North of Germany (cf. Koß 1983;Panzer 1983). For the urban variety of Berlin, Lasch (cf.…”

Section: Variationmentioning

confidence: 99%

VARIATIONist Linguistics meets CONTACT Linguistics

Lenz¹,

Maselko²

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

sciences). Although contact and variationist linguistics are closely related to other scientific areas, they clearly addresstheirown different linguistic aspects and employ distinct methods.Contact linguistics investigates the use of languages,w hich-like their speakers-are socially in contact with each other. This disciplinei se xplored through different stages-varying according to phenomena, area, and periodof the language contact process, including its inception,evolution, and results. At the same time, it considers the intralinguistic and extralinguisticparameters and control factors that determine the level of intensity of interactionand, therefore, of potential influence. Language contact occurs in alarge number of phenomena, including:l anguage convergence, borrowing, relexification, hybrid structures development, adoption, as well as degradation, and leveling of morphological and grammatical features, code-switching,stratal influence, and language shift. It can lead to the emergence of new varieties (such as pidgins, creoles,m ixedlanguage varieties,interdialects-especially so-called language 'island' varieties' or linguistic 'enclaves',minority languages, ethnolects, guest workers' varieties, xenolects) or even fully-developed languages. Not least of all, aw ide range of interestsi nl anguage contact studies includes ('external')m ultilingualism-be that in the context of language border areas, non-monolingual communities, migration,orthe workplace (cf.

show abstract

“…Mike Manatos, for example, reported to Johnson on 1967 Senate support that "on these 78 votes absenses [sic] were not counted for or against, but I believe that statistic is most telling" (1968). Indeed, the problem of absenteeism generated a separate study which recommended that Johnson" emphasize the importance of attendance at the upcoming [congressional] leadership meeting" (Panzer, 1968). The larger issue remains, however: did OCR have an incentive to distort scores?…”

Section: The Ocr Presidential Support Score Data Setmentioning

confidence: 99%

Congressional Support for the President: The View from the Kennedy/Johnson White House

Covington¹

1986

The Journal of Politics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper describes characteristics of presidential support scores compiled by the Office of Congressional Relations (OCR) from 1961 to 1967. These characteristics are compared to similar scores compiled by Congressional Quarterly (CQ). The OCR scores were based on votes known to be important to the presidents, while CQ could not make such distinctions. This difference in vote selection generated important substantive and methodological implications. For example, the OCR scores reveal that Republicans and southern Democrats were much less supportive of the presidents than CQ suggests, while northern Democrats were much more supportive. This, along with other CQ shortcomings revealed by the analysis of CQ-OCR differences, argues for the use of the OCR scores when attempting to explain presidential influence, and a sensitivity to important problems with the CQ scores when the OCR data are not available.For decades, students of presidential-congressional relations have sought the field's "holy grail": an explanation of the nature and determinants of presidential influence in the legislative process. Formidable theoretical and empirical problems surrounding that quest have made progress difficult. In its stead, a sizable literature addressing more modest and prior empirical questions about the nature, distribution, and determinants of presidential support has emerged (see, for example, Bond

show abstract

68. Formenneutralisationen in den Flexionssystemen deutscher Dialekte

Cited by 4 publications

References 0 publications

Case loss in Texas German: The influence of semantic and pragmatic factors

Case loss in Texas German: The influence of semantic and pragmatic factors

VARIATIONist Linguistics meets CONTACT Linguistics

Congressional Support for the President: The View from the Kennedy/Johnson White House

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About