Competing comparative constructions in Europe / Thomas Stolz.

Includes bibliographical references and indexes.

Online resource; title from PDF title page (ebrary, viewed January 6, 2014).

Preface and Acknowledgments; Abbreviations; 1 Introduction; 2 Basics; 2.1 Our starter kit: possible vs. realized types; 2.2 Diversity and variation; 2.3 Secondary options/multiple options; 3 Areal distribution; 4 Language contact; 5 Contemporary Europe; 5.1 Distribution: the genetic perspective; 5.1.1 Germanic; 5.1.1.1 Glimpses of the dichotomy of analytic vs. synthetic DEGREE marking in Germanic; 5.1.1.2 High-contact varieties vs. low-contact variety: Cymbrian/Yiddish vs. Icelandic; 5.1.2 Romance; 5.1.2.1 The que/di-divide; 5.1.2.2 In the Balkans; 5.1.3 Slavic; 5.1.3.1 Back to the Balkans.

5.1.3.2 Multitudes of constructions5.1.4 Sundry Indo-European languages; 5.1.4.1 Baltic and Celtic issues; 5.1.4.2 Unitary vs. multiple options; 5.1.4.3 Optional DEGREE marking; 5.1.5 Indo-European languages of Europe: intermediate results; 5.1.6 Non-Indo-European languages; 5.1.6.1 Competition of schemata; 5.1.6.2 Beyond Harry Potter; 5.1.6.3 Uralic; 5.1.6.4 Kalmyk and Greenlandic; 5.1.7 Non-Indo-European languages of Europe: intermediate results; 5.1.8 Indo-European vs. non-Indo-European languages; 5.2 Division of labor; 5.2.1 TIES and STANDARDS; 5.2.1.1 The equative-pro-COI construction.

5.2.1.2 The quantitative side of variation5.2.1.3 Qualities; 5.2.1.4 South Slavic languages; 5.2.1.5 Albanian and Romance; 5.2.1.6 Crosscheck; 5.2.1.7 Group I: case inflection vs. conjunction; 5.2.1.8 Group II: adposition vs. conjunction; 5.2.1.9 Ukrainian: a plethora of constructions; 5.2.1.10 Slovak: conjunction vs. conjunction (and some prepositional TIES); 5.2.1.11 Where Harry Potter keeps silent about COI constructions; 5.2.1.12 On the differential behavior of B2 and B3; 5.2.1.13 Conclusions on TIE-variation; 5.2.2 DEGREE marking; 5.3 Geography; 5.3.1 The equative-pro-COI isogloss.

5.3.2 Event schemata5.3.3 DEGREE marking in areal perspective; 5.3.4 The internal geolinguistics of Europe; 5.3.5 HintermHorizont geht's weiter; 6 Change and contact; 6.1 Linguistic antiquity outside Europe; 6.2 Europe in days gone by; 6.3 Motives for change; 6.3.1 Likely and unlikely chronologies; 6.3.2 Towards an explanation; 7 Some answers and yet more questions; Appendix; A: Sample sentences taken from source text HP I English; B: Sample sentences taken from source text LPP French; C1:Germanic phylum; C2: Romance phylum; C3: Slavic phylum; C4: Sundry Indo-European languages.

C5:Non-Indo-European languagesD: Equative vs. comparative inequality; E: Primary vs. secondary/tertiary options in HP I; F: Translation strategies in sample languages which supposedly only have one COI construction; G: TIE-marker differences in the translations of B1-B5; H: Non-European control sample; I: Extinct non-European languages and old stages of non-European languages; J: Extinct European languages and older stages of European languages; K: Maps; Sources; References; Index of authors; Index of languages; Index of subjects.

Diese arealtypologische Studie untersucht die grammatischen Mittel, die in den Sprachen Europas verwendet werden, um den Komparativ der Ungleichheit/Überlegenheit auszudrücken. Die bestehenden Theorien und Hypothesen über die morphosyntaktische Struktur und die crosslinguistische Verteilung von Konstruktionstypen werden durchgemustert; das Verhalten von Komparativen unter den Bedingungen des Sprachkontakts wird diskutiert. Dabei werden Daten aus mehr als 170 Standard- und Nichtstandardvarietäten europäischer Sprachen systematisch untersucht. Das synchrone Bild wird um Überlegungen zur die Diac.

German.

eBooks on EBSCOhost EBSCO eBook Subscription Academic Collection - Worldwide