scholarly journals On reconstruction effects in English wh-slifting: Theoretical and experimental considerations

2019 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 138
Author(s):  
Christos Vlachos ◽  
Nikoletta Christou ◽  
Kleanthes K. Grohmann
Keyword(s):  
Reconstruction Effects ◽  
English I

scholarly journals Typological diversity in New Englishes

2009 ◽  
Vol 30 (2) ◽  
pp. 170-195 ◽  
Author(s):  
Devyani Sharma
Keyword(s):  
Past Tense ◽  
Linguistic Typology ◽  
Indian English ◽  
English I

Recent research has aimed to integrate the investigation of vernacular universals in native English dialects with variation in postcolonial varieties of English and cross-linguistic typology (Chambers 2004; Kortmann 2004). This article assumes that any search for universals in bilingual varieties must include an assessment of the grammatical conditioning of features and a comparison with the relevant substrates. Comparing Indian English and Singapore English, I examine three proposed candidates for English universals (Kortmann and Szmrecsanyi 2004), all of which show some presence in the two varieties — past tense omission, over-extension of the progressive, and copula omission. Past tense omission is found to be genuinely similar in the two varieties and accounted for by typological parallels in the substrates, whereas progressive morphology use and copula omission are found to be divergent in the two varieties and accounted for by typological differences in the substrates. All three variable systems are explicable as substrate-superstrate interactions, tempering claims of universality in both distribution and explanation.

The First Few Weeks in English I

1951 ◽  
Vol 12 (8) ◽  
pp. 448
Author(s):  
John Bushman
Keyword(s):  
English I

Disaffiliation amongst academically elite students in Singapore: the role of a non-standard variety of English

2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 (271) ◽  
pp. 139-166
Author(s):  
Luke Lu
Keyword(s):  
Peer Groups ◽  
Transnational Migration ◽  
Interview Data ◽  
Standard English ◽  
Standard Variety ◽  
Multinational Group ◽  
Social Fields ◽  
English I

Abstract This article seeks to examine whether and how a non-standard variety of English (i.e. Singlish) might contribute to (dis)affiliation amongst a multinational group of academically elite students in Singapore. Using interview data when informants expressed ideologies about Singlish and Standard English, I argue that informants tended to orient to two different social fields in interviews: a field of education where Standard English is consistently valued by them, and an informal field of socialisation where the value of Singlish is contested. Differences in valuation of Singlish suggest disaffiliation between two groups of academically elite students: (a) immigrants from China who arrived more recently and do not value Singlish; (b) localised peer groups (including immigrants and Singaporeans) who claim to value and practise Singlish in their informal interactions. There are implications for our understanding of the role of vernaculars in processes of transnational migration, and Singlish as a local marker of solidarity.

Null Subjects in Old English

2013 ◽  
Vol 44 (2) ◽  
pp. 271-285 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elly van Gelderen
Keyword(s):  
Old English ◽  
Null Subjects ◽  
Verb Movement ◽  
Null Subject ◽  
Null Arguments ◽  
Germanic Languages ◽  
English I

I review the proposal made by Sigurðsson (2011) that null arguments follow from third-factor principles, as in Chomsky 2005 . A number of issues remain unclear: for instance, the kind of topic that licenses null arguments in Modern Germanic, including Modern English. I argue that Old English is pro drop and add to the discussion Frascarelli (2007) started as to which topic licenses a null subject. I agree with Frascarelli and Hinterhölzl (2007) that the licensing topic in Modern Germanic and Old English is an aboutness-shift topic. I also argue that verb movement to C is necessary to license the empty argument in the modern Germanic languages (including Modern English), but not in Old English, since agreement is still responsible for licensing in that language, as in Italian.

The relation of vowel letters to phonological syllables in English and German

2005 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 205-234
Author(s):  
Martin Neef
Keyword(s):  
Side Effects ◽  
Main Function ◽  
Writing System ◽  
Writing Systems ◽  
Phonological Representations ◽  
Language System ◽  
English I

Assuming that a writing system is inevitably dependent on a language system, the main function of written representations is to give access to the basic representations of the language system. In this paper, I want to deal with graphematic phenomena, i.e. the relations of written representations to corresponding phonological representations. In particular, I will delve into the relation of written representations to the phonological factor of the number of syllables, based on data from English and German. Though in these languages, there is neither a specific written element relating to the syllable number nor an isomorphic relation between vowel letters and the number of syllables, two questions are worth examining: Can a word have more syllables than vowel letters? Can a word have less syllables than uninterrupted sequences of vowel letters? The first question will be answered positively for both languages although there are some severe differences to be stated; the second question will be answered positively only for English. I will show that these results are side-effects of more basic regularities of the writing systems under consideration.

scholarly journals Eighteenth-Century Swiss Peasant Meets Bard: Ulrich Bräker's A Few Words About William Shakespeare's Plays (1780)

2000 ◽  
Vol 25 (3) ◽  
pp. 255-265
Author(s):  
Lukas Erne
Keyword(s):  
Nineteenth Century ◽  
Eighteenth Century ◽  
Gerhart Hauptmann ◽  
Johann Gottfried Herder ◽  
Ludwig Tieck ◽  
Sturm Und Drang ◽  
Dramatic Technique ◽  
English I

Britain began making Shakespeare her national poet early in the eighteenth century, and Germany followed suit a few decades later, progressively turning ‘unser Shakespeare’ into one of three national poets, with Goethe and Schiller. As early as 1773, Johann Gottfried Herder included his essay on ‘Shakespear’ in a collection entitled Von Deutscher Art und Kunst. The drama of the ‘Sturm und Drang’, which Herder's collection programmatically inaugurated, appropriated what Goethe (Götz von Berlichingen), Schiller (The Robbers) and their contemporaries (mis)understood to be Shakespeare's dramatic technique. By the end of the century, the assimilation had advanced far enough for August Wilhelm von Schlegel, the famous translator of seventeen of Shakespeare's plays, to indulge in no slight national chauvinism: ‘I am eager’, he writes in a letter to his cotranslator Ludwig Tieck, ‘to have your letters on Shakespeare.… I hope you will prove, among other things, that Shakespeare wasn't English. I wonder how he came to dwell among the frosty, stupid souls on that brutal island? … The English critics understand nothing about Shakespeare.’ Even though Tieck failed to prove that Shakespeare was not of English birth, the conviction that Shakespeare was best understood by German rather than by English critics only grew in the course of the nineteenth century. Appropriately, it was in Germany that the first periodical devoted exclusively to Shakespeare, the Jahrbuch der Deutschen Shakespeare-Gesellschaft, was founded in 1865. Fifty years later, the German novelist Gerhart Hauptmann could still claim that ‘there is no people, not even the English, that has the same right to claim Shakespeare as the German. Shakespeare's characters are a part of our world, his soul has become one with ours: and though he was born and buried in England, Germany is the country where he truly lives.’

French phrases in English, I

Neophilologus ◽  
1948 ◽  
Vol 32 (1) ◽  
pp. 28-39 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. A. Prins
Keyword(s):  
English I
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document