Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T19:46:03.187Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Beers, Kaffi, and Schnaps: Different Grammatical Options for Restaurant Talk Coercions in Three Germanic Languages

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 March 2005

Heike Wiese  and
Joan Maling
Heike Wiese
Affiliation:
Humboldt Universität Berlin
Joan Maling
Affiliation:
Brandeis University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper discusses constructions such as We'll have two beers and a coffee that are typically used for beverage orders in restaurant contexts. We compare the behavior of nouns in these constructions in three Germanic languages, English, Icelandic, and German, and take a closer look at the correlation of the morphosyntactic and semantic-conceptual changes involved. We show that even within such a restricted linguistic sample in closely related languages one finds three different grammatical options for the expression of the same conceptual transition. Our findings suggest an analysis of coercion as a genuinely semantic phenomenon, located on a level of semantic representations that serves as an interface between the conceptual and the grammatical systems and takes into account inter- and intralinguistic variations.Work on this paper was supported by NSF award BCS-0080377 to Boston University. The material is based in part on work done while the second author was serving as Director of the Linguistics Program at the U.S. National Science Foundation. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions expressed in this material are those of the authors, and do not necessarily reflect the views of the U.S. National Science Foundation. For comments on an earlier version, we would like to thank two anonymous JGL reviewers.

Type
ARTICLES
Information
Journal of Germanic Linguistics , Volume 17 , Issue 1 , March 2005 , pp. 1 - 38
Copyright
© 2005 Society for Germanic Linguistics

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bierwisch Manfred. 1983. Semantische und konzeptuelle Repräsentation lexikalischer Einheiten. Untersuchungen zur Semantik, ed. by Rudolf Ruzicka and Wolfgang Motsch, 61– 99. Berlin: Akademie.
Bloom Paul. 1994. Syntax-semantics mappings as an explanation for some transitions in language development. Other children, other languages: Theoretical issues in language development, ed. by Yonata Levy 41– 75. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Bloom Paul. 2000. How children learn the meanings of words. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Brown Roger W. 1957. Linguistic determinism and the parts of speech. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 55. 1– 5.Google Scholar
Bunt Harry C. 1985. The formal representation of (quasi-)continuous concepts. Formal theories of the commonsense world, ed. by Jerry R. Hobbs, and Robert C. Moore, 37– 70. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Corbett Greville G. 2000. Number. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Dölling Hannes. 2001. Systematische Bedeutungsvariationen: Semantische Form und kontextuelle Interpretation (Linguistische Arbeitsberichte, 78). Leipzig: Leipzig University.
Egg Markus. 2004. Anti-Ikonizität an der Syntax-Semantik-Schnittstelle. To appear in Zeitschrift für Sprachwissenschaft.
Eschenbach Carola. 1993. Semantics of number. Journal of Semantics 10. 1– 31.Google Scholar
Greenberg Joseph H. 1973. Numeral classifiers and substantival number. Problems in the genesis of a linguistic type. Working Papers on Language Universals 9. 1– 39.Google Scholar
Indriðason Þorsteinn G. 1999. Um eignarfallssamsetningar og aðrar samsetningar í íslensku. [On genitive compounds and other compounds in Icelandic.] Íslenskt mál 21. 107– 150.Google Scholar
Jackendoff Ray S. 1997. The architecture of the language faculty. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Kayne Richard S. 2003a. Some notes on comparative syntax, with special reference to English and French. Unpublished ms., New York University.
Kayne Richard S. 2003b. Silent years, silent hours. Grammar in focus, vol. 2, Festschrift for Christer Platzack, 18 November 2003, ed. by Lars-Olof Delsing, Gunlög Josefsson, Halldór Sigurdsson, and Cecilia Falk, 209– 226. Lund: Department of Scandinavian Languages, Lund University.
Kress Bruno. 1982. Isländische Grammatik. Leipzig: Enzyklopädie.
Krifka Manfred. 1995. A theory of common nouns. The generic book, ed. by Gregory N. Carlson and Francis Jeffry Pelletier, 398– 411. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
Lang Ewald. 1994. Semantische vs. konzeptuelle Struktur: Unterscheidung und Überschneidung. Kognitive Semantik, ed. by Monika Schwarz, 25– 41. Tübingen: Narr.
McElree Brian, Matthew J. Traxler, Martin J. Pickering, Ray S. Jackendoff and Rachel E. Seely. 2001. Coercion in on-line semantic processing. Cognition 78. B17– B25.Google Scholar
Pelletier Francis Jeffry. 1975/1979. Non-singular reference: Some preliminaries. Mass terms: Some philosophical problems, ed. by Francis Jeffry Pelletier, 1– 14. Dordrecht: Reidel.
Pelletier Francis Jeffry, and Schubert Lenhard K. 1989. Mass expressions. Handbook of philosophical logic, vol. 4, ed. by Dov M. Gabbay and Franz Guenthner, 327– 407. Dordrecht: Reidel.
Piñango Maria, Edgar Zurif, and Ray S. Jackendoff. 1999. Real-time processing implications of aspectual coercion at the syntax-semantics interface. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 28. 394– 414.Google Scholar
Pinker Steven. 1989. Learnability and cognition. The acquisition of argument structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Prasada Sandeep. 1996. Quantification, arbitrariness of structure, and the count-mass noun distinction. Proceedings of the 20th annual Boston University conference on language development, I–II, ed. by Andy Stringfellow, Dalia Cahana-Amitay, Elizabeth Hughes, and Andrea Zukowski, 600– 609. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.
Prasada Sandeep. 1999. Names for things and stuff: An Aristotelian perspective. Language, logic, and concepts: Essays in memory of John Macnamara, ed. by Ray S. Jackendoff, Paul Bloom, and Karen Wynn, 119– 146. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Pustejovsky James. 1991. The generative lexicon. Computational Linguistics 17. 409– 441.Google Scholar
Pustejovsky James. 1995. The generative lexicon. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Smith-Stark T. Cedric. 1974. The plurality split. Chicago Linguistics Society 10. 657– 671.Google Scholar
Todorova Marina, Kathy Straub, William Badecker, and Robert Frank. 2000. Aspectual coercion and online computation of sentential aspect. Proceedings of the 22nd annual conference of the Cognitive Science Society, ed. by Lila R. Gleitman and Aravind K. Joshi, 545– 550. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Wiese Heike. 1997a. Zahl und Numerale. Eine Untersuchung zur Korrelation konzeptueller und sprachlicher Strukturen (Chapter 7: Kardinal-Konstruktionen) (Studia Grammatica, 44). Berlin: Akademie.
Wiese Heike. 1997b. Semantics of nouns and nominal number. ZAS Papers in Linguistics 8. 136– 163.Google Scholar
Wiese Heike. 2003. Sprachliche Arbitrarität als Schnittstellenphänomen. Habilitationsschrift, Humboldt University, Berlin.
Wiese Heike. 2004. Semantics as a gateway to language. Mediating between concepts and language, ed. by Holden Härtl and Heike Tappe, 197– 222. (Trends in Linguistics, 152). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Wiese Heike, and Piñango Maria. 2001. Mass and count in language and cognition: Some evidence from language comprehension. Proceedings of the 23rd annual conference of the Cognitive Science Society, ed. by Johanna D. Moore and Keith Stenning, 1244. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Wunderlich Dieter. 1991. Bedeutung und Gebrauch. Semantik Semantics, ed. by Arnim von Stechow and Dieter Wunderlich, 32– 52. (Handbücher zur Sprach- und Kommunikationswissenschaft, 6.) Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.