Search

In this study, we present an experiment in which we examined the time course of typing German compounds. The compounds varied according to three criteria: (1) whole word frequency (high vs. low), (2) head frequency (high vs. low) and (3) semantic transparency (transparent vs. opaque). In this experiment, we recorded the interkey intervals (IKIs) and concentrated on the IKI measurements found at the boundary of the two immediate constituents in compounds. We refer to this boundary type as an SM-boundary because (S)yllable and (M)orpheme boundaries coincide at this word position. As we found effects of lexical frequency for SM-IKIs in a series of previous studies, we argue that possible differences in SM-IKIs found for compounds of different frequency classes and of different degrees of semantic transparency can give an insight into the processes involved in the written production of German compounds: whole word procedures and/or compositional procedures. Our findings show that SM-IKIs are affected by compound frequency, head frequency and semantic transparency. We therefore argue that both whole word procedures and compositional procedures are involved in the written production of German compounds. These findings are in line with those versions of dual-route models which postulate that the two routes run in parallel and interact. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper describes a construction from (spoken) German that will be called INTEGRATED VERB SECOND (IV2). This term refers to V2 clauses that look like relative clauses except that they must contain a weak demonstrative in initial position and have to be extraposed. Their syntactic behavior will be accounted for by a paratactic analysis. IV2 can only modify wide scope indefinites inside what looks like the matrix clause. This is captured at the level of DRS construction. Since the matrix clause alone doesn't constitute a complete informational unit, IV2 can be introduced as a condition into the matrix DRS before evaluation. The weak demonstrative of IV2 establishes the relative link by copying a top-level discourse marker. In addition, the assertional nature of IV2 prevents it from modifying definite descriptions. Reference is made to the close relatedness of demonstrative and relative pronouns in Indo-European. Dutch, Swedish, and Zurich German provide the comparative horizon of this study. My answer to the question in the title is negative from the syntactic perspective but positive with reference to interpretation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]