Search

The aim of the article is to examine the most frequent nomina instrumenti (NI) ending in -er in German and their Czech equivalents, in order to reveal similarities and differences in the ways NI are formed in both languages. To present a representative and realistic picture of the German-Czech interlingual relations, authentic language material extracted from the parallel language corpus InterCorp was used in the analysis. First, the most frequent NI ending in -er were separated from other homonymous denominations, and then the study focused on their Czech counterparts. The results show that most equivalents of German masculine NI ending in -er are also derivatives in Czech, but the dispersion goes across all three genders. It was concluded that the Czech equivalents of the German nomina instrumenti ending in -er are very often derived by means of various suffixes, with the most frequent being the suffixes -č- for masculine nouns, -(č)ka for feminine nouns and -tko for neuter nouns. Additionally, the article shows that similarities and differences between the two languages in this field can also be traced back to the morphological type of the two languages. Dieser Artikel untersucht die häufigsten deutsche Nomina Instrumenti (NI) auf -er und ihre tschechischen Äquivalente mit dem Ziel, die Ähnlichkeiten und Unterschiede in diesem sprachlichen Segment aufzuzeigen. Um eine möglichst repräsentative und realitätsnahe Darstellung der zwischensprachlichen Verhältnisse der untersuchten Benennungsgruppe präsentieren zu können, wurden für die Analyse ausschließlich Daten aus authentischem Sprachmaterial des allgemeinen Sprachgebrauchs, gewonnen mithilfe des Parallelkorpus InterCorp, verwendet. Es werden zuerst die häufigsten deutschen NI mit dem Suffix -er von homonymen Benennungen abgegrenzt, danach konzentriert sich die Untersuchung auf die tschechischen Pendants. Die Ergebnisse zeigen, dass die meisten tschechischen Pendants ebenfalls Derivate sind, die Streuung geht jedoch über alle drei Genera. Es lässt sich festhalten, dass dem deutschen Suffix -er zur Bildung von NI im Tschechischen am häufigsten ein Suffix mit -č für maskuline Nomina, -(č)ka für feminine Nomina und –tko für neutrale Nomina entspricht. Darüber hinaus wird belegt, dass hier auch Übereinstimmungen und Differenzen, die auf den morphologischen Typus beider Sprachen zurückzuführen sind, deutlich werden.

Poster-Präsentation: InterCorp Version 12 Poster: InterCorp v12 Poster presentation: InterCorp v12

There are basically two possible ways how to form terms: motivated and not motivated. I would like to point out Czech derivatives with (typically) diminutive suffixes functioning as terms (e.g. Czech sloupek for English column, German (Zeitungs)Kolumne) and examine if there is any system in the structures of their counterparts in German and English. Potential regularities could ease the orientation in the terminology of several fields in these languages. The central roles in these issues are played by diminutives. The wide meaning of diminutive seems to be quite controversial because most of the constructs can not or do not convey evaluative meaning - one of the typical features of diminutives. For this paper, I would like to stick to the definition of Czech diminutives which has been proved on several corpus examples Many Czech words with diminutive affixes do not have an evaluative meaning although they are (most precisely, they were) apparent modifications of a base word such as bavlnka (cotton thread) derived from bavlna (cotton). A certain part of these derivatives belong to technical or scientific language. I would like to pick up all such terms from the list of diminutive forms of nouns which were identified as the most frequent in the contemporary written Czech (data of corpus syn, 2010 and InterCorp Czech-German version 7 in Káňa 2016). Further, I present their (non-evaluative) technical meaning and compare it with their German and English counterparts. I assume that most of the German counterparts will be a compound (stolek - Nachttisch) and the most of the English counterparts will be either a simplex (desk) or an attributive phrase (bedside table). This assumption is based on the results of counterparts of Czech “real” diminutives with an evaluative meaning such as dřevíčko: most significant counterparts in German Kleinholz (compound) and in English stick (simplex). Further topics: Czech back-formations used for coining terms in jargons e.g. loupák, limeta in food industry; correlation between the morphological language type and the type of coining terms. All data for this study were gathered from the multi-lingual corpus InterCorp (various versions) and from the Czech National Corpus (syn and syn2015). There are basically two possible ways how to form terms: motivated and not motivated. I would like to point out Czech derivatives with (typically) diminutive suffixes functioning as terms (e.g. Czech sloupek for English column, German (Zeitungs)Kolumne) and examine if there is any system in the structures of their counterparts in German and English. Potential regularities could ease the orientation in the terminology of several fields in these languages. The central roles in these issues are played by diminutives. The wide meaning of diminutive seems to be quite controversial because most of the constructs can not or do not convey evaluative meaning - one of the typical features of diminutives. For this paper, I would like to stick to the definition of Czech diminutives which has been proved on several corpus examples Many Czech words with diminutive affixes do not have an evaluative meaning although they are (most precisely, they were) apparent modifications of a base word such as bavlnka (cotton thread) derived from bavlna (cotton). A certain part of these derivatives belong to technical or scientific language. I would like to pick up all such terms from the list of diminutive forms of nouns which were identified as the most frequent in the contemporary written Czech (data of corpus syn, 2010 and InterCorp Czech-German version 7 in Káňa 2016). Further, I present their (non-evaluative) technical meaning and compare it with their German and English counterparts. I assume that most of the German counterparts will be a compound (stolek - Nachttisch) and the most of the English counterparts will be either a simplex (desk) or an attributive phrase (bedside table). This assumption is based on the results of counterparts of Czech “real” diminutives with an evaluative meaning such as dřevíčko: most significant counterparts in German Kleinholz (compound) and in English stick (simplex). Further topics: Czech back-formations used for coining terms in jargons e.g. loupák, limeta in food industry; correlation between the morphological language type and the type of coining terms. All data for this study were gathered from the multi-lingual corpus InterCorp (various versions) and from the Czech National Corpus (syn and syn2015).

Der Artikel beschreibt die Struktur und einige Formulierungen der Textsorte Arbeitszeugnis und zeigt, wie diese Textsorte im Deutschunterricht eingesetzt werden kann, um die Textkompetenz zu fördern. Die Beschreibung der Textsorte enthält auch rechtliche Rahmenbedingungen für die Erstellung von Arbeitszeugnissen in Österreich, Deutschland und in Tschechien. Die Umsetzung im Unterricht folgt Schmölzer-Eibingers 3-Phasen-Modell zur Förderung der Textkompetenz und zeigt, wie man mit Texten umgehen kann, die selbst für Muttersprachler/-innen relativ kompliziert sind. Die Textsorte Arbeitszeugnis sollte ein Thema im Deutschunterricht sein, weil es sich um eine spezifische Textsorte handelt und sie ein fester Bestandteil des Berufslebens im deutschsprachigen Raum ist. Popis podpory zvyšování textové kompetence pomocí jednoho druhu textů (referenční list zaměstnavatele). Článek popisuje jednotlivé možné postupy ve výuce němčiny jako cizího jazyka. The article describes the structure and several formulations of one of the typical German text types Arbeitszeugnis (Reference paper from the employer for the employee) and shows how to implement this text type into German language teaching focussing on enhancing the discourse competence. The description of this text type includes legal frames in Austria, Germany and Czechia. The implementation into teaching follows Schmölzer Eibinger’s 3 phase model for promoting text competence and demonstrates how to deal with such texts, which seem to be quite complicated even for native speakers. The Arbeitszeugnis should be a topic in German language teaching for its specific features and because it is an integral part of vocational life in German speaking countries.

Dieses Buch trägt die wichtigsten Kenntnisse über Korpora und Korpuslinguistik so zusammen, dass sich die Deutschlehrenden und -lernenden auf diesem Gebiet schnell orientieren können. Es beschreibt für DaF/DaZ relevante elektronische Sprachkorpora und einige korpusähnliche Instrumente. In dreizehn Forschungsstudien wird Schritt für Schritt gezeigt, wie man Sprachprobleme mit der Verwendung von Korpora lösen kann. Die Ergebnisse dieser Studien sowie die Übersichten von den häufigsten deutschen lexikalischen Einheiten wurden mit Hilfe von Korpora noch nie erforscht. Die Publikation zeigt auch Möglichkeiten, wie man aus Korpora sprachliche Chunks herausfiltern kann. Das Buch enthält Listen von nützlichen Hilfen für die Arbeit mit Korpora wie CQL Abkürzungen, Tag-Sets, Internet-Adressen sowie einen Index mit Erläuterungen der korpuslinguistischen und sprachlichen Begriffen. Monografie přináší důležité vědomosti o korpusech a korpusové lingvistice pro učitele, studenty a žáky němčiny jako cizího a druhého jazyka. Popisuje jazykové korpusy, korpusové nástroje a korpusům podobné elektronické pomůcky. Ve třinácti výzkumných studiích ukazuje krok za krokem, jak řešit dílčí jazykové problémy pomocí elektronických korpusů. Výsledky těchto studií, jakož i přehledy, které vznikly na základě dalších výzkumů, dosud nebyly publikovány a měly by podpořit korpusově řízený výzkum němčiny, kontrastivní výzkum němčiny (především s jazyky L1 klientely) a také výzkum německých volných, ale častých vazeb (tzv. „chunků“) i jejich výuku. Kniha obsahuje seznamy užitečné k práci s korpusy: CQL zkratky, morfologické značky, internetové adresy a rejstřík s vysvětlením běžné korpusově lingvistické a méně běžné lingvistické terminologie. This book is a survey of the corpus linguistic knowledge for teachers and learners of German as a foreign and second language. It describes language corpora, corpus tools and corpus similar instruments relevant for the target audience. In thirteen research studies it shows step by step how to solve language problems with using corpora. The results of these studies as well as the overviews of the most frequent German lexical units coming out from further researches are a new lead and challenge in researching German and discovering and teaching German in chunks. The research results of all issues in the book were not published yet and should stress the need for describing (not only) the German language in a corpus driven way and in contrast with other languages, preferably with L1s of the clientele. The book contains lists of useful helps for exploring corpora such as CQL abbreviations, tag sets, internet addresses as well as an index with explanations of the corpus linguistic and linguistic terminology.

Článek systematicky popisuje vývoj popisu deminutivního aparátu češtiny od M. Vavřince Benedikta Nudožerského až po přehled Miloše Dokulila a současné publikace, které systém uvádějí. Sufixy jsou rozděleny na jednoduché a složené, jejich (ne)existence byla ověřena na korpusových datech převáženě korpusu InteCorp, ale i SYN. Závěr článku je věnován stručnému pohledu na kontrast s němčinou. Článek systematicky popisuje vývoj popisu deminutivního aparátu češtiny od M. Vavřince Benedikta Nudožerského až po přehled Miloše Dokulila a současné publikace, které systém uvádějí. Sufixy jsou rozděleny na jednoduché a složené, jejich (ne)existence byla ověřena na korpusových datech převáženě korpusu InteCorp, ale i SYN. Závěr článku je věnován stručnému pohledu na kontrast s němčinou. It has been almost 50 years ago since Miloš Dokulil presented his system of Czech diminutive suffixes. Actually, it was Lubomír Doležel, who wrote the chapter “Diminutive Names” and listed as many as 39 diminutive suffixes (incl. their variants). This number is the highest in the in traditional Czech word-formation literature dating from M. Vavřinec Benedikt Nudožerský (1603) to the latest contemporary Czech grammar. This article revises the system of the Czech diminutive suffixes of nouns: corpus data show there are some suffixes hardly used or even not existing at all in the modern system of Czech noun diminutives. On the other hand the corpus driven approach proved the existence of suffixes that have not been listed in the system so far. These suffixes are either “simple” ones or “blended” from a derivational and diminutive suffix (“compound suffix”). (We use terms “simple” and “compound” suffix instead of “primary”, “secondary” and “tertiary” suffix.) This new system of Czech diminutive suffixes can improve the analysis of formal diminutive pairs and can help to cover up regularities in forming Czech noun diminutives. The first chapter of this article re-defines a diminutive as a one-word-form and outlines diminutives, non-diminutives and the “grey zone” between them.