DE eng

Search in the Catalogues and Directories

Hits 1 – 14 of 14

1
To appear in Markedness in the Morphosemantics of φ-Features (special issue of
In: http://epubs.surrey.ac.uk/4056/2/GGC-MUMSA-13.pdf (2009)
BASE
Show details
2
Proceedings of the
In: http://www.zas.gwz-berlin.de/papers/zaspil/articles/zp44/Sub10-Proceedings-Complete.pdf (2005)
BASE
Show details
3
Genitive Quantifiers in Japanese as Reverse Partitives∗
In: http://edocs.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/volltexte/2009/12746/pdf/SAUERLAND_Genitive_Quantifiers_in_Japanese_as.pdf (2004)
BASE
Show details
4
Pronoun movement in dream reports
In: http://semarch.linguistics.fas.nyu.edu/Archive/jQ0MDc2M/PercusSauerland03b.pdf (2002)
BASE
Show details
5
“sub7 – Sinn und Bedeutung” 7 th Annual Meeting of the Gesellschaft für Semantik
In: http://www.ub.uni-konstanz.de/kops/volltexte/2003/1103/pdf/ap114.pdf (2002)
BASE
Show details
6
Scalar vs. Epistemic Vagueness: Evidence from Approximators
In: http://ecommons.library.cornell.edu/bitstream/1813/11303/1/salt_17_sauerland.pdf
BASE
Show details
7
The Frobenius Problem
In: http://people.umass.edu/scable/LING720-FA10/Handouts/Beck%26Sauerland-Presentation.pdf
BASE
Show details
8
Scalar vs. Epistemic Vagueness: Evidence from Approximators
In: http://elanguage.net/journals/index.php/salt/article/viewFile/17.228/1852/
BASE
Show details
9
Scalar vs. Epistemic Vagueness: Evidence from Approximators
In: http://semantics.uchicago.edu/kennedy/classes/s09/experimentalsemantics/sauerland-stateva07.pdf
BASE
Show details
10
Could
In: http://edocs.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/volltexte/2009/12808/pdf/SAUERLAND_Plural_Is_Semantically_Unmarkedpdf.pdf
BASE
Show details
11
Could
In: http://webcgi.oit.umass.edu/~linguist/archive/archive/submissions/a0309da1646ad1f7/SauerlandAnderssenYatsushiro_2005_WeakPlurals.pdf
BASE
Show details
12
Contrastive topics decomposed ∗
In: http://semprag.org/article/viewFile/sp.5.8/pdf/
Abstract: Abstract The analysis of contrastive topics introduced in Büring 1997b and further developed in Büring 2003 relies on distinguishing two types of constituents that introduce alternatives: the sentence focus, which is marked by a FOC feature, and the contrastive topic, which is marked by a CT feature. A non-compositional rule of interpretation that refers to these features is used to derive a topic semantic value, a nested set of sets of propositions. This paper presents evidence for a correlation between the restrictive syntax of nested focus operators and the syntax of contrastive topics, a correlation which is unexpected under this analysis. A compositional analysis is proposed that only makes use of the flatter focus semantic values introduced by focus operators. The analysis aims at integrating insights from the original analysis while at the same time capturing the observed syntactic restrictions.
Keyword: alternatives; contrastive topics; Daniel Büring; Edward; focus; intonation; Noah Constant; prosody ∗ Thanks for helpful comments to Pranav Anand; scope
URL: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.353.1573
http://semprag.org/article/viewFile/sp.5.8/pdf/
BASE
Hide details
13
PRESUPPOSITION AND IMPLICATURE IN COMPOSITIONAL SEMANTICS
In: http://www.cs.umd.edu/projects/active/publications/papers/Paulgre_Klinedinst_book_11.pdf
BASE
Show details
14
Prosody and Scope in German Inverse Linking Constructions
In: http://edocs.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/volltexte/2009/12881/pdf/SAUERLAND_Prosody_and_Scope_in_German_Inverse_Linking_Constructions.pdf
BASE
Show details

Catalogues
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Bibliographies
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Linked Open Data catalogues
0
Online resources
0
0
0
0
Open access documents
14
0
0
0
0
© 2013 - 2024 Lin|gu|is|tik | Imprint | Privacy Policy | Datenschutzeinstellungen ändern