Untersuchungsgegenstand der Dissertation sind sprachliche Strukturen, die aus einer Form des Verbs „machen“ und einer objektsprädikativen Adjektivphrase bestehen. Die Arbeit ist eingebettet in einen konstruktionsgrammatischen Rahmen, nach dem Sprache sich als strukturiertes Inventar von Konstruktionen (Form-Funktions-Beziehungen) beschreiben lässt. Ziele der Arbeit sind a) die korpusbasierte Ermittlung lexikalischer Kollokationen und Gebrauchstendenzen innerhalb der Zielstruktur sowie b) die systematische Beschreibung der damit verbundenen Form-Funktions-Beziehungen. Als Arbeitshypothese wurde übereinstimmend mit bisherigen Arbeiten zum selben sprachlichen Gegenstand eine kausative Bedeutung, also die Kodierung einer Ursache-Wirkung-Relation, angenommen. Da konstruktionsgrammatischen Ansätzen zufolge formale Unterschiede mit Unterschieden auf der Ebene der Funktion korrespondieren sollten, wurde empirisch untersucht, in welchen Fällen formale Unterschiede innerhalb der Zielstruktur tatsächlich systematisch zu unterschiedlichen funktionalen Interpretationen führen. Lexikalische Kollokationen innerhalb der Zielstruktur wurden statistisch anhand von Kollostruktionsanalysen („Covarying Collexeme Analysis“; vgl. Gries/Stefanowitsch, 2004) ermittelt. Zur Beschreibung der Bedeutung oder Funktion dienten Frame-semantische Beschreibungen englischer Verben aus dem FrameNet (vgl. Fillmore/Baker, 2010). Eine wesentliche Beobachtung besteht nun darin, dass entgegen der ursprünglichen Annahme keineswegs alle Vorkommen von „machen“ mit einer objektsprädikativen Adjektivphrase eine Ursache-Wirkung-Relation kodieren. Gerade die in der Kombination mit „machen“ hochfrequenten Adjektive korrelieren signifikant mit abweichenden, nicht im engeren Sinne kausativen, Interpretationen im Sinne der jeweils evozierten semantischen Frames. / This dissertation focuses on combinations of a form of the German verb “machen” with an adjective phrase which, according to a working hypothesis, is said to have a resultative reading. The work is grounded in a Construction Grammar approach, viewing language as a structured inventory of Constructions, i.e. form-function mappings. The aims are a) establishing lexical collocations and usage tendencies within these structures involving “machen” and a resultative adjective phrase, based on corpus studies, and b) describing systematically the relevant form-function mappings. As Construction Grammar approaches predict changes in function corresponding to changes in form, the formal collocations established according to aim a) are systematically analyzed with respect to their respective functional interpretations. The methods used involve a series of „Covarying Collexeme Analyses“ (cf. Gries/Stefanowitsch, 2004) to study lexical collocations within the given formal structure, and the application of frame semantic descriptions of English verbs, as found in FrameNet (cf. Fillmore/Baker, 2010), to the German structures found in the corpora. The results indicate that, contrary to the working hypothesis, a great number of “machen” plus adjective tokens does not lead to a causative or resultative interpretation. Especially the most frequent adjectives combined with “machen” exhibit a significant correlation with structures evoking different, not strictly causative, semantic frames.

The characterization of the Markan disciples has been and continues to be the object of much scholarly reflection and speculation. For many, the Markan author's presentation of Jesus' disciples holds a key, if not the key, to unlocking the purpose and function of the gospel as a whole. Commentators differ as to whether the Markan disciples ultimately serve a pedagogical or polemical function, yet they are generally agreed that the disciples in Mark come off rather badly, especially when compared to their literary counterparts in Matthew, Luke, and John. This narrative-critical study considers the characterization of the Markan disciples within the Sea Crossing movement (Mark 4:1-8:30). While commentators have, on the whole, interpreted the disciples' negative characterization in this movement in terms of lack of faith and/or incomprehension, neither of these, nor a combination of the two, fully accounts for the severity of language leveled against the disciples by the narrator (6:52) and Jesus (8:17-18). Taking as its starting point an argument by Jeffrey B. Gibson (1986) that the harshness of Jesus' rebuke in Mark 8:14-21 is occasioned not by the disciples' lack of faith or incomprehension but by their active resistance to his Gentile mission, this investigation uncovers additional examples of the disciples' resistance to Gentile mission, offering a better account of their negative portrayal within the Sea Crossing movement and helping explain many of their other failures. In short, this study argues that in Mark 4:1-8:26, the disciples are characterized as resistant to Jesus' Gentile mission and to their participation in that mission, the chief consequence being that they are rendered incapable of recognizing Jesus' vocational identity as Israel's Messiah (Thesis A). This leads to a secondary thesis, namely, that in Mark 8:27-30, Peter's recognition of Jesus' messianic identity indicates that the disciples have finally come to accept Jesus' Gentile mission and their participation in it (Thesis B). Chapter One: Introduction: offers a selective review of scholarly treatments of the Markan disciples, which shows that few scholars attribute resistance, let alone purposeful resistance, to the disciples. Chapter Two: The Rhetoric of Repetition: introduces the methodological tools, concepts, and perspectives employed in the study. It includes a section on narrative criticism, which focuses upon the story-as-discoursed and the implied author and reader, and a section on Construction Grammar, a branch of cognitive linguistics founded by Charles Fillmore and further developed by Paul Danove, which focuses upon semantic and narrative frames and case frame analysis. Chapter Three: The Sea Crossing Movement, Mark 4:1-8:30: addresses the question of Markan structure and argues that Mark 4:1-8:30 comprises a single, unified, narrative movement, whose action and plot is oriented to the Sea of Galilee and whose most distinctive feature is the network of sea crossings that transport Jesus and his disciples back and forth between Jewish and Gentile geopolitical spaces. Following William Freedman, Chapter Four: The Literary Motif: introduces two criteria (frequency and avoidability) for determining objectively what constitutes a literary motif and provides the methodological basis and starting point for the analyses performed in chapters five and six. Chapter Five: The Sea Crossing Motif: establishes and then carries out a lengthy narrative analysis of the Sea Crossing motif, which is oriented around Mark's use of ‎θάλασσα (thalassa) and πλοῖον (ploion), and Chapter Six: The Loaves Motif: does the same for The Loaves motif, oriented around Mark's use of ἄρτος (artos). Finally, Chapter Seven: The Narrative Logic of the Disciples (In)comprehension: draws together all narrative, linguistic, and exegetical insights of the previous chapters and offers a single coherent reading of the Sea Crossing movement that establishes Theses A and B.

comprises 50 occurrences of presenter's IPS and 50 occurrences of guests' IPS. - - - - ' presenter's IPS react in 98 % of cases to (78 % of presenter's IPS occur in thematic , on the other hand 52 % of guests' IPS occur in thematic (while presenter's IPS adjacency pair, guests' IPS in most -