No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

In the English language adjectives can either be placed before the noun or after the nounin the noun phrase. This thesis is concerned with the postposition of adjectives inEnglish. It is particularly concerned with adjectives ending in -ible and -able which caneither take a prepositive or postpositive position when modified by a superlativeadjective, only or next etc. In the theoretical section of this study, reasons for whypostposition might occur and historic information about the -ble suffix are described.The usage of these adjectives in both the prepositive and postpositive position isfurthermore excerpted from the Corpus of Contemporary American English. Twentyadjectives from the adjective sample are further analysed in detail regarding theirpostposition, to ascertain which characteristics might lead to postposition, in principlesemantics, domain usage, etymology, syntactic function, and the characteristics of theirnoun collocates. Ten nouns are further analysed using the same criteria to ascertain ifcertain nouns can affect the postposition of adjectives in the noun phrase. From theseexamples, conclusions about the common characteristics of adjectives ending in -blethat prefer the postpositive position are drawn. The results showed that -ible adjectiveshad a 17.4% tendency to be postposed, whereas -able adjectives had a 17.5 % tendencyto be postposed. Which can be compared to the 4.6 % chance that an adjective ispostposed in English. -Ible and -able adjectives were, furthermore, mostly postposed inprepositional phrases, phrases with complements and in fixed expressions. The -ibleadjectives were also often of Latin or French origin, whilst the -able adjectives were ofFrench origin. These adjectives were moreover commonly used in the academic domainand denoted a dynamic sense. Their noun collocates were, lastly, commonly inanimate,intangible objects used in the academic domain.

The ways in which someone’s first language (L1) influences his or her second language (L2) to create errors, that is negative transfer, is a topic that has received much attention in the field of Second Language Acquisition (SLA). Previous research has suggested that negative transfer is responsible for many errors. The primary aim of this study is to investigate article and preposition errors in the production of Swedish learners of English and to discuss these errors in relation to negative transfer. The secondary aim is to compare transfer errors by L1 Swedish and L1 Portuguese learners of English.   The first and main part of the study is a corpus investigation of the written production of 80 students in upper secondary school (high school). The second part is a multiple-choice test constructed to provoke transfer errors. It was distributed to students in upper secondary school in Sweden and in Brazil. The results from the corpus analysis are largely in line with those of previous research, for example with regards to how definite article errors are more common than indefinite article errors, and how contexts with definite articles and generic noun phrases seem prone to create transfer errors. The corpus study also shows that substitution was the most common preposition error and that many transfer preposition errors supposedly were caused by direct translations. Through the multiple-choice test, the degree to which the first language had an impact on individual errors could be revealed. All in all, the study reveals several aspects of negative transfer that perhaps a single-language investigation could not, because it is in the comparison of English-learners with different L1s that the most interesting results occur. / De sätt som någons första språk påverkar hans eller hennes andra språk så att fel uppstår, det vill säga negativ språköverföring (negative transfer), är ett ämne som har fått mycket uppmärksamhet inom forskning kring språkinlärning. Tidigare studier har visat på hur negativ språköverföring orsakar många fel. Det primära syftet i denna uppsats är att undersöka artikel- och prepositionsfel i skrift hos svenska elever som lär sig engelska och att diskutera dessa fel i relation till negativ språköverföring. Det sekundära målet är att jämföra hur negativ språköverföring yttrar sig hos svenska och portugisiska elever som lär sig engelska. Den första delen av denna uppsats, som även är huvuddelen, är en korpusundersökning av 80 uppsatser skrivna av högstadieelever. Den andra delen är ett flervalstest som konstruerats för att provocera fram språköverföringsfel. Deltagarna var högstadie- och gymnasieelever från Sverige och Brasilien. Resultaten från korpusundersökningen stämmer i stor utsträckning överens med vad tidigare forskning visat, till exempel att det är vanligare att fel uppstår med bestämda artiklar än med obestämda artiklar och hur bestämda artiklar och tillsammans med generiska nominalfraser tenderar att generera negativ språköverföring. Korpusstudien visar också på hur felaktigt utbyte (substitution) var det vanligaste prepositionsfelet och att många språköverföringsfel förmodligen orsakats av direkta översättningar från svenska. I analysen av resultateten från flervalstestet kunde graden av inflytande från första språket på enskilda fel påvisas. Sammantaget avslöjar undersökningen i denna uppsats på flera aspekter av negativ språköverföring som troligen ej uppenbarats om enkom elever med ett förstaspråk inkluderats, detta eftersom det är i jämförelsen mellan engelska-elever med olika förstaspråk som de mest intressanta resultaten framkommer.

This quantitative corpus study discusses and compares the distribution of the inflected genitive (’s- or zero-genitive) with that of the of-construction in East African, Indian, American and British English using data collected from the ICE-EA, ICE-IND, Frown and FLOB corpora. This study also discusses the semantic categories of the inflected genitive in the varieties mentioned. The first conclusion of the study is that the distribution of tokens according to semantic categories is similar in all varieties examined. Furthermore, it is concluded for the modifier classes that animateness-biased classes are more common with the inflected genitive, while inanimateness-biased classes are more common with the of-construction; this distribution is similar in all varieties.

Die vorliegende Arbeit beschäftigt sich mit dem Phänomen der deutschen Modalpartikeln (MPn), das in der linguistischen Forschung viel Aufmerksamkeit erhalten hat, aber fast immer nur innerhalb der Satzgrenzen betrachtet wurde. Es wurde mehrfach vorgeschlagen, dass MPn eine Funktion im Hinblick auf Common Ground-Management haben, jedoch wird nie ausgeführt, wie diese zustande kommt. In dieser Arbeit wird gezeigt, wie die Bedeutung und Funktion verschiedener MPn im Rahmen eines erweiterten Common Ground-Modells erfasst werden kann. In einem zweiten Schritt wird in zwei empirischen Studien die Interaktion von MPn mit Diskursstruktur analysiert, wobei Diskursstruktur hier im Rahmen von Diskursrelationen modelliert wird. Dafür wurden in einem Korpus von Parlamentsreden (126.000 Token) alle Sätze, die eine MP (ja, doch, eben, halt, wohl und schon wurden analysiert) enthalten im Hinblick auf ihre Relationen zu adjazenten Diskurseinheiten annotiert. Verwendet wurde dafür die in der Rhetorischen Strukturtheorie (Mann & Thompson 1989) vorgeschlagenen Relationen. Die statistische Analyse der Ergebnisse zeigen signifikante Präferenzen der einzelnen MPn für bestimmte Diskursrelationen. Diese wurden anschließend in einem Lexical Choice Experiment überprüft und bestätigt, bei dem SprecherInnen im Kontext verschiedener Diskursrelationen auswählen sollten, welche MP am natürlichsten in einen Diskurs passt. SprecherInnen verwenden MPn, um zu zeigen, in welchem Verhältnis eine Proposition zu anderen steht oder um die Proposition auf eine bestimmte Art und Weise im Diskurs zu verankern, z.B. in dem sie als Hintergrundinformation markiert wird. Die beiden empirischen Studien zeigen zum ersten Mal, wie SprecherInnen diese Funktionen nutzen – und teilweise ausnutzen – um Diskurs zu strukturieren, Diskursrelationen hervorzuheben und so Kohärenz zu fördern. Gleichzeitig zeigt diese Arbeit, dass ein erweitertes Common Ground-Modell notwendig ist, um den Beitrag von MPn adäquat zu erfassen. / This work focuses on the phenomenon of German modal particles (Mps) which has received much attention in linguistic research – however mainly restricted to an analysis inside the sentence boundaries. It has been proposed that the function of Mps can be described with respect to common ground management, but this has never been spelled out in detail. Here, the meaning and function of different Mps will be captured in a broadened common ground model. In a second step, two empirical studies analyse the interaction of MPs and discourse structure – here modelled in terms of discourse relations. In a corpus of parliament speeches (126.000 word tokens), all sentences containing a modal particle (ja, doch, eben, halt, wohl and schon have been analyzed) were annotated for their discourse relations towards adjacent discourse units. The statistical analysis of the results reveals clear preferences of the single particles for different discourse relations. These preference were tested again in a follow-up experiment, a lexical choice task in which speakers had to decide which particle fits most naturally in contexts of different discourse relations. The results verified the findings of the corpus study. Overall, MPs can be used to indicate to the addressee how a proposition that is asserted by the speaker is related to (an)other proposition(s) and anchor information in discourse structure in a certain way, e.g. by marking it as background information. The results of the empirical studies show for the first time how speakers can make use of these functions – sometimes by exploiting them – to structure discourse, enhance the function of discourse relations and thereby establish coherence. At the same time, it becomes clear that a broader model of common ground is needed to capture this function of MPs in discourse appropriately.