Die ukrainische Sprache, die zu den Nominativ-Akkusativ-Sprachen gehört, weist sowohl historisch als auch synchron Abweichungen vom kanonischen Lizensierungsmuster dieser beiden Kasus auf. So kennt das Ukrainische resultative, inkongruente, in den Finitheitsmerkmalen neutralisierten Passiv-Partizipien auf -no, -to, die wie finite Aktiv-Verben ihrem internen Argument Akkusativ zuweisen, aber historisch auch Nominativ am Patiensargument lizensierten. Solche Kasus-Zuweisung am Patiens passivischer und impersonaler Verben bei fehlender oder Default-Kongruenz stellt einen wichtigen Prüfstein für die theoretische Erfassung von Kasus, Finitheitsmerkmale und Subjektmarkierung dar. Das Ziel der Untersuchung war, über die etymologische Fragestellung hinaus, ein korpus-basiertes und quantifizierbares Bild des diachronen grammatischen Wandels der -no, -to-Formen im Mittelukrainischen zu erstellen. Synchron sind -no, -to bereits gut erforscht: die Struktur erlaubt eine overte Agensangabe im Instrumental und eine optional eingesetzte overte Kopula. Diagnostische Subjekteigenschaften wie Kontrolle in die Infinitiv- und Partizipialkontexte, sowie die Bindung von Reflexiva greifen nicht. Historisch dagegen bestehen noch große empirische Lücken und Beschreibungsdesiderate. Es wurden einige der empirischen Lücken in der Diachronie der -no, -to auf der Grundlage eines elektronischen, diachronen (1500-1800) mittelgroßen Korpus literarischer und administrativer Texte geschlossen: die Arbeit beschäftigt sich mit der Kongruenz und Transitivität der -no, -to und untersucht sie parallel zu den morphologisch identischen passiven kongruierenden -no, -to. / The Ukrainian language belongs to the nominative-accusative languages and demonstrates both historically and synchronically the deviations from the canonical case licensing pattern. That is, Ukrainian has resultative, non-agreeing and non-finite passive participles ending in either -no or -to that assign accusative to their internal argument, just like finite active verbs do. Historically -no, -to forms licensed the nominative on the patience argument as well. Accusative case assignment on the patience in impersonal verbs that lack agreement represents an important touchstone for the theoretical understanding of case, finiteness and subject marking. Along with the etymological questions, the aim of this investigation was to obtain a corpus-based quantifiable picture of the diachronic grammatical change of -no, -to forms in Middle Ukrainian. The modern -no, -to structure has already been properly investigated: it is clear that the structure allows for an overt agent phrase in instrumental and for an optional copula. Diagnostic subject properties like control into the infinitival and participial contexts, as well as the binding of reflexives do not apply. Historically however, there are large empirical gaps and desiderata as to the development of -no, -to. The thesis closes several of the empirical gaps in the diachrony of -no, -to on the basis of a middle-sized electronic corpus of literary and administrative texts from 1500-1800. The thesis deals with the agreement and transitivity of non-agreeing -no, -to that have been investigated parallel to the morphologically identical to them agreeing passive -no, -to.

The benefits of Model-Driven Software Development (MDSD) and Domain-Specific Languages (DSLs) wrt. efficiency and quality in software engineering increase the demand for custom languages and the need for efficient methods for language engineering. This motivated the introduction of language families that aim at further reducing the development costs and the maintenance effort for custom languages. The basic idea is to exploit the commonalities and provide means to enable systematic variation among a set of related languages. Current techniques and methodologies for language engineering are not prepared to deal with the particular challenges of language families. First, language engineering processes lack means for a systematic analysis, specification and management of variability as found in language families. Second, technical approaches for a modular specification and realisation of languages suffer from insufficient modularity properties. They lack means for information hiding, for explicit module interfaces, for loose coupling, and for flexible module integration. Our first contribution, Feature-Oriented Language Family Engineering (LFE), adapts methods from Software Product Line Engineering to the domain of language engineering. It extends Feature-Oriented Software Development to support metamodelling approaches used for language engineering and replaces state-of-the-art processes by a variability- and reuse-oriented LFE process. Feature-oriented techniques are used as means for systematic variability analysis, variability management, language variant specification, and the automatic derivation of custom language variants. Our second contribution, Integrative Role-Based Language Composition, extends existing metamodelling approaches with roles. Role models introduce enhanced modularity for object-oriented specifications like abstract syntax metamodels. We introduce a role-based language for the specification of language components, a role-based composition language, and an extensible composition system to evaluate role-based language composition programs. The composition system introduces integrative, grey-box composition techniques for language syntax and semantics that realise the statics and dynamics of role composition, respectively. To evaluate the introduced approaches and to show their applicability, we apply them in three major case studies. First, we use feature-oriented LFE to implement a language family for the ontology language OWL. Second, we employ role-based language composition to realise a component-based version of the language OCL. Third, we apply both approaches in combination for the development of SumUp, a family of languages for mathematical equations.

The benefits of Model-Driven Software Development (MDSD) and Domain-Specific Languages (DSLs) wrt. efficiency and quality in software engineering increase the demand for custom languages and the need for efficient methods for language engineering. This motivated the introduction of language families that aim at further reducing the development costs and the maintenance effort for custom languages. The basic idea is to exploit the commonalities and provide means to enable systematic variation among a set of related languages. Current techniques and methodologies for language engineering are not prepared to deal with the particular challenges of language families. First, language engineering processes lack means for a systematic analysis, specification and management of variability as found in language families. Second, technical approaches for a modular specification and realisation of languages suffer from insufficient modularity properties. They lack means for information hiding, for explicit module interfaces, for loose coupling, and for flexible module integration. Our first contribution, Feature-Oriented Language Family Engineering (LFE), adapts methods from Software Product Line Engineering to the domain of language engineering. It extends Feature-Oriented Software Development to support metamodelling approaches used for language engineering and replaces state-of-the-art processes by a variability- and reuse-oriented LFE process. Feature-oriented techniques are used as means for systematic variability analysis, variability management, language variant specification, and the automatic derivation of custom language variants. Our second contribution, Integrative Role-Based Language Composition, extends existing metamodelling approaches with roles. Role models introduce enhanced modularity for object-oriented specifications like abstract syntax metamodels. We introduce a role-based language for the specification of language components, a role-based composition language, and an extensible composition system to evaluate role-based language composition programs. The composition system introduces integrative, grey-box composition techniques for language syntax and semantics that realise the statics and dynamics of role composition, respectively. To evaluate the introduced approaches and to show their applicability, we apply them in three major case studies. First, we use feature-oriented LFE to implement a language family for the ontology language OWL. Second, we employ role-based language composition to realise a component-based version of the language OCL. Third, we apply both approaches in combination for the development of SumUp, a family of languages for mathematical equations.:1. Introduction 1.1. The Omnipresence of Language Families 1.2. Challenges for Language Family Engineering 1.3. Language Family Engineering with Features and Role-Based Composition 2. Review of Current Language Engineering 2.1. Language Engineering Processes 2.1.1. Analysis Phase 2.1.2. Design Phase 2.1.3. Implementation Phase 2.1.4. Applicability in Language Family Engineering 2.1.5. Requirements for an Enhanced LFE Process 2.2. Technical Approaches in Language Engineering 2.2.1. Specification of Abstract Syntax 2.2.2. Specification of Concrete Syntax 2.2.3. Specification of Semantics 2.2.4. Requirements for an Enhanced LFE Technique 3. Feature-Oriented Language Family Engineering 3.1. Foundations of Feature-Oriented SPLE 3.1.1. Introduction to SPLE 3.1.2. Feature-Oriented Software Development 3.2. Feature-Oriented Language Family Engineering 3.2.1. Variability and Variant Specification in LFE 3.2.2. Product-Line Realisation, Mapping and Variant Derivation for LFE 3.3. Case Study: Scalability in Ontology Specification, Evaluation and Application 3.3.1. Review of Evolution, Customisation and Combination in the OWL LanguageFamily 3.3.2. Application of Feature-Oriented Language Family Engineering for OWL 3.4. Discussion 3.4.1. Contributions 3.4.2. Related Work. 3.4.3. Conclusion 4. Integrative, Role-Based Composition for Language Family Engineering 4.1. Foundations of Role-Based Modelling. 4.1.1. Information Hiding and Interface Specification in Role Models 4.1.2. Loose Coupling and Flexible Integration in Role Composition 4.2. The LanGems Language Composition System 4.2.1. The Language Component Specification Language . 4.2.2. TheLanguageCompositionLanguage 4.2.3. TechniquesofLanguageComposition 4.3. Case Study: Component-based OCL 4.3.1. Role-Based OCL Modularisation 4.3.2. Role-Based OCL Composition 4.4. Discussion 4.4.1. Contributions 4.4.2. Related Work 4.4.3. Conclusion 5. LFE with Integrative, Role-Based Syntax and Semantics Composition 5.1. Integrating Features and Roles 5.2. SumUp Case Study 5.2.1. Motivation 5.2.2. Feature-Oriented Variability and Variant Specification 5.2.3. Role-Based Component Realisation 5.2.4. Feature-Oriented Variability and Variant Evolution 5.2.5. Model-driven Concrete Syntax Realisation 5.2.6. Model-driven Semantics Realisation 5.2.7. Role-Based Composition and Feature Mapping 5.2.8. Language Variant Derivation 5.3. Conclusion 6. Conclusion 6.1. Contributions 6.2. Outlook 6.2.1. Co-Evolution in Language Families 6.2.2. Role-Based Tool Integration. 6.2.3. Automatic Modularisation of Existing Language Families 6.2.4. Language Component Library Appendix A Appendix B Bibliography