@article{31680, author = {{Scharlau, Ingrid and Karsten, A. and Rohlfing, Katharina J.}}, issn = {{2030-1006}}, journal = {{Journal of Writing Research}}, keywords = {{Literature and Literary Theory, Linguistics and Language, Language and Linguistics, Education}}, number = {{vol. 12 issue 3}}, pages = {{493--529}}, publisher = {{ARLE (International Association for Research in L1 Education)}}, title = {{{Building, emptying out, or dreaming? Action structures and space in students’ metaphors of academic writing}}}, doi = {{10.17239/jowr-2021.12.03.01}}, volume = {{12}}, year = {{2021}}, } @article{41220, abstract = {{Abstract In line with international developments in applied linguistics, school curricula in Germany have begun to demand that Global Englishes be included in English Language Teaching. However, the perspectives of German school students, the main addressees of such a shift, are little explored. This article investigates the attitudes to and familiarity with different Englishes among 160 German high school students, using a mix of direct and indirect attitude elicitation methods and a nationality identification task. Informants rated (speakers of) Standard Southern British (StSBrE), Standard American (StAmE), Indian (IndE), German (GerE), and African/Kenyan English (AfrE/KenE). Multivariate analyses revealed that informants are most familiar with StSBrE and StAmE. StSBrE and, to a smaller degree, StAmE are perceived as reference norms, while English as a Second Language (ESL) varieties, especially IndE are rated negatively for competence, professionalism, and intelligibility. Familiarity with specific English as a First/Native Language varieties is linked to more positive attitudes. The observed congruence of directly and indirectly elicited attitudes suggests that changes put forth in language curricula have not influenced language attitudes (yet).}}, author = {{Meer, Philipp and Hartmann, Johanna and Rumlich, Dominik}}, issn = {{0142-6001}}, journal = {{Applied Linguistics}}, keywords = {{Linguistics and Language, Language and Linguistics, Communication}}, number = {{3}}, pages = {{538--562}}, publisher = {{Oxford University Press (OUP)}}, title = {{{Attitudes of German high school students toward different varieties of English}}}, doi = {{10.1093/applin/amab046}}, volume = {{43}}, year = {{2021}}, } @article{46149, abstract = {{The paper presents a cross-European survey on teachers and crowdsourcing. The survey examines how familiar language teachers are with the concept of crowdsourcing and addresses their attitude towards including crowdsourcing into language teaching activities. The survey was administrated via an online questionnaire and collected volunteers’ data on: (a) teachers’ experience with organizing crowdsourcing activities for students/pupils, (b) the development of crowdsourced resources and materials as well as (c) teachers’ motivation for participating in or employing crowdsourcing activities. The questionnaire was disseminated in over 30 European countries. The final sample comprises 1129 language teachers aged 20 to 65, mostly working at institutions of tertiary education. The data indicates that many participants are not familiar with the concept of crowdsourcing resulting in a low rate of crowdsourcing activities in the classroom. However, a high percentage of responding teachers is potentially willing to crowdsource teaching materials for the language(s) they teach. They are particularly willing to collaborate with other teachers in the creation of interactive digital learning materials, and to select, edit, and share language examples for exercises or tests. Since the inclusion of crowdsourcing activities in language teaching is still in its initial stage, steps for further research are highlighted.}}, author = {{Arhar Holdt, Špela and Zanasi, Lorenzo and Weber, Tassja and Volodina, Elena and Rodosthenous, Christos and Ordulj, Antonia and Miloshevska, Lina and Lazić Konjik, Ivana and Koeva, Svetla and Kasperavičienė, Ramunė and Hatipoglu, Ciler and Fort, Karën and Bago, Petra and Durán-Muñoz, Isabel and Gajek, Elżbieta and Zviel-Girshin, Rina}}, issn = {{1849-0379}}, journal = {{Rasprave Instituta za hrvatski jezik i jezikoslovlje}}, keywords = {{Linguistics and Language, Language and Linguistics}}, number = {{1}}, pages = {{1--28}}, publisher = {{Institute of Croatian Language and Linguistics}}, title = {{{Language Teachers and Crowdsourcing}}}, doi = {{10.31724/rihjj.46.1.1}}, volume = {{46}}, year = {{2020}}, } @article{29223, abstract = {{Die Klage über mangelnde Steuermoral ist in der aktuellen Medienberichterstattung omnipräsent, aber sie ist nicht neu: Bereits kurz nach dem Zweiten Weltkrieg wurde bemängelt, die Deutschen in den westlichen Besatzungszonen hinterzögen ihre Steuern. Verfiel die westdeutsche Steuermoral schon damals? Wie veränderte sie sich im Zeitraum zwischen 1945 und 1953? Nach einem kurzen Überblick über die Geschichte der interdisziplinären Steuermoralforschung und einigen methodischen Überlegungen, wie Historiker*innen die Entwicklung der Steuermoral qualitativ untersuchen können, wird im vorliegenden Aufsatz der Diskurs um das Steuerzahlen in der Nachkriegszeit analysiert. Durch die Analyse von Zeitungsberichten und Parlamentsdebatten werden drei unterschiedliche, konkurrierende Narrative identifiziert, die geeignet waren, ganz verschiedene »policy windows« zu öffnen. Die historische Untersuchung zeigt, dass Narrative über das (ehrliche) Steuerzahlen immer mit bestimmten politischen Interessen verknüpft sind - und dass sie deshalb auch im aktuellen Diskurs über das (ehrliche) Steuerzahlen sorgfältig analysiert werden sollten. }}, author = {{Schönhärl, Korinna}}, issn = {{0340-0425}}, journal = {{Leviathan}}, keywords = {{Political Science and International Relations, Linguistics and Language, Sociology and Political Science, Language and Linguistics}}, number = {{2}}, pages = {{169--191}}, publisher = {{Nomos Verlag}}, title = {{{Steuermoral in Westdeutschland nach dem Zweiten Weltkrieg. Eine diskursanalytische Rekonstruktion}}}, doi = {{10.5771/0340-0425-2019-2-169}}, volume = {{47}}, year = {{2019}}, } @article{51320, abstract = {{

Die Systemtheorie und die Kritische Theorie sind Schulen, die Theoretikerinnen seit langem ein Zuhause bieten. In der Zeit ihres Bestehens kam es immer wieder zu Treffpunkten und Theoriekollisionen dieser beiden Traditionen des Denkens der Gesellschaft. Durch die hier entwickelte Metareflexion wird es möglich, zu analysieren, wie diese Theorietraditionen verbunden werden. Da sich die aktuelle Diskussion auf die Perspektive der Systemtheorie beschränkt, ist es notwendig, die Verbindung auch aus der Perspektive Kritischer Theorie zu debattieren. Denn erst die Unterscheidung der heute immer mehr ins Gespräch kommenden Kritischen Systemtheorie von der kaum diskutierten Kritischen Theorie sozialer Systeme macht es möglich, die volle Produktivität der Theoriekollisionen zu erkennen. Wir konzipieren unsere Metareflexion damit als eine Intervention im Sinne einer soziologischen Selbstkritik. Sie richtet sich gegen die Gefahr des theoretischen Dogmatismus und plädiert für die Öffnung der Kontingenz des eigenen Denkens der Gesellschaft.

}}, author = {{Alvear, Rafael and Haker, Christoph}}, issn = {{0340-0425}}, journal = {{Leviathan}}, keywords = {{Political Science and International Relations, Linguistics and Language, Sociology and Political Science, Language and Linguistics}}, number = {{4}}, pages = {{498--513}}, publisher = {{Nomos Verlag}}, title = {{{Kritische Systemtheorie und Kritische Theorie sozialer Systeme. Ein Plädoyer für eine fruchtbare Unterscheidung}}}, doi = {{10.5771/0340-0425-2019-4-498}}, volume = {{47}}, year = {{2019}}, } @article{46141, abstract = {{Abstract In this paper, the contractions shoulda, coulda, woulda are compared with their respective full forms should have, would have, and could have. Although the full forms are used much more frequently and are, therefore, considered canonical, the non-canonical forms have increased in frequency throughout the better part of the twentieth century. They are predominantly used in American English – in conversation as well as in fictional writing to imitate speech. With respect to their syntactic environment, shoulda, coulda, and woulda behave differently than their full counterparts since they are often used without subjects and without lexical verbs. Some of these uses can be explained by the fact that shoulda, coulda, and woulda are not always used as verbal items but also as nouns, adjectives, and interjections. Due to their overall low frequency and their restriction to a particular register, however, it appears they will keep their non-canonical status for the foreseeable future.}}, author = {{Freudinger, Markus}}, issn = {{2196-4726}}, journal = {{Zeitschrift für Anglistik und Amerikanistik}}, keywords = {{Literature and Literary Theory, Linguistics and Language, Language and Linguistics}}, number = {{3}}, pages = {{319--337}}, publisher = {{Walter de Gruyter GmbH}}, title = {{{Shoulda, Coulda, Woulda – Non-Canonical Forms on the Move?}}}, doi = {{10.1515/zaa-2017-0031}}, volume = {{65}}, year = {{2017}}, } @article{48306, abstract = {{The goal of argumentation mining, an evolving research field in computational linguistics, is to design methods capable of analyzing people's argumentation. In this article, we go beyond the state of the art in several ways. (i) We deal with actual Web data and take up the challenges given by the variety of registers, multiple domains, and unrestricted noisy user-generated Web discourse. (ii) We bridge the gap between normative argumentation theories and argumentation phenomena encountered in actual data by adapting an argumentation model tested in an extensive annotation study. (iii) We create a new gold standard corpus (90k tokens in 340 documents) and experiment with several machine learning methods to identify argument components. We offer the data, source codes, and annotation guidelines to the community under free licenses. Our findings show that argumentation mining in user-generated Web discourse is a feasible but challenging task.}}, author = {{Habernal, Ivan and Gurevych, Iryna}}, issn = {{0891-2017}}, journal = {{Computational Linguistics}}, keywords = {{Artificial Intelligence, Computer Science Applications, Linguistics and Language, Language and Linguistics}}, number = {{1}}, pages = {{125--179}}, publisher = {{MIT Press}}, title = {{{Argumentation Mining in User-Generated Web Discourse}}}, doi = {{10.1162/coli_a_00276}}, volume = {{43}}, year = {{2016}}, } @article{46148, author = {{Wolfer, Sascha and Bartz, Thomas and Weber, Tassja and Abel, Andrea and Meyer, Christian M and Müller-Spitzer, Carolin and Storrer, Angelika}}, issn = {{0950-3846}}, journal = {{International Journal of Lexicography}}, keywords = {{Language and Linguistics}}, number = {{1}}, pages = {{1--28}}, publisher = {{Oxford University Press (OUP)}}, title = {{{The Effectiveness of Lexicographic Tools for Optimising Written L1-Texts}}}, doi = {{10.1093/ijl/ecw038}}, volume = {{31}}, year = {{2016}}, } @article{46434, abstract = {{Abstract When looking at seminal works in contemporary literary criticism (exemplary: Martinez/Scheffel 2012), it is apparent that the subject of “time”, or, “the representation of time”, receives a great deal of significance. Regarding the ontogenesis of literary research discourse over the past 50 years, Käte Hamburger’s “The Logic of Poetry” (original “Die Logik der Dichtung”, 1957) is a work that has fundamentally shaped the research discourse. But not only within the field of literary studies has the subject of “tense and narration” has been received and discussed – also the field of linguistics also demonstrates an intensive engagement with the subject of narration (cf. e. g. Weinrich 1964, Ehlich 1980) and tense. For example, Rolf Thieroffs monograph “The finite Verb in German: Tense – Mood – Distance” (original “Das finite Verb im Deutschen: Tempus – Modus – Distanz”, 1992) elaborates a conceptualisation of the German temporal system with reference to Weinrich’s representation of time in fiction and non-fiction texts (cf. Thieroff 1992, 298). This contribution joins at the interface between linguistic research on tenses and literary research on narration. The aim is to show that there is an interaction between choice of tense and narrative context, or, in other words: the use of different tenses activates different states of consciousness, and thereby different ‘forms’ of narration are created. The latter are captured from empirical data arising from language acquisition and speech genesis as well as, in accordance with Iser (1991) and Sartre (1940/1994), not in a dichotomic fashion but as a trias-system, and are opened for discussion. The remodeling does not regard the two poles of “every­day narration” and “literary narration” as contrasting, but rather as a continuum, which can show transitions relative to the genre of the text and the speech competence of the narrator.}}, author = {{Topalović, Elvira and Uhl, Benjamin}}, issn = {{1613-0626}}, journal = {{Zeitschrift für germanistische Linguistik}}, keywords = {{Linguistics and Language, Developmental and Educational Psychology, Language and Linguistics}}, number = {{1}}, pages = {{26--49}}, publisher = {{Walter de Gruyter GmbH}}, title = {{{Linguistik des literarischen Erzählens}}}, doi = {{10.1515/zgl-2014-0002}}, volume = {{42}}, year = {{2014}}, }