German adjectives

Abstract: We present two studies aimed at developing a comprehensive taxonomy of German personality-descriptive terms. In the first study, all personality-descriptive adjectives (e.g. cynical), type nouns (e.g. cynic), and attribute nouns (e.g. cynicism) were extracted from a German dictionary. We found that almost half of all German adjectives were potentially personality-relevant, as contrasted with only 8% of the nouns. Moreover, there were more attribute nouns than type nouns, the latter appearing more slangy, metaphorical, concrete, and rich in imagery (e.g. Big-mouth, Wooden-head). In the second study, we discuss basic conceptual distinctions among units ofpersonality description, develop a category system basedon a prototype conception, and present a classification of 5092 adjectives into 13 categories. The classifications were generalizable across both judges and a two-year time interval, and agreed with a priori expert classifications. An analysis of the prototypical category cores suggested that Evaluations, Temperament and character traits, and Experiential states were represented most extensively in German, whereas Social effects, Roles and relationships, and Appearance were rather infrequent. These findings, though generally similar, differ from Norman's (1967) American taxonomy in the number of Evaluative terms and of Activity descriptors. Our studies provide comprehensive and representative lists of German words for personality traits, moods and emotions, social roles, effects, evaluations, and physical appearance, and may serve as the basis for taxonomies, dimensional analyses, and assessment instruments. We emphasize the need to standardize procedures in taxonomic research and outline suggestions for future studies of other languages.

Abstract: In this paper I wish to address certain questions relating to the fact that adjectives in Modern High German have the property of being able to assign case to their complement NP. In particular, I wish to raise three questions: (1) why is it that adjectives in Germah have this property at all?, (2) why are the cases that are assigned to the complements of adjectives dative and genitive, but not accusative and nominative?, and (3) why does there appear to be a correlation between the existence in a language of a morphological case system and the possibility for adjectives to assign case?

Abstract: The authors investigate how morphological relationships between inflected word forms are represented in the mental lexicon, focusing on paradigmatic relations between regularly inflected word forms and relationships between different stem forms of the same lexeme. We present results from a series of psycholinguistic experiments investigating German adjectives (which are inflected for case, number, and gender) and the so-called strong verbs of German, which have different stem forms when inflected for person, number, tense, or mood. Evidence from three lexical-decision experiments indicates that regular affixes are stripped off from their stems for processing purposes. It will be shown that this holds for both unmarked and marked stem forms. Another set of experiments revealed priming effects between different paradigmatically related affixes and between different stem forms of the same lexeme. We will show that associative models of inflection do not capture these findings, and we explain our results in terms of combinatorial models of inflection in which regular affixes are represented in inflectional paradigms and stem variants are represented in structured lexical entries. We will also argue that the morphosyntactic features of stems and affixes form abstract underspecified entries. The experimental results indicate that the human language processor makes use of these representations.

Abstract: This is the first of a series of papers that, taken together, will give an essentially complete account of inflection in standard German. In this paper we present that part of the account that covers adjectives, determiners, and third-person pronouns, one that captures all the regularities, subregularities, and irregularities that are involved. The forms are defined in terms of their syllable structure, as proposed in Cahill (1990a, 1990b, 1993). The morphological treatment is based on ideas originally set out by Zwicky (1985). The analysis is formulated as a DATR theory - a set of lexical axioms - from which all the relevant facts follow as theorems. DATR is a widely used formal lexical-knowledge-representation language developed for use in computational linguistics