Лакуна лингвистика

Lexikalische Luecke
Von einer lexikalischen L;cke spricht man, wenn in einer (natuerlichen) Sprache f;r einen Sachverhalt kein Wort vorhanden ist.

Ein Schulbeispiel ist das fehlende Wort f;r „nicht mehr durstig sein“ im Deutschen:

nicht mehr hungrig = satt; nicht mehr durstig = ?
Das Beispiel zeigt eine fehlende lexikalische Symmetrie des deutschen Wortschatzes auf. Teilweise wird die fehlende Symmetrie als f;r eine lexikalische L;cke spezifisch angegeben.[2]

Unabh;ngig von Symmetriefragen kann es aber auch zum Beispiel bei Archisemen an einer lexikalischen Realisierung fehlen.[3][4]

In der Sprachentwicklung bei Kindern spricht man von einer L;ckenf;ller-Strategie, wenn lexikalische L;cken durch eine ;bergeneralisierung gef;llt werden.[5]

Der Versuch, die lexikalische L;cke des fehlenden Durstes im Deutschen mit dem Kunstwort „sitt“ zu schlie;en, war bisher nicht erfolgreich.

Siehe auch
Gelegenheitsbildung
Semantische L;cke
Einzelnachweise
 Christoph Gabriel, Trudel Meisenberg: Romanische Sprachwissenschaft (UTB Basics; Bd. 2897). Fink Verlag, Paderborn 2007, ISBN 978-3-8252-2897-2. S. 169.
 Helmut Rehbock: Lexikalische L;cke. In: Helmut Gl;ck (Hrsg.): Metzler Lexikon Sprache. 4. Aufl. Metzler, Stuttgart 2010, ISBN 978-3-476-02335-3.
 Heidrun Pelz: Linguistik. Eine Einf;hrung. Hoffmann & Campe, Hamburg 1996, ISBN 3-455-10331-6, S. 195
 Michael Schlaefer: Lexikologie und Lexikographie. Eine Einf;hrung am Beispiel deutscher W;rterb;cher (Grundlagen der Germanistik; Bd. 40). 2. Aufl. E. Schmidt, Berlin 2009, ISBN 978-3-503-09863-7, S. 39.
 Helmut Gl;ck: L;ckenf;ller-Strategie. In: Ders. (Hrsg.): Metzler Lexikon Sprache. 4. Aufl. Metzler, Stuttgart 2010, ISBN 978-3-476-02335-3.
Kategorie: Semantik

***
Лакуна (лингвистика)
Материал из Википедии — свободной энциклопедии
У этого термина существуют и другие значения, см. Лакуна.
Лакуна (в широком смысле) — национально-специфический элемент культуры, нашедший соответствующее отражение в языке и речи носителей этой культуры, который либо полностью не понимается, либо недопонимается носителями иной лингвокультуры в процессе коммуникации.

Лакуна (в узком смысле, так называемая языковая лакуна) — отсутствие в лексической системе языка слова для обозначения того или иного понятия.

Лакуны расшифровываются с помощью фреймов — способа организации опыта, а также знаний об особенностях предметов, событий, которые традиционно соединяются в практической деятельности участника коммуникации.

Лакуны подразделяются на:

культурологические
текстовые
лакуны фоновых знаний
поведенческие
кинесические
речевые
языковые
Теория лакун
Основная статья: Теория лакун
Теория лакун, существующая в российской и германской психолингвистике, рассматривает специфические для конкретных лингвокультурных общностей лакуны. В Западной Европе и в США теория лакун используется в социологических исследованиях, а также в исследованиях по маркетингу, рекламе и кросс-культурному менеджменту.
См. также
Гипотеза Сепира — Уорфа
Этнолингвистика
Лингвокультурология
Примечания
 С. И. Титкова. Языковая лакуна в практике преподавания РКИ Архивная копия от 3 июля 2009 на Wayback Machine
 Психолингвистика // Белянин В. П. Дата обращения: 18 июля 2010. Архивировано из оригинала 21 июля 2010 года.
 Astrid Ertelt-Vieth, 2005.
 А. Эртельт-Фит и Е.Денисова-Шмидт. Лакуны и их классификационная сетка (рус.) // ВОПРОСЫ ПСИХОЛИНГВИСТИКИ : журнал. — 2007. — Т. 6. — С. 39—51. — ISSN 2077-5911. Архивировано 13 октября 2017 года.
 Elena Denisova-Schmidt. Transcultural Studies in a Russian Context / S;nchez, Yvette and Br;hwiler, Claudia Franziska. — Transculturalism and Business in the BRIC States: A Handbook. — Farnham, Surrey: Gower, 2015. — С. 95—102. — ISBN 9781472444011. — ISBN 9781315550213.
 Erika Grodzki. Using Lacuna Theory to Detect Cultural Differences in American and German Automotive Advertising. — Frankfurt/M., Berlin, Bern, Bruxelles, New York, Oxford, Wien: Peter Lang, 2003. — ISBN 9783631393628.
 Olena Kryzhko. Diverging interpretations in German-Russian business communication. — Diss. University of St. Gallen. — St. Gallen: University of St. Gallen, 2015.
 И. Ю. Марковина и Ю. А. Сорокин. КУЛЬТУРА И ТЕКСТ: ВВЕДЕНИЕ В ЛАКУНОЛОГИЮ. — Москва: Общество с ограниченной ответственностью Издательская группа "ГЭОТАР-Медиа", 2008. — ISBN 978-5-9704-1563-4.
В Викисловаре есть статья «лакуна»
Литература
Сорокин Ю. А., Марковина И. Ю., Крюков А. Н. и др. Этнопсихолингвистика / отв. ред. Сорокин Ю. А.. — М.: Наука, 1988. — 192 с.
Astrid Ertelt-Vieth. Interkulturelle Kommunikation und kultureller Wandel. — Giessen: Gunter Narr Verlag, 2005. — ISBN 3823361341. — ISBN 9783823361343.


***
Accidental gap


From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In linguistics an accidental gap, also known as a gap, paradigm gap, accidental lexical gap, lexical gap, lacuna, or hole in the pattern, is a potential word, word sense, morpheme, or other form that does not exist in some language despite being theoretically permissible by the grammatical rules of that language.[1] For example, a word pronounced /ze;;k/ is theoretically possible in English, as it would obey English phonological rules, but does not currently exist. Its absence is therefore an accidental gap, in the ontologic sense of the word accidental (that is, circumstantial rather than essential).

Accidental gaps differ from systematic gaps, those words or other forms which do not exist in a language due to the boundaries set by phonological, morphological, and other rules of that specific language. In English, a word pronounced /pfnk/ does not and cannot exist because it has no vowels and therefore does not obey the word-formation rules of English. This is a systematic, rather than accidental, gap.

Various types of accidental gaps exist. Phonological gaps are either words allowed by the phonological system of a language which do not actually exist, or sound contrasts missing from one paradigm of the phonological system itself. Morphological gaps are nonexistent words or word senses potentially allowed by the morphological system. A semantic gap refers to the nonexistence of a word or word sense to describe a difference in meaning seen in other sets of words within the language.

Phonological gaps
This section contains phonetic transcriptions in the International Phonetic Alphabet (IPA). For an introductory guide on IPA symbols, see Help:IPA. For the distinction between [ ], / / and ; ;, see IPA § Brackets and transcription delimiters.
Often words that are allowed in the phonological system of a language are absent. For example, in English the consonant cluster /spr/ is allowed at the beginning of words such as spread or spring and the syllable rime /;k/ occurs in words such as sick or flicker. Even so, there is no English word pronounced */spr;k/. Although this potential word is phonologically well-formed according to English phonotactics, it happens to not exist.[2]

The term "phonological gap" is also used to refer to the absence of a phonemic contrast in part of the phonological system.[1] For example, Thai has several sets of stop consonants that differ in terms of voicing (whether or not the vocal cords vibrate) and aspiration (whether a puff of air is released). Yet the language has no voiced velar stop (/;/).[3] This lack of an expected distinction is commonly called a "hole in the pattern".[2]

Thai stop consonants
plain voiceless aspirated voiceless voiced consonant
p p; b
t t; d
k k;
Morphological gaps
A morphological gap is the absence of a word that could exist given the morphological rules of a language, including its affixes.[1] For example, in English a deverbal noun can be formed by adding either the suffix -al or -(t)ion to certain verbs (typically words from Latin through Anglo-Norman French or Old French). Some verbs, such as recite have two related nouns, recital and recitation. However, in many cases there is only one such noun, as illustrated in the chart below. Although in principle the morphological rules of English allow for other nouns, those words do not exist.[4]

verb noun (-al) noun (-ion)
recite recital recitation
propose proposal proposition
arrive arrival "arrivation"
refuse refusal "refusation"
describe "describal" description
Many potential words that could be made following morphological rules of a language do not enter the lexicon.[5] Blocking, including homonymy blocking and synonymy blocking, stops some potential words.[6] A homonym of an existing word may be blocked. For example, the word liver meaning "someone who lives" is only rarely used because the word liver (an internal organ) already exists.[7] Likewise, a potential word can be blocked if it is a synonym of an existing word. An older, more common word blocks a potential synonym, known as token-blocking. For example, the word stealer ("someone who steals") is also rarely used, because the word thief already exists. Not only individual words, but entire word formation processes may be blocked. For example, the suffix -ness is used to form nouns from adjectives. This productive word-formation pattern blocks many potential nouns that could be formed with -ity. Nouns such as *calmity (a potential synonym of calmness) and *darkity (cf. darkness) are unused potential words. This is known as type-blocking.[6]

A defective verb is a verb that lacks some grammatical conjugation. For example, several verbs in Russian do not have a first-person singular form in non-past tense. Although most verbs have such a form (e.g. vo;u "I lead"), about 100 verbs in the second conjugation pattern (e.g. *derz'u "I talk rudely"; the asterisk indicates ungrammaticality) do not appear as first-person singular in the present-future tense.[8] Morris Halle called this defective verb paradigm an example of an accidental gap.

The similar case of unpaired words occurs where one word is obsolete or rare while another word derived from it is more common. Examples include effable (whence ineffable), kempt (whence unkempt), or whelm (root of overwhelmed).[9]

Semantic gaps
A gap in semantics occurs when a particular meaning distinction visible elsewhere in the lexicon is absent. For example, English words describing family members generally show gender distinction. Yet the English word cousin can refer to either a male or female cousin.[1] Similarly, while there are general terms for siblings and parents, there is no comparable common gender-neutral term for a parent's sibling, and traditionally none for a sibling's child. The separate words predicted on the basis of this semantic contrast are absent from the language, or at least from many speakers' dialects. It is possible to coin new ones (as happened with the word nibling), but whether those words gain widespread acceptance in general use, or remain neologistic and resisted outside particular registers, is a matter of prevailing usage in each era.

male female neutral
grandfather grandmother grandparent
father mother parent
son daughter child
brother sister sibling
uncle aunt pibling (but this coinage remains in limited use to date)
nephew niece nibling (but this coinage remains in limited use to date)
cousin
See also
Idiom (language structure)
Lacuna model
Pseudoword, a unit that appears to be a word in a language but has no meaning in its lexicon
Semantic gap in computer programming languages and natural language processing
Sniglet, described as "any word that doesn't appear in the dictionary, but should"
Notes
References
 Crystal, David (2003). A Dictionary of Linguistics and Phonetics. Malden: Wiley-Blackwell. ISBN 0-6312-2664-8.
 Trask, Robert Lawrence (1996). A Dictionary of Phonetics and Phonology. London: Routledge.
 Abramson, Arthur S. (1962). The Vowels and Tones of Standard Thai: Acoustical Measurements and Experiments. Bloomington: Indiana University Research Center in Anthropology, Folklore, and Linguistics.
 Kerstens, Johan; Eddy Ruys; Joost Zwarts, eds. (2001). "Accidental gap". Lexicon of Linguistics. Utrecht institute of Linguistics OTS. Retrieved 2011-02-12.
 Aronoff, Mark (1983). "Potential words, actual words, productivity and frequency". Proceedings of the 13th International Congress of Linguists: 163–171.
 Fern;ndez-Dom;nguez, Jes;s (2009). "3". Productivity in English Word-formation: An Approach to N+N Compounding. Bern: Peter Lang. pp. 71–74. ISBN 9783039118083.
 Naghzguy-Kohan, Mehrdad; Kuteva, Tania (1 January 2016). "On competition and blocking in inflectional morphology: Evidence from the domainof number in New Persian". Folia Linguistica. 50 (1). doi:10.1515/flin-2016-0003.
 Halle, Morris (1973). "Prolegomena to a theory of word-formation". Linguistic Inquiry. 4: 451–464.
 Quinion, Michael (23 November 1996). "Unpaired words". World Wide Words. Retrieved 2012-07-31.