	Personen	Treffen/Publikationen	Fotografien	Intern
jusla-31: Gießen 2023 jusla-30: Jena 2022 jusla-29: Bochum 2021 JuSla-Online-Kaffeepause 2020 jusla-28: Hamburg 2019 jusla-27: Heidelberg 2018 jusla-26: Bamberg 2017 jusla-25: Göttingen 2016 jusla-24: Köln 2015 jusla-23: Dresden 2014 jusla-22: München 2013 jusla-21: Göttingen 2012 jusla-20: Würzburg 2011 jusla-19: Berlin 2010 jusla-18: Regensburg 2009 jusla-17: Frankfurt am Main 2008 jusla-16: Dresden 2007 jusla-15: Bochum 2006 jusla-14: Stuttgart 2005 jusla-13: Leipzig 2004 jusla-12: Gießen 2003 jusla-11: Cambridge 2002 jusla-10: Berlin 2001 jusla-9: Halle/Wittenberg 2000 jusla-8: München 1999 Vorwort Thomas Daiber Horst Dippong Anja Grimm Robert Hammel Björn Hansen Marion Krause Holger Kuße Anke Levin-Steinmann Irina Levontina Doris Marszk Florence Maurice Imke Mendoza Katrin Unrath-Scharpenack jusla-7: Tübingen/Blaubeuren 1998 jusla-6: Wien 1997 jusla-5: Bautzen 1996 jusla-4: Frankfurt am Main 1995 jusla-3: Hamburg 1994 jusla-2: Leipzig 1993 jusla-1: Wien 1992
Sie sind hier: Homepage → Treffen → jusla-8 → jusla-Mendoza Singular, Plural und generische Referenz im Polnischen Imke Mendoza This paper is concerned with the number of generic noun phrases in Polish. Generally speaking, slavistic scholars have paid little attention to this particular problem. Most studies suggest, albeit in passing, that singular and plural in generic noun phrases are interchangeable. The matter, however, is much more complicated. I found four major criteria which have an impact on the choice of number in generic noun phrases: Collective predicates: With collectives predicates, both numbers are possible. The plural, however, is generally preferable. Intensional vs. extensional interpretation of predicates: The object of an intensional predicate can be a singular or a plural noun phrase. With extensional predicates, only the plural can be used. Creation of a stereotype: If it is possible to form a stereotype of the elements of the denoted class, the singular is acceptable. The plural is always possible. Internal structure of the denoted class: The more homogeneous the internal structure of the denoted class is, the more acceptable the generic singular becomes. Again, the plural is always acceptable. Generic comparisons: Generic comparisons differ from the above four criteria in that the singular, not the plural, is more "versatile". The singular can be used if the first member of the comparison is a singular or a plural noun phrase, although the latter sounds slightly odd. The plural, however, is only possible if the first element of the comparison is also a plural noun phrase. All of the above criteria are similar in that the singular relates to the so-called characteristic, or typical features of the class. The plural indicates mere class membership. To be sure, the numbers are indeed often interchangeable. This does not contradict my thesis. Rather it shows that the context of the sentence often allows both the relation to the typical features and the indication of class membership. Linguistische Beiträge zur Slavistik. VIII. JungslavistInnen-Treffen München 1999. Hg. Florence Maurice und Imke Mendoza. München: Sagner 2000 (= Specimina Philologiae Slavicae 131), 183–196.

Singular, Plural und generische Referenz im Polnischen

Imke Mendoza

This paper is concerned with the number of generic noun phrases in Polish. Generally speaking, slavistic scholars have paid little attention to this particular problem. Most studies suggest, albeit in passing, that singular and plural in generic noun phrases are interchangeable. The matter, however, is much more complicated. I found four major criteria which have an impact on the choice of number in generic noun phrases:

Collective predicates: With collectives predicates, both numbers are possible. The plural, however, is generally preferable.
Intensional vs. extensional interpretation of predicates: The object of an intensional predicate can be a singular or a plural noun phrase. With extensional predicates, only the plural can be used.
Creation of a stereotype: If it is possible to form a stereotype of the elements of the denoted class, the singular is acceptable. The plural is always possible.
Internal structure of the denoted class: The more homogeneous the internal structure of the denoted class is, the more acceptable the generic singular becomes. Again, the plural is always acceptable.
Generic comparisons: Generic comparisons differ from the above four criteria in that the singular, not the plural, is more "versatile". The singular can be used if the first member of the comparison is a singular or a plural noun phrase, although the latter sounds slightly odd. The plural, however, is only possible if the first element of the comparison is also a plural noun phrase.

All of the above criteria are similar in that the singular relates to the so-called characteristic, or typical features of the class. The plural indicates mere class membership. To be sure, the numbers are indeed often interchangeable. This does not contradict my thesis. Rather it shows that the context of the sentence often allows both the relation to the typical features and the indication of class membership.

Linguistische Beiträge zur Slavistik. VIII. JungslavistInnen-Treffen München 1999. Hg. Florence Maurice und Imke Mendoza. München: Sagner 2000 (= Specimina Philologiae Slavicae 131), 183–196.