English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Despite their high frequency in present-day language, German proper name compounds have received little attention in the linguistic literature. It has been assumed that this pattern is rather recent, and possibly a loan from English. Focusing on the period between 1600 and 1900, the paper provides evidence against this claim. More specifically, I argue that the development of proper name compounds can only be properly described if proper name compounds that are names themselves (e. g.,  Martin-Luther-Universität  ‘Martin Luther University’) are strictly distinguished from those that are common nouns (e. g.,  Nilfahrt  ‘Nile ride’). It is shown that both types develop differently, and in particular that common noun compounds undergo a functional extension in this period. In this connection the paper also discusses the idea of proper name compounds as competitors of the genitive and it compares proper name compounds and alternative constructions with respect to the concept of the “Nominalklammer” (nominal frame).

Von Donaustrom zu Donauwelle . Die Entwicklung der Eigennamenkomposition von 1600–1900