Chapter published in:
Brazilian Portuguese, Syntax and Semantics: 20 years of Núcleo de Estudos Gramaticais
Edited by Roberta Pires De Oliveira, Ina Emmel and Sandra Quarezemin
[Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 260] 2020
► pp. 3366
References
Abraham, Werner
2001Modals: Toward explaining the epistemic non-finiteness gap. In Modalität und Modalverben im Deutschen [Linguistische Berichte Sonderheft 9], Reimar Müller & Marga Reis (eds), 7–36. Hamburg: Buske.Google Scholar
2012Gesprochene Syntax im Zimbrischen der deutschen Sprachinseln Oberitaliens. Was sie über Sprachuniversalien und über Wandel unter Sprachkontakt (nicht) verrät. In Perspektiven Vier. Akten der 4. Tagung Deutsche Sprachwissenschaft in Italien Rom, 4.-6. Februar 2010, Claudio Di Meola, Antonie Hornung & Lorenza Rega (eds), 37–72. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
2012bIllocutionary force is speaker and information source concern. What type of syntax does the representation of speaker deixis require? Templates vs. derivational structure? In Modality and Theory of Mind Elements across Languages, Werner Abraham & Elisabeth Leiss (eds), 67–108. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2013Philologische Dialektologie und moderne Mikrovarietätsforschung. Zum Begriff des Erklärstatus in Syn- und Diachronie. In Dialektologie in neuem Gewand. Zu Mikro-/Varietätenlinguistik, Sprachenvergleich und Universalgrammatik [Linguistische Berichte Sonderheft 19], Werner Abraham & Elisabeth Leiss (eds), 9–27. Hamburg: Buske.Google Scholar
2014Strong modality and truth disposability in syntactic subordination: What is the locus of the phase edge validating modal adverbials? Studia Linguistica 69(3): 1–41.Google Scholar
Bidese, Ermenegildo
2008Die diachronische Syntax des Zimbrischen. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
2017Kontaktbedingter Sprachwandel. Problemannäherung aus der I-Language-Perspektive. In Grammatische Funktionen aus der Sicht der japanishen und deutschen Germanistik [Linguistische Berichte Sonderheft 24], Shin Tanaka, Elisabeth Leiss, Werner Abraham & Yasuhiro Fujinawa (eds), 135–157. Hamburg: Buske.Google Scholar
Boye, Kasper & Harder, Peter
2012A usage-based theory of grammatical status and grammaticalization. Language 88(1): 1–44. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Boye, Kasper & Petar Kehayov
eds. Complementizer semantics in European languages HYPERLINK https://​www​.degruyter​.com​/view​/serial​/16080 Empirical Approaches to Language Typology [EALT] 57 Berlin Mouton De Gruyter Crossref
Boye, Kasper, van Lier, Eva & Brink, Eva T.
2015Epistemic complementizers: A crosslinguistic survey. Language Sciences 51(5): 1–17. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Breitbarth, Anne
2015Exceptive negation in Middle Low German. Ms.Google Scholar
Catasso, Nicholas & Hinterhölzl, Roland
2016On the question of subordination or coordination in V2-relatives in German. In Co- and subordination in German and other languages [Linguistische Berichte Sonderheft 21], Ingo Reich & Augustin Speyer (eds), 99–123. Hamburg: Buske.Google Scholar
Cognola, Federica
2013Syntactic Variation and Verb Second: A German Dialect in Northern Italy [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 201]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Coniglio, Marco
2017Verbal mood in early Old High German relative clauses. Annali di Ca’ Foscari. Serie Occidentale 51: 245–269.Google Scholar
Coniglio, Marco, Hinterhölzl, Roland & Petrova, Svetlana
2018Mood Alternations in Old High German. Annali di Ca’ Foscari. Serie Occidentale 52: 7–38.Google Scholar
Cristofaro, Sonia
2003The referential hierarchy: Reviewing the evidence in diachronic perspective. In Language across Boundaries. Studies in Memory of Anna Siewierska, Dik Bakker & Martin Haspelmath (eds), 69–93. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Dobrushina, Nina
2012Subjunctive complement clauses. Russian Linguistics 36(2): 121–156. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ebert, Robert P., Reichmann, Oskar, Solms, Hans-Joachim & Wegera, Klaus-Peter
1993Frühneuhochdeutsche Grammatik. Tübingen: Niemeyer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fabricius-Hansen, Cathrine & Kjell, Johan Saebo
2004In a mediative mood? The semantics of the German reportiv and subjunctive. Natural Language Semantics 12(3): 213–257. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Farkas, Donka
1985Intensional Descriptions and the Romance Subjunctive Mood. New York NY: Garland.Google Scholar
1992On the semantics of subjunctive complements. In Romance Languages and Modern Linguistic Theory [Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 91], Paul Hirschbühler & E. F. Konrad Koerner (eds), 67–104. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fleischer, Jürg
2005Relativsätze in den Dialekten des Deutschen: Vergleich und Typologie. Linguistik Online 24(3):171–186.Google Scholar
Fourquet, Jean
1938L’ordre des éléments de la phrase en germanique ancien; études de syntaxe de position. Paris: Les Belles lettres.Google Scholar
Frajzyngier, Zygmunt
1991The de dicto domain in language. In Approaches to Grammaticalization, Vol. I [Typological Studies in Language 19], Elizabeth Closs Traugott & Bernd Heine (eds), 219–251. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gärtner, Hans-Martin & Eyþórsson, Þórhallur
2018Varieties of dependent Verb Second and verbal mood: A view from Icelandic. In Rethinking Verb Second, Rebecca Woods & Sam Wolfe (eds). Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Geiger, Arno
2016Unter der Drachenwand. Munich: Carl HanserGoogle Scholar
van Gelderen, Elly
2004Grammaticalization as Economy [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 71]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2017The main and embedded clauses in the history of English: Changes in assertive and non-assertive complements. Ms, University of Arizona, March 27 2017.Google Scholar
Giannakidou, Anastasia
1998Polarity Sensitivity as (Non)Veridical Dependency [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 23]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2009The dependency of the subjunctive revisited. Temporal semantics and polarity. Lingua 120: 1883–1908. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2011(Non)veridicality and mood choice: Subjunctive, polarity, and time. In Tense across Languages [Linguistische Arbeiten 541], Renate Musan & Monika Rathert (eds), 59–90. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2013(Non)veridicality, evaluation, and event actualization: Evidence from the subjunctive in relative clauses. In Non-veridicality and Evaluation. Theoretical, Computational, and Corpus Approaches [Studies in Pragmatics 11], Maite Taboada & Rada Trnavac (eds), 17–47. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
2015Evaluative subjunctive and non-veridicality. Ms, University of Chicago.Google Scholar
Giorgi, Alessandra & Pianesi, Fabio
2002Tense and Aspect. From Semantics to Morphosyntax. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Haegeman, Liliane
2006Conditionals, factives and the left periphery. Lingua 116: 1651–1669. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hooper, Joan & Thompson, Sandra A.
1973On the applicability of root transformations. Linguistic Inquiry 4(4): 465–497.Google Scholar
Hooper, Joan
1975On assertive predicates. Syntax and Semantics, Vol. 4, John P. Kimball (ed.), 91–124. New York NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Iwein: Mittelhochdeutsch/Neuhochdeutsch
2012Reclams Universal-Bibliothek. Reclam Taschenbuch.Google Scholar
Julien, Marit
2005Nominal Phrases from a Scandinavian Perspective [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 87]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lahousse, Karen
2010Information structure and epistemic modality in adverbial clauses. Studies in Language 34(2): 298–326. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Meinunger, André
2004Verb position, verbal mood and the anchoring (potential) of sentences. In The Syntax and Semantics of the Left Periphery, Horst Lohnstein & Susanne Trissler (eds), 313–341. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2017Desires, wishes and hopes – Desiderative predicates and presuppositions. STUF – Language Typology and Universals 70(4): 1–24.Google Scholar
Montague, Richard
1969On the nature of certain philosophical entities. The Monist 53: 159–94. Reprinted in 1974 in Formal Philosophy. Selected papers of Richard Montague, Richmond H. Thomason (ed.), 148–187. New Haven CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Nishiwaki, Maiko
2017Negation und Konjunktivgebrauch im Mittelhochdeutschen – am Beispiel des Nibelungenliedes. In Grammatische Funktionen aus Sicht der japanischen und deutschen Germanistik [Linguistische Berichte, Sonderhefte 24], Shin Tanaka, Elisabeth Leiss, Werner Abraham & Yasuhiro Fujinawa (eds), 159–177. Hamburg: Buske.Google Scholar
Noonan, Michael P.
2007 [1985]Complementation. In Language Typology and Syntactic Description, Vol 2: Complex Constructions, 2nd edn, Timothy Shopen (ed.), 52–150. Cambridge: CUP. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Nordström, Jackie & Boye, Kasper
2016Complementizer semantics in the Germanic languages. In Complementizer Semantics in European Languages, Kaspar Boye & Petar Kehayov (eds), 131–174. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Nordström, Jackie
2010Modality and Subordinators [Studies in Language Companion Series 116]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Padovan, Andrea
2011Diachronic clues to grammaticalization phenomena in the Cimbrian CP. Studies on German-Language Islands [Studies in Language Companion Series 123], Michael T. Putnam (ed.), 279–300. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Paul, Hermann, Wiehl, Peter & Grosse, Siegfried
1989Mittelhochdeutsche Grammatik. Tübingen: Niemeyer.Google Scholar
Petrova, Svetlana & Hinterhölzl, Roland
2013Der Ausdruck indirekter Aufforderungen im Vergleich Althochdeutsch – Neuhochdeutsch. Eine Fallstudie zur Entwicklung des Modusgebrauchs im abhängigen Satz. In Vielfalt und Einheit der Germanistik weltweit. Akten des 12. Internationalen Germanistenkongresses Warschau 2010, Franciszek Grucza (ed.), 45–52. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Rizzi, Luigi
1997The fine structure of the left periphery. In Elements of Grammars, Liliane Haegemann (ed.), 281–337. Dordrecht: Kluwer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2004Locality and left periphery. In Structures and Beyond, Vol. 3: The Cartography of Syntactic Structures, Adriana Belletti (ed.), 223–251. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Rödel, Michael
2016Möglichkeiten der Redewiedergabe bei Textinterpretationen. Unterrichtspraxis 256: 50–58.Google Scholar
Salvesen, Christine & Walkden, George
To appear. Diagnosing embedded V2 in Old French and Old English. In From Micro-change to Macro-change, Eric Mathieu & Robert Truswell eds Oxford OUP Crossref
Schönherr, Monika
2013Die Konjunktivformen und ihre kategorialen Funktionen aus diachroner Sicht. In Akten des XII. Internationalen Germanistenkongresses. Warschau 2010 – Vielheit und Einheit der Germanistik weltweit: Diachronische, diatopische und typologische Aspekte des Sprachwandels, Band 17, Franciszek Grucza & Jianhua Zhu (eds), 33–38. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Schrodt, Richard
2004Althochdeutsche Grammatik, II: Syntax. Tübingen: Niemeyer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Searle, John
1969Speech Act Theory. Cambridge: CUP. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sode, Frank
2014Zur Semantik und Pragmatik des Konjunktivs der Indirektheit im Deutschen. PhD dissertation, Humboldt University Berlin.Google Scholar
2018Der deutsche Indirektheitskonjunktiv: Semantik und Pragmatik. [Studia Grammatica 79]. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
Valentin, Paul
1979Das althichdeutsche Verbsystem: Tempus und Modus. In Linguistic Method: Essays in Honor of Herbert Penzl, Irmengard Rauch & Gerald F. Carr (eds), 425–440. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Visser, Fredericus Theodorus
1966An Historical Syntax of the English Language, Vol. 2. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
Zeijlstra, Hedde
2012There is only one way to agree. The Linguistic Review 29(3): 491–539. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Zwarts, Frans
1995Non-veridical contexts. Linguistic Analysis 25(3–4): 286–312.Google Scholar