Cover not available
Part of
Discourse Particles: Syntactic, semantic, pragmatic and historical aspects
Edited by Xabier Artiagoitia, Arantzazu Elordieta and Sergio Monforte
[Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 276] 2022
► pp. 13–40

Chapter 1
On the adverbial origin of German modal particles

| Georg-August-Universität Göttingen
All German modal particles share important common properties. However, in a diachronic perspective, their origin has often been explained by assuming that they have grammaticalized from different types of lexemes belonging to several word classes: adjectives, adverbs, conjunctions, etc. The present paper intends to dissipate some erroneous assumptions about the grammaticalization paths of modal particles and to offer a novel syntactic approach that explains their origin and development. By following and elaborating on some recent ideas, I will explore the hypothesis that modal particles have an adverbial origin and will provide corresponding evidence. In the syntactic analysis, I will claim that all modal particles originate from specific types of (strong) lower adverb(ial)s that become weak sentential adverbs under reanalysis.
Keywords: adverbial, grammaticalization, modal particle, sentence adverb
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Definition and general properties of modal particles
  • 3.Origin and grammaticalization of German modal particles
    • 3.1Donor lexemes – a short state of the art
    • 3.2Donor lexemes – hypotheses
  • 4.Which donor lexemes? Some empirical facts
    • 4.1“Real” adverbs
      • Einfach
    • 4.2Predicatives
      • Ruhig
    • 4.3Sentence adverbs
      • Eigentlich
      • Vielleicht
    • 4.4Temporal adverbs
      • Denn
    • 4.5Conjunctions
      • Aber
      • Doch
    • 4.6Degree particles
      • Nur
      • Bloß
    • 4.7Interim conclusions
  • 5.Syntactic analysis of the grammaticalization of modal particles
  • 6.Conclusions
  • Acknowledgments
  • Notes
  • References
  • Appendix
Published online: 17 May 2022
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/la.276.01con
References (57)
References
Abraham, Werner. 1991a. The grammaticization of the German modal particles. In Approaches to Grammaticalization vol. 2 [Typological Studies in Linguistics 19:2], Elizabeth C. Traugott & Bernd Heine (eds), 331–380. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1991b. Discourse particles in German: How does their illocutive force come about?. In Discourse Particles, Werner Abraham (ed), 203–252. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Autenrieth, Tanja. 2002. Heterosemie und Grammatikalisierung bei Modalpartikeln: Eine synchrone und diachrone Studie anhand von »eben«, »halt«, »e(cher)t«, »einfach«, »schlicht« und »glatt« [Linguistische Arbeiten 450]. Berlin: de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Axel, Katrin. 2007. Studies on Old High German syntax. Left sentence periphery, verb placement and verb-second [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 112]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Axel-Tober, Katrin & Müller, Kalle. 2017. Evidential adverbs in German. Diachronic development and present-day meaning. Journal of Historical Linguistics 7(1–2): 9–47. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bayer, Josef. 2012. From modal particle to interrogative marker: a study of German denn. In Functional heads [The cartography of syntactic structures 7], Laura Brugè et al.. (eds), 13–28. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Burkhardt, Armin. 1994. Abtönungspartikeln im Deutschen. Bedeutung und Genese. Zeitschrift für germanistische Linguistik 22: 129–151. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cardinaletti, Anna. 2007. Für eine syntaktische Analyse von Modalpartikeln. In Gesprochene Sprache – Partikeln, Eva-Maria Thüne & Franca Ortu (eds), 89–101. Frankfurt: Lang.Google Scholar
. 2011. German and Italian modal particles and clause structure. The Linguistic Review 28(4): 493–531. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2015. Italian verb-based discourse particles in a comparative perspective. In Discourse-oriented Syntax, Josef Bayer, Roland Hinterhölzl & Andreas Trotzke (eds), 71–91. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cardinaletti, Anna & Starke, Michal. 1999. The typology of structural deficiency: A case study of the three classes of pronouns. In Clitics in the Languages of Europe, Henk van Riemsdijk (ed), 145–233. Berlin: de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cinque, Guglielmo. 1999. Adverbs and Functional Heads: A Cross-Linguistic Perspective [Oxford Studies in Comparative Syntax]. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
. 2001. ‘Restructuring’ and the order of aspectual and root modal heads. In Current Studies in Italian Syntax. Essays Offered to Lorenzo Renzi, Guglielmo Cinque & Giampaolo Salvi (eds), 137–155. Amsterdam: Elsevier. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2006. Restructuring and Functional Heads. The Cartography of Syntactic Structures, Volume 4 [Oxford Studies in Comparative Syntax]. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Cognola, Federica & Cruschina, Silvio. 2020. From time to discourse: a syntactic analysis of Italian poi. Handout for Seminari di Linguistica Ca’ Foscari – VeReWebLing, 17th November 2020.
Coniglio, Marco. 2005. Deutsche Modalpartikeln: eine syntaktische Analyse. Diplomarbeit, Università Ca’ Foscari Venezia.
. 2011. Die Syntax der deutschen Modalpartikeln: ihre Distribution und Lizenzierung in Haupt- und Nebensätzen. Berlin: Akademie. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2014. The fine structure of Force. On the interaction of modal particles with illocutionary force and clause type. In On Peripheries. Exploring Clause Initial and Clause Final Positions [Hituzi Linguistics in English 23], Anna Cardinaletti, Guglielmo Cinque & Yoshio Endo (eds), 103–140. Tokyo: Hituzi Syobo.Google Scholar
Coniglio, Marco & Zegrean, Iulia. 2012. Splitting up Force. Evidence from discourse particles. In Main Clause Phenomena. New Horizons [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 190], Lobke Aelbrecht, Liliane Haegeman & Rachel Nye (eds), 229–255. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Diewald, Gabriele. 1997. Grammatikalisierung. Eine Einführung in Sein und Werden grammatischer Formen [Germanistische Arbeitshefte 36]. Tübingen: Niemeyer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1999. Die dialogische Bedeutungskomponente von Modalpartikeln. In Dialogue Analysis and the Mass Media. Proceedings of the International Conference, Erlangen, April 2–3, 1998 [Beiträge zur Dialogforschung 20], Bernd Naumann (ed), 187–199. Tübingen: Niemeyer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2011. Pragmaticalization (defined) as grammaticalization of discourse functions. Linguistics 49(2): 365–390. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Diewald, Gabriele & Ferraresi, Gisella. 2008. Semantic, syntactic and constructional restrictions in the diachronic rise of modal particles in German: A corpus-based study on the formation of a grammaticalization channel. In Theoretical and Empirical Issues in Grammaticalization [Typological Studies in Language 77], Elena Seoane & María José López-Couso (eds), 77–110. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dohi, Atsushi. 2020. CP-internal Discourse Particles and the Split ForceP Hypothesis. Lingua 233: 102757. < DOI logo>.Google Scholar
Ebert, Robert P., Reichmann, Oskar, Solms Hans-Joachim and Wegera, Klaus-Peter 1993. Frühneuhochdeutsche Grammatik. Tübingen: Niemeyer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ferraresi, Gisella. 2005. Word order and phrase structure in Gothic. A comparative study. Leuven: Peeters.Google Scholar
. 2014. Grammatikalisierung [Kurze Einführung in die Germanistische Linguistik 15]. Heidelberg: Winter.Google Scholar
Frey, Werner. 2004. The grammar-pragmatics interface and the German prefield. Sprache und Pragmatik 52: 1–39.Google Scholar
Grosz, Patrick. 2005. “Dn” in Viennese German. The Syntax of a Clitic Version of the Discourse Particle “denn”. MA thesis, Universität Wien.
Gutzmann, Daniel. 2008. On the Interaction between Modal Particles and Sentence Mood in German. Magisterarb. Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz.
. 2009. Hybrid semantics for modal particles. Sprache und Datenverarbeitung 33(1–2): 45–59.Google Scholar
Haegeman, Liliane & Hill, Virginia. 2013. The syntactization of discourse. In Syntax and its limits [Oxford Studies in Theoretical Linguistics 48], Raffaella Folli, Christina Sevdali & Robert Truswell (eds), 370–390. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2014. Vocatives and speech act projections: a case study in West Flemish. In On peripheries: Exploring Clause Initial and Clause Final Positions, Anna Cardinaletti, Guglielmo Cinque & Yoshio Endo (eds), 209–236. Tokyo: Hituzi Shobo.Google Scholar
Hentschel, Elke. 1986. Funktion und Geschichte deutscher Partikeln:‘Ja‘,‘doch‘,‘halt‘ und ‘eben‘. Tübingen: Niemeyer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jacobs, Joachim. 1986. Abtönungsmittel als Illokutionstypmodifikatoren. Groninger Arbeiten zur Germanistischen Linguistik 27: 100–111.Google Scholar
Kluge, Friedrich. 2011. Etymologisches Wörterbuch der deutschen Sprache. 25. Auflage. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Lehmann, Christian. 2002. Thoughts on grammaticalization. 2nd revised edition [ASSidUE 9]. Erfurt: Seminar für Sprachwissenschaft der Universität.Google Scholar
Meibauer, Jörg. 1994. Modaler Kontrast und konzeptuelle Verschiebung: Studien zur Syntax und Semantik deutscher Modalpartikeln [Linguistische Arbeiten 314]. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Molnár, Anna. 2002. Die Grammatikalisierung deutscher Modalpartikeln. Fallstudien [Metalinguistica 12]. Frankfurt: Lang.Google Scholar
Müller, Kalle. 2019. Satzadverbien, Evidentialität und Non-At-issueness. PhD dissertation, Eberhard Karls Universität Tübingen.
Müller, Sonja. 2018. Distribution und Interpretation von Modalpartikel-Kombinationen. Berlin: Language Science Press.Google Scholar
Norde, Muriel. 2009. Degrammaticalization. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ormelius-Sandblom, Elisabet. 1997a. The modal particle schon: Its syntax, semantics and pragmatics. In Modality in Germanic Languages. Historical and Comparative Perspectives [Trends in Linguistics. Studies and Monographs 99], Toril Swan & Olaf J. Westwik (eds), 75–131. Berlin: de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1997b. Die Modalpartikeln “ja“, “doch” und “schon”. Zu ihrer Syntax, Semantik und Pragmatik. Lund: Almqvist & Wiksell International.Google Scholar
Paul, Hermann. 1992. Deutsches Wörterbuch. 9. Auflage. Tübingen: Niemeyer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Petrova, Svetlana. 2017. Left-Peripheral Modal Particles in Older Germanic? In Syntax and Semantics of Modal Particles, Volker Struckmeier & Josef Bayer (eds), 304–331. Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Remberger, Eva-Maria. 2020. Discourse and Pragmatic Markers in the Romance Languages. In The Oxford Encyclopedia of Romance Linguistics, Michele Loporcaro & Francesco Gardani (eds). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Advance online publication. [[URL]].Google Scholar
Roberts, Ian & Roussou, Anna. 2003. Syntactic change. A minimalist approach to grammaticalization [Cambridge Studies in Linguistics 100]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schifano, Norma & Cognola, Federica. 2020. From macro to nano: A parametric hierarchy approach to the diatopic and diachronic variation of Italian ben. In Syntactic architecture and its consequences I: Syntax inside the grammar [Open Generative Syntax 9], András Bárány, Theresa Biberauer, Jamie Douglas & Sten Vikner (eds), 233–250. Berlin: Language Science Press.Google Scholar
Searle, John. 1976. A classification of illocutionary acts. Language in Society 5(1), 1–23. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Thurmair, Maria. 1989. Modalpartikeln und ihre Kombinationen [Linguistische Arbeiten 223]. Tübingen: Niemeyer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1993. Äußerungsform oder Äußerungsfunktion? Zu den Bedingungen für das Auftreten von Modalpartikeln. Deutsche Sprache 21: 22–43.Google Scholar
van Gelderen, Elly. 2004. Grammaticalization as economy. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2011. The Linguistic Cycle: Language Change and the Language Faculty. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
van Kemenade, Ans & Links, Meta. 2020. Discourse particles in early English: Clause structure, pragmatics and discourse management. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics 5(1): 3. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wegener, Heide. 2002. The Evolution of the German Modal Particle “denn”. In New Reflections on Grammaticalization [Typological Studies in Language 49], Ilse Wischer & Gabriele Diewald (eds), 379–393. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zimmermann, Malte. 2004. Discourse particles in the left periphery. Proceedings of the Dislocated Elements Workshop, Zentrum für Allgemeine Sprachwissenschaft Berlin, November 2003. ZAS Papers in Linguistics 35(2): 543–566. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Brône, Geert & Steven Schoonjans
2022. „So was von spannend“. Zeitschrift für germanistische Linguistik 50:3 ► pp. 499 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 5 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.