Chapter 6
A synchronic and diachronic study of the Dutch Auxiliary “Zou(den)”
This contribution presents the results of a corpus based investigation of the Dutch auxiliary zou(den). The synchronic and diachronic study demonstrates that the auxiliary can express nine meanings since the oldest language stages, and that its meaning has specialized to hypotheticality. Furthermore, the paper focuses on the evidential function and discusses some grammatical and contextual features that support an evidential interpretation. It is highly probable that linguistic features such as a source reference and the grammatical construction have contributed to the evolution of an evidential meaning.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Modal auxiliaries and the framework
-
3.Methodology
-
4.Results
- 4.1The meaning categories
-
4.2The semantic development of zou(den)
- 5.Discussion
- 5.1
Zou(den) as an evidential marker
- 5.2The presence of source references
- 5.3Grammatical and semantic features of evidential zou(den)
- 5.4The evolution of the evidential meaning
- 6.Conclusions
-
Notes
-
References
References
References
Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y.
2004 Evidentiality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Broekhuis, Hans, and Norbert Corver
2015 Syntax of Dutch. Verb and Verb Phrases. Volume II. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.
Byloo, Pieter, and Jan Nuyts
2014 “
Meaning Change in the Dutch Core Modals: (Inter)subjectification in a Grammatical Paradigm.”
Acta Linguistica Hafniensia 46: 85–116.
Colleman, Timothy, and Dirk Noël
Comrie, Bernard
1985 Tense. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
De Haan, Ferdinand
2000 “
Evidentiality in Dutch.”
Proceedings of the 25th Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, 74–85.
Ebeling, Carl L.
1962 “
A Semantic Analysis of the Dutch Tenses.”
Lingua 11: 86–99.
Engels, Gerard
1895 Over het gebruik van den conjunctief en de casus bij Maerlant, een bijdrage tot de Middelnederlandsche Syntaxis. Groningen: Scholtens & Zoon.
Grondelaers, Stefan, Katrien Deygers, Hilde Van Aken, Vicky Van Den Heede, and Dirk Speelman
2000 “
Het CONDIV-corpus geschreven Nederlands.”
Nederlandse Taalkunde 5: 356–363.
Haeseryn, Walter, Kirsten Romijn, Guido Geerts, Jaap de Rooij, and Maarten C. van den Toorn
1997 Algemene Nederlandse Spraakkunst. Second, completely revised edition. Groningen/Deurne: Martinus Nijhoff uitgevers/Wolters Plantyn.
Halliday, Michael A.K., and Christian M. Matthiessen
2014 Halliday’s Introduction to Functional Grammar. Fourth edition. London/New York: Routledge.
Harmes, Ingeborg
2014 “
Wat zou het? Een synchrone en diachrone analyse van zou(den).” In
Patroon en argument. Een dubbelfeestbundel bij het emeritaat van William Van Belle en Joop van der Horst, ed. by
Freek Van de Velde,
Hans Smessaert,
Frank Van Eynde, and
Sara Verbrugge, 365–378. Leuven: Universitaire Pers Leuven.
Hengeveld, Kees
1989 “
Layers and operators in Functional Grammar.”
Journal of Linguistics 25 (1): 127–157.
Hengeveld, Kees, and John Lachlan Mackenzie
2008 Functional Discourse Grammar. A Typologically-Based Theory of Language Structure. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Janssen, Theo A.M.
1989 “
Die Hilfsverben ndl. zullen und dt. werden: modal oder temporal?” In
Tempus – Aspekt – Modus: die lexikalischen und grammatischen Formen in den germanischen Sprachen, ed. by
Werner Abraham, and
Theo Janssen, 65–82. Tübingen: Niemeyer.
Kirsner, Robert S.
1969 “
The Role of “Zullen” in the Grammar of Modern Standard Dutch.”
Lingua 24 (2): 101–154.
Marín-Arrese, Juana I.
this volume). “
Multifunctionality of evidential expressions in discourse: Evidence from cross-linguistic case studies.”
Mortelmans, Tanja
2009 “
Erscheinungsformen der indirekten Rede im Niederländischen und Deutschen: zou-, soll(te)- und der Konjunktiv I.” In
Modalität: Epistemik und Evidentialität bei Modalverb, Adverb, Modalpartikel und Modus, ed. by
Werner, Abraham, and
Elisabeth Leiss, 171–187. Studien zur deutschen Grammatik 77 Tübingen: Stauffenburg-Verlag.
Mortelmans, Tanja
this volume). “
Seem-type Verbs in Dutch and German:
lijken, schijnen & scheinen.”
Mortelmans, Tanja, and Jeroen Vanderbiesen
2011 “
Dies will ein Parlamentarier ‘aus zuverlässiger Quelle’ erfahren haben. Reportives wollen zwischen sollen und dem Konjunktiv I der indirekten Rede.”. In
Modalität und Evidentialität – Modality and evidentiality, ed. by
Gabriele Diewald, and
Elena Smirnova, 69–88. Trier: Wissenschaftlicher Verlag.
Nederlandse Taalunie
2004 Corpus Gesproken Nederlands, Version 2.0. Leiden: TST-Centrale INL.
Nuyts, Jan.
2004 Over de (beperkte) combineerbaarheid van deontische, epistemische en evidentiële uitdrukkingen in het Nederlands. Wilrijk: Antwerp Papers in Linguistics 108.
Nuyts, Jan.
2005 “
The Modal Confusion: On Terminology and the Concepts behind it.” In
Modality: Studies in Form and Function, ed. by
Alex Klinge, and
Henrik H. Müller, 5–38. London: Equinox.
Nuyts, Jan.
2007 “
Kunnen diachroon.”
Taal en Tongval 59: 118–148.
Nuyts, Jan.
2013 “
De-auxiliarization without De-modalization in the Dutch Core Modals: A Case of Collective Degrammaticalization?”
Language Sciences 36: 124–133.
Nuyts, Jan.
this volume). “
Evidentiality reconsidered.”
Nuyts, Jan, and Pieter Byloo
Nuyts, Jan, Pieter Byloo, and Janneke Diepeveen
2010 “
On Deontic Modality, Directivity, and Mood: The Case of Dutch mogen and moeten
.”
Journal of Pragmatics 42: 16–34.
Oxford English Dictionary (OED)
1989 2. Ed. Complete text reproduced micrographically. Oxford: Clarendon 1991.
Roels, Linde, Tanja Mortelmans, and Johan van der Auwera
2007 “
Dutch Equivalents of the German Past Conjunctive: Zou + Infinitive and the Modal Preterit.” In
Tense, Mood and Aspect: Theoretical and Descriptive Issues, ed. by
Louis de Saussure,
Jacques Moeschler, and
Genoveva Puskas, 177–196. Amsterdam/New York: Rodopi.
Smirnova, Elena, and Gabriele Diewald
2013 “
Kategorien der Redewiedergabe im Deutschen: Konjunktiv I versus sollen.”
Zeitschrift für Germanistische Linguistik 41 (3): 443–471.
Stoett, Frederik A.
1889/1977 Middelnederlandsche spraakkunst. Syntaxis. Third, revised edition. Den Haag: Martinus Nijhoff.
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs
1989 “
On the Rise of Epistemic Meanings in English: an Example of Subjectification in Semantic Change.”
Language 65: 31–55.
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs
1992 “
Syntax.” In
The Cambridge History of the English Language. Volume 1. The Beginnings to 1066, ed. by
Hogg, Richard M., 168–289. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs, and Richard B. Dasher
2001 Regularity in Semantic Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Vanderbiesen, Jeroen
2015 “
The Grounding Functions of German Reportives and Quotatives.”
Studies van de BKL = Travaux du CBL = Papers of the LSB 9: 16–39.
Verkuyl, Henk J., and Hans Broekhuis
2013 “
Temporaliteit en Modaliteit.”
Nederlandse Taalkunde 18 (3): 306–323.
Verstraete, Jean-Christophe
2001 “
Subjective and objective modality: Interpersonal and ideational functions in the English modal auxiliary system.”
Journal of Pragmatics 33, 1505–1528.
Vroegmiddelnederlands Woordenboek (VMNW)
1999 Leiden: INL. URL:
[URL]/
Warner, Anthony
1993 English Auxiliaries: Structure and History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Wiemer, Björn
2010 “
Hearsay in European Languages: Towards an Integrative Account of Grammatical and Lexical Marking.” In
Linguistic Realization of Evidentiality in European Languages, ed. by
Gabriele Diewald, and
Elena Smirnova, 59–130. Berlin and New York: De Gruyter Mouton.
Woordenboek der Nederlandsche Taal (WNT)
2007 Leiden: INL. URL:
[URL]/
Cited by
Cited by 3 other publications
Coussé, Evie & Gerlof Bouma
2022.
Semantic scope restrictions in complex verb constructions in Dutch.
Linguistics 60:1
► pp. 123 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 12 april 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.