Abraham, Werner
1995/2013Deutsche Syntax im Sprachenvergleich. Tübingen: Narr-Stauffenburg.Google Scholar
2012a(Inter)subjectification or foreign consciousness/other’s mind alignment as synchronic and diachronic concepts of change? Conceptualizations and data fidelity. In Covert Patterns of Modality, Werner Abraham & Elisabeth Leiss (eds), 24–78. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars.Google Scholar
2012bSprecherdeixis und Merkmaldistributionsdifferential deutscher Modalitätselemente. Deutsche Sprache. Zeitschrift für Theorie, Praxis, Dokumentation 40: 72–95.Google Scholar
2013Zur grammatischen Grundlegung von Modalität – semantisch-syntaktische Affinitäten zu nominaler Referenz, Aspekt und Quantifikation. In Funktionen von Modalität [Linguistik – Impulse & Tendenzen/LIT 55], Werner Abraham & Elisabeth Leiss (eds), 25–76. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2014Strong modality and truth disposability in syntactic subordination: What is the locus of the phase edge validating modal adverbials? Studia Linguistica 69(3): 119–159.Google Scholar
Bayer, Josef & Trotzke, Andreas
2015The derivation and interpretation of left peripheral discourse particles. In Discourse-oriented Syntax [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 226], Josef Bayer, Rainer Hinterhölzl & Andreas Trotzke (eds), 13–40. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brentano, Franz
1874/1924Psychologie vom empirischen Standpunkt. Leipzig: Duncker & Humblot. (English translation: Brentano, Franz 1973 Psychology from an Empirical Point of View, translated by Antos C. Rancurello, D. B. Terrell & Linda L. McAlister. New York NY: Humanities Press).Google Scholar
Brünjes, Lena
2014Das Paradigma Deutscher Modalpartikeln: Dialoggrammatische Funktion Und Paradigmeninterne Oppositionen. Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bühler, Karl
1934Sprachtheorie. Jena: Gustav Fischer. (English translation: 2011 Theorie of Language. Amsterdam: John Benjamins).Google Scholar
Bühring, Daniel
2004Focus suppositions. Theoretical Linguistics 30(1): 65–76.Google Scholar
Cardinaletti, Anna
2011German and Italian modal particles and clause structure. The Linguistic Review 28: 493–531. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cardinaletti, Anna & Starke, Michal
1999The 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: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Carlson, Gregory N.
1977Reference to kinds in English. PhD dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.Google Scholar
Cinque, Guglielmo
1993A null theory of phrase and compound stress. Linguistic Inquiry 24: 239–294.Google Scholar
Coniglio, Marco
2011Die Syntax der deutschen Modalpartikeln: Ihre Distribution und Lizenzierung in Haupt- und Nebensätzen [Studia Grammatica 73]. Berlin: Akademie-verlag. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Davidson, Donald
1967The logical form of action sentences. In The Logic of Decision and Action, Nicolas Rescher (ed.), 81–95. Pittsburgh PA: University of Pittsburgh Press.Google Scholar
Diesing, Molly
1988Bare plural subjects and the stage/individual contrast. In Genericity in Natural Language. Proceedings of the 1988 Tübingen Conference, Manfred Krifka (ed.). Tübingen.Google Scholar
1992Indefinites. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Diewald, Gabriele
2006Discourse particles and modal particles as grammatical elements. In Approaches to Discourse Particles [Studies in Pragmatics 1], Kerstin Fischer (ed.), 403–425. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Diewald, Gabriele & Fischer, Kerstin
1998Zur diskursiven und modalen Funktion der Partikeln aber, auch, doch und ja in Instruktionsdialogen. Linguistica 38: 75–99.Google Scholar
Diewald, Gabriele & Smirnova, Elena
(eds) 2010Linguistic Realization of Evidentiality in European Languages [Empirical Approaches to Language Typology 49]. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(eds) 2011Modalität und Evidentialität [FOKUS 37]. Trier: Wissenschaftlicher Verlag Trier.Google Scholar
Gutzmann, Daniel & Castroviejo Miró, Elena
2011The dimensions of VERUM. In Empirical Issues in Syntax and Semantics 8, Olivier Bonami & Patricia Cabredo Hofherr (eds), 143–165. Paris: CSSP.Google Scholar
Heine, Bernd
1995Agent-oriented vs. epistemic modality. Some observations on German modals. In Modality in Grammar and Discourse [Typological Studies in Language 32], Joan L. Bybee & Suzanne Fleischman (eds), 17–53. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Höhle, Tilman
1982Explikationen für 'normale Betonung' und 'normale Wortstellung. In Satzglieder im Deutschen, Werner Abraham (ed.), 75–154. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
1992Über Verum Fokus in Deutschen. Linguistische Berichte 60: 20–45.Google Scholar
Jacobs, Joachim
(ed.) 1992Informationsstruktur und Grammatik. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jäger, Gerhard
2001Topic-comment structure and the contrast between stage level and individual level predicates. Journal of Semantics 18(2): 83–126. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kaiser, Sebastian
2014: Interpretation selbständiger Sätze im Diskurs. Syntax und Intonation in Interaktion. Frankfurt: Peter Lang. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kaiser, Sebastian & Struckmeier, Volker
2015When insubordination is an artefact (of sentence type theories). Talk and handout, SLE Leiden.Google Scholar
Kaltenböck, Gunther & Heine, Bernd
2015Sentence Grammar vs. Thetical Grammar. Two Competing Domains? Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Kuroda, Sige-Yuki
1972The categorical and the thetic judgment. Foundations of Language 9: 153–185.Google Scholar
Ladusaw, William
1994Thetic and categorical, stage and individual, weak and strong. In Proceedings from Semantics and Linguistic Theory IV, Mandy Harvey & Lynn Santelmann (eds), 220–229. Ithaca NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Leiss, Elisabeth
2012Aspectual patterns of covert coding of modality in Gothic. In Covert Patterns of Modality, Werner Abraham & Elisabeth Leiss (eds), 175–201. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars.Google Scholar
Leonetti, Manuel
2008Definiteness effects and the role of the coda in existential constructions. In Essays on Nominal Determination. From Morphology to Discourse Management [Studies in Language Companion Series 99], Henrik Hoeg-Müller & Alex Klinge (eds), 131–162. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lohnstein, Horst
2000Satzmodus – kompositionell. Zur Parametrisierung der Modusphrase im Deutschen [Studia Grammatica 49]. Berlin: Akademie Verlag.Google Scholar
2007On clause types and sentential force. Linguistische Berichte 209: 63–86.Google Scholar
2012Verumfokus – Satzmodus – Wahrheit. Linguistische Berichte Sonderheft 18: 2–37. Hamburg: Helmut Buske.Google Scholar
2014Verum focus. In Handbook of Information Structure, Caroline Féry & Shinichiro Ishihara (eds), 1–29. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Lohnstein, Horst & Stommel, Hildegard
2009Verum focus and phases. Linguistic Analysis 35(1–4): 100–140. [Special issue Phase Edge Investigations, Phoevos Panageotidis & Kleanthes Grohmann (eds)].Google Scholar
Longa, Victor M., Lorenzo, Guillermo & Rigau, Gemma
1998Subject clitics and clitic recycling. Locative sentences in some Iberian Romance languages. Journal of Linguistics 34(1): 125–164. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Meisnitzer, Benjamin
2012Modality in the Romance languages: Modal verbs and modal particles. In Theory of Mind Elements and Modality across Languages, Werner Abraham & Elisabeth Leiss (eds). Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Romero, Maribel & Han, Chung-Hye
2004On negative yes/no questions. Linguistics and Philosophy 27(5): 609–658. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sasse, Hans-Jürgen
1987The thetic/categorical distinction revisited. Linguistics 25: 511–580. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Struckmeier, Volker
2014Ja doch wohl C. Modal particles in German as C-related elements. Studia Linguistica 68(1): 16–48. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Trotzke, Andreas
2015DP-internal discourse particles, expressive content, and illocutionary force. Grazer Linguistische Studien 83: 91–104.Google Scholar
Truckenbrodt, Hubert
2004Zur Strukturbedeutung von Interrogativsätzen. Linguistische Berichte 199: 313–350.Google Scholar
2013An analysis of prosodic F-effects in interrogatives: Prosody, syntax and semantics. Lingua 124: 131–175. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zimmermann, Malte
2004Zum 'Wohl': Diskurspartikeln als Satztypmodifikatoren. Linguistische Berichte 199: 253–286.Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 4 other publications

Averina, Anna Viktorovna
2018. MODAL VERBS OF GERMAN AS A PHENOMENON OF THE MAIN CLAUSE. Philology. Theory & Practice :2  pp. 270 ff. DOI logo
Catasso, Nicholas
2021. Some notes on central causal clauses in Venetian. Poznan Studies in Contemporary Linguistics 57:4  pp. 519 ff. DOI logo
Modicom, Pierre-Yves
2022. Chapter 10. Modal particles in questions and wh-sensitivity. In Particles in German, English, and Beyond [Studies in Language Companion Series, 224],  pp. 269 ff. DOI logo
Okamoto, Junji
2020. Perception description, report and thetic statements. In Thetics and Categoricals [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today, 262],  pp. 352 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 15 september 2023. 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.