Chapter published in:
Morphological Variation: Theoretical and empirical perspectives
Edited by Antje Dammel and Oliver Schallert
[Studies in Language Companion Series 207] 2019
► pp. 283310
References

Corpora

Used

WebCorp Live
http://​www​.webcorp​.org​.uk​/live/ (last accessed for this study on 4 November 2014).
DeReKo = Deutsches Referenzkorpus
(‘German reference corpus’) http://​www​.ids​-mannheim​.de​/cosmas2 (last accessed for this study on 4 November 2014).

Mentioned

DWDS = Digitales Wörterbuch der deutschen Sprache
(‘Digital dictionary of the German language’) https://​www​.dwds​.de/
DTA = Deutsches Textarchiv

References

Abraham, Werner
2001Modals. Towards 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
2004The grammaticalization of the infinitival preposition. Toward a theory of ‘grammaticalizing reanalysis’. Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics 7(2): 111–170.Google Scholar
2017Modalpartikel und Mirativeffekte. In Grammatische Funktionen aus Sicht der japanischen und deutschen Germanistik [Linguistische Berichte Sonderheft 24], Shin Tanaka, Elisabeth Leiss, Werner Abraham & Yasuhiro Fujinawa (eds), 75–107. Hamburg: Buske.Google Scholar
Bond, Oliver
2013A base for canonical negation. In Brown et al. (eds), 20–47.Google Scholar
Brown, Dunstan, Chumakina, Marina, Corbett, Greville G., Popova, Gergana & Spencer, Andrew
2012Defining ‘periphrasis’. Key notions. Morphology 22(2): 233–275.Google Scholar
Brown, Dunstan, Chumakina, Marina & Corbett, Greville G.
(eds) 2013Canonical Morphology and Syntax. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan L.
2003Tense. Definition. International Encyclopedia of Linguistics, Vol. 4, 2nd edn, William J. Frawley (ed.), 223–224. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Corbett, Greville G.
2011The penumbra of morphosyntactic feature systems. Morphology 21(2): 445–480.Google Scholar
2012Features. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Diewald, Gabriele & Smirnova, Elena
2010 Evidentiality in German. Linguistic Realization and Regularities in Grammaticalization [Trends in Linguistics: Studies and Monographs 228]. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
Dowty, David R.
1991Word Meaning and Montague Grammar. The Semantics of Verbs and Times in Generative Semantics and in Montague’s PTQ [Studies in Linguistics and Philosophy 7]. Dordrecht: Kluwer. (Reprint from 1979).Google Scholar
Eide, Kristin M.
2016Introduction. In Finiteness Matters. On Finiteness-related Phenomena in Natural Languages [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 231], Kristin M. Eide (ed.), 1–44. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Fabricius-Hansen, Cathrine
1999“Moody time”. Indikativ und Konjunktiv im deutschen Tempussystem. Zeitschrift für Literaturwissenschaft und Linguistik 29(1): 119–146.Google Scholar
Fortescue, Michael
1984West Greenlandic. London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar
Gaeta, Livio
2013Multiple sources for the German scandal construction. Studies in Language 37(3): 566–598.Google Scholar
Givón, Talmy
1990Syntax. A Functional-typological Introduction 2 Vols. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Harris, Alice C. & Campbell, Lyle
1995Historical Syntax in Cross-linguistic Perspective [Cambridge Studies in Linguistics 74]. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Helbig, Gerhard & Buscha, Joachim
2001Deutsche Grammatik. Ein Handbuch für den Ausländerunterricht. Berlin: Langenscheidt.Google Scholar
Holmberg, Anders
2015Verb second. In Syntax. Theory and Analysis [Handbücher zur Sprach- und Kommunikationswissenschaft 42.2], Tibor Kiss & Artemis Alexiadou (eds), 342–383. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
Iatridou, Sabine
2000The grammatical ingredients of counterfactuality. Linguistic Inquiry 31(2): 231–270.Google Scholar
Klein, Wolfgang
1994Time in Language. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
1998Assertion and finiteness. In Issues in the Theory of Language Acquisition. Essays in Honor of Jürgen Weissenborn, Norbert Dittmar & Zvi Penner (eds), 225–245. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
2008The topic situation. In Empirische Forschung und Theoriebildung. Beiträge aus Soziolinguistik, Gesprochene-Sprache- und Zweitspracherwerbsforschung; Festschrift für Norbert Dittmar zum 65. Geburtstag, Ahrenholz, Bernt, Bredel, Ursula, Klein, Wolfgang, Rost-Roth, Martina & Skiba, Romuald (eds), 287–305. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Koptjevskaja-Tamm, Maria
1993Finiteness. In The Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics, Vol. 3, Ronald E. Asher (ed.), 1245–1248. Oxford: Pergamon.Google Scholar
Maienborn, Claudia
2003Die logische Form von Kopula-Sätzen [Studia Grammatica 56]. Berlin: Akademie.Google Scholar
Martin, Roger
2001Null Case and the Distribution of PRO. Linguistic Inquiry 32(1): 141–166.Google Scholar
Mithun, Marianne
1999The Languages of Native North America. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Müller, Stefan
2018Grammatical Theory. From Transformational Grammar to Constraint-based Approaches, 2nd edn [Textbooks in Language Sciences 1]. Berlin: Language Science Press. http://​langsci​-press​.org​/catalog​/book​/195Google Scholar
Myers, James
2009Syntactic judgment experiments. Language and Linguistics Compass 3(1): 406–423.Google Scholar
Nikolaeva, Irina
2007Introduction. In Finiteness. Theoretical and Empirical Foundations, Irina Nikolaeva (ed.), 1–19. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
2013Unpacking finiteness. In Brown et al. (eds), 20–47.Google Scholar
Palmer, Frank R.
2001Mood and Modality, 2nd edn.. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Pinkster, Harm
2015The Oxford Latin Syntax, Vol. 1: The Simple Clause. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Reiner, Tabea
2015An emerging future infinitive in present day German? De Gruyter Open Linguistics 1: 503–518.Google Scholar
2017 ??sehen werden kann. Ergebnisse einer Korpusstudie. Sprachwissenschaft 42(2): 191–202.Google Scholar
. Submitted. Idiomaticity as a problematic semantic criterion for defining periphrasis.
2018Existiert ein Infinitiv Posterior im Gegenwartsdeutschen? Habilitation thesis, LMU Munich. Supplement: http://​www​.tabea​-reiner​.de/​/index​.php​/dat​-hab​.html
Reis, Marga
2001Bilden Modalverben im Deutschen eine syntaktische Klasse? In Modalität und Modalverben im Deutschen [Linguistische Berichte. Sonderheft 9], Reimar Müller & Marga Reis (eds), 287–318. Hamburg: Buske.Google Scholar
Rothstein, Björn
2013Belege mit doppeltem Futur im Deutschen? Ergebnisse einer Internetrecherche. Sprachwissenschaft 38(1): 101–119.Google Scholar
Schallert, Oliver
2018A note on misplaced or wrongly attached zu ‘to’ in German. https://​ling​.auf​.net​/lingbuzz​/003980 (15 May 2018).
Seiler, Guido
2015Syntactization, analogy and the distinction between proximate and evolutionary causations. In Variation in Language. System- and Usage-based Approaches [Linguae & Litterae 50], Aria Adli, Marco García García & Göz Kaufmann (eds), 239–264. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Stirling, Lesley
2006Switch-reference. Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics, Vol. 12, 2nd edn, Keith Brown (ed.), 316–323. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Thieroff, Rolf
1992Das finite Verb im Deutschen. Tempus - Modus - Distanz [Studien zur deutschen Grammatik 40]. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
Vater, Heinz
1975Werden als Modalverb. In Aspekte der Modalität [Studien zur deutschen Grammatik 1], Joseph P. Calbert & Heinz Vater (eds), 71–148. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
Zeller, Jochen
1994Die Syntax des Tempus. Zur strukturellen Repräsentation temporaler Ausdrücke. Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag.Google Scholar
Zifonun, Gisela, Hoffmann, Ludger & Strecker, Bruno
1997Grammatik der deutschen Sprache [Schriften des Instituts für Deutsche Sprache 7]. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar