Cover not available
Part of
Micro- and Macro-variation of Causal Clauses: Synchronic and Diachronic Insights
Edited by Łukasz Jędrzejowski and Constanze Fleczoreck
[Studies in Language Companion Series 231] 2023
► pp. 1–12

Chapter 1
Outline of the volume

| University of Cologne
| Leibniz University Hannover
Published online: 1 March 2023
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.231.01jed
References
Bayer, Josef
2001 Two grammars in one: Sentential complements and complementizers in Bengali and other South Asian languages. In The Yearbook of South Asian Languages – Contact, Convergence and Typology, Peri Bhaskarorao, Kamuri V. Subbarao & Rajendra Singh (eds), 11–36. New Delhi: Sage. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Charnavel, Isabelle
2017 Non-at-issueness of since-clauses. In Proceedings of the 27th Semantics and Linguistic Theory Conference, University of Maryland, College Park, 12–14 May, Dan Burgdorf, Jacob Collard, Sireemas Maspong & Brynhildur Stefánsdóttir (eds), 43–58. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cinque, Guglielmo
1999 Adverbs and Functional Heads. A Cross-Linguistic Perspective [Oxford Studies in Comparative Syntax]. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
2017 On the status of functional categories (heads and phrases). Language and Linguistics 18(4): 521–576. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Curme, George O.
1922 A Grammar of the German Language. Designed for a Thorough and Practical Study of the Language as Spoken and Written to Day. New York NY: The MacMillan Company.Google Scholar
van Dijk, Teun A.
1977 Text and Context. Explorations in the Semantics and Pragmatics of Discourse [Longman Linguistics Library 21]. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Eberhardt, Ira
2017 From a focus particle to a conjunction: Diachronic and synchronic analysis of German zumal. Language 93(2): e66–e96. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Endo, Yoshio
2015 Two ReasonPs: What are*(n’t) you coming to the United States for? In Beyond Functional Sequence: The Cartography of Syntactic Structures [Oxford Studies in Comparative Syntax 10], Ur Shlonsky (ed.), 220–231. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Frey, Werner
2016 About some correlations between formal and interpretative properties of causal clauses. In Co- and Subordination in German and Other Languages [Linguistische Berichte Sonderheft 21], Ingo Reich & Augustin Speyer (eds), 153–179. Hamburg: Buske.Google Scholar
2020 German concessives as TPs, JPs and ActPs. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics 5(110): 1–31. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
To appear. On the categorical status of different dependent clauses. In Propositionale Argumente im Sprachvergleich: Theorie und Empirie / Propositional Arguments in Cross-Linguistic Research: Theoretical and Empirical Issues [Studien zur deutschen Sprache], Jutta M. Hartmann & Angelika Wöllstein eds Tübingen Narr
Frey, Werner & Masiero, Federica
2018 Desintegration versus Parordination bei obwohl und weil-Konstruktionen. In Im Mittelpunkt Deutsch [ZAS Papers in Linguistics 59], André Meinunger (ed.), 57–82. Berlin: Zentrum für Allgemeine Sprachwissenschaft. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
van Gelderen, Elly
2004 Grammaticalization as Economy [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 71]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haegeman, Liliane
1984 Pragmatic conditionals in English. Folia Linguistica 18(3–4): 485–502. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2003 Conditional clauses: External and internal syntax. Mind and Language 18(4): 317–339. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2010 The internal syntax of adverbial clauses. Lingua 120(3): 628–648. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2012 Adverbial Clauses, Main Clause Phenomena, and the Composition of the Left Periphery [The Cartography of Syntactic Structures 8]. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Higginbotham, James & Ramchand, Gillian
1997 The stage-level/individual-level distinction and the Mapping Hypothesis. Oxford University Working Papers in Linguistics, Philology and Phonetics 2: 55–83.Google Scholar
Krifka, Manfred
2018 Semantic types of complement clauses: Propositions, judgements and commitments. Talk delivered at the Conference ‘Ars Grammatica: Theorie und Empirie im Sprachvergleich zum Schwerpunktthema Sachverhalts-/propositionale Argumente’ at the IDS, Mannheim, June.
To appear. Layers of assertive clauses: Propositions, judgements, commitments, acts. In Propositionale Argumente im Sprachvergleich: Theorie und Empirie / Propositional Arguments in Cross-Linguistic Research: Theoretical and Empirical Issues [Studien zur deutschen Sprache], Jutta Hartmann & Angelika Wöllstein eds Tübingen Narr
Küper, Christoph
1991 Geht die Nebensatzstellung im Deutschen verloren? – Zur pragmatischen Funktion der Wortstellung in Haupt- und Nebensätzen. Deutsche Sprache 19(2): 133–158.Google Scholar
Kuteva, Tania, Heine, Bernd, Bo Hong, Haiping Long, Narrog, Heiko & Rhee, Seongha
(eds) 2019 Word Lexicon of Grammaticalization. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Morreall, John
1979 The evidential use of because. Papers in Linguistics 12(1–2): 231–238. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pan, Victor Junnan & Paul, Waltraud
2018 The syntax of complex sentences in Mandarin Chinese: A comprehensive overview with analyses. Linguistic Analysis 42(1–2): 63–162.Google Scholar
Pander Maat, Henk & Degand, Liesbeth
2001 Scaling causal relations and connectives in terms of speaker involvement. Cognitive Linguistics 12(3): 211–246. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pittner, Karin
2007 Dialog in der Grammatik: Doch in Kausalsätzen mit Verberststellung. In Von der Pragmatik zur Grammatik, Sandra Döring & Jochen Geilfuß-Wolfgang (eds), 39–56. Leipzig: Leipziger Universitätsverlag.Google Scholar
2011 Subsidäre Begründungen. In Konnektoren im Deutschen und im Sprachvergleich: Beschreibung und grammatische Analyse [Studien zur deutschen Sprache 53], Gisella Ferraresi (ed.), 157–182. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
Rizzi, Luigi
1997 The fine structure of the left periphery. In Elements of Grammar. Handbook in Generative Syntax [Kluwer International Handbooks of Linguistics 1], Liliane Haegeman (ed.), 281–337. Dordrecht: Kluwer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2001 On the position Int(errogative) in the left periphery of the clause. In Current Studies in Italian Syntax: Essays Offered to Lorenzo Renzi, Guglielmo Cinque & Giampaolo Salvi (eds), 287–296. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
2006 On the form of chains: Criterial positions and ECP effects. In Wh-Movement: Moving On [Current Studies in Linguistics 42], Lisa Cheng & Norbert Corver (eds), 97–133. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sanders, Ted J. M., Spooren, Wilbert P. M. S. & Noordman, Leo G. M.
1992 Toward a taxonomy of coherence relations. Discourse Processes 15(1): 1–35. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Scheffler, Tatjana
2013 Two-dimensional Semantics. Clausal Adjuncts and Complements [Linguistische Arbeiten 549]. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schiffrin, Deborah
1987 Discourse Markers [Studies in Interactional Sociolinguistics 5]. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shlonsky, Ur & Soare, Gabriela
2011 Where’s why? Linguistic Inquiry 42(4): 651–669. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Speyer, Augustin
2011 Zur Integriertheit kausaler (Neben-)Sätze im Frühneuhochdeutschen. Sprachwissenschaft 36(1): 53–84.Google Scholar
2015 Informationsdichte als Faktor für Einbettung. Eine sprachhistorische Studie an Kausalsätzen. Sprachwissenschaft 40(4): 453–485.Google Scholar
Stukker, Ninke, Sanders, Ted J. M. & Verhagen, Arie
2008 Causality in verbs and in discourse connectives: Converging evidence of cross-level parallels in Dutch linguistic categorization. Journal of Pragmatics 40(7): 1296–1322. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stump, Gregory
1985 The Semantic Variability of Absolute Constructions [Studies in Linguistics and Philosophy 25]. Dordrecht: Foris. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sweetser, Eve
1990 From Etymology to Pragmatics. Metaphorical and Cultural Aspects of Semantic Structure [Cambridge Studies in Linguistics 54]. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Szczepaniak, Renata
2011 Grammatikalisierung im Deutschen. Eine Einführung. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
Voigtmann, Sophia & Speyer, Augustin
2021 Information density and the extraposition of German relative clauses. Frontiers in Psychology 12(650969): 1–18. DOI logoGoogle Scholar