Traditionally, conditional
wenn-clauses in German are
treated as subordinate clauses, either preceding or
following their matrix clauses. My data – based on
naturally occurring German talk-in-interaction from
various settings – show that participants in
everyday interactions use various types of
(pre-positioned) wenn-constructions
as resources to accomplish social activities. These
constructions not only blur the boundaries between
subordinated and main clauses, but also reveal a
wide range of in-between
wenn-constructions ranging from
tightly integrated to loosely integrated, from
non-integrated to free-standing.
The empirically based analysis, furthermore,
shows that practices of clause-combining turn out to
be closely connected to the temporal unfolding of
talk-in-interaction, and thus to issues of
projection, retractive expansions as well as the
ongoing accomplishment of social action.
Auer, P. (2000). Pre- and post-positioning of
wenn-clauses in spoken and
written German. In E. Couper-Kuhlen & B. Kortmann (Eds.), Cause, condition, concession, contrast:
cognitive and discourse perspectives (pp. 173–204). Berlin/Boston: de Gruyter.
Auer, P. (2005). Projection in interaction and
projection in grammar. Text 25, 7–36.
Auer, P. (2007). Syntax als Prozess. In H. Hausendorf (Ed.), Gespräch als Prozess. Linguistische
Aspekte der Zeitlichkeit verbaler
Interaktion. (pp. 95–124). Tübingen: Narr.
Auer, P. (2009a). On-line syntax: Thoughts on the
temporality of spoken language. Language Sciences 31, 1–13.
Auer, P. (2009b). Projection and minimalistic syntax
in interaction. Discourse Processes 46(2), 180–205.
Auer, P. & Pfänder, S. (2011). Constructions: Emergent or
emerging? In P. Auer & S. Pfänder (Eds.), Constructions: Emerging and
Emergent (pp. 1–12). Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter.
Auer, P. & Lindström, J. (2015). Left/right asymmetries and the
grammar of pre- vs. postpositioning in German and
Swedish talk-in-interaction. InLiSt 56.
Bergmann, J. (1992). Konversationsanalyse. In Flick, U.et al. (Eds.), Handbuch qualitativer
Sozialforschung (pp. 213–218). München: Psychologie Verlags Union.
Boogaart, R. & Verheij, K. (2013). Als dát geen insubordinatie is! De
pragmatiek van zelfstandige conditionele
zinnen. In T. Janssen, & J. Noordegraaf (Eds.), Honderd jaar taalwetenschap (pp. 12–28). Amsterdam/Münster: Nodus Publikationen.
Breyer, T., Ehmer, O. & Pfänder, S. (2011). Improvisation, temporality and
emergent constructions. In P. Auer & S. Pfänder (Eds.), Constructions: Emerging and
Emergent (pp. 186–217). Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter.
Brown, P. & Levinson, S. C. (1978/87). Politeness. Some universals in language
usage. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
Brugmann, K. (1918): Verschiedenheit der Satzgestaltung nach
Maßgabe der seelischen Grundfunktionen in den
indogermanischen Sprachen. Leipzig: B.G. Teubner.
Christmann, G. & Günthner, S. (1996). Sprache und Affekt. Die
Inszenierung von Entrüstung im
Gespräch. Deutsche Sprache 1, 1–33.
Couper-Kuhlen, E. & Barth-Weingarten, D. (2011). A system for transcribing
talk-in-interaction: GAT 2. Gesprächsforschung – Online-Zeitschrift
zur verbalen Interaktion 12, 1–51.
Couper-Kuhlen, E., Fox, B. & Thompson, S. (2014). Forms of responsitivity:
Grammatical formats for responding to two types of
request in conversation. In S. Günthner, W. Imo & J. Bücker (Eds.). Grammar and Dialogism. Sequential,
Syntactic, and Prosodic Patterns between Emergence
and Sedimentation (pp. 109–138). Berlin/Boston: de Gruyter.
Dancygier, B. & Sweetser, E. (2000). Constructions with if, since, and
because: Causality, epistemic stance, and clause
order. In E. Couper-Kuhlen & Kortmann, B. (Eds.), Cause, Condition, Concession, Contrast:
Cognitive and Discourse Perspectives (p. 111–142). Berlin/Boston: de Gruyter.
Deppermann, A. (1999). Gespräche analysieren. Eine Einführung in
konversationsanalytische Methoden. Opladen: Leske & Budrich.
Du Bois, J. W. (2014). Towards a dialogic
syntax. Cognitive Linguistics 25(3), 359–410.
Evans, N. (2007). Insubordination and its
uses. In I. Nikolaeva (Ed.), Finitness: theoretical and empirical
foundations (pp. 366–431). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Fauconnier, G. (1985): Mental Spaces. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Ford, C. (1993). Grammar in Interaction. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
Greenberg, J. H. (1963). Some universals of grammar with
particular reference to the order of meaningful
elements. In J. H. Greenberg (Ed.), Universals of Language (pp. 73–113). Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
Günthner, S. (1999). Wenn-Sätze im Vor-Vorfeld: Ihre
Formen und Funktionen in der gesprochenen
Sprache. Deutsche Sprache 3, 209–235.
Günthner, S. (2006). Was ihn trieb, war vor allem
Wanderslust: Pseudocleft-Konstruktionen im
Deutschen. In S. Günthner, & W. Imo (Eds.), Konstruktionen in der Interaktion (pp. 59–90). Berlin/Boston: de Gruyter.
Günthner, S. (2007). Brauchen wir eine Theorie der
gesprochenen Sprache? Und: wie kann sie aussehen?
GIDI-Arbeitspapierreihe (Grammatik in der Interaktion). [URL] Last access on 24.09.18.
Günthner, S. (2008a). ‘Die Sache ist …‘: eine
Projektorkonstruktion im gesprochenen
Deutsch. Zeitschrift für
Sprachwissenschaft 27(1), 39–72.
Günthner, S. (2008b). Projektorkonstruktionen im
Gespräch: Pseudoclefts, die Sache
ist-Konstruktionen und Extrapositionen mit
es. Gesprächsforschung 9, 86–114.
Günthner, S. (2009). Konstruktionen in der
kommunikativen Praxis. Zur Notwendigkeit einer
interaktionalen Anreicherung
konstruktionsgrammatischer Ansätze. Zeitschrift für germanistische
Linguistik 37(3), 402–426.
Günthner, S. (2011a). Between emergence and
sedimentation. Projecting constructions in German
interactions. In P. Auer & S. Pfänder (Eds.), Constructions: Emerging and
Emergent (pp. 156–185). Berlin/ Boston: de Gruyter.
Günthner, S. (2012). Die Schriftsprache als Leitvarietät
die gesprochene Sprache als Abweichung?
‘Normwidrige’ wenn-Sätze im
Gebrauch. In S. Günthneret al. (Eds.), Kommunikation und Öffentlichkeit (pp. 61–84). Berlin/Boston: de Gruyter.
Günthner, S. (2014). The dynamics of
dass-constructions in everyday
German interactions – a dialogical
perspective. In S. Günthner, W. Imo & J. Bücker (Eds.), Grammar and Dialogism. Sequential,
syntactic, and prosodic patterns between emergence
and sedimentation (pp. 179–206). Berlin/Boston: de Gruyter.
Günthner, S. (2014). This is a paper published in the following volumn: S. Günthner, W. Imo & J. Bücker (Eds.), Grammar and Dialogism. Sequential, syntactic, and prosodic patterns between emergence and sedimentation (pp.179–206). Berlin/Boston: de Gruyter.
Günthner, S. (2015a). ‚Geteilte Syntax‘: Kollaborativ
erzeugte
dass-Konstruktionen. In A. Ziem & A. Lasch (Eds.), Konstruktionsgrammatik IV. Konstruktionen
als soziale Konventionen und kognitive
Routinen (pp. 25–40). Tübingen: Stauffenburg.
Günthner, S. (2015b). Ko-Konstruktionen im Gespräch:
Zwischen Kollaboration und
Konfrontation. In U. Dausendschön-Gay, E. Gülich & U. Krafft (Eds.), Ko-Konstruktionen in der
Interaktion. (pp. 55–74). Bielefeld: transcript Verlag.
Günthner, S. (2015c). A temporally oriented perspective
on connectors in interaction: und zwar (,namely/in
fact‘)-constructions in everyday German
conversations. In A. Deppermann & S. Günthner (Eds.), Temporality in Interaction (pp. 237–266). Amsterdam: John Benjamin.
Günthner, S. (2017). Alleinstehende Nebensätze:
Insubordinierte
wenn-Konstruktionen in der
kommunikativen Praxis. In Y. Ekinci, E. Montanari & L. Selmani (Eds.), Grammatik und Variation. (pp. 97–111). Heidelberg: Synchron Wissenschaftsverlag der Autoren.
Günthner, S. & Hopper, P. (2010). Zeitlichkeit & sprachliche
Strukturen: Pseudoclefts im Englischen und
Deutschen. Gesprächsforschung 11, 1–28.
Günthner, S. & Imo, W. (Eds.) (2006). Konstruktionen in der Interaktion. Berlin/New York: de Gruyter.
Günthner, S., Imo, W. & Bücker, J. (Eds.) (2014). Grammar and Dialogism. Sequential,
syntactic, and prosodic patterns between emergence
and sedimentation. Berlin/Boston: de Gruyter.
Günthner, S. (i. pr.). Wenn-Konstruktionen im Gespräch. Zur Verwobenheit kognitiver und interaktionaler Faktoren bei der Realisierung grammatischer Muster. In A. Binanzer, J. Gamper & V. Wecker (Eds.), Prototypen - Schemata - Konstruktionen. Untersuchungen zur deutschen Morphologie und Syntax. Berlin: de Gruyter.
Hilpert, M. (2015). Kollaborative Insubordination in
gesprochenem Englisch: Konstruktion oder Umgang
mit Konstruktionen? In A. Ziem & A. Lasch (Eds.), Konstruktionsgrammatik IV. Konstruktionen
als soziale Konventionen und kognitive
Routinen (pp. 25–40). Tübingen: Stauffenburg.
Hopper, P. (1987). Emergent Grammar. In Berkeley Linguistic Society (Ed.), General Session and Parasession on Grammar
and Cognition (pp. 139–157). Berkeley CA: Berkeley Linguistics Society.
Hopper, P. (1988). Emergent Grammar and the A Priori
Grammar Postulate. In D. Tannen (Ed.), Linguistics in Context (pp. 117–133). Norwood: Ablex.
Hopper, P. (2004). The openness of grammatical
constructions. Chicago Linguistic Society 40, 153–175.
Hopper, P. (2011). Emergent grammar and temporality in
interactional linguistics. In P. Auer & S. Pfänder (Eds.), Constructions: Emerging and
Emergent (pp. 22–44). Berlin/ Boston: de Gruyter.
Hopper, P. & Thompson, S. A. (2008). Projectability and clause combining
in interaction. In R. Laury (Ed.). Crosslinguistic Studies of Clause
Combining. The multifunctionality of
conjunctions (pp. 99–124). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Imo, W. (2013). Sprache in Interaktion. Analysemethoden
und Untersuchungsfelder. Berlin: de Gruyter.
Imo, W. (2014). Elliptical structures as dialogical
resources for the management of
understanding. In S. Günthner, W. Imo & J. Bücker (Eds.), Grammar and Dialogism. Sequential,
Syntactic, and Prosodic Patterns between Emergence
and Sedimentation (pp. 139–176). Berlin/Boston: de Gruyter.
Jespersen, O. (1924). The Philosophy of Grammar. London: George Allen, and Unwin.
Laury, R. (2012). Syntactically Non-Integrated
Finnish jos ‘If’-Conditional Clauses as
Directives. Discourse Processes 49, 213–242.
Laury, R., Lindholm, C. & Lindström, J. (2013). Syntactically non-integrated
conditional clauses in spoken Finish and
Swedish. In E. Havu & I. Hyvärinen (Eds.), Comparing and contrasting syntactic
structures. (pp. 231–269). Helsinki: Société Néophilologique de Helsinki.
Lehmann, C. (1982/95). Thoughts on Grammaticalization. München/Newcastle: Lincom.
Lerner, G. H. (1991). On the syntax of
sentences-in-progress. Language in Society 20, 441–458.
Lerner, G. H. (2002). Collaborative turn
sequences. In G. H. Lerner (Ed.) Conversation Analysis. Studies from the
first generation (pp. 225–256). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Leipzig Glossing Rules (2015). The Leipzig Glossing Rules:
Conventions for interlinear morpheme-by-morpheme
glosses. URL: [URL]. Last access on 24.09.18.
Levinson, S. C. (2006). Cognition at the heart of human
interaction. Discourse Studies 8, 85–93.
Levinson, S. C. (2013). Action Formation and
Ascription. In J. Sidnell & T. Stivers (Eds.), The Handbook of Conversation
Analysis (pp. 103–130). Chichester: Blackwell.
Linell, P. (2009). Rethinking Language, Mind, and World
Dialogically: Interactional and contextual
Theories of Human Sense-Making. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
Luckmann, T. (1990). Social communication, dialogue and
conversation. In I. Marková & K. Foppa (Eds.), The Dynamics of Dialogue (pp. 45–61). New York: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
Matthiessen, C. & Thompson, S. A. (1988). The Structure of Discourse and
‘Subordination’. In J. Haiman & S. A. Thompson (Eds.): Clause Combining in Grammar and
Discourse (pp. 275–330). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Metschkowa-Atanassova, Z. (1983). Temporale und konditionale
‘wenn’-Sätze. Düsseldorf: Pädagogischer Verlag Schwann.
Oppenrieder, W. (1989). Selbständige Verb-Letzt-Sätze: Ihr
Platz im Satzmodussystem und ihre intonatorische
Kennzeichnung. In H. Altmann, A. Batliner & W. Oppenrieder (Eds.), Zur Intonation von Modus und Fokus im
Deutschen (pp. 163–244). Tübingen: Niemeyer.
Schegloff, E. A. (1984). On some questions and ambiguities
in conversation. In J. M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (Eds.), Structures of Social Action. Studies in
Conversation Analysis (pp. 28–52). Cambridge MA.: Cambridge University Press.
Silverstein, M. (1993). Metapragmatic discourse and
metapragmatic function. In J. Lucy (Ed.), Reflexive Language: Reported Speech and
Metapragmatics (pp. 33–58). Cambridge MA: Cambridge University Press.
Stirling, L. (1999). Isolated
if-clauses in Australian
English. In P. Collins & D. Lee (Eds.), The Clause in English. In honour of Rodney
Huddleston. (pp. 273–294). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Sweetser, E. E. (1990). From Etymology to Pragmatics. Metaphorical
and cultural aspects of semantic
structure. Cambridge: University Press.
Vallauri, E. L. (2004). Grammaticalization of Syntactic
Incompleteness: Free Conditionals in Italian and
Other Languages. SKY/Journal of Linguistics 17, 189–215.
Wegner, L. (2010). Unverbundene WENN-Sätze in der
gesprochenen Sprache. GIDI-Arbeitspapierreihe. URL: [URL]. Last access on 24.09.18.
Zifonun, G.et al. (1997). Grammatik der deutschen Sprache. Band
1–3. Berlin/New York: de Gruyter.
Cited by (6)
Cited by six other publications
Horlacher, Anne-Sylvie, F. Neveu, S. Prévost, A. Montébran, A. Steuckardt, G. Bergounioux, G. Merminod & G. Philippe
2024. Les si-indépendantes dans l’interaction : un continuum d’insubordination. SHS Web of Conferences 191 ► pp. 01016 ff.
Corminboeuf, Gilles, Matthieu Monney, F. Neveu, S. Prévost, A. Steuckardt, G. Bergounioux & B. Hamma
2022. Si je t’aime ! Régimes insubordonnés. SHS Web of Conferences 138 ► pp. 13001 ff.
2022. Si vous avez quelqu’un sous la main : les si-indépendantes en tant que format de requête. Langue française N° 216:4 ► pp. 47 ff.
De Stefani, Elwys
2021. If-Clauses, Their Grammatical Consequents, and Their Embodied Consequence: Organizing Joint Attention in Guided Tours. Frontiers in Communication 6
Floyd, Simeon
2021. Conversation and Culture. Annual Review of Anthropology 50:1 ► pp. 219 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 29 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.