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
Cited by

Cited by 1 other publications

No author info given
2021.  In Linguistic Categories, Language Description and Linguistic Typology [Typological Studies in Language, 132], Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 15 june 2021. 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.