Chapter published in:
Information-Structural Perspectives on Discourse Particles
Edited by Pierre-Yves Modicom and Olivier Duplâtre
[Studies in Language Companion Series 213] 2020
► pp. 196222
References

References

Abraham, Werner & Leiss, Elisabeth
2006Personal and impersonal passives: Definite vs. indefinite diatheses. Transactions of the Philological Society 104: 230–259. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2014Introduction. In Modes of Modality. Modality, Typology, and Universal Grammar [Studies in Language Companion Series 149], Elisabeth Leiss & Werner Abraham (eds), 1–15. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Abraham, Werner
1990Zur heterogenen Entfaltung der Modalpartikel im Ahd. und Mhd. In Neuere Forschungen zur historischen Syntax des Deutschen, Anne Betten & Claudia Maria Riehl (eds), 124–138. Tübingen: Niemeyer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1991The grammaticalization of the German modal particles. In Approaches to Grammaticalization, Vol. II: Types of Grammatical Markers [Typological Studies in Language 19], Elizabeth Closs Traugott & Bernd Heine (eds), 223–380. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2016aDie deutschen Entsprechungen zu omdat und want: Nur weil und denn? In Addenda. Artikelen voor Ad Foolen, Sander Lestrade, Peter de Swart & Lotte Hogeweg (eds), 1–12. Nijmegen: Radboud University.Google Scholar
2016bWas bedeutet Subordination mit V2 im Deutschen und Niederländischen: Omdat und want ebenso wie weil und denn? Leuvense Bijdragen 99–100: 122–132. Special issue Sprache in Raum und Geschichte, System und Kultur. Festschrift für Luk Draaye, K. Feyaerts, G. Brône, S. Schoonjans & G. Stuyckens.Google Scholar
2016cZum grundsätzlichen Unterschied von Ereignissubjunction (de re) und Prämissensubjunction (de dicto) im Westgermanischen. Glottotheory 7(2): 113–136. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2017Modalpartikel und Mirativeffekte. In Grammatische Funktionen aus Sicht der japanischen und deutschen Germanistik, Shin Tanaka, Elisabeth Leiss, Werner Abraham & Yasuhiro Fujinawa (eds), 76–108. Hamburg: Buske.Google Scholar
2019Modality. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Bech, Gunnar
1955Studien über das deutsche Verbum infinitum, Band I, 2nd ed. 1983 [Det Kongelige Danske Videnskabernas Selskab, Historisk-filologiske Meddelser 35, no. 2]. Tübingen: Niemeyer.Google Scholar
Behaghel, Otto
1932Deutsche Sprache. Eine geschichtliche Darstellung, Vol IV. Heidelberg: Winter.Google Scholar
Benincá, Paola & Poletto, Cecilia
2004Topic, focus and V2: Defining the CP sublayers. In The Structure of CP and IP. The Cartography of Syntactic Structures, Vol. 2, Ludigi Rizzi (ed.), 52–75. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Blühdorn, Hardarik
2013Review of Marco Coniglio 2011. Die Syntax der deutschen Modalpartikeln. Ihre Distribution und Lizenzierung in Haupt- und Nebensätzen [Studia Grammatica 73], Akademie Verlag, Berlin. Zeitschrift für Dialektologie und Linguistik LXXX: 206–209.Google Scholar
Brentano, Franz
1874/1924Psychologie vom empirischen Standpunkt. (English translation: Brentano, Franz 1973 Psychology from an Empirical Point of View. Translated by Antos C. Rancurello, D. B. Terrell & Linda L. McAlister)Google Scholar
Brinton, Laurel J.
1996Pragmatic Markers in English. Grammaticalization and Discourse Markers. Berlin: De Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Carlson, Gregory N.
1977Reference to Kinds in English. PhD dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.Google Scholar
Cognogla, Federica
2013Syntactic Variation and Verb Second: A German Dialect in Northern Italy [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 201]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Comrie, Bernard
2008Subordination, coordination: Form, semantics, pragmatics. In Subordination and Coordination Strategies in North Asian Languages, [Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 300], Edward J. Vajda (ed.), 1–16. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cristofaro, Sonia
2003Subordination. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
2008Asymmetric events, subordination, and grammatical categories. In Asymmetric Events [Converging Evidence in Language and Communication Research 11], Barbara Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk, 151–172. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2014Is there really a syntactic category of subordination? In Contexts of Subordination – Cognitive, Typological and Discourse Perspectives [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 249], Laura Visapää, Jyrki Kalliokoski, Helena Sorva (eds), 73–91. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Cristofaro, Sonja
2016Subordination in cross-linguistic perspective. (1) Some traditional assumptions about subordination. Ms, University of Pavia.Google Scholar
Frascarelli, Mara & Hinterhölzl, Roland
2007Types of Topics in German and Italian. In On Information Structure, Meaning and Form. Generalizations across Languages [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 100], Kerstin Schwabe & Susanne Winkler (eds), 87–116. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Frey, Werner & Pittner, Karin
1998Zur Positionierung der Adverbiale im deutschen Mittelfeld. Linguistische Berichte 176: 489–534.Google Scholar
Gärtner, Hans Martin
2017Root infinitivals and modal particles. An interim report. Discourse Particles, Josef Bayer & Volker Struckmeier (eds), 115–143. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
van Gelderen, Elly
1992Tense and to in Layamon. Folia Linguistica Historica 13(1–2): 133–142.Google Scholar
Giannakidou, Anastasia
2011(Non)Veridicality and mood choice: Subjunctive, polarity, and time. In Tense across Languages, Renate Musan & Monika Rathert (eds), 59–90. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Haberland, Hartmut
2006Thetic-categorical distinction. In Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics, 2nd edn, Keith Brown (ed.), 676–677. Oxford: Elsevier. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Haegeman, Liliane
2012Adverbial Clauses, Main Clause Phenomena, and Composition of the Left Periphery. Oxford: OUP. CrossrefGoogle 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
Langacker, Ronald W.
2008Subordination in cognitive grammar. In Asymmetric Events [Converging Evidence in Language and Communication Research 11], Barbara Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk (ed.), 137–49. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Müller, Sonja
2014Modalpartikel [Kurze Einführungen in die germanistische Linguistik 17]. Heidelberg: Winter.Google Scholar
Sasse, Hans-Jürgen
1987The thetic/categorical distinction revisited. Linguistics 25: 511–580. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Tanaka, Shin
2017Suche nach latenter Invarianz bei genetisch fremden Sprachen am Beispiel Deutsch-Japanisch. In Grammatische Functionen aus Sicht der japanischen und deutschen Germanistik, Shin Tanaka, Elisabeth Leiss, Werner Abraham & Yasuhiro Fujinawa (eds), 59–74. Hamburg: Buske.Google Scholar
Weydt, Harald
1989Partikelfunktionen und Gestalterkennen. In Sprechen mit Partikeln. Internationaler Kongreß über Sprachpartikeln 4.-8. August 1987, Harald Weydt (ed.). Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Whitt, Richard J.
2015Review of Lena Brünjes, Das Paradigma deutscher Modalpartikeln: Dialoggrammatische Funktion und paradigmeninterne Oppositionen. Journal of Pragmatics 76: 181–183. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Zybatov, Lew
1990Was die Partikeln bedeuten. Eine kontrastive Analyse Russisch-Deutsch. München: Otto Sagner. CrossrefGoogle Scholar