Cover not available

Article In: Evolutionary Linguistic Theory: Online-First Articles

From needing to wanting

Taking a deep dive into Abraham’s Modal Protosoup

 | Universidade de Lisboa
This content is being prepared for publication; it may be subject to changes.
Abstract
This paper explores the concepts of needing and wanting, and their relevance for communication from an evolutionary perspective. The main claim is that volition is rooted in the set of needs that determine an individual’s condition. It will be shown how needs and volition shape the architecture of speech acts, providing new support for Gricean intentionalism, according to which each major speech act is driven by a communicative intention. In addition, the paper investigates how these concepts are mapped onto natural-language expressions with intensional semantics and argues that the resulting ‘need’-predicates and volitional predicates differ in their argument structure: whereas ‘need’-predicates are analyzed as three-place predicates introducing an extra slot for a goal-argument, volitional predicates are analyzed as two-place predicates. Finally, it is assumed that all semantic flavors of deontic modality can be derived from volitional modality.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Needing
    • 2.1Typology of needs
    • 2.2Interacting needs
    • 2.3Needs in non-human organisms
    • 2.4Conceptualizing needs
  • 3.Wanting
  • 4.Speech acts as need management
    • 4.1Communication is driven by needs
    • 4.2Intention in communication
  • 5.Talking about needing and wanting in natural language
    • 5.1Accounting for the semantic contrasts between ‘needing’ and ‘wanting’
    • 5.2Deontic modality as an extension of volitional modality
  • 6.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgement
  • Notes
  • Author queries
  • References
References (125)
References
Abraham, W. (2008). Wie ist die historisch spezifische Ausgliederung der Modalitäten bei den deutschen Modalverben denkbar? Linguistische Berichte, 56–83. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2009). Die Urmasse von Modalität und ihre Ausgliederung. Modalpartikeln anhand von Modalverben, Modalpartikeln und Modus. Was ist das Gemeinsame, was das Trennende, und was steckt dahinter. In Modalität, Epistemik und Evidentialität bei Modalverb, Adverb, Modalpartikel und Modus. W. Abraham & E. Leiss (eds.) 551. [Studien zur deutschen Grammatik 77]. (pp. 251–302) Tübingen: Stauffenburg.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2011). Traces of Bühler’s semiotic legacy in modern linguistics. In: Theory of language. A. Eschbach & D. Goodwin (eds.) (pp. xiii–xlvii) 2nd ed. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Chap. Preface. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2012). (Inter)Subjektivierung oder Fremdbewusstseinsabgleich als synchrone und diachrone Wandelbegriffe? Begriffsschärfung und theoretische Einordnung. Jahrbuch für Germanistische Sprachgeschichte 3.11, 24–56. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2020). Modality in Syntax, Semantics and Pragmatics. Cambridge Studies in Linguistics 165. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Arfsten, A., Paulsen-Schwarz, A., & Terhart, L. (2019). Friesische Gebrauchsgrammatik. Bräist/Bredstedt: Nordfriisk Instituut.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Au, S. von et al. (2025). Effects of self-touch and social-touch on peripheral oxytocin concentrations: A study conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic. Physiology &Behavior 3011, p. 115061. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bach, K. & Harnish, R. M. (1979). Linguistic Communication and Speech Acts. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bech, G. (1949). Das Semantische System der Modalverben. Travaux du Cercle Linguistique de Copenhague VI1, 3–46. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Becker, K. F. (1836). Ausführliche deutsche Grammatik als Kommentar der Schulgrammatik. 2nd ed. Vol. 11. Frankfurt am Main: G. F. Kettembeil.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bekoff, M., Allen, C. & Gordon, B. M. (2002). The cognitive animal. Empirical and theoretical perspectives on animal cognition. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Berger, R. & al. (2024). Oxytocin-Augmented Modular-Based Group Intervention for Loneliness: A Proof-Of-Concept Randomized Controlled Trial. Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics 93.31, 169–180. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bornstein, M. H. & Esposito, G. (2023). Coregulation: A Multilevel Approach via Biology and Behavior. Children 10.81, p.1323. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bowlby, J. (1982). Attachment and Loss: Attachment. 2nd ed. New York City: Basic Books.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1991). “Postscript”. In: Attachment across the life cycle. C. Murray Parkes, J. Stevenson-Hinde, & P. Marris (eds.), (pp. 293–297) London: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bühler, K. (1934). Sprachtheorie. Jena: Fischer.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chereches, F. S., Ballhausen, N., et al. (2024). Is There a Link Between Older Adults’ Frequency of (Face-to-Face and Remote) Contact With Grandchildren and Cognitive Functioning Over 12 Years? In The Journals of Gerontology, Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences 80.31. B. Cassidy (ed.). Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chereches, F. S., Olaru, G. et al. (2026). Grandparents’ cognition and caregiving for grandchildren: Frequency, type, and variety of activities. In: Psychology and Aging. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cooper, R. (2023). From perception to communication: A type theory for action and meaning. [Oxford Studies in Semantics and Pragmatics 16]. Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cooper, R. et al. (2015). Probabilistic Type Theory and Natural Language Semantics. Linguistic Issues in Language Technology 10.41, 1–45. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Coye, C. et al. (2024). Female Diana Monkeys (Cercopithecus diana) Have Complex Calls. In: Linguistic Inquiry, 1–10. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Curme, G. O. (1922). A grammar of the German language. New York: Frederick Ungar Publishing CO.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Davidson, Donald (2001). Subjective, Intersubjective, Objective. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
De Dreu, Carsten K. W. et al. (2011). Oxytocin promotes human ethnocentrism. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 108.41, 1262–1266. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Delbrück, B. (1901). Grundfragen der Sprachforschung. Strassburg: Karl J. Trübner. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Den Dikken, M., Larson, R. & Ludlow, P. (2018). Intensional Transitive Verbs and Abstract Clausal Complementation. In Non-propositional intentionality. A. Grzankowski, & M. Montague, (eds), (pp. 46–94). Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dennett, D. C. (1991). Consciousness explained. Little, Brown and Co.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Diewald, G. (1999). Die Modalverben im Deutschen: Grammatikalisierung und Polyfunktionalität. [Reihe Germanistische Linguistik 208]. Tübingen: Niemeyer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Durkheim, É. (1897). Le Suicide. Paris: Ancienne Librairie Germer Baillière et C ie.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Eco, U. (1986). Semiotics and Philosophy of Language. Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Eide, K. M. (2005). Norwegian Modals. [Studies in Generative Grammar 74]. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Eisenberg, Peter (1992). Adverbiale Infinitive: Abgrenzung, Grammatikalisierung, Bedeutung. In: Deutsche Syntax. Ansichten und Aussichten. Hoffmann, L. (ed.). (pp. 206–224) Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2013). Grundriß der deutschen Grammatik: Das Wort. 4th ed. Vol. 11. Stuttgart: Metzler.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Erb, M. C. (2001). Finite Auxiliaries in German. PhD thesis. Katholieke Universiteit Brabant.
Farkas, Donka F. (1983). Intensionality and Romance Subjunctive Relatives. Phd-thesis. University of Chicago. Chicago, IL.
Farkas, D. F. & Bruce, K. B. (Sept. 2010). On Reacting to Assertions and Polar Questions. Journal of Semantics 27.11, 81–118. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Feldman, R. (2003). Infant–mother and infant–father synchrony: The coregulation of positive arousal. In: Infant Mental Health Journal 24.11, 1–23. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fillmore, C. (1968). The case for case. In: Universals in linguistic theory. E. Bach & R. T. Harms (eds.). (pp. 1–90) London: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fintel, K. von & Heim, I. (2011). Intensional semantics. Ms.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Forbes, G. (2006). Attitude problems. An essay on linguistic intensionality. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fortune, S. M. E. et al. (2025). Cooperative foraging between dolphins and fish-eating killer whales. Scientific Reports 15.11. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fritz, G. (1997). Historische Semantik der Modalverben”. In Untersuchungen zur semantischen Entwicklungsgeschichte der Modalverben im Deutschen. G. Fritz & Gloning (eds.). [Reihe Germanistische Linguistik 187], (pp. 1–157) Tübingen: Niemeyer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Geurts, B. (2019). Communication as commitment sharing: Speech acts, implicatures, common ground. In: Theoretical Linguistics 45.1–21, 1–30. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ginzburg, J. (2012). The interactive stance: Meaning for conversation. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ginzburg, J. & Kim, J.-B. (2023). Exclaiming non-sententially: exclamative sluices and the (non-elliptical) nature of ellipsis constructions. In: Glossa: a journal of general linguistics 8.11. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Glas, R. (1984). ‘sollen’ im heutigen Deutsch. Bedeutung und Gebrauch in der Schriftsprache. [Studien zur deutschen Grammatik 27]. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gretsch, P. (2013). “Satztyp und Spracherwerb”. In: Satztypen des Deutschen. J. Meibauer, M. Steinbach, & H. Altmann. (pp. 815–845.) Berlin: De Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Grice, P. H. (1957). Meaning. The Philosophic Review 66.31, 377–388. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gutzmann, D. (2019). The Grammar of Expressivity. Oxford Studies in Theoretical Linguistics 72. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hackl, M. (1998). “On the semantics of ”ability attributions””. Ms.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hacquard, V. (2006). “Aspects of Modality”. PhD thesis. MIT.
(2011). “Modality”. In: Semantics. An International Handbook of Natural Language Meaning. C. Maienborn, K. von Heusinger, & P. Portner (eds.). Handbücher zur Sprach- und Kommunikationswissenschaft 33.2, (pp. 1484–1515). Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Harris, D. W. (2014). Speech act theoretic semantics. PhD thesis. New York City: City University of New York Graduate Center.
(2019). Intention and commitment in speech acts. Theoretical Linguistics 451.1–2, (pp. 53–67) Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Harves, S. &. Kayne, R. S. (2012). “Having ‘Need’ and Needing ‘Have’”. Linguistic Inquiry 43.11, (pp. 120–132). Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hill, V. (2007). Vocatives and the pragmatics–syntax interface. Lingua 117.121, 2077–2105. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hockett, C. F. (1960). The Origin of Speech. In: Scientific American 203.31, 88–96. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Horn, L. R. (2001). A natural story of negation. The David Hume Series. Stanford: Center for the Study of Language and Information.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jespersen, O. (1931). A Modern English Grammar. Syntax. Third volume. Time and Tense. Vol. IV1. Heidelberg: Carl Winter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Johnson, S. (2019). Attachment Theory in Practice: Emotionally Focused Therapy (EFT) with Individuals, Couples and Families. New York City: The Guildford Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Koenig, J.-P., Mauner, G. & Bienvenue, B. (2003). Arguments for adjuncts. Cognition 89.21, pp. 67–103. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kratzer, A. (1978). Semantik der Rede: Kontexttheorie — Modalwörter — Konditionalsätze. Königstein/Ts.: Scriptor.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1981). The notional category of modality. In: Words, worlds and contexts. New approaches in World Semantics. H.-J. Eikmeyer & H. Rieser (eds.). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 38–74. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1991). Modality. In: Semantik. Ein internationales Handbuch der zeitgenössischen Forschung. A. von Stechow & D. Wunderlich (eds.). 639–650. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kremsmayr, T. et al. (2024). Oxytocin Verbindungen zur oralen Behandlung von Bauchschmerzen. In: Angewandte Chemie 136.521. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Krifka, M. (2023). Layers of assertive clauses: propositions, judgements, commitments, acts. In Propositionale Argumente im Sprachvergleich/Propositional Arguments in Cross-Linguistic Research: Theorie und Empirie/Theoretical and Empirical Issues. J. Hartmann & A. Wöllstein. [Studien zur deutschen Sprache 84]. (pp.116–183) Tübingen: Gunter Narr Verlag, Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kringelbach, M. L. & Rolls, E. T. (2004). The functional neuroanatomy of the human orbitofrontal cortex: evidence from neuroimaging and neuropsychology”. Progress in Neurobiology 72.51, 341–372. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Larson, R. K. (1983). Restrictive Modification: Relative Clauses and Adverbs. Phd-thesis. University of Wisconsin-Madison.
Leys, O. (1991). Skizze einer kognitiv-semantischen Typologie der deutschen ’um’-Infinitive”. Leuvense Bijdragen 801, 167–203.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Libet, B. (1985). Unconscious cerebral initiative and the role of conscious will in voluntary action. In: Behavioral and Brain Sciences 8.41, (pp. 529–539). Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lowen, A. (1985). Narcissism. Denial of the true self. New York: Touchstone.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
MacFarlane, J. (2011). What is assertion? In: Assertion. J. Brown and H. Cappelen (eds). (pp. 79–96.) Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Maché, Jakob (2013). On black magic. How epistemic modifiers emerge. PhD thesis. Freie Universität Berlin.
(2019). Germanische Bedürfnisverben im Wandel. Ms. Humboldt Universität.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2021). “Braucht das epistemisch zu sein? Wie Infinitivmorphologie, Negation und lexikalische Semantik die Interpretation von Notwendigkeitsverben in Korpusdaten bestimmen”. Linguistische Berichte 2671, 37–82. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Marcuse, H. (1964). One-dimensional man. Studies in the ideology of advanced society. London: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Maslow, A. H. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review 50.41, 370–396. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Miyagawa, S. (2022). Syntax in the Treetops. Linguistic Inquiry Monographs 85. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Moltmann, F. (1997). “Intensional Verbs and Quantifiers”. In: Natural Language Semantics 51, pp. 1–52. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2008). Intensional Verbs and their Objects. Natural Language Semantics, 239–270. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2013). Abstract Objects and the Semantics of Natural Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Neidle, C. (1988). The Role of Case in Russian Syntax. [Studies in Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 10]. Dordrecht: Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Öhlschläger, G. (1989). Zur Syntax und Semantik der Modalverben. [Linguistische Arbeiten 144]. Tübingen: Niemeyer.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Palmer, F. R. (1986). Mood and modality. Cambridge Text Books in Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Paul, H. (1920). Prinzipien der Sprachgeschichte. 8th ed. Tübingen: Niemeyer.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Poesio, M. & Traum, D. R. (1998). “Towards an axiomatization of dialogue acts”. Proceedings of the Twente Workshop on the Formal Semantics and Pragmatics of Dialogues. Enschede, 207–222.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Portner, P. (2009). Modality. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Quine, W. V. O. (1956). “Quantifiers and propositional attittudes”. Journal of Philosophy 531, 185–196. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1960). Word and Object. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Raynaud, F. (1977). Noch einmal Modalverben! In: Deutsche Sprache 11, 1–30.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Remberger, E-M. (2010). The evidential shift of WANT. In: Evidence from Evidentials. T. Peterson and U. Sauerland (eds.). UBC Working Papers in Linguistics 25. Vancouver: University of British Columbia, pp. 161–182.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rogers, R. D. et al. (1999). Choosing between Small, Likely Rewards and Large, Unlikely Rewards Activates Inferior and Orbital Prefrontal Cortex. The Journal of Neuroscience 19.201, 9029–9038. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ross, J. R. (1970). On declarative sentences. In Readings in English Transformational Grammar. R. A. Jacobs and P. S. Rosenbaum (eds.) (pp. 222–272). Waltham, MA: Ginn.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rossano, F. & K. Liebal (2014). “Requests” and “offers” in orangutans and human infants. In Requesting in Social Interaction. P. Drew and E. Couper-Kuhlen (eds.). [Studies in language and social interaction 26], (pp. 335–365) Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schlenker, P., Chemla, E., Arnold, K. et al. (2016). Pyow-hack revisited: Two analyses of Putty-nosed monkey alarm calls. Lingua 1711, 1–23. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schlenker, P., Chemla, E., Cäsar, C. et al. (2016). Titi semantics: Context and meaning in Titi monkey call sequences. In Natural Language &Linguistic Theory 35.11, 271–298. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schlenker, P., Chemla, E., Schel, Anne M., et al. (2016). Formal monkey linguistics. Theoretical Linguistics 42.1–21, pp. 1–90. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schneider, Ekaterina et al. (2026). Intranasal Oxytocin and Physical Intimacy for Dermatological Wound Healing and Neuroendocrine Stress: A Randomized Clinical Trial.: JAMA Psychiatry 83.21, p. 118. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schopenhauer, Arthur (1819). Die Welt als Wille und Vorstellung. Leipzig: F. A. Brockhaus.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schwarz, Florian (2006). “On needing propositions and looking for Properties”. In: Proceedings of SALT XVI I. M. Gibson & J. Howell (eds.). Ithaca, NY: Cornell University, pp. 259–276. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2020). Intensional Transitive Verbs — I owe you a horse. In The Wiley Blackwell Companion to Semantics. D. Gutzmann et al. (eds.). John Wiley &Sons Inc. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Soon, Chun Siong et al. (2008). Unconscious determinants of free decisions in the human brain. Nature Neuroscience 11.51, (pp. 543–545). Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Speas, M. (2004). “Evidentiality, logophoricity and the syntactic representation of pragmatic features”. Lingua 114.31, pp. 255–276. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Speas, Peggy and Carol Tenny (2003). “Configurational properties of point of view roles”. In: Asymmetry in grammar vol. 1. Syntax and Semantics. A. M. Di Sciullo. Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 57. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company, pp. 315–344. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Spitz, R. A. (1945). Hospitalism: An Inquiry into the Genesis of Psychiatric Conditions in Early Childhood.: The Psychoanalytic Study of the Child 1.11, 53–74. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Spitz, R. A. & M. Wolf, K. (1946). Anaclitic Depression: An Inquiry into the Genesis of Psychiatric Conditions in Early Childhood, II. The Psychoanalytic Study of the Child 2.11, 313–342. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Stern, D. N. (1985). The interpersonal world of the infant. A view from psychoanalysis. New York City: Basic Books.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Takahashi, J. et al. (2020). Oxytocin reverses A β -induced impairment of hippocampal synaptic plasticity in mice”. Biochemical and Biophysical Research Communications 528.11, 174–178. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Thráinsson, H. & Vikner, S. (1995). Modals and double modals in the Scandinavian Languages. Working Papers in Scandinavian Syntax 551, 51–88.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tomasello, M. (2014). A natural history of human thinking. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Universtiy Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2022). The evolution of agency. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tomasello, M. and K. Z. (2002). Primate vocal and gestural communication. In The cognitive animal: empirical and theoretical perspectives on animal cognition. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Treiber, H. (2021). Macht — ein soziologischer Grundbegriff*. Macht und Herrschaft. P. Gostmann & P.-U. Merz-Benz, (pp. 91–106). Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tronick, E. Z. (1989). Emotions and emotional communication in infants. American Psychologist 44.21, 112–119. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Truckenbrodt, H. (2006). On the semantic motivation of syntactic verb movement to C in German. In Theoretical Linguistics 32.31, pp. 257–306. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wasserman, A. H. et al. (2022). Oxytocin promotes epicardial cell activation and heart regeneration after cardiac injury. In: Frontiers in Cell and Developmental Biology 101. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Watzlawick, P. (1983). Die erfundene Wirklichkeit. München: Piper.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Weber, M. (1922). Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft. Erster Teil: die Wirtschaft und die gesellschaftlichen Ordnungen und M ä chte. Tübingen: Mohr.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Welke, K. (1965). Untersuchungen zum System der Modalverben in der deutschen Sprache der Gegenwart. [Schriften zur Phonetik, Sprachwissenschaft und Kommunikationsforschung 10]. Berlin: Akademie Verlag. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wundt, W. (1901). Sprachgeschichte und Sprachpsychologie. Leipzig: Wilhelm Engelmann.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wurmbrand, S. (2001). Infinitives. Restructuring and Clause Structure. [Studies in Generative Grammar 55]. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zaefferer, D. (2001). Deconstructing a classical classification: a typological look at Searle’s concept of illocution type.: Revue Internationale de Philosophie 55.2161. 209–225. URL–: [URL].
Zak, P.l J., Kurzban, R., and Matzner, W. T. (2004). The Neurobiology of Trust. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 1032.11, 224–227. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zeman, S. (2013). Zur Diachronie der Modalverben: sollen zwischen Temporalität, Modalität und Evidentialität. In Funktionen von Modalität. W. Abraham & E. Leiss (eds.). Linguistik — Impulse & Tendenzen 55]. (pp. 335–366), Berlin: De Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue