In:The Conversation Frame: Forms and functions of fictive interaction
Edited by Esther Pascual and Sergeiy Sandler
[Human Cognitive Processing 55] 2016
► pp. 193–213
Fictive questions in conditionals?
Synchronic and diachronic evidence from German and English
Published online: 1 November 2016
https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.55.10leu
https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.55.10leu
This chapter discusses the alleged emergence of verb-first (V1) conditionals in English and German from question-driven fictive interaction of the type A: p? (B: Yes.) A: Then q. Since this scenario proves impossible to maintain with regard to English, an alternative model is proposed treating V1 as the grammaticalized residue of a stage in ancient Germanic at which word-order options were determined pragmatically instead of syntactically. The chapter shows that the conversational frame left its mark on V1-conditionals indirectly through the period as a rhetorical discourse unit in which V1 emerged as a marker of conditionality. This happened in different ways linked in part to the divergence of word-order systems between English and German.
References (48)
Auer, P., & Lindström, J. (2011). Verb-first conditionals in German and Swedish: Convergence in writing, divergence in speaking. In P. Auer, & S. Pfänder (Eds.), Constructions: Emerging and emergent (pp. 218–261). Berlin: De Gruyter.
Axel, K., & Wöllstein, A. (2009). German verb-first conditionals as unintegrated clauses: A case study in converging synchronic and diachronic evidence. In S. Featherston & S. Winkler (Eds.), The fruits of empirical linguistics. Vol. 2: Product (pp. 1–36). Berlin: De Gruyter.
Betten, A. (1992). Sentence connection as an expression of medieval principles of representation. In M. Gerritsen, & D. Stein (Eds.), Internal and external factors in syntactic change (pp. 157–173). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
de Boor, H. (1922). Studien zur altschwedischen Syntax in den ältesten Gesetzestexten und Urkunden. Breslau: Marcus.
de Castro Campos, F. (1985). On conditionals as dialogue constructs. In M. Dascal (Ed.), Dialogue: An interdisciplinary approach (pp. 101–113). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Chen, R. (2013). Subject auxiliary inversion and linguistic generalization: Evidence for functional/cognitive motivation in language. Cognitive Linguistics, 24, 1–32.
Dancygier, B., & Sweetser, E. (2005). Mental spaces in grammar: Conditional constructions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Donhauser, K., Solf, M., & Zeige, L.E. (2006). Informationsstruktur und Diskursrelationen im Vergleich Althochdeutsch – Altisländisch. In A. Hornscheidt, K. Kotcheva, T. Milosch, & M. Rießler (Eds.), Grenzgänger. Festschrift zum 75. Geburtstag von Jurij Kusmenko (pp. 73–90). Berlin: Nordeuropa-Institut der Humboldt-Universität.
Erdmann, O. (1886). Grundzüge der deutschen Syntax nach ihrer geschichtlichen Entwicklung. Stuttgart: Cotta.
Fleischmann, K. (1973). Verbstellung und Relieftheorie. Ein Versuch zur Geschichte des deutschen Nebensatzes. Munich: Fink.
Hawkins, J. (1986). A comparative typology of English and German: Unifying the contrasts. London: Croom Helm.
Helbig, G. (1983). Die uneingeleiteten Nebensätze im Deutschen. In Studien zur deutschen Syntax (Vol. 1, pp. 159–167). Leipzig: Enzyklopädie.
Herring, S.C. (1991). The grammaticalization of rhetorical questions in Tamil. In E.C. Traugott, & B. Heine (Eds.), Approaches to grammaticalization (pp. 253–284). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Hilpert, M. (2010). What can synchronic gradience tell us about reanalysis? Verb-first conditionals in written German and Swedish. In E.C. Traugott, & G. Trousdale (Eds.), Gradience, gradualness and grammaticalization (pp. 181–201). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Hinterhölzl, R. (2014). On the interaction between syntax, prosody and information structure: an interface approach to word order developments in Germanic. In K. Bech, & K.G. Eide (Eds.), Information structure and syntactic change in Germanic and Romance languages (pp. 341–376). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Hopper, P.J. (1975). The syntax of the simple sentence in Proto-Germanic. The Hague: De Gruyter Mouton.
. (1991). On some principles of grammaticalization. In E.C. Traugott, & B. Heine (Eds.), Approaches to grammaticalization (Vol. 1, pp. 17–35). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
. (1992). A discourse perspective on syntactic change: Text-building strategies in Early Germanic. In E.C. Polomé, & W. Winter (Eds.), Reconstructing languages and cultures (pp. 217–238). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
. (2011). Emergent grammar and temporality in interactional linguistics. In P. Auer, & S. Pfänder (Eds.), Constructions: Emerging and emergent (pp. 22–44). Berlin: De Gruyter.
Jespersen, O. (1940). A modern English grammar on historical principles. Part V: Syntax. Fourth volume. Copenhagen: Munksgaard.
Kim, J.B. (2011). Conditional inversion: A construction-based approach. Language and Information, 15, 13–29.
König, E. (2012). Contrastive linguistics and language comparison. Languages in Contrast, 12, 3–26.
König, E., & van der Auwera, J. (1988). Clause integration in German and Dutch conditionals, concessive conditionals, and concessives. In J. Haiman & S.A. Thompson (Eds.), Clause combining in grammar and discourse (pp. 101–133). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Kusmenko, J. (1996). Die Periode – syntaktische Haupteinheit der altisländischen Prosa. In L. Popova, & Y. Kuzmenko (Eds.), Berkovs bók (pp. 145–160). Moscow: Impeto.
Lenerz, J. (1984). Syntaktischer Wandel und Grammatiktheorie. Eine Untersuchung an Beispielen aus der Sprachgeschichte des Deutschen. Tübingen: Niemeyer.
Leuschner, T., & Van den Nest, D. (2015). Asynchronous grammaticalization: V1-conditionals in present-day English and German. Languages in Contrast, 15(1), 34–64.
Önnerfors, O. (1997). Verb-erst-Deklarativsätze. Grammatik und Pragmatik. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell International.
Pascual, E. (2014). Fictive interaction: The conversation frame in thought, language and discourse. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Petrova, S., & Solf, M. (2008). Rhetorical relations and verb placement in the early Germanic languages. In C. Fabricius-Hansen, & W. Ramm (Eds.), ‘Subordination’ versus ‘coordination’ in sentence and text: A crosslinguistic perspective (pp. 329–351). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Podlesskaya, V.I. (2001). Conditional constructions. In M. Haspelmath, E. König, W. Oesterreicher & W. Raible (Eds.), Language typology and language universals: An international handbook (pp. 998–1010). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G., & Svartvik, J. (1985). A comprehensive grammar of the English language. London: Longman.
Rieger, G.E. (1968). Die Spitzenstellung des Verbs als Stilmittel des altisländischen Sagenerzählers. Arkiv för nordisk filologi, 83, 81–139.
Sandler, S. (2012). Reenactment: An embodied cognition approach to meaning and linguistic content. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences, 11, 583–598.
Stolt, B. (1990). Redeglieder, Informationseinheiten. Cola und Commata in Luthers Syntax. In A. Betten (Ed.), Neuere Forschungen zur historischen Syntax des Deutschen (pp. 379–392). Tübingen: Niemeyer.
Sweetser, E. (1990). From etymology to pragmatics: Metaphorical and cultural aspects of semantic structure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Szczepaniak, R. (2013). Satztyp und Sprachwandel. In J. Meibauer, M. Steinbach, & H. Altmann (Eds.), Satztypen im Deutschen (pp. 738–763). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
Traugott, E.C. (1985). Conditional markers. In J. Haiman (Ed.), Iconicity in syntax: Proceedings of a symposium on iconicity in syntax, Stanford, June 24–26, 1983 (pp. 289–307). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Van den Nest, D. (2010). Emergenz und Grammatikalisierung von V1-Konditionalen. Ein Rekonstruktionsversuch am Beispiel des Deutschen und Englischen. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Ghent University.
Cited by (1)
Cited by one other publication
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 10 december 2025. 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.