Cover not available

Article published In: Journal of Historical Linguistics
Vol. 12:1 (2022) ► pp.108–166

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
EPUB logo with download linkDownload EPUB
authorization required

Reichenbach meets underspecification

A novel approach to the perfect-past-cycle in German (and elsewhere)

 | Universität Zürich
 | Leibniz-Institut für Deutsche Sprache, Mannheim
Published online: 31 January 2022
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/jhl.20002.sei
Abstract
This paper investigates the long-term diachronic development of the perfect and preterite tenses in German and provides a novel analysis by supplementing Reichenbach, Hans. 1947. Elements of Symbolic Logic. New York: The Macmillan Company. (Edition used: Reichenbach, Hans. 1966. Elements of Symbolic Logic. New York: Free Press.)Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar classical theory of tense by the notion of underspecification. Based on a newly compiled parallel corpus spanning the entire documented history of German, we show that the development in question is cyclic: It starts out with only one tense form (preterite) compatible with both current relevance and narrative past readings in (early) Old High German and, via three intermediate stages, arrives at only one tense form again (perfect) compatible with the same readings in modern Upper German dialects. We propose that in order to capture all attested stages we must allow tenses to be unspecified for R (reference time), with R merely being inferred pragmatically. We then propose that the transitions between the different stages can be explained by the interplay between semantics and pragmatics.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Preterite vs. perfect in German
    • 2.1Distribution, “preterite decay” and “perfect expansion”
    • 2.2Previous analyses: Monosemous vs. polysemous
    • 2.3Our proposal: Reichenbach meets underspecification
  • 3.Diachronic corpus study
    • 3.1Goals, methodology and data
    • 3.2Results for study A: Forms used in current relevance contexts
    • 3.3Results for study B: Forms used in narrative contexts
    • 3.4Summary and discussion of the results
  • 4.Diachronic analysis
    • 4.1Five diachronic stages
    • 4.2Motivating the transitions
      • 4.2.1Semantic enrichment of the preterite
      • 4.2.2Semantic impoverishment of the perfect
      • 4.2.3A note on preterite expansion
      • 4.2.4Eventual (non-)loss of the preterite
  • 5.Conclusion and outlook
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • Abbreviations
  • Primary texts for studies A and B (cf. Section 3)
  • Other primary texts
  • References
References (132)
Primary texts for studies A and B (cf. Section 3)
Bibel Teütsch der ursprünglichen Hebreischen und Griechischen wahrheit nach, auffs treüwlichest verdolmetschet. 1534. Zürich: Froschauer. Digital reproduction from the Bavarian State Library Munich. Online: [URL] (last accessed 26 October 2020).
Biblia: das ist: Die gantze Heilige Schrifft: Deudsch. Lutherbibel. 1545. Online: [URL] (last accessed 26 October 2020).
Das Matthias von Beheim Evangelienbuch in Mitteldeutscher Sprache. 1343 1867. Ed. by Richard Bechstein. Leipzig: T.O. Weigel.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Das Neue Testament unsers Herren und Heilands. 1687. Zürich: Froschauer. Digital reproduction from the Zentralbibliothek Zürich. Online: [URL] (last accessed 26 October 2020).
Holy Bible. New International Version. Bible Gateway. Online: [URL] (last accessed 26 October 2020).
S Nöi Teschtamänt Züritüütsch. Us em Griechische. 2011. Trans. by Emil Weber. Zürich: Jordan. [Zurich German dialect.]Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tatian. Lateinisch und altdeutsch mit ausführlichem Glossar. 1892. Ed. by Eduard Sievers. 2nd edition. Paderborn: Schöningh (=Bibliothek der ältesten deutschen Litteratur-Denkmäler).Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zürcher Bibel. 2009. Zürich: Theologischer Verlag Zürich. Online: [URL] (last accessed 26 October 2020).
Other primary texts
Die heilige Bybel. 1953. Online: [URL] (last accessed 26 October 2020) [Afrikaans].
Das Neue Testament uff Hessisch. 2011. Trans. by Klemens Mieth. Norderstedt: Books on Demand GmbH. [Southern Hessian.]Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dat Ole un dat Nie Testament in unse Moderspraak. 1984. Trans. by Johannes Jessen. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht. [Low German.]Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Es Nei Teshtament. Mitt Di Psaltah un Shpricha. 2002. South Holland, IL: The Bible League. [Pennsylvania Dutch.]Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Het Boek. Biblica, Inc. 1988. Online: [URL] (last accessed 26 October 2020) [Dutch.].
References
Adelung, Johann Christoph. 1782. Umständliches Lehrgebäude der Deutschen Sprache, zur Erläuterung der Deutschen Sprachlehre für Schulen II1. Leipzig: Breitkopf.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ágel, Vilmos & Mathilde Hennig. 2006. Theorie des Nähe- und Distanzsprechens. Grammatik aus Nähe und Distanz: Theorie und Praxis am Beispiel von Nähetexten 1650–2000 ed. by Vilmos Ágel & Mathilde Hennig, 3–31. Tübingen: Niemeyer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Amft, Camilla. 2018. Das präteritale Konzept im Frühneuhochdeutschen: Zur Distribution von Präteritum und präteritalem Perfekt in Flugschriften des 16. Jahrhunderts. Heidelberg: Winter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Andersson, Sven Gunnar. 1989. Zur Interaktion von Temporalität, Modalität, Aspektualität und Aktionsart bei den nichtfuturen Tempora im Deutschen, Englischen und Schwedischen. Tempus – Aspekt – Modus: Die lexikalischen und grammatischen Formen in den germanischen Sprachen ed. by Werner Abraham & Theo Janssen. Tübingen: Niemeyer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Archangeli, Diana. 1988. Aspects of Underspecification Theory. Phonology 51.183–207. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Barba, Preston A. & Albert F. Huffington. 1954. A Pennsylvania German Grammar. Allentown, PA: Schlechter. Online: [URL] (last accessed 26 October 2020).
Bäuerle, Rainer. 1979. Temporale Deixis, temporale Frage: Zum propositionalen Gehalt deklarativer und interrogativer Sätze. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Behaghel, Otto. 1924. Deutsche Syntax: Eine geschichtliche Darstellung. Vol. II1. Heidelberg: Winter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bertinetto, Pier Marco. 2010. Non-Conventional Uses of the Pluperfect in the Italian (and German) Literary Prose. Quaderni del Laboratorio di Linguistica 9.2. Online: [URL] (last accessed 26 October 2020).
Bertinetto, Pier Marco & Mario Squartini. 1996. La distribuzione del Perfetto Semplice e Composto nelle diverse varietà di italiano. Romance Philology 491.383–419.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Blass, Friedrich & Albert Debrunner. 1961. A Greek Grammar of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature trans. by Robert W. Funk. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Blutner, Reinhard & Henk Zeevat (eds.). 2004. Optimality Theory and Pragmatics. Basingstoke, Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bornemann, Eduard & Ernst Risch. 1978. Griechische Grammatik. 2nd ed. Braunschweig: Diesterweg.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Braune, Wilhem & Ingo Reiffenstein. 2004. Althochdeutsche Grammatik I: Laut- und Formenlehre. 15th ed. Tübingen: Niemeyer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Braune, Wilhelm & Frank Heidermanns. 2004. Gotische Grammatik. 20th ed. Tübingen: Niemeyer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Buchwald-Wargenau, Isabel. 2012. Die doppelten Perfektbildungen im Deutschen– eine diachrone Untersuchung. Berlin & Boston: de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan, Revere D. Perkins & William Pagliuca. 1994. The Evolution of Grammar. Tense, Aspect, and Modality in the Languages of the World. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Campbell, Constantine. 2008. Basics of Verbal Aspect in Biblical Greek. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Comrie, Bernard. 1976. Aspect. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Condoravdi, Cleo and Ashwini Deo. (2015). Aspect Shifts in Indo-Aryan and Trajectories of Semantic Change. Language Change at the Syntax Semantics Interface ed. by Chiara Gianollo, Agnes Jaeger & Doris Penka, 261–292. Berlin: De Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cysouw, Michael & Bernhard Wälchli. 2007. Parallel Texts: Using Translational Equivalents in Linguistic Typology. Sprachtypologie und Universalienforschung STUF 60:2.95–99. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dahl, Östen. 2007. From Questionnaires to Parallel Corpora in Typology. Sprachtypologie und Universalienforschung STUF 60:2.172–181. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dahl, Östen & Viveka Velupillai. 2013. The Perfect. The World Atlas of Language Structures Online ed. by Matthew S. Dryer & Martin Haspelmath. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. Online: [URL] (last accessed 26 October 2020).
Dal, Ingerid. 1960. Zur Frage des süddeutschen Präteritumschwundes. Indogermanica: Festschrift für Wolfgang Krause ed. by Hans Hartmann & Hans Neumann, 1–7. Heidelberg: Winter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2014. Kurze deutsche Syntax auf historischer Grundlage, 4th ed, ed. by Hans-Werner Eroms. Berlin & New York: de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Declerck, Renaat. 1986. From Reichenbach (1947) to Comrie (1985): Towards a Theory of Tense. Lingua 701.305–364. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dentler, Sigrid. 1997. Zur Perfekterneuerung im Mittelhochdeutschen: Die Erweiterung des zeitreferentiellen Funktionsbereichs von Perfektfügungen (= Göteborger Germanistische Forschungen 37). Göteborg: Acta universitatis Gothoburgensis.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1998. Gab es den Präteritumschwund? Historische germanische und deutsche Syntax: Akten des Internationalen Symposiums anläßlich des 100. Geburtstages von Ingerid Dal, Oslo, 27.9.-1.10.1995 (= Osloer Beiträge zur Germanistik 21) ed. by John Ole Asekedal, 133–147. Frankfurt am Main: Lang.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Deo, Ashwini. 2014. Formal Semantics/Pragmatics and Language Change. The Routledge Handbook of Historical Linguistics ed. by Claire Bowern & Bethwyn Evans, 393–409. Oxford: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2015a. Diachronic Semantics. The Annual Review of Linguistics 11.179–197. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2015b. The Semantic and Pragmatic Underpinnings of Grammaticalization Paths: The Progressive to Imperfective Shift. Semantics and Pragmatics 81.1–52. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Detges, Ulrich. 1999. Reanalyse und Grammatikalisierung in den romanischen Sprachen (= Linguistische Arbeiten 410). Tübingen: Niemeyer.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dik, Simon. 1987. Copula Auxiliarization: How and Why? Historical Development of Auxiliaries ed. by Martin Harris & Paolo Ramat, 53–84. Berlin, New York & Amsterdam: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Donaldson, Bruce C. 1993. A Grammar of Afrikaans. Berlin & New York: De Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Drinka, Bridget. 2017. Language Contact in Europe: The Periphrastic Perfect through History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Duden-Grammatik. 2016. Duden – Die Grammatik: Unentbehrlich für richtiges Deutsch ed. by Angelika Wöllstein & the Dudenredaktion. Dudenverlag: Berlin.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dürscheid, Christa & Inga Hefti. 2006. Syntaktische Merkmale des Schweizer Standarddeutsch: Theoretische und empirische Aspekte. Schweizer Standarddeutsch: Beiträge zur Varietätenlinguistik ed. by Christa Dürscheid & Martin Businger, 131–161. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Egg, Markus. 2010. Semantic Underspecification. Language and Linguistics Compass 4.3.166–181. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ehret, Katharina & Benedikt Szmrecsanyi. 2016. An Information-Theoretic Approach to Assess Linguistic Complexity. Complexity, Isolation, and Variation ed. by Raffaela Baechler & Guido Seiler, 71–94. Berlin: De Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ehrich, Veronika. 1992. Hier und Jetzt: Studien zur lokalen und temporalen Deixis im Deutschen (= Linguistische Arbeiten 283). Tübingen: Niemeyer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Elsness, Johan. 1997. The Perfect and the Preterite in Contemporary and Earlier English. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Enke, Dankmar & Roland Mühlenbernd. 2017. The Grammaticalization Cycle of the Progressive: A Game-Theoretic Analysis. Morphology 27:4.497–526. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fabricius-Hansen, Catherine. 1986. Tempus fugit: Über die Interpretation temporaler Strukturen im Deutschen (= Sprache der Gegenwart 64.) Düsseldorf: Schwann.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fischer, Hanna. 2015. Präteritumschwund in den Dialekten Hessens. Eine Neuvermessung der Präteritalgrenze(n). Deutsche Dialekte: Konzepte, Probleme, Handlungsfeldr. Akten des 4. Kongresses der Internationalen Gesellschaft für Dialektologie des Deutschen (IGDD) ed. by Michael Elmentaler, Markus Hundt & Jürgen Erich, 107–1033. Stuttgart: Steiner.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2018. Präteritumschwund im Deutschen. Dokumentation und Erklärung eines Verdrängungsprozesses. Berlin & Boston: De Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fleischer, Jürg. 2013. Frühneuhochdeutsche und mittelniederdeutsche Syntax im Kontrast: die Abfolge des akkusativischen und dativischen Personalpronomens in der ältesten Luther- und Bugenhagen-Bibel. Zeitschrift für deutsche Philologie 1321.49–72.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fløgstad, Guro Nore. 2016. Preterit Expansion and Perfect Demise in Porteño Spanish and Beyond: A Critical Perspective on Cognitive Grammaticalization Theory (= Brill’s Studies in Historical Linguistics 6). Leiden & Boston: Brill. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gillmann, Melitta. 2016. Perfekt-Konstruktionen mit ‘haben’ und ‘sein’: Eine Korpusuntersuchung im Althochdeutschen, Altsächsischen und Neuhochdeutschen. Berlin & New York: De Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Grice, Paul. 1975. Logic and Conversation. Syntax and Semantics, vol. 3: Speech Acts, ed. by Peter Cole & Jerry L. Morgan, 41–58. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Grønn, Atle & Arnim von Stechow. To Appear. The Perfect. The Wiley Blackwell Companion to Semantics, ed. by Daniel Gutzmann, Lisa Matthewson, Cecile Meier, Hotze Rullmann & Thomas E. Zimmerman. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell.
Harnisch, Rüdiger. 1997. Ein mitteldeutsches Tempusparadigma in textökonomischer Sicht. Vergleichende germanische Philologie und Skandinavistik ed. by Thomas Birkmann, Heinz Klingenberg, Damaris Nübling & Elke Ronneberger-Sibold, 111–128. Tübingen: Niemeyer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Horn, Laurence. 1984. Towards a New Taxonomy of Pragmatic Inference: Q-Based and R-Based Implicature. Meaning, Form, and Use in Context: Linguistic Applications, ed. by D. Schiffrin, 11–42. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Horn, Laurence R. & Barbara Abbott (2012). ‘<the, a>: (In)definiteness and implicature’, in William P. Kabasenche, Michael O’Rourke, & Matthew H. Slater (eds.): Reference and Referring. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Haag, Earl C. 1982. A Pennsylvania German Reader and Grammar. University Park, London: Pennsylvania State University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hamburger, Käte. 1957. Die Logik der Dichtung. Stuttgart: Klett.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Helbig, Gerhard & Joachim Buscha. 2011. Deutsche Grammatik: Ein Handbuch für den Ausländerunterricht. 7th ed. München: Langenscheidt.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hennig, Mathilde. 2000. Tempus und Temporalität in geschriebenen und gesprochenen Texten. Tübingen: Niemeyer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hentschel, Elke & Harald Weydt. 2010. Handbuch der deutschen Grammatik. 3rd ed. Auflage. Berlin: De Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jacobs, Neil G. 2005. Yiddish: A Linguistic Introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jörg, Ruth. 1976. Untersuchungen zum Schwund des Präteritums im Schweizerdeutschen. (= Basler Studien zur deutschen Sprache und Literatur 52). Tübingen: Francke.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jacki, Kurt. 1909. Das starke Präteritum in den Mundarten des hochdeutschen Sprachgebiets. Beiträge zur Geschichte der deutschen Sprache und Literatur (PBB) 341.425–529.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Juola, Patrick. 2008. Assessing Linguistic Complexity. Language Complexity: Typology, Contact, Change ed. by Matti Miestamo, Kaius Sinnemäki & Fred Karlsson. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kiparsky, Paul. 1973. ‘Elsewhere’ in Phonology. A Festschrift for Morris Halle ed. by Paul Kiparsky & Stephen Anderson, 93–106. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1982. From Cyclic Phonology to Lexical Phonology. The Structure of Phonological Representations: Part 1 ed. by Harry van der Huist & Norval Smith, 131–175. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Klein, Wolfgang. 1992. The Present Perfect Puzzle. Language 681.525–552. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1994. Time in Language. London: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2000. An Analysis of the German Perfekt. Language 761.358–382. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Koch, Peter & Wulf Oesterreicher. 1985. Sprache der Nähe – Sprache der Distanz: Mündlichkeit und Schriftlichkeit im Spannungsfeld von Sprachtheorie und Sprachgeschichte. Romanistisches Jahrbuch 361.15–43. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
König, Ekkehard & Volker Gast. 2012. Understanding English-German Contrasts. Berlin: Erich Schmidt.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lahiri, Aditi & Henning Reetz. 2002. Underspecified Recognition. Laboratory Phonology VII, 637–675. Berlin: Mouton. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Langer, Nils. 2001. Linguistic Purism in Action. How Auxiliary Tun was Stigmatized in Early New High German. Berlin & New York: de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lavater, Hans Rudolf. 1997. Die Zürcher Bibel 1524 bis heute. Die Bibel in der Schweiz: Ursprung und Geschichte ed. by Urs David Joerg & Marc Hoffmann, 199–218. Basel: Schwabe.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lindgren, Kaj B. 1957. Über den oberdeutschen Präteritumschwund (= Annales Academiae Scientarium Fennicae 112.1). Helsinki: Suomalaisen Tiedeakatemian Toimituksia.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mayer, Thomas & Michael Cysouw. 2014. Creating a Massively Parallel Bible Corpus. Proceedings of the International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 14), 3158–3163. Reykjavik: European Language Resources Association. Online: [URL] (last accessed 26 October 2020).
MacLeod, Morgan. 2014. Synchronic Variation in the Old English Perfect. Transactions of the Philological Society 112:3.319–343. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Musan, Renate. 2002. The German Perfect: Its Semantic Composition and its Interactions with Temporal Adverbials (= Studies in Linguistics and Philosophy 78). Dordrecht: Kluwer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nilsson, Sofie. 2016. Das perfektische Präteritum im Deutschen. Lund: Lund University.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nübling, Damaris, in collaboration with Antje Dammel, Janet Duke und Renata Szczepaniak. 2006. Historische Sprachwissenschaft des Deutschen. Eine Einführung in die Prinzipien des Sprachwandels. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Petrova, Svetlana. 2008. Die Interaktion von Tempus und Modus: Studien zur Entwicklungsgeschichte des deutschen Konjunktivs (= Germanistische Bibliothek 30). Heidelberg: Winter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Oubouzar, Erika. 1974. Über die Ausbildung der zusammengesetzten Verbformen im deutschen Verbalsystem. Beiträge zur Geschichte der deutschen Sprache und Literatur (PBB) 951.5–96.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Portner, Paul. 2011. Perfect and Progressive. Semantics: An International Handbook of Natural Language Meaning ed. by Claudia Maienborn, Klaus von Heusinger & Paul Portner, 21.1217–1261. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Prince, Alan & Paul Smolensky. 2004. Optimality Theory: Constraint Interaction in Generative Grammar. Malden, MA, Oxford & Carlton: Blackwell. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rathert, Monika. 2004. Textures of Time. (= Studia Grammatica 59). Berlin & New York: De Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Reichenbach, Hans. 1947. Elements of Symbolic Logic. New York: The Macmillan Company. (Edition used: Reichenbach, Hans. 1966. Elements of Symbolic Logic. New York: Free Press.)Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Reis, Hans. 1891. Beitrage zur Syntax der mainzer Mundart. Mainz: Gottsleben.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Reyle, Uwe, Antje Rossdeutscher & Hans Kamp. 2007. Ups and Downs in the Theory of Temporal Reference. Linguistics and Philosophy 301.565–635. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ringe, Don. 2006. From Proto-Indo-European to Proto-Germanic. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rödel, Michael. 2007. Doppelte Perfektbildungen und die Organisation von Tempus im Deutschen. Tübingen: Stauffenburg.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rowley, Anthony. 1983. Das Präteritum in den heutigen deutschen Dialekten. Zeitschrift für Dialektologie und Linguistik 50:2.161–182.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rothstein, Björn. 2008. The Perfect Time Span: On the Present Perfect in German, Swedish and English (= Lingustik Aktuell 125). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Russ, Charles V. 1982. Studies in Historical German Phonology: A Phonological Comparison of MHG and NHG with Reference to Modern Dialects. Bern: Lang.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sapp, Christopher D. 2009. Syncope as the Cause of Präteritumschwund: New Data from an Early New High German Corpus. Journal of Germanic Linguistics 21:4.419–450. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sanders, Willy. 1982. Sachsensprache, Hansesprache, Plattdeutsch: Sprachgeschichtliche Grundzüge des Niederdeutschen. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schaden, Gerhard. 2009. Present Perfects Compete. Linguistics and Philosophy 321.115–141. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2012. Modelling the “Aoristic Drift of the Present Perfect” as Inflation: An Essay in Historical Pragmatics. International Review of Pragmatics 41.261–292. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schallert, Oliver. 2010. Als Deutsch noch nicht OV war: Althochdeutsch im Spannungsfeld zwischen OV und VO. Historische Textgrammatik und historische Syntax des Deutschen ed. by Christian Braun & Arne Ziegler, 365–394. Berlin & New York: De Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schrodt, Richard & Karin Donhauser. 2003. Tempus, Aktionsart/Aspekt und Modus im Deutschen. Sprachgeschichte: Ein Handbuch zur Geschichte der deutschen Sprache und ihrer Erforschung ed. by Werner Besch, Anne Betten, Oskar Reichmann & Stefan Sonderegger (= Handbücher zur Sprach- und Kommunikationswissenschaft 2), 31. 2504–2525. 2nd ed. Berlin & New York: De Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schaden, Gerhard. 2009. Present Perfects Compete. Linguistics and Philosophy 321.115–141. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Seiler, Guido. 2005. Open Syllable Shortening in Bernese German. Proceedings of the 31st Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society: General Session and Parasession on Prosodic Variation and Change ed. by Rebecca T. Cover & Yuni Kim Berkeley, 477–488. Berkeley, CA: Berkeley Linguistics Society.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2009. Sound Change or Analogy?: Monosyllabic Lengthening in German and Some of Its Consequences. Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics 121.229–272. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schmidt, Oskar & Thoe Vennemann. 1985. Die niederdeutschen Grundlagen des neuhochdeutschen Lautsystems. Beiträge zur Geschichte der deutschen Sprache und Literatur (PBB) (West), 1071.1–20 & 1071.157–173.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sieberg, Bernd. 2002. Analytische Imperfektbildungen in der gesprochenen Sprache. Muttersprache 112:3.240–252.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Solms, Hans-Joachim. 1984. Die morphologischen Veränderungen der Stammvokale der starken Verben im Frühneuhochdeutschen: Untersucht an Texten des 14.–18. Jahrhunderts. Doctoral Dissertation, Universität Bonn.
Sperschneider, Heinz (1959). Studien zur Syntax der Mundarten im ostlichen Thuringer Wald. Marburg: Elwert (Deutsche Dialektgeographie, 54).Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Squartini, Mario & Pier Marco Bertinetto. 2000. The Simple and Compound Past in Romance Languages. Tense and Aspect in the Languages of Europe ed. by Östen Dahl, 403–439. Berlin & New York: De Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Szulc, Aleksander. 1997. Außersprachliche Determinanten im phonologischen System der deutschen Hochlautung. Vergleichende germanische Philologie und Skandinavistik ed. by Thomas Birkmann, Heinz Klingenberg, Damaris Nübling & Elke Ronneberger-Sibold, 275–286. Tübingen: Niemeyer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Thieroff, Rolf. 2000. On the Areal Distribution of Tense-Aspect Categories in Europe. Tense and Aspect in the Languages of Europe ed. by Östen Dahl, 265–308. Berlin & New York: De Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Thies, Heinrich. 2010. Plattdeutsche Grammatik. Kiel: Wachholtz.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
von Stechow, Arnim. 1999. Eine erweiterte Extended-Now Theorie für Perfekt und Futur. Zeitschrift für Literaturwissenschaft und Linguistik 1131.86–118. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Weber, Albert. 1987. Zürichdeutsche Grammatik: Ein Wegweiser zur guten Mundart: Unter Mitwirkung von Eugen Dieth. 3rd ed. Zürich: Rohr.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Weinreich, Uriel. 1954. Is a Structural Dialectology Possible? WORD 101.388–400. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wunderlich, Dieter. 1970. Tempus und Zeitreferenz im Deutschen (= Linguistische Reihe 5). München: Hueber.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zeman, Sonja. 2010. Tempus und „Mündlichkeit“ im Mittelhochdeutschen: Zur Interdependenz grammatischer Perspektivensetzung und „historischer Mündlichkeit“ im mittelhochdeutschen Tempussystem (= Studia Linguistica Germanica 102). Berlin & New York: De Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2013. Historische Mündlichkeit: Empirische Erörterung einer theoretischen Problemlage. Zeitschrift für germanistische Linguistik 41:3.377–412. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zifonun, Gisela, Ludger Hoffmann & Bruno Strecker. 1997. Grammatik der deutschen Sprache. Berlin & New York: 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