Het gebruik van so in de zinsaanloop in de Duitse, Nederlandse en Engelse Ponthus | Amsterdam University Press Journals Online
2004
Volume 76, Issue 1
  • ISSN: 0039-8691
  • E-ISSN: 2215-1214

Abstract

Abstract

This study investigates the left peripheral uses of in Early New High German narratives and compares them to left peripheral in Dutch and English. In the German and Dutch Ponthus, tends to occur with adverbial elements and normally occupies a position immediately preceding the finite verb. English diverges from the Dutch and German both in its function and in the position it occupies within the clause. Interestingly, Dutch combines more frequently with adverbs than with adverbial clauses. This contrasts strongly with the use of in German, where the opposite is true. For this reason, the study further investigates the + pattern, and argues that it is not simply an extension of the resumptive function with adverbial clauses to adverbs. Instead, the adverbs seem to further specify how the following sentence connects to the preceding discourse.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.5117/TET2024.1.001.BLOO
2024-06-01
2024-07-21
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/00398691/76/1/TET2024.1.001.BLOO.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.5117/TET2024.1.001.BLOO&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Blomme der doechden (tussen 1475 en 1495). DircPotter. 1904. Bouck der bloemen. P.S.Schoutens (red.) Den Haag: Sdu Uitgevers/Standaard Uitgeverij. Beschikbaar online: https://www.dbnl.org/titels/titel.php?id=pott002ssch01
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Das Rollwagenbüchlein (1555). GeorgWickram. 1979. Das Rollwagenbuͤchlin. Stuttgart: Philipp Reclam jun.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Der Goldene Esel (1538). Ain Schoen Lieblich, auch kurtzweylig gedichte Lucij Apuleij von ainem gulden Esel…: lustig zu lesen / mit schönen figuren zugericht grundtlich verdeutscht, durch Johan Sieder. 1538. Freiburg: Universitätsbibliothek Freiburg. Beschikbaar online: http://dl.ub.unifreiburg.de/diglit/apuleius1538
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Die Schöne Magelone (1535). Müller, Jan-Dirk (red.). 1990. Romane des 15. und 16. Jahrhunderts. Nach den Erstdrucken mit sämtlichen Holzschnitten, 587–678. Frankfurt am Main: Deutscher Klassiker Verlag.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Fortunatus (1509). Schmitt, Ludwig Erich & RenateNoll-Wiemann (red.) 1974. Fortunatus: Von Fortunato und seynem Seckel auch Wünschhütlein. Hildesheim: Georg Olms Verlag.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Huge Scheppel (tussen 1455 en 1472). Huge Scheppel; Königin Sibille Saarbrücken. 1455–1456. Hamburg: Staats-und Universtitätsbibliotek. Codex 12 in scrinio. Beschikbaar online: https://resolver.sub.uni-hamburg.de/kitodo/HANSh495.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. King Ponthus and the fair Sidone (ca. 1450). Mather, Frank Jewett. 1897. King Ponthus and the Fair Sidone. PMLA12 (1). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 1–150.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Melusine (1474 [1456]). Müller, Jan-Dirk (red.). 1990. Romane des 15. und 16. Jahrhunderts. Nach den Erstdrucken mit sämtlichen Holzschnitten, 9–176. Frankfurt am Main: Deutscher Klassiker Verlag.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Ponthus ende Sidonie (1564). Kuiper, Willem & PaulJacob Brüggeman (red.). 2010. Een schoone ende amoruese historie van Ponthus ende die schoone Sydonie. Diplomatische editie. Amsterdam: Bibliotheek van Middelnederlandse Letterkunde. Facsimile: https://dams.antwerpen.be/asset/gUgSkIgrovsbXHNRNCucCUn1/s2WKU7EcPqFL7VrqHm10uGvI
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Pontus und Sidonia (tussen 1450 en 1476). Schneider, Karin (red.). 1961. Pontus und Sidonia: in der Verdeutschung eines Ungenannten aus dem 15. Jahrhundert. Berlin: Erich Schmidt Verlag. Handschrift beschikbaar online: https://www.digitale-sammlungen.de/en/view/bsb00014877
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Rijmbijbel (tussen 1275 en 1300). Jacobvan Maerlant. 1998. Rijmbijbel editie M. Gysseling. Den Haag/Antwerpen: Sdu Uitgevers/Standaard Uitgeverij. Beschikbaar online: https://www.dbnl.org/tekst/maer002mgys01_01/maer002mgys01_01_0001.php
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Tristrant und Isalde (1484). Elsner, Helga (red.). 1989. Tristan und Isolde (Augsburg bei Antonius Sorg, 1484). Hildesheim: Georg Olms Verlag.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Wigalois vom Rade (1519). Melzer, Helmut (red.). 1973. Wigalois. Hildesheim: Georg Olms Verlag.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Wilhelm von Österreich (1481). Podleiszek, Franz (red.). 1936. Volksbücher von Weltweite und Abenteuerlust, 191–284. Leipzig: Verlag von Philipp Reclam jun.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Allen, Cynthia. 1977. Topics in diachronic English syntax. University of Massachusetts: Proefschrift.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Axel, Katrin. 2004. “The syntactic integration of preposed adverbial clauses on the German left periphery: A diachronic perspective.” In The syntax and semantics of the left periphery, geredigeerd door HorstLohnstein & SusanneTrissler, 23–58. Berlijn: Mouton de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Barske, Tobias & AndreaGolato. 2010. “German so: Managing sequence and action.”Text and Talk30 (3): 245–266. https://doi.org/10.1515/TEXT.2010.013.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Bech, Sigrid. 2023. “On Old English swa ‘so’.”Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics8 (1). https://doi.org/10.16995/glossa.5755.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Bertelsmeier-Kierst, Christa. 2014. “Zur Entwicklung des deutschen Prosaromans bis 1500.”Zeitschrift für deutsches Altertum und deutsche Literatur143 (2): 141–165.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Bertelsmeier-Kierst, Christa. 2019. “Durchbruck zur Prosa und der Einfluss des Buchdrucks auf die deutschsprachige Erzählliteratur des 15. Jahrhunderts.” In Early printed narrative literature in western Europe, geredigeerd door BartBesamusca, Elisabethde Bruijn & FrankWillaert, 17–48. Berlijn: Mouton de Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110563016.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Burrdige, Kate. 1993. Syntactic change in Germanic. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Catasso, Nicholas. 2021. “How theoretical is your (historical) syntax? Towards a typology of verb-third in Early Old High German.”The Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics24 (1): 1–48. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10828-021-09123-7.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Cichosz, Anna. 2017. “Inversion after clause-initial adverbs in Old English: The special status of þa, þonne, nu, and swa.”Journal of English Linguistics45 (4): 308–337. https://doi.org/10.1177/0075424217733026.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Eide, Kristin Melum. 2011. “Norwegian (non-V2) declaratives, resumptive elements, and the Wackernagel position.”Nordic Journal of Linguistics34 (2): 179–213. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0332586511000163.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Fischer, Olga. 1992. “Syntax.” In The Cambridge history of the English language, volume II 1066–1476, geredigeerd door NormanBlake, 207–408. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Haeseryn, Walter, Peter-ArnoCoppen, en Folkertde Vriend. 2002. E-ANS (= elektronische versie van de Algemene Nederlandse Spraakkunst. Nijmegen: Katholieke Universiteit Nijmegen. Online beschikbaar: https://e-ans.ivdnt.org, geraadpleegd op 23-09-2022.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Hawkins, John A.2004. Efficiency and complexity in grammars. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Hoffmann, Thomas. 2019. English comparative correlatives. Diachronic and synchronic variation at the lexicon-syntax interface. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Hothorn, Torsten, KurtHornik & AchimZeileis. 2006. “Unbiased recursive partitioning: A conditional inference framework.”Journal of Computational and Graphical Statistics15 (3): 651–674. https://doi.org/10.1198/106186006X133933.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Jansen, Frank. 1980. “Developments in the Dutch left-dislocation structures and the verb-second constraint.” In Papers from the 4th International Conference on Historical Linguistics, Stanford, March 26-30 1979, geredigeerd door Elizabeth C.Traugott, RebeccaLabrum & Susan C.Shepherd, 137–149. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.14.16jan.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Kroch, Anthony. 1989. “Reflexes of grammar in patterns of language change.”Language Variation and Change1: 199–244. https://10.1017/S0954394500000168
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Kuiper, Willem & Paul JacobBrüggeman. 2010. Een schoone ende amoruese historie van Ponthus ende die schoone Sydonie. Diplomatische editie. Amsterdam: Bibliotheek van Middelnederlandse Letterkunde.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. König, Ekkehard & Johanvan der Auwera. 1988. “Clause integration in German and Dutch conditionals, concessive conditionals and concessives.” In Clause combining in discourses, geredigeerd door JohnHaiman & SandraThompson, 101–133. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. König, Ekkehard & LetiziaVezzosi. 2020. “On the development of swā to ModE so and related changes in an atypical group of demonstratives.” In English historical linguistics. Change in structure and meaning. Papers from the XXth ICEHL, geredigeerd door BettelouLos, ClaireCowie, PatrickHoneybone & GraemeTrousdale, 309–344. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.358.13kon.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Lambrecht, Knud. 1994. Information structure and sentence form. Topic, focus, and the mental representation of discourse referents. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Langacker, Ronald W.1987. Foundations of cognitive grammar, volume 1: Theoretical prerequisites. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Langacker, Ronald W.2008. Cognitive grammar: A basic introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Levshina, Natalia. 2015. How to do linguistics with R. Data exploration and statistical analysis. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Links, Meta, AnsVan Kemenade & StefanGrondelaers. 2017. “Correlatives in earlier English: Change and continuity in the expression of interclausal dependencies.”Language variation and change29 (3): 365–392. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954394517000187.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Links, Meta. 2018. “Expressing conditionality in earlier English.”English Language and Linguistics23 (1): 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1360674317000600.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Lötscher, Andreas. 1995. “Herausstellung nach links in diachroner Sicht.”Sprachwissenschaft20 (1): 32–63.
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Mather, Frank Jewett. 1897. King Ponthus and the fair Sidone. PMLA12 (1): 1–150. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/456284.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Meklenborg, Christine. 2020. “Adverbial resumptive particles and verb second.” In Rethinking verb second, geredigeerd door RebeccaWoods & SamWolfe, 90–125. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198844303.003.0005.
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Meltzer-Asscher, Aya. 2021. “Resumptive pronouns in language comprehension and production.”Annual Review of Linguistics7: 177–94. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-linguistics-031320-012726.
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Nordström, Jackie. 2010. “The swedish -construction, a new point of departure.”Working Papers in Scandinavian Syntax85: 37–63.
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Nummenmaa, Liisa. 1973. The uses of so, al so and as in Early Middle English. Helsinki: Société Néophilologique.
    [Google Scholar]
  47. Pasch, Renate, UrsulaBrauße, EvaBreindl & UlrichHermann Waßner. 2003. Hand-buck der Deutschen Konnektoren: Linguistische Grundlagen der Beschreibung und Syntaktische Merkmale der Deutschen Satzverknüpfer (Konjunktionen, Satzadverbien und Partikeln). Berlijn: Walter de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  48. Patocka, Franz. 1998. Zu Linksversetzung im Mittelhochdeutschen. In Deutsche Sprache in Raum und Zeit. Festschrift für Peter Wiesinger zum 60. Geburtstag, geredigeerd door PeterErnst & FranzPatockam, 611–622. Wenen: Edition Praesens.
    [Google Scholar]
  49. Pfeijffer, Ilja Leonard. 2023. Alkibiades. Amsterdam: Uitgeverij de Arbeiderspers.
    [Google Scholar]
  50. Postma, Gertjan. 2002. “De enkelvoudige clitische negatie in het Middelnederlands en de Jespersen-cyclus.”Nederlandse Taalkunde7 (1): 44–82.
    [Google Scholar]
  51. Prince, Ellen F.1997. “On the functions of left-dislocation in English discourse.” In Directions in functional linguistics, geredigeerd door AkioKamio, 117–143. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
    [Google Scholar]
  52. Schneider, Karin, red. 1961. Pontus und Sidonia: In der Verdeutschung eines Ungenannten aus dem 15. Jahrhundert. Berlijn: Erich Schmidt Verlag.
    [Google Scholar]
  53. Sollid, Hilde, and KristinMelum Eide. 2008. “On verb second and the -construction in two mainland Scandinavian contact situations.”Nordlyd34 (3): 7–28. https://doi.org/10.7557/12.121.
    [Google Scholar]
  54. Tagliamonte, Sali A. en R.Harald Baayen. 2012. “Models, forests, and trees of York English: Was/Were variation as a case study for statistical inference.”Language Variation and Change24 (2): 135–178. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954394512000129.
    [Google Scholar]
  55. Talmy, Leonard. 1975. “Figure and ground in complex sentences”. Proceedings of the First Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society1. 419–430.
    [Google Scholar]
  56. Thim-Mabrey, Christiane. 1987. “Adverbiale + so. Distribution und Funktion des Korrelats so.”Sprachwissenschaft12: 180–219.
    [Google Scholar]
  57. Vandenberghe, Roxane. 2002. “Het syntactische gedrag van het Middelnederlandse zinsinleidende doe (‘toen’).”Taal en Tongval15-16: 251–276.
    [Google Scholar]
  58. Vandenberghe, Roxane. 2006. De morfosyntaxis van de Middelnederlandse adverbiale bindwoorden in synchroon en diachhroon perspectief. Universiteit van Gent: Proefschrift.
    [Google Scholar]
  59. Van den Nest, Daan. 2010. “Should conditionals be emergent … Asyndetic conditionals in English and German as a challenge to grammaticalization research.” In Formal evidence in grammaticalization research, geredigeerd door AnVan Linden, Jean-ClaudeVerstraete & KristinDavidse, 93–136. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
    [Google Scholar]
  60. Van der Horst, Joop. 2008, Geschiedenis van de Nederlandse syntaxis. Leuven: Universitaire Pers Leuven.
    [Google Scholar]
  61. Van Kemenade, Ans. 1987. Syntactic case and morphological case in the history of English. Rijksuniversiteit te Utrecht: Proefschrift.
    [Google Scholar]
  62. Van Kemenade, Ans & BettelouLos. 2006. “Discourse adverbs and clausal syntax in Old and Middle English.” In The handbook of the history of English, geredigeerd door Ansvan Kemenade & BettelouLos, 224–248. Malden: Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470757048.ch10.
    [Google Scholar]
  63. Van Riemsdijk, Henk. 1997. “Left dislocation.” In Materials on left dislocation, geredigeerd door ElenaAnagnostopoulou, Henkvan Riemsdijk & FransZwarts, 1–10. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
    [Google Scholar]
  64. Von Polenz, Peter. 2009. Geschichte der deutschen Sprache. 10., völlig neu bearbeitete Auflage von Norbert Richard Wolf. Berlijn: Walter de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  65. Veeninga, Maaike, SanneKuijper & PetraHendriks. 2011. “Steunpronomina die komen overal voor.”TABU39 (3/4): 111–30.
    [Google Scholar]
  66. Wolf, Norbert Richard. 1987. “Satzkonnektoren im Neuhochdeutschen und Mittelhochdeutschen: Prolegomena zu einer Kontrastiven Textsyntax.”Sprachwissenschaft3: 16–48.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.5117/TET2024.1.001.BLOO
Loading
/content/journals/10.5117/TET2024.1.001.BLOO
Loading

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error