1995
DOI: 10.1017/s1040820700001578
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Toward a Cognitive Explanation of Perfect Auxiliary Variation: Some Modal and Aspectual Effects in the History of Germanic

Abstract: This paper introduces a cognitive framework for perfect auxiliary selection (HAVE versus BE) in Germanic based on transitive (HAVE) and mutative (BE) prototypes as affected by lexical aspect and transitivity parameters (Hopper and Thompson 1980). The phenomenon of "HAVE-switch" is exemplified in the history of several Germanic languages. Here numerous modal and aspectual factors shift the perfect auxiliary with mutatives from the customary BE to HAVE. This shift is then explained in terms of the proposed mode… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
13
0
2

Year Published

2006
2006
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
5
3
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 23 publications
(15 citation statements)
references
References 9 publications
0
13
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…33 31 Auxiliary selection has been reported to be sensitive to similar factors in many other languages. See, for example, Shannon 1995 andLedgeway 2003 for discussion of such patterns in Germanic and Romance varieties, respectively. It is unclear whether the account we propose here can be directly extended to all of these cases, as the reported restrictions on BE are not always as strong as we have shown here, or are limited to certain verb classes (as Cennamo and Sorace (2007:76) claim for verbs of indefinite change in Paduan).…”
Section: Structural Detailsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…33 31 Auxiliary selection has been reported to be sensitive to similar factors in many other languages. See, for example, Shannon 1995 andLedgeway 2003 for discussion of such patterns in Germanic and Romance varieties, respectively. It is unclear whether the account we propose here can be directly extended to all of these cases, as the reported restrictions on BE are not always as strong as we have shown here, or are limited to certain verb classes (as Cennamo and Sorace (2007:76) claim for verbs of indefinite change in Paduan).…”
Section: Structural Detailsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Evidence for variation regarding the auxiliary selection of intransitive verbs can already be found in early texts (cf. Jacob 1996;Elvira González 2001 Examples such as (1) and (2) demonstrate what has been called the 'irrealis effect' in auxiliary selection (Shannon 1996). As in Old English, Old Spanish aver + PtP anteriors 2 disproportionately often occur in contexts that display irrealis modality or negation (Stolova 2006).…”
Section: Semantic-displacement Hypothesismentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A preference for HAVE in modal contexts in older Germanic languages other than English was already noted by Kern (1912) and Johannisson (1958). Shannon (1995), largely following Kern, discusses the effects of modality on auxiliary selection in Middle Dutch and Middle Low German, noting for Middle Dutch "a strong, though by no means absolute tendency for mutative verbs, which of course are otherwise normally conjugated with BE in the perfect, to take HAVE in irrealis contexts" [p. 138] Johannisson (1958, p. 108) identifies "the subjunctive expressing unreality" as a key factor favoring HAVE with verbs that otherwise took BE in Old Swedish (though, interestingly enough, not in Old West Norse).…”
Section: Some Cross-linguistic Notesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The only theory of which we are aware which specifically addresses the counterfactual effect is that proposed by Shannon (1995). 27 Shannon proposes that BE is most strongly selected by clauses that approximate what he calls a mutative intransitive prototype, which is defined in terms of a cluster of semantic properties.…”
Section: Problems For Other Theories Of Auxiliary Selectionmentioning
confidence: 99%