Skip to main content
Log in

In a Mediative Mood: The Semantics of the German Reportive Subjunctive

  • Published:
Natural Language Semantics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper aims at an account of the German “reportive subjunctive”, where the mood signals that the proposition is the object of an utterance report. The report can be explicit in the sentence or in the context, or more or less implicit. We interpret these uses as a more or less local verification or accommodation of a presupposition introduced by the subjunctive, thus accounting for a range of facts and contributing to the theory of presuppositions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abusch, Dorit: 1997, ‘Sequence of Tense and Temporal De Re’ Linguistics and Philosophy 20, 1–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Asher, Nicholas: 1993, Reference to Abstract Objects in Discourse, Kluwer, Dordrecht.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beaver, David: 1997, ‘Presupposition’, in J. van Benthem and A. ter Meulen (eds.), Handbook of Logic and Language, pp. 939–1008. Elsevier, Amsterdam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bybee, Joan and Suzanne Fleischmann (eds.): 1995, Modality in Grammar and Discourse. Benjamins, Amsterdam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bybee, Joan, Revere Perkins, and William Pagliuca: 1994, The Evolution of Grammar. Tense, Aspect, and Modality in the Languages of the World. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dal, Ingerid: 1962, Kurze deutsche Syntax auf historischer Grund lage. Niemeyer, Tübingen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eisenberg, Peter: 1994, Grundriss der deutschen Grammatik, 3rd edn. Metzler, Stuttgart.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fabricius-Hansen, Cathrine: 2002, ‘Nicht-direktes Referat im Deutschen — Typologie und Abgrenzungsprobleme’, in C. Fabricius-Hansen, O. Leirbukt, and O. Letnes (eds.), Modus, Modalverben, Modalpartikeln, pp. 6–29. Wissenschafflicher Verlag, Trier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fabricius-Hansen, Cathrine; 2003, ‘Wessen Redehintergrund? In direktheitskontexte aus kontrastiver Sicht (Deutsch — Norwegisch — Englisch)’ in O. Leirbukt (ed.), Tempus/Temporalität und Modus/Modalität im Deutschen — auch in kotrastiver Perspektive, pp. 119–155. stauffenburg, Tübingen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fabricius-Hansen, Cathrine: (forthcoming), Über den deutschen Konjunktiv. Tübingen.

  • Fabricius-Hansen, Cathrine and Arnim von Stechow: 1989, ‘Explikative und implikative Nominalerweiterungen im Deutschen’, Zeitschrift für Sprachwissenschaft 8, 173–205.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frank, Anette: 1997, Context Dependence in Modal Constructions. Arbeitspapiere des SFB 340 ‘Sprachtheoretische Grundlagen der Computerlinguistik’ 91. IBM Deutschland, Tübingen/Stuttgart.

    Google Scholar 

  • Geurts, Bart: 1999, Presuppositions and Pronouns. Elsevier, Amsterdam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Groenendijk, Jeroen, and Martin Stokhof: 1982, ‘Semantic Analysis of wh Complements’, Linguistics and Philosophy 5, 175–223.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heim, Irene: 1983, ‘On the Projection Problem for Presuppositions’, in M. Barlow, D. Flickinger, and M. Wescoat (eds.), Proceedings of WCCFL 2, pp. 114–125. Stanford University, Stanford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heim, Irene, and Angelika Kratzer: 1997, Semantics in Generative Grammar. Blackwell, Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jäger, Siegfried: 1971, Der Konjunktiv in der deutschen Sprache der Gegenwart. Hüber, München.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kamp, Hans: 2001a, ‘The Importance of Presupposition’ in C. Rohrer and A. Rossdeutscher (eds.), Linguistic Form and its Computation. CSLI Publications, Stanford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kamp, Hans: 2001b, ‘Presupposition Computation and Presupposition Justification: One Aspect of the Interpretation of Multi Sentence Discourse’, in M. Bras and L. Vieu (eds.), Semantic and Pragmatic Issues in Discourse and Dialogue: Experimenting with Current Dynamic Theories, pp. 57–84. Elsevier, Amsterdam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kamp, Hans, and Antje Rossdeutscher: 1992, Remarks on Lexical Structure, DRS Construction, and Lexically Driven Inferences, Arbeitspapiere des SFB 340 21, University of Stuttgart.

  • Karttunen, Lauri: 1974, ‘Presupposition and Linguistic Context’ Theoretical Linguistics 1, 181–194.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kasper, Walther: 1987, Semantik des Konjunktivs II in Deklarativsätzen des Deutschen. Niemeyer, Tübingen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Partee, Barbara: 1973, ‘Some Structural Analogies between Tenses and Pronouns in English’, Journal of Philosophy 70, 601–609.

    Google Scholar 

  • Plank, Frans: 1986, ‘Über den Personenwechsel und den anderer deiktischer Kategorien in der wiedergegebenen Rede’, Zeitschrift, für germanistische Linguistik 14, 284–308.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pütz, Herbert: 1989, ‘Referat — vor allem berichtete Rede — im Deutschen und Norwegischen’, in W. Abraham and T. Janssen (eds.), Tempus — Aspekt — Modus. Die lexikalischen und grammatischen Formen in den germanischen Sprachen, pp. 183–223. Niemeyer, Tübingen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reis, Marga: 1997, ‘Zum syntaktischen Status unselbständiger Ver bzweitsätze’, in C. Dürscheid, K. Ramers, and M. Schwarz (eds.), Sprache im Fokus, pp. 121–144. Niemeyer, Tübingen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, Craige: 1989, ‘Modal Subordination and Pronominal Anaphora in Discourse’, Linguistics and Philosophy 12, 683–721.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sæbø, Kjell Johan: 1996, ‘Anaphoric Presuppositions and Zero Anaphora’, Linguistics and Philosophy 19, 187–209.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sæbø, Kjell Johan: 2001, ‘The Semantics of Scandinavian Free Choice Items’, Linguistics and Philosophy 24, 737–788.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schlenker, Philippe: 2003, ‘A Plea for Monsters’, Linguistics and Philosophy 26, 29–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, Carlota: 2002, ‘Perspective and Point of View: Accounting for Subjectivity’, in H. Hasselgård et al. (eds.), Information Structure in a Cross-linguistic Perspective, pp. 63–80. Rodopi, Amsterdam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steinberg, Günter: 1971, Erlebte Rede. Ihre Eigenart und ihre Formen in neuerer deutscher, französischer und englischer Erzählliteratur. Alfred Kuimmerle, Göppingen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stirling, Leslie: 1993, Switch-Reference and Discourse Representation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thieroff, Rolf: 1992, Das finite Verb im Deutschen. Narr, Tübingen.

    Google Scholar 

  • vander Auwera, Johan and Wladimir Plungian: 1998, ‘Modality's Semantic Map’, Linguistic Typology 2, 79–124.

    Google Scholar 

  • van der Sandt, Rob: 1992, ‘Presupposition Projection as Anaphora Resolution’, Journal of Semantics 9, 333–377.

    Google Scholar 

  • von Roncador, Manfred: 1988, Zwischen direkter und indirekter Rede. Niemeyer, Tübingen.

    Google Scholar 

  • von Stechow, Arnim: 1995, ‘On the Proper Treatment of Tense’, in M. Simons and T. Galloway (eds.), Proceedings of SALT 5, pp. 362–386. Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y.

    Google Scholar 

  • von Stechow, Arnim: 2003, ‘Binding by Verbs: Tense, Person and Mood under Attitudes’, unpublished manuscript, University of Tübingen.

  • Wichter, Sigurd: 1978, Probleme des Modusbegriffs im Deutschen. Narr, Tübingen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zifonun, Gisela, Ludger Hoffmann und Brun. Strecker: 1997, Grammatik der deutschen Sprache. De Gruyter, Berlin.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Fabricius-Hansen, C., Johan Sæbø, K. In a Mediative Mood: The Semantics of the German Reportive Subjunctive. Natural Language Semantics 12, 213–257 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1023/B:NALS.0000034514.27887.d9

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/B:NALS.0000034514.27887.d9

Keywords

Navigation