1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Journal of Historical Linguistics
  4. Volume 7, Issue 1
  5. Article
Volume 7, Issue 1-2
  • ISSN 2210-2116
  • E-ISSN: 2210-2124
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

This article demonstrates the diachronic development of present-day Dutch as an evidential copular verb meaning ‘to seem, based on (auditory) evidence’ from the Middle Dutch intransitive verb meaning ‘to give off a clear sound’. I identify four semantic stages in the history of , which are divided by processes of semantic bleaching (14th–16th century, 16th–17th century) and subjectification and copularization (during the 16th century). I claim that the process of copularization is the trigger of both the evidential meaning and the subjective interpretation that copular constructions with receive. Furthermore, I show that, unlike the development of ‘look’ and ‘feel’ from cognitive perception verbs, has developed much like the Dutch copular verbs ‘seem’ and ‘turn out’: from an intransitive verb with a sensory-related meaning.

© John Benjamins Publishing Company
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/jhl.7.1-2.08poo
2017-11-23
2025-04-21

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/jhl.7.1-2.08poo
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y.
    2003 Evidentiality in Typological Perspective. Studies in Evidentiality ( Typological Studies in Language 54 ) ed. by Alexandra Y. Aikhenvald & Robert M. W. Dixon , 33–62. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing. doi: 10.1075/tsl.54.04aik
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.54.04aik [Google Scholar]
  2. Aikhenvald, Alexandra. Y.
    2004 Evidentiality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Asudeh, Ash
    2012 The Logic of Pronominal Resumption. Oxford: Oxford University Press. doi: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199206421.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199206421.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  4. Asudeh, Ash & Ida Toivonen
    2012 Copy Raising and Perception. Natural Language Linguistic Theory30:2.321–380. doi: 10.1007/s11049‑012‑9168‑2
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s11049-012-9168-2 [Google Scholar]
  5. Anderson, Lloyd B.
    1986 Evidentials, Paths of Change, and Mental Maps: Typologically regular asymmetries. In Wallace Chafe & Johanna Nichols , eds., 273–312.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Barron, Julia
    1997 LFG and the History of Raising Verbs. Proceedings of the LFG97 Conferenceed. by Miriam Butt & Tracy Holloway King . Stanford: CSLI.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Bender, Emily & Dan Flickinger
    1999 Diachronic Evidence for Extended Argument Structure. Constraints and Resources in Natural Language Syntax and Semanticsed. by Gosse Bouma , Erhard W. Hinrichs , Geert-Jan M. Kruij , & Richard T. Oehrle , 3–19. Stanford: CSLI.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Boas, Franz
    1938 General Anthropology. Boston: D.C. Heath and Company.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Brinton, Laurel J. & Donna Brinton
    2010 The Linguistic Structure of Modern English. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/z.156
     https://doi.org/10.1075/z.156 [Google Scholar]
  10. Bybee, Joan. L.
    1985 Morphology: A study of the relation between meaning and form. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/tsl.9
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.9 [Google Scholar]
  11. Chafe, Wallace. L. & Johanna Nichols
    eds. 1986 Evidentiality: The linguistic coding of epistemology. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishers.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Cruschina, Silvio
    2015 The Expression of Evidentiality and Epistemicity: Cases of grammaticalization in Italian and Sicilian. Probus27:1.1–31. doi: 10.1515/probus‑2013‑0006
     https://doi.org/10.1515/probus-2013-0006 [Google Scholar]
  13. Cruschina, Silvio & Eva-M. Remberger
    2008 Hearsay and Reported Speech: Evidentiality in Romance. Rivista di Grammatica Generativa33.95–116.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. De Haan, Ferdinand
    1999 Evidentiality and Epistemic Modality: Setting boundaries. Southwest Journal of Linguistics18:1.83–101.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. 2007 Raising as Grammaticalization: The case of Germanic SEEM-verbs. Italian Journal of Linguistics19:1.129–150.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. 2013 The Interaction of Modality and Negation: A typological study. London: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. De Smet, Hendrick & Jean-Christophe Verstraete
    2006 Coming to Terms with Subjectivity. Cognitive Linguistics17.365–392.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Diewald, Gabriele & Elena Smirnova
    2010 Evidentiality in German: Linguistic realization and regularities in grammaticalization. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. doi: 10.1515/9783110241037
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110241037 [Google Scholar]
  19. Gisborne, Nikolas & Jasper Holmes
    2007 A History of English Evidential Verbs of Appearance. English Language and Linguistics11:1.1–29. doi: 10.1017/S1360674306002097
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S1360674306002097 [Google Scholar]
  20. Haiman, John
    1991 From V/2 to Subject Clitics: Evidence from Northern Italian. Approaches to Grammaticalization. Vol. II. Focus on Types of Grammatical Markersed. by Elizabeth C. Traugott & Bernd Heine , 135–157. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/tsl.19.2.08hai
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.19.2.08hai [Google Scholar]
  21. Haßler, Gerda
    2002 Evidentiality and Reported Speech in Romance Languages. Reported Discourse: A meeting ground for different linguistic domains ( Typological Studies in Language 52 ) ed. by Tom Güldemann & Manfred Von Roncador , 143–172. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/tsl.52.11has
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.52.11has [Google Scholar]
  22. 2015 Evidentiality and the Expression of Speaker’s Stance in Romance Languages and German. Discourse Studies17:2.182–209. doi: 10.1177/1461445614564522
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445614564522 [Google Scholar]
  23. Helle, Philipp
    2006 A Contrastive Analysis of Perception Verbs in English and German. Munich: GRIN Verlag.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Holierhoek, Christina M. G.
    1978 Auditory Verbs in Dutch. Linguistics in the Netherlands 1974–1976ed. by Wim Zonneveld , 81–101. Lisse: Peter de Ridder Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Iatridou, Sabine
    1990 About AgrP. Linguistic Inquiry21:4.551–576.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Kim, Jong-Bok
    2014 English Copy Raising Constructions: Argument realization and characterization condition. Linguistics52:1.167–203. doi: 10.1515/ling‑2013‑0059
     https://doi.org/10.1515/ling-2013-0059 [Google Scholar]
  27. Koring, Loes
    2013 Seemingly Similar: Subjects and displacement in grammar, processing, and acquisition. Utrecht University PhD Thesis.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Landau, Idan
    2009 This Construction Looks Like a Copy is Optional. Linguistic Inquiry40:2.343–346. doi: 10.1162/ling.2009.40.2.343
     https://doi.org/10.1162/ling.2009.40.2.343 [Google Scholar]
  29. Langacker, Ronald W.
    1990 Subjectification. Cognitive Linguistics1.5–38. doi: 10.1515/cogl.1990.1.1.5
     https://doi.org/10.1515/cogl.1990.1.1.5 [Google Scholar]
  30. Lasersohn, Peter
    1995 Sounds Like ‘Like’. Linguistic Analysis25:1–2.70–77.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Lesage, Clair , Nalini Ramlakhan , Ida Toivonen , & Chris Wildman
    2015 The Reliability of Testimony and Perception: Connecting epistemology and linguistic evidentiality. Proceedings of the 37th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Societyed. by David C. Noelle , Rick Dale , Anne S. Warlaumont , Jeff Yoshimi , Teenie Matlock , Carolyn D. Jennings , & Paul P. Maglio . Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Levin, Beth
    1993 English Verb Classes and Alternations: A preliminary investigation. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Lohndal, Terje
    2009 The Copula Cycle. Cyclical Changeed. by Elly van Gelderen , 209–242. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/la.146.13loh
     https://doi.org/10.1075/la.146.13loh [Google Scholar]
  34. Maling, Joan
    1983 Transitive Adjectives: A case of categorial reanalysis. Linguistic Categories: Auxiliaries and related puzzles1ed. by Frank Heny & Barry Richards , 253–289. Dordrecht: Reidel. doi: 10.1007/978‑94‑009‑6989‑6_8
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-6989-6_8 [Google Scholar]
  35. Matushansky, Ora
    2002 Tipping the Scales: The syntax of scalarity in the complement of seem. Syntax5:3.219–276. doi: 10.1111/1467‑9612.00052
     https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9612.00052 [Google Scholar]
  36. Palmer, Frank. R.
    1986 Mood and Modality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  37. Poortvliet, Marjolein
    2016 Copy Raising in English, German and Dutch: Synchrony and diachrony. Journal of Germanic Linguistics28:4.370–402. doi: 10.1017/S1470542716000167
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S1470542716000167 [Google Scholar]
  38. . Forthcoming. Perception and Predication Copular Evidentials: A synchronic and diachronic study of descriptive perception verbs in Dutch. University of Oxford PhD Thesis.
     [Google Scholar]
  39. Potsdam, Eric & Jeffrey T. Runner
    2001 Richard Returns: Copy raising and its implications. Proceedings of CLS37.453–468.
     [Google Scholar]
  40. Rett, Jessica & Nina Hyams
    2014 The Acquisition of Syntactically Encoded Evidentiality. Language Acquisition21:2.173–198 doi: 10.1080/10489223.2014.884572
     https://doi.org/10.1080/10489223.2014.884572 [Google Scholar]
  41. Rogers, Andy
    1971 Three Kinds of Physical Perception Verbs. Papers from the Seventh Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, April 16–18, 206–222. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.
     [Google Scholar]
  42. 1972 Another Look at Flip Perception Verbs. Papers from the Eighth Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Societyed. by Paul M. Peranteau , Judith N. Levi , & Gloria C. Phares , 303–315. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.
     [Google Scholar]
  43. 1974 Physical Perception Verbs in English: A study in lexical relatedness. University of California, Los Angeles PhD Thesis.
     [Google Scholar]
  44. Squartini, Mario
    2004 Disentangling Evidentiality and Epistemic Modality in Romance. Lingua114:7.873–895. doi: 10.1016/S0024‑3841(03)00064‑0
     https://doi.org/10.1016/S0024-3841(03)00064-0 [Google Scholar]
  45. 2012 Evidentiality in Interaction: The concessive use of the Italian future between grammar and discourse. Journal of Pragmatics44:15.2116–2128. doi: 10.1016/j.pragma.2012.09.008
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2012.09.008 [Google Scholar]
  46. Traugott, Elizabeth C.
    1996 Subjectification and the Development of Epistemic Meaning: The case of promise and threaten . Modality in Germanic Languages: Historical and comparative perspectivesed. by Swan Toril & Olaf J. Westvik , 185–210. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
     [Google Scholar]
  47. Traugott, Elizabeth C. & Richard B. Dasher
    2001 Regularity in Semantic Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511486500
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511486500 [Google Scholar]
  48. Van Gelderen, Elly
    2014 Changes in Psych-verbs: A reanalysis of little v.Catalan Journal of Linguistics13.99–122.
     [Google Scholar]
  49. 2015 The Copula Cycle. Lingue e Linguaggio14:2.287–301
     [Google Scholar]
  50. Viberg, Åke
    1984 The Verbs of Perception: A typological study. Explanations for Language Universalsed. by Brian Butterworth , Bernard Comrie , & Östen Dahl , 123–162. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. doi: 10.1515/9783110868555.123
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110868555.123 [Google Scholar]
  51. 2001 The Verbs of Perception. Language Typology and Language Universals: An International Handbooked. by Martin Haspelmath , Ekkehard König , Wulf Oesterreicher , & Wolfgang Raible . Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter
     [Google Scholar]
  52. Vliegen, Maurice
    2011 Evidentiality. Dutch ‘seem’ and ‘appear’ verbs: blijken, lijken, schijnen . Linguistics in the Netherlands28:1.125–137.
     [Google Scholar]
  53. Whitt, Richard J.
    2009 Auditory Evidentiality in English and German: The case of verbs. Lingua119:7.1083–1095. doi: 10.1016/j.lingua.2008.11.001
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2008.11.001 [Google Scholar]
  54. 2010a Evidentiality, Polysemy, and the Verbs of Perception in English and German. Linguistic Realization of Evidentiality in European Languagesed. by Gabriele Diewald & Elena Smirnova , 249–279. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
     [Google Scholar]
  55. 2010b Evidentiality and Perception Verbs in English and German. Oxford: Peter Lang. doi: 10.3726/978‑3‑0353‑0306‑3
     https://doi.org/10.3726/978-3-0353-0306-3 [Google Scholar]
  56. 2011 (Inter)Subjectivity and Evidential Perception Verbs in English and German. Journal of Pragmatics43:1.347–360. doi: 10.1016/j.pragma.2010.07.015
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2010.07.015 [Google Scholar]
  57. Willet, Thomas. L.
    1988 A Cross-Linguistic Survey of the Grammaticalization of Evidentiality. Studies in Language12.51–97. doi: 10.1075/sl.12.1.04wil
     https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.12.1.04wil [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/jhl.7.1-2.08poo
Loading
The grammaticalization of Dutch klinken
Journal of Historical Linguistics 7, 190 (2017); https://doi.org/10.1075/jhl.7.1-2.08poo
/content/journals/10.1075/jhl.7.1-2.08poo
/content/journals/10.1075/jhl.7.1-2.08poo
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): copularization; evidentiality; grammaticalization; perception verbs; subjectification

Most Cited

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