Volition ascription to the addressee in a diachronic perspective

References

1. Adams, James N.
   1984 “Female Speech in Latin Comedy”. Antichthon: –. 10.1017/S0066477400003142
   https://doi.org/10.1017/S0066477400003142 [Google Scholar]
2. Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y.
   2010 Imperatives and Commands. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   [Google Scholar]
3. Aloni, Maria
   2021 “Indefinites as Fossils: The Case of Wh-Based Free Choice”. InChiara Gianollo, Klaus von Heusinger and Maria Napoli (eds), Determiners and Quantifiers: Functions, Variation, and Change, –. Leiden and Boston: Brill. 10.1163/9789004473324_008
   https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004473324_008 [Google Scholar]
4. van der Auwera, Johan and Vladimir A. Plungian
   1998 “Modality’s Semantic Map”. Linguistic Typology (): –. 10.1515/lity.1998.2.1.79
   https://doi.org/10.1515/lity.1998.2.1.79 [Google Scholar]
5. Barrios-Lech, Peter
   2016 Linguistic Interaction in Roman Comedy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781316416983
   https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781316416983 [Google Scholar]
6. Broth, Mathias, Jakob Cromdal and Lena Levin
   2019 “Telling the Other’s Side: Formulating Others’ Mental States in Driver Training”. Language & Communication: –. 10.1016/j.langcom.2018.04.007
   https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langcom.2018.04.007 [Google Scholar]
7. Brown, Penelope and Stephen C. Levinson
   1987 Politeness: Some Universals in Language Use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511813085
   https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511813085 [Google Scholar]
8. Caffi, Claudia and Richard W. Janney
   1994 “Toward a Pragmatics of Emotive Communication”. Journal of Pragmatics (): –. 10.1016/0378‑2166(94)90115‑5
   https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(94)90115-5 [Google Scholar]
9. Chierchia, Gennaro
   2013 Logic in Grammar: Polarity, Free Choice, and Intervention. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199697977.001.0001
   https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199697977.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
10. Childs, Carrie
    2012a “Directing and Requesting: Two Interactive Uses of the Mental State Terms ‘Want’ and ‘Need’”. Text & Talk (): –. 10.1515/text‑2012‑0034
    https://doi.org/10.1515/text-2012-0034 [Google Scholar]
11. Childs, Carrie
    2012b “‘I’m Not X, I Just Want Y’: Formulating ‘Wants’ in Interaction”. Discourse Studies (): –. 10.1177/1461445612439819
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445612439819 [Google Scholar]
12. Company Company, Concepción
    2016 “Gramaticalización y cambio sintáctico”. InJavier Gutiérrez-Rexach (ed.), Enciclopedia de lingüística hispánica (‘Encyclopedia of Hispanic Linguistics’), –. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
13. Cormany, Edward
    2012 “Velle-type Prohibitions in Latin: The Rise and Fall of a Morphosyntactic Conspiracy”. InAns van Kemenade and Nynke de Haas (eds), Historical Linguistics 2009: Selected Papers from the 19th International Conference on Historical Linguistics, –. Nijmegen. 10–14 August 2009. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/cilt.320.18cor
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.320.18cor [Google Scholar]
14. Curl, Traci S.
    2006 “Offers of Assistance: Constraints on Syntactic Design”. Journal of Pragmatics (): –. 10.1016/j.pragma.2005.09.004
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2005.09.004 [Google Scholar]
15. Dayal, Veneeta
    1998 “Any as Inherently Modal”. Linguistics and Philosophy (): –. 10.1023/A:1005494000753
    https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005494000753 [Google Scholar]
16. Degano, Marco and Maria Aloni
    2022 “Indefinites and Free Choice: When the Past Matters”. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory: –. 10.1007/s11049‑021‑09518‑x
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11049-021-09518-x [Google Scholar]
17. Dell’Oro, Francesca
    . Forthcoming. “A Comparative Approach to want-constructions as Sources of Reported-Speech and Reported-Thought Evidential Markers: Latin uolo vis-à-vis its Cognates German wollen and French vouloir”.
    [Google Scholar]
18. Deppermann, Arnulf
    2014 “‘Don’t Get Me Wrong’: Recipient Design by Using Negation to Constrain an Action’s Interpretation”. InSusanne Günther, Wolfgang Imo and Jörg Bücker (eds), Grammar and Dialogism: Sequential, Syntactic, and Prosodic Patterns between Emergence and Sedimentation, –. Berlin: Walter De Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110358612.15
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110358612.15 [Google Scholar]
19. Deppermann, Arnulf and Michael Haugh
    (eds) 2022 Action Ascription in Interaction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781108673419
    https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108673419 [Google Scholar]
20. Deppermann, Arnulf and Julia Kaiser
    2022 “Intention Ascriptions as a Means to Coordinate Own Actions with Others’ Actions”. InArnulf Deppermann and Michael Haugh (eds), Action Ascription in Interaction, –. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781108673419.008
    https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108673419.008 [Google Scholar]
21. Devos, Maud and Daniël Van Olmen
    2013 “Describing and Explaining the Variation of Bantu Imperatives and Prohibitives”. Studies in Language (): –. 10.1075/sl.37.1.01dev
    https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.37.1.01dev [Google Scholar]
22. Dickey, Eleanor
    2019 “When Please Ceases to Be Polite: The Use of sis in Early Latin”. Journal of Historical Pragmatics (): –. 10.1075/jhp.00029.dic
    https://doi.org/10.1075/jhp.00029.dic [Google Scholar]
23. Diewald, Gabriele
    2011 “Pragmaticalization (Defined) as Grammaticalization of Discourse Functions”. Linguistics (): –. 10.1515/ling.2011.011
    https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.2011.011 [Google Scholar]
24. Drew, Paul and Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen
    (eds) 2014 Requesting in Social Interaction. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/slsi.26
    https://doi.org/10.1075/slsi.26 [Google Scholar]
25. Fedriani, Chiara
    2021 “Conditional Clauses as Polite Modifiers in Latin: si placet between Pragmaticalization and Language Contact”. Transactions of the Philological Society: –. 10.1111/1467‑968X.12223
    https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-968X.12223 [Google Scholar]
26. Fruyt, Michèle
    2004 “Some Cases of Grammaticalisation in Latin: Subordinating Conjunctions, Concessivity and Modal Lexemes”, Classica et mediaevalia (): –.
    [Google Scholar]
27. Fruyt, Michèle
    2011 “Grammaticalization in Latin”. InPh. Baldi and P. Cuzzolin (eds), New Perspectives on Historical Latin Syntax, –. (Volume 4: Complex Sentences, Grammaticalization, Typology.) Berlin and Boston: de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110253412.661
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110253412.661 [Google Scholar]
28. Gianollo, Chiara
    2018 Indefinites between Latin and Romance. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oso/9780198812661.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198812661.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
29. Harjunpää, Katariina
    2021 “Brokering Co-participants’ Volition in Request and Offer Sequences”. InJan Lindström, Ritva Laury, Anssi Peräkylä and Marja-Leena Sorjonen (eds), Intersubjectivity in Action, –. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.326.07har
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.326.07har [Google Scholar]
30. Haspelmath, Martin
    1997 Indefinite Pronouns. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
31. Haspelmath, Martin and Ekkehard König
    1998 “Concessive Conditionals in the Languages of Europe”. InJohan van der Auwera (ed.), Adverbial Constructions in the Languages of Europe, –. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110802610.563
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110802610.563 [Google Scholar]
32. Heine, Bernd
    2003 “Grammaticalization”. InBrian D. Joseph and Richard D. Janda (eds), The Handbook of Historical Linguistics, –. Malden, Massachusetts: Blackwell. 10.1002/9780470756393.ch18
    https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470756393.ch18 [Google Scholar]
33. Hofmann, Johann Baptist
    1951 Lateinische Umgangssprache (‘Colloquial Latin’). Heidelberg: Winter.
    [Google Scholar]
34. Hopper, Paul J.
    1991 “On Some Principles of Grammaticalization”. InElizabeth Closs Traugott and Bernd Heine (eds), Approaches to Grammaticalization, –. (Volume .) Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.19.1.04hop
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.19.1.04hop [Google Scholar]
35. Huddleston, Rodney D.
    2017 “Clause Type and Illocutionary Force”. InRodney Huddleston and Geoffrey K. Pullum (eds), The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language, –. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
36. Kendrick, Kobin H. and Paul Drew
    2016 “Recruitment: Offers, Requests, and the Organization of Assistance in Interaction”. Research on Language and Social Interaction (): –. 10.1080/08351813.2016.1126436
    https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2016.1126436 [Google Scholar]
37. Kuryłowicz, Jerzy
    1975 “The Evolution of Grammatical Categories”. InJerzy Kuryłowicz (ed.), Esquisses linguistiques (‘Linguistic Sketches’), –. (Volume .) Munich: Fink.
    [Google Scholar]
38. Leech, Geoffrey N.
    2014 The Pragmatics of Politeness. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195341386.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195341386.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
39. Lehmann, Christian
    1995 (1982) Thoughts on Grammaticalization. A Programmatic Sketch. Munich: Lincom Europa. (First published in the Arbeiten des Kölner Universalien-Projekts, Volume 48, 1982.)
    [Google Scholar]
40. Leumann, Manu, Johann Baptist Hofmann and Anton Szantyr
    1977 Lateinische Grammatik (‘Latin Grammar’). (Volume .) Munich: C.H. Beck.
    [Google Scholar]
41. Leumann, Manu, Johann Baptist Hofmann and Anton Szantyr
    2016 Lateinische Grammatik (‘Latin Grammar’). (Volume .) Munich: C.H. Beck.
    [Google Scholar]
42. livMartin Kümmel and Helmut Rix
    liv 2001 Lexikon der indogermanischen Verben: die Wurzeln und ihre Primärstammbildungen (‘Lexicon of Indo-European Verbs: The Roots and Their Primary Stem Formations’). Edited byMartin Kümmel and Helmut Rix. (Second edition.) Wiesbaden: L. Reichert.
    [Google Scholar]
43. Lo Baido, Maria Cristina and Caterina Mauri
    2022 “The Encoding of Irrelevance in Discourse: tanto between Concession and Justification”. Cuadernos de Filología Italiana (): –. 10.5209/cfit.79601
    https://doi.org/10.5209/cfit.79601 [Google Scholar]
44. Loeb Classical Library Database. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press
    Loeb Classical Library Database. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press. AccessedJanuary 2025at: https://www.loebclassics.com/
45. Matthews, Richard
    1991 Words and Worlds: On the Linguistic Analysis of Modality. Frankfurt am Main and New York: Peter Lang.
    [Google Scholar]
46. Narrog, Heiko
    2012 Modality, Subjectivity, and Semantic Change: a Cross-Linguistic Perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199694372.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199694372.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
47. Nuyts, Jan
    2016 “Analyses of the Modal Meanings”. InJan Nuyts and Johan van der Auwera (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Modality and Mood, –. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
48. old (Oxford Latin Dictionary)P. G. W. Glare
    old (Oxford Latin Dictionary) 2016 (Edited byP. G. W. Glare.) Oxford: Oxford University Press.
49. Pinkster, Harm
    2015 The Oxford Latin Syntax: The Simple Clause. (Volume .) Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199283613.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199283613.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
50. Pinkster, Harm
    2021 The Oxford Latin Syntax: The Complex Sentence and Discourse. (Volume .) Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oso/9780199230563.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780199230563.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
51. Portner, Paul
    2009 Modality. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oso/9780199292424.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780199292424.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
52. Ramat, Paolo
    2015 “Grammaticalization”. InJames D. Wright (ed.), International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences, –. (Volume .) (Second edition.) Amsterdam: Elsevier. 10.1016/B978‑0‑08‑097086‑8.53011‑6
    https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-097086-8.53011-6 [Google Scholar]
53. Risselada, Rodie
    1993 Imperatives and Other Directive Expressions in Latin: A Study in the Pragmatics of a Dead Language. Amsterdam: J.C. Gieben. 10.1163/9789004408975
    https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004408975 [Google Scholar]
54. Rosén, Hannah
    2009 “Coherence, Sentence Modification, and Sentence-Part Modification — the Contribution of Particles”. InPhilip Baldi and Pierluigi Cuzzolin (eds), New Perspectives on Historical Latin Syntax, –. Berlin: de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110205626.317
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110205626.317 [Google Scholar]
55. Ruiz Yamuza, Emilia
    2022 “Parenthetical Conditionals and Insubordinate Clauses in Ancient Greek. Protasis with βούλομαι (boúlomai) and (ἐ)θέλω (ethélō)”. Journal of Greek Linguistics (): –. 10.1163/15699846‑02202002
    https://doi.org/10.1163/15699846-02202002 [Google Scholar]
56. Sperber, Dan and Deirdre Wilson
    1995 Relevance: Communication and Cognition. (Second edition.) Oxford, UK and Cambridge, Massachusetts: Wiley-Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
57. Spevak, Olga
    2005 La concession en latin (‘Concession in Latin’). Bruxelles: Latomus.
    [Google Scholar]
58. Traugott, Elizabeth Closs
    2003 “Constructions in Grammaticalization”. InBrian Joseph and Richard Janda (eds), The Handbook of Historical Linguistics, –. Oxford: Blackwell. 10.1002/9780470756393.ch20
    https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470756393.ch20 [Google Scholar]
59. Traugott, Elizabeth Closs and Graeme Trousdale
    2013 Constructionalization and Constructional Changes. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199679898.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199679898.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
60. Untermann, Jürgen
    2000 Wörterbuch des Oskisch-Umbrischen (‘Dictionary of Oscan-Umbrian’). Heidelberg: Winter.
    [Google Scholar]
61. Van der Horst, Joop M.
    2008 Geschiedenis van de Nederlandse syntaxis (‘History of Dutch Syntax’). Leuven: Universitaire Pers Leuven.
    [Google Scholar]
62. Walde, Alois and Johann Baptist Hofmann
    1965 Lateinisches etymologisches Wörterbuch (‘Latin Etymological Dictionary’). (Third edition.) Heidelberg: C. Winter.
    [Google Scholar]