1887
Volume 44, Issue 1
  • ISSN 0378-4177
  • E-ISSN: 1569-9978
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

This article explores the connection between irrealis mood and type of complement clause. It is argued that irrealis performs different functions in propositional and state-of-affairs complements, reflecting either irreality (non-actualisation in a situation that often has a concrete location in time) or lack of temporal and situational anchoring. While these distinct functions could be viewed as different realisations of a general irrealis meaning, one must keep in mind that general irrealis meanings are generalisations of more specific meanings arising in particular contexts of grammaticalisation. It is argued that the functions defined above are useful intermediate generalisations enabling a coherent account of irrealis use in complementation. However, the distinction between propositional and state-of-affairs complements is not neat: functions characteristic of the propositional domain also occasionally spill over into the state-of-affairs domain (in the form of counterfactuality or non-factuality marking) and vice versa (as the unanchoring function of subjunctives with evaluative predicates).

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/sl.18057.hol
2020-05-06
2020-05-28
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Ammann, Andreas & Johan van der Auwera
    2004 Complementizer-headed main clauses for volitional moods in the languages of South-Eastern Europe: A Balkanism?InOlga Mišeska Tomić (ed.), Balkan Syntax and Semantics, 293–314. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Auwera, Johan van der & Ewa Schalley
    2004 From optative and subjunctive to irrealis. InFrank Brisard, Michael Meeuwis & Bart Vandenabeele (eds.), Seduction, Community, Speech. A Festschrift for Herman Parret, 87–96. Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.127.08auw
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.127.08auw [Google Scholar]
  3. Browne, Wayles
    1997 Verbal forms with da in Slovenian complement, purpose and result clauses. InNeka mu e večna slavata. Studies Dedicated to the Memory of Zbigniew Gołąb = Balkanistica10, 72–80.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Bybee, Joan S.
    1998 ‘Irrealis’ as a grammatical category. Anthropological Linguistics40(2). 257–271.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Bybee, Joan S., Revere Perkins & William Pagliuca
    1994The Evolution of Grammar. Tense, Aspect, and Modality in the Languages of the World. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Chafe, Wallace
    1995 The realis-irrealis distinction in Caddo, the Northern Iroquoian Languages, and English. InJoan S. Bybee & Susan Fleischman (eds.), Modality in Grammar and Discourse, 349–365. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.32.15cha
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.32.15cha [Google Scholar]
  7. Cleary-Kemp, Jessica
    2014 Irrealis as verbal non-specificity in Koro (Oceanic). Berkeley Linguistics Society40, 20–41. 10.3765/bls.v40i0.3131
    https://doi.org/10.3765/bls.v40i0.3131 [Google Scholar]
  8. Cristofaro, Sonia
    2012 Descriptive notions vs. Grammatical categories: Unrealized states-of-affairs and ‘irrealis’. Language Sciences34(2). 121–146. 10.1016/j.langsci.2011.08.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langsci.2011.08.001 [Google Scholar]
  9. Croft, William
    1983 Quantifier scope ambiguity and definiteness. Berkeley Linguistics Society9. 25–36.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Dik, Simon C. & Kees Hengeveld
    1991 The hierarchical structure of the clause and the typology of perception-verb complements. Linguistics29(2). 221–259. 10.1515/ling.1991.29.2.231
    https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.1991.29.2.231 [Google Scholar]
  11. Dixon, Robert M. W.
    2006 Complement clauses and complementation strategies in typological perspective. InRobert M. W. Dixon & Alexandra Y. Aikhenvald (eds.), Complementation, 1–48. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Dobrušina, Nina
    2016Soslagatel’noe naklonenie v russkom jazyke. Opyt issledovanija grammatičeskoj semantiki [The Subjunctive in Russian. An Investigation into Grammatical Semantics]. Prague: Animedia.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Elliott, Jennifer
    2000 Realis and Irrealis: Forms and concepts of the grammaticalisation of reality. Linguistic Typology4(1). 55–90. 10.1515/lity.2000.4.1.55
    https://doi.org/10.1515/lity.2000.4.1.55 [Google Scholar]
  14. Gildersleeve, Basil L.
    1900Syntax of Classical Greek from Homer to Demosthenes. New York: American Book Company.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Haan, Ferdinand de
    2012 Irrealis: Fact or fiction?Language Sciences34(2). 107–130. 10.1016/j.langsci.2011.06.016
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langsci.2011.06.016 [Google Scholar]
  16. Haspelmath, Martin
    1997Indefinite Pronouns. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. 1998 The semantic development of old presents: New futures and subjunctives without grammaticalization. Diachronica15(1). 29–62. 10.1075/dia.15.1.03has
    https://doi.org/10.1075/dia.15.1.03has [Google Scholar]
  18. Haspelmath
    2010 Comparative concepts and descriptive categories in cross-linguistic studies. Language86(3). 663–687. 10.1353/lan.2010.0021
    https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2010.0021 [Google Scholar]
  19. Hodgson, William B.
    1881Errors in the Use of English. Edinburgh: David Douglas.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Holvoet, Axel
    2007Mood and Modality in Baltic. Cracow: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Jespersen, Otto
    1933A Modern English Grammar on Historical Principles. Partiv. Syntax (ThirdVolume). London: George Allen & Unwin.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Kehayov, Petar & Kasper Boye
    2016a Complementizer semantics – an introduction. In: Kasper Boye & Petar Kehayov (eds), Complementizer Semantics in European Languages, 1–11. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110416619‑004
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110416619-004 [Google Scholar]
  23. 2016b Complementizer semantics in European languages: Overview and generalizations. InKasper Boye & Petar Kehayov (eds.), Complementizer Semantics in European Languages, 809–878. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110416619‑023
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110416619-023 [Google Scholar]
  24. Kuryłowicz, Jerzy
    1964The Inflectional Categories of Indo-European. Heidelberg: Carl Winter.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Lillo, Antonio
    2017 On the oblique optative in Herodotus’ completive sentences: An evidentiality mark in Ancient Greek. InFelicia Logozzo & Paolo Pocett (eds.), Ancient Greek Linguistics. New Approaches, Insights, Perspectives, 313–324. Berlin: De Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110551754‑325
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110551754-325 [Google Scholar]
  26. Lunn, Patricia V.
    1989 Spanish mood and the prototype of assertability. Linguistics27(4), 687–702. 10.1515/ling.1989.27.4.687
    https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.1989.27.4.687 [Google Scholar]
  27. Mauri, Caterina & Andrea Sansò
    2012 The reality status of directives and its coding across languages. Language Sciences34(2), 147–170. 10.1016/j.langsci.2011.08.002
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langsci.2011.08.002 [Google Scholar]
  28. Mithun, Nancy
    1995 On the relativity of irreality. InJoan S. Bybee & Susan Fleischman (eds.), Modality in Grammar and Discourse, 367–388. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.32.16mit
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.32.16mit [Google Scholar]
  29. Nikolaeva, Irina
    2016 Analyses of the semantics of mood. InJan Nuyts & Johan van der Auwera (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Modality and Mood, 68–85. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Palmer, F. R.
    2001Mood and Modality, 2nd edn.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139167178
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139167178 [Google Scholar]
  31. Ransom, Evelyn
    1986Complementation: Its Meanings and Forms. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.10
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.10 [Google Scholar]
  32. Rijksbaron, Albert
    1994The Syntax and Semantics of the Verb in Classical Greek, 2nd edn.Amsterdam: Gieben.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Sičinava, Dmitrij V.
    2004 K probleme proisxoždenija slavjanskogo uslovnogo naklonenija [On the problem of the origin of the Slavic conditional]. InJurij A. Lander, Vladimir A. Plungjan & Anna Ju. Urmančieva (eds.), Irrealis i irreal’nost’ [Irrealis and Irreality], 292–312. Moskva: Gnozis.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Sperber, Dan & Deirdre Wilson
    1986Relevance: Communication and Cognition. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Squartini, Mario
    2010 Mood in Italian. InBjörn Rothstein & Rolf Thieroff (eds.), Mood in the Languages of Europe, 237–250. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/slcs.120.13squ
    https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.120.13squ [Google Scholar]
  36. Szucsich, Luka
    2010 Mood in Bosnian, Croatian and Serbian. InBjörn Rothstein & Rolf Thieroff (eds.), Mood in the Languages of Europe, 394–408. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/slcs.120.22szu
    https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.120.22szu [Google Scholar]
  37. Švedova, Natalija Ju
    (ed.) 1980Russkaja grammatika [Russian Grammar] i–ii. Moskva: Nauka.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Thieroff, Rolf
    2010 Moods, moods, moods. InBjörn Rothstein & Rolf Thieroff (eds.), Mood in the Languages of Europe, 1–29. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/slcs.120.01thi
    https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.120.01thi [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/sl.18057.hol
Loading
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