Cover not available
Article published In:
What is a verb? – Linguistic, psycholinguistic and developmental perspectives on verbs in Germanic and Semitic languages
Edited by Eva Smolka and Dorit Ravid
[The Mental Lexicon 14:2] 2019
► pp. 319–332

What does a verb? Indicate sentence type

The history of the Germanic sentence type system

 | Saarland University
An important task of the verb in German is to indicate sentence type. Depending on where the verb is positioned, the clause is a declarative (verb after the first constituent, which can be any constituent), wh-interrogative (verb after the first constituent, being the wh-phrase), yes/no-interrogative (verb in first position, bearing indicative or subjunctive mood) or imperative clause (verb in first position, bearing imperative mood). This system developed out of a system in which sentence type was indicated by clause-final sentence mood particles, as is usual in older Indo-European (and Semitic) languages. In declarative sentences, the verb-second syntax only came about shortly before the Old High German attestation sets in. We can trace the gradual development of the modern German verb-second syntax with variable prefield from a clear topic-comment structure to a more flexible structure.
Keywords: sentence type, prefield, verb-second, Old High German
Article outline
  • The Germanic sentence type system
  • The origins of the German sentence type system
  • The development of the verbal position in declarative clauses
  • Corpus study on Old High German
  • Discussion
  • Conclusion
  • Note
  • References
Published online: 15 January 2020
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ml.00009.spe
References (35)
References
Axel, Katrin. (2007). Studies on Old High German Syntax. Amsterdam / Philadelphia: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Axel-Tober, Katrin. (2018). Origins of verb-second in Old High German. In Jäger, Agnes, Gisella Ferraresi and Helmut Weiß (eds.), Clause structure and word order in the history of German. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 22–47.Google Scholar
Brandt, Margareta, Marga Reis, Inger Rosengren & Ilse Zimmermann. (1992). Satztyp, Satzmodus und Illokution. In Rosengren, Inger (ed.), Satztyp und Illokution. Tübingen: Niemeyer, 1–90.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. (1986). Barriers. Cambridge, Ma.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
. (1995). The Minimalist Program. Cambridge, Ma.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
den Besten, Hans. (1977 [1983]). On the Interaction of Root Transformations and Lexical Deletive Rules. In Abraham, Werner (Hg.), On the formal syntax of the Westgermania. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 47–131.Google Scholar
Duke, E. A.. (1995). Platon: Platonis opera tomus I tetralogias I-II continens. Oxford. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Dürscheid, Christa. (1989). Zur Vorfeldbesetzung in deutschen Verbzweit-Strukturen. Trier: Wissenschaftlicher Verlag Trier.Google Scholar
Eggers, Hans. (1964). Der althochdeutsche Isidor. Nach der Pariser Handschrift und den Monseer Fragmenten. Tübingen: Niemeyer.Google Scholar
Elliger, K. & W. Rudolph. (1990). Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia. Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft.Google Scholar
Embick, David & Rolf Noyer. (2001). Movement Operations after Syntax. Linguistic Inquiry 321, 555–595. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Grewendorf, Günter. (2002). Minimalistische Syntax. Tübingen: Francke.Google Scholar
Hinterhölzl, Roland & Svetlana Petrova. (2010). From V1 to V2 in West Germanic. Lingua 1201, 315–328. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (2011). Rhetorical relations and verb placement in Old High German. In Chiarcos, Christian, Berry Claus & Michael Grabski (Hgg.), Salience. Multidisciplinary perspectives on its function in discourse. Berlin/New York: de Gruyter, 173–201. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Isidor of Sevilla. (1964). Der althochdeutsche Isidor: nach der Pariser Handschrift und den Monseer Fragmenten. Ed. by Hans Eggers. Tübingen: Niemeyer. [URL] (accessed July 15, 2016)Google Scholar
Jacobs, Joachim. (2001). The Dimensions of Topic-Comment. Linguistics, 391: 641–681. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kiparsky, Paul. (1995). Indo-European origins of Germanic sntax. In Battye, Adrian & Ian Roberts (eds.), Clause structure and language change. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 140–169.Google Scholar
Masser, Achim. (1994). Tatian: Die lateinisch-althochdeutsche Tatianbilingue Stiftsbibliothek St. Gallen Cod.56. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Önnerfors, Olaf. (1997). Verb-erst-Deklarativsätze. Grammatik und Pragmatik. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell.Google Scholar
Panhuis, Dirk G. J. (1982). The communicative perspective in the sentence. A Study of Latin Word Order. Amsterdam / Philadelphia: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pinkster, Harm. (1990). Latin Syntax and Semantics. London / New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Prince, Ellen F. (1999) .‘How Not to Mark Topics: ‘Topicalization’ in English and Yiddish’. in Texas Linguistics Forum, Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
Reinhart, Tanya. (1982). ‘Pragmatics and Linguistics: An Analysis of Sentence Topics’. Philosophica, 271: 53–94.Google Scholar
Rizzi, Luigi. (1997). The Fine Structure of the Left Periphery. In Haegeman, Liliane (Hg.): Elements of Grammar. Dordrecht: Kluwer, 281–337. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shaer, Benjamin & Werner Frey. (2004). ‘Integrated’ and ‘Non-Integrated’ Left-peripheral Elements in German and English. In Shaer, Benjamin, Werner Frey & Claudia Maienborn (Hgg.), Proceedings of the Dislocated Elements Workshop. ZASPiL 35(2). Berlin: ZAS, 465–502.Google Scholar
Speyer, Augustin. (2008). German Vorfeld-filling as Constraint Interaction. In Benz, Anton und Peter Kühnlein (Hgg.) Constraints in Discourse. Amsterdam / Philadelphia: Benjamins, 267–290. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (2009a). Versuch zur Syntax im Protoindoeuropäischen. In Rieken, Elisabeth & Paul Widmer (Hgg.), Pragmatische Kategorien. Form, Funktion und Diachronie. Wiesbaden: Reichert, 287–305.Google Scholar
. (2009b). Das Vorfeldranking und das Vorfeld-es . Linguistische Berichte 2191, 323–353.Google Scholar
. (2010). Filling the Vorfeld in spoken and written discourse. In Tanskanen, Sanna-Kaisa, et al. (Hgg.), Discourses in Interaction. Amsterdam / Philadelphia: Benjamins, 263–290. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (2019). Topichood and the margins of the German clause from a historical perspective. In Molnár, Valéria, Verner Egland & Susanne Winkler (eds.), Architecture of Topic. Berlin /New York: Mouton de Gruyter, 337–371. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Speyer, Augustin & Helmut Weiß. (2018). The prefield after the Old High German period. In Jäger, Agnes, Gisella Ferraresi and Helmut Weiß (eds.), Clause structure and word order in the history of German. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 64–81.Google Scholar
Thiersch, Craig. (1978). Topics in German Syntax. PhD thesis, MIT, Cambridge, Ma.Google Scholar
Watts, W. S.. (1958). M. Tulli Ciceronis epistulae. Tom. III1. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Weber, Robert. (1983). Vulgata: Biblia sacra iuxta vulgatam versionem. Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft.Google Scholar
Wöllstein, Angelika. (2010). Topologisches Satzmodell. Heidelberg: Winter.Google Scholar