Frequency differences in reportative exceptionality and how to account for them
A case study on verbal reportative markers in French, Dutch and German
Reportative evidential markers are – in contrast to other evidential markers – compatible with distancing
interpretations, in which the speaker denies the truth of what is being reported. This exceptional behaviour of reportatives is
termed ‘reportative exceptionality’ (
AnderBois 2014). In this paper, which addresses
French, Dutch and German reportative markers, we argue that they differ with respect to the frequency with which such distancing
interpretations actually arise. The French reportative
conditionnel most frequently occurs with distancing
interpretations, whereas German
sollen hardly occurs with this function. Dutch
zou takes up an
intermediate position. It is claimed that the higher compatibility of the
conditionnel with distancing
interpretations can be accounted for by a number of factors: its general preference for contexts in which other perspectives than
the speaker’s are highly salient; the fact that it has past tense morphology; and its general semantic make-up in which the
marking of hypotheticality is a key function.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Reportative evidentiality vs. quotative markers; reportative exceptionality
- 3.French conditionnel, Dutch zou + inf, German soll
IND +
inf: An overview
- 3.1Present-day semantics and use
- 3.2Diachrony: A contrastive analysis of French, Dutch and German
- 4.Reportative markers in French, Dutch and German: A comparative case study
- 4.1French conditionnel, Dutch zou + inf, German soll
IND +
inf: Similarities and differences
- 4.2Reportative exceptionality (RE)
- 5.Conclusion
- Acknowledgements
- Notes
- Abbreviations
-
References
References (44)
References
Abouda, Lotfi. 2001. Les
emplois journalistique, polémique et atténuatif du conditionnel. Un traitement
unitaire. In Patrick Dendale & Liliane Tasmowski (eds.), Le
conditionnel en
français, 277–294. Paris: Klincksieck.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Aikhenvald, Alexandra (ed.). 2018. The
Oxford handbook of evidentiality. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Aikhenvald, Alexandra. 2004. Evidentiality. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
AnderBois, Scott. 2014. On
the exceptional status of reportative evidentials. Proceedings of
SALT 241. 234–254. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Azzopardi, Sophie. 2011. Le
Futur et le Conditionnel: valeur en langue et effets de sens en discours. Analyse contrastive espagnol /
français. Montpellier: Université Paul Valéry. PhD dissertation.
Baumann, Carolin. 2017. Bedeutung
und Gebrauch der deutschen Modalverben. Lexikalische Einheit als Basis konzeptueller
Vielfalt. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Boye, Kasper. 2012. Epistemic
meaning: A crosslinguistic and functional-cognitive
study. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Bres, Jacques, Sophie Azzopardi & Sophie Sarrazin. 2012. Le
conditionnel en français: énonciation, ultériorité dans la passé et valeurs modales. Faits de
langues 401. 37–43. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Bres, Jacques. 2010. Alors
comme ça, le conditionnel serait une forme dialogique.... In Marion Colas-Blais, Mohamed Kara, Laurent Perrin & André Petitjean (eds.), La
polyphonie en langue et en discours. Modèles et réflexions
théoriques, 201–225. Metz: Presses universitaires de Metz.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Bres, Jacques. 2018. Le
conditionnel en français: un état de l’art. Langue
française 2001. 5–17.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Celle, Agnès. 2006. Temps
et modalité. L’anglais, le français et l’allemand en
contraste. Bern: Peter Lang.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Celle, Agnès. 2007. Analyse
unifiée du conditionnel de non prise en charge en français et comparaison avec
l’anglais. In Louis de Saussure, Jacques Moeschler & Genoveva Puskas (eds.), Études
sémantiques et pragmatiques sur le temps, l’aspect et la modalité (Cahiers Chronos
19), 43–61. Amsterdam: Rodopi. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Celle, Agnès. 2009. Hearsay
adverbs and modality. In Raphael Salkie, Pierre Busuttil & Johan van der Auwera (eds.), Modality
in English, theory and
description, 269–293. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Dendale, Patrick & Liliane Tasmowski (eds.). 2001. Le
conditionnel en
français. Paris: Klincksiek.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Dendale, Patrick. 2001. Les
problèmes linguistiques du conditionnel français. In Patrick Dendale & Liliane Tasmowski (eds.), Le
conditionnel en
français, 7–18. Paris: Klincksieck.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Dendale, Patrick. 2018. Évidentialité
ou non-prise en charge ? Le cas du conditionnel épistémique en français. Une réanalyse. Langue
française 2001. 63–76.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Diewald, Gabriele & Elena Smirnova. 2010. Evidentiality
in German. Linguistic realization and regularities in
grammaticalization. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Diewald, Gabriele & Elena Smirnova. 2013. Kategorien
der Redewiedergabe im Deutschen. Zeitschrift für germanistische
Linguistik 41(3). 443–471. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Diewald, Gabriele. 1999. Die
Modalverben im
Deutschen. Tübingen: Niemeyer. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Faller, Martina. 2019. The
discourse commitments of illocutionary reportatives. Semantics and
Pragmatics 12(8). 1–46. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Fritz, Gerd. 1991. Deutsche
Modalverben 1609 – Epistemische Verwendungsweisen. Ein Beitrag zur Bedeutungsgeschichte der Modalverben im
Deutschen, Beiträge zur Geschichte der deutschen Sprache und
Literatur 1131. 28–52. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Güldemann, Tom. 2008. Quotative
indexes in African languages: A synchronic and diachronic
survey. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Haillet, Patrick. 1998. Le
conditionnel d’altérité énonciative et les formes du discours rapport dans la presse
écrite. Pratiques 1001. 63–79. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Haillet, Patrick. 2002. Le
conditionnel en français: une approche
polyphonique. Paris: Ophrys.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Larreya, Paul. 2012. Irrealis,
past time reference and modality. In Roberta Facchinetti, Frank Palmer & Manfred Krug (eds.), Modality
in contemporary
English, 21–46. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Letnes, Ole. 2008. Quotatives
sollen und Sprecherhaltung. In Ole Letnes, Eva Maagerø & Heinz Vater (eds.), Modalität
und
Grammatikalisierung, 23–37. Trier: WVT.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Mélac, Eric. 2014. L’évidentialité
en anglais – approche contrastive à partir d’un corpus
anglais-tibétain. Paris: Université de la Sorbonne nouvelle Paris III. PhD thesis.
Merle, Jean-Marie. 2004. Les
énoncés au conditionnel ‘journalistique’: un cas particulier de style indirect libre? Bulletin
de la Société de stylistique anglaise. Stylistique et énonciation: le cas du discours indirect
libre (spécial), 229–248.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Michael, Lev D. 2012. Nanti self-quotation:
Implications for the pragmatics of reported speech and evidentiality. Pragmatics and
Society, 3(2). Available at: [URL] (last
access 1 October
2023).
Mortelmans, Tanja. 2000. On
the evidential nature of the epistemic use of the German modals müssen and
sollen. In Johan van der Auwera & Patrick Dendale (eds.), Modal
verbs in Germanic and Romance
languages, 131–148. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Mortelmans, Tanja. 2009. Erscheinungsformen
der indirekten Rede im Niederländischen und Deutschen zou-, soll(te)- und der Konjunktiv
I. In Werner Abraham & Elisabeth Leiss (eds.), Modalität.
Epistemik und Evidentialität bei Modalverb, Adverb, Modalpartikel und
Modus, 171–190. Tübingen: Stauffenburg.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Mortelmans, Tanja. 2022. Evidentiality
in Dutch. In Björn Wiemer & Juana I. Marin-Arrese (eds.), Evidential
marking in European languages: Toward a unitary comparative
account, 95–136. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Patard, Adeline & Walter De Mulder. 2012. L’évolution
des usages du conditionnel en français. Faits des
langues 401. 29–36. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Patard, Adeline. 2017. Du
conditionnel comme constructions ou la polysémie du conditionnel. Langue
française 194(2). 105–124. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Schenner, Mathias. 2010. Embedded
evidentials in German. In Gabriele Diewald & Elena Smirnova (eds.), Linguistic
realization of evidentiality in European
languages, 157–186. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Spronck, Stef & Tatiana Nikitina. 2019. Reported
speech forms a dedicated syntactic domain. Linguistic
Typology 23(1). 119–159. Available
at:
(last
access 1 October
2023).![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Van de Weerd, Jessica. 2021. Le
conditionnel de reprise en français. Une étude de son origine et de son évolution de
sens. Antwerp: University of Antwerp PhD dissertation.
Vanderbiesen, Jeroen. 2014.
wollen:
On the verge between quotative and reportive evidential. Yearbook of the German Cognitive
Linguistics
Association 2(1). 167–190. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Vanderbiesen, Jeroen. 2015. The
grounding functions of German reportives and quotatives. Studies van de BKL/Travaux du
CBL/Papers of the
LSB 91. 16–39. Available
at: [URL] (last
access: 1 October
2023).
Vanderbiesen, Jeroen. 2016. Mixed
viewpoints and the quotative-reportive cline in German: Reported speech and reportive
evidentiality. In Barbara Dancygier, Wei-lun Lu & Arie Verhagen (eds.), Viewpoint
and the fabric of meaning. Form and use of viewpoint tools across languages and
modalities, 41–91. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Wiemer, Björn. 2018. Evidentials
and epistemic modality. In: Alexandra Y. Aikhenvald (ed.), The
Oxford handbook of
evidentiality, 85–108. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Cited by (1)
Cited by one other publication
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 5 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers.
Any errors therein should be reported to them.