Copy Raising in English, German, and Dutch

Synchrony and Diachrony

Bibliographic Data

ID22994019
AuthorsMarjolein Poortvliet (0000-0001-5860-9992, University of Oxford, corresponding author)
Year2016
Volume28
Issue4
Pages370-402
Publication date2016-12-01
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueJournal of Germanic Linguistics (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1470-5427 • E-ISSN: 1475-3014
PublisherCambridge University Press (CUP) (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1017/s1470542716000167
OpenAlexW2551645335
LanguageEN
Citations received2
References cited23

This study discusses copy raising in English, German, and Dutch from both a synchronic and diachronic perspective. Synchronically, copy raising has the same purpose in all three languages: to mark direct evidence. However, the languages differ in whether they allow their ‘seem’-verbs to appear in copy-raised constructions: English seem can copy raise, German scheinen cannot, whereas the status of Dutch lijken is undecided. This difference is explained by the diachronic development of these verbs: English seem has developed the furthest along the grammaticalization cline of ‘seem’-verbs, German scheinen is the most conservative in its development, and Dutch lijken has developed quite late, but is quickly catching up to English seem . Even though it is too early to tell, this distribution hints at a Van Haeringen pattern.

Cline (biology) · German · Germanic languages · Grammaticalization · Linguistics · Perspective (graphical) · Raising (metalworking) · Sociology · Artificial Intelligence · Computer Science · Demography · History · Linguistic Variation and Morphology · Mathematics · Natural Language Processing Techniques · Philosophy · Syntax, Semantics, Linguistic Variation

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub