@article{Hassler2001,
  author    = {Haßler, Gerda},
  title     = {Crosslinguistic and diachronic remarks on the grammaticalization of aspect in Romance languages : location and motion verbs},
  year      = {2001},
  language  = {en}
}
@incollection{Hassler2016,
  author    = {Haßler, Gerda},
  title     = {Deg{\´e}rando's three prize essays and the shift in linguistic thought at the turn of the 19th century},
  series = {History of Linguistics 2014 : selected papers from the 13th International Conference on the History of the Language Sciences (ICHoLS XIII), Vila Real, Portugal, 25-29 August 2014 (Studies in the History of the Language Sciences ; 126)},
  booktitle = {History of Linguistics 2014 : selected papers from the 13th International Conference on the History of the Language Sciences (ICHoLS XIII), Vila Real, Portugal, 25-29 August 2014 (Studies in the History of the Language Sciences ; 126)},
  publisher = {John Benjamins Publishing Company},
  address   = {Amsterdam, Philadelphia},
  isbn      = {978-90-272-4617-2},
  issn      = {0304-0720},
  publisher      = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam},
  pages     = {149 -- 160},
  year      = {2016},
  abstract  = {Deg{\´e}rando started out from the views of the French ideologists on the relationship of language and thought, but increasingly distanced himself from them. This is already evident based on the choice of reference authors and also on the increasing emphasis on empirical research. His prize essays reflect the fundamental changes in linguistic thought during the late 18th century. He was successful in the competition of the Institut National (1797/1799) and with another essay at the Berlin Academy (1802). His main argument against Condillac and the ideologists is that empirical knowledge does not depend on signs. Therefore, the development of better languages will not improve this kind of human knowledge.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{Hassler1999,
  author    = {Haßler, Gerda},
  title     = {Diversity of human languages and universals of thougth : an eigteenth-century debate in the Berlin Academy},
  isbn      = {90-272-4583-5},
  year      = {1999},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{Hassler2010,
  author    = {Haßler, Gerda},
  title     = {Epistemic modality and evidentiality and their determination on a deictic basis},
  isbn      = {978-3-11-023433-6},
  year      = {2010},
  abstract  = {It has often been pointed out that there is some overlap between epistemic modality and evidentiality (Chafe \& Nichols 1986, Cornillie 2007, De Haan 1999, Dendale \& Tasmowski 2001, Plungian 2001, Squartini 2004). In this paper I would like to offer several reflections about the necessity of drawing a boundary between modality and evidentiality. Starting from the typological category of evidentiality - extended here for use in pragmatic studies - I will then explore demarcation problems in Romance languages, which lack grammaticalized forms for expressing evidentiality. The underlying premise of this paper is that evidentiality as marker of the origin of the speaker's knowledge stands in relation to the speaker's pragmatic stance. Because the perspective of the speaker is thus incorporated into the utterance, it seems appropriate to analyse the applicability of the deictic category. Finally, under the aspect of deixis, I shall attempt a demarcation between evidentiality and modality.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{Hassler2010,
  author    = {Haßler, Gerda},
  title     = {Epistemic modality and evidentiality and their determination on a deictic basis : the case of Romance languages},
  isbn      = {978-3-11-022396-5},
  year      = {2010},
  abstract  = {In recent years the category of evidentiality has come into use also for the description of Romance languages. This has been contingent on a change in its interpretation from a typological category to a semantic-pragmatic category, which allows an application to languages lacking specialised morphemes for the expression of evidentiality. In the following we will first describe the theoretical framework in which we use the category of evidentiality for the description of Romance languages. A key question to be elucidated here will be the determination of evidentiality as a deictic phenomenon. This will also be the basis for discussing the distinction between evidentiality and epistemic modality.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{Hassler2003,
  author    = {Haßler, Gerda},
  title     = {Epistemic modality revisited: evidential functions of lexical and grammatical forms in Romance languages},
  isbn      = {80-8673221-5},
  year      = {2003},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{Hassler2018,
  author    = {Haßler, Gerda},
  title     = {Evidential and epistemic sentence adverbs in Romance languages},
  series = {Linguistik online},
  volume    = {92},
  journal   = {Linguistik online},
  number    = {5},
  issn      = {1615-3014},
  doi       = {10.13092/lo.92.4506},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-421822},
  pages     = {82 -- 98},
  year      = {2018},
  abstract  = {In this paper evidential and modal adverbs will be studied, such as French apparemment, {\´e}videmment, visiblement, Italian apparentemente, evidentemente, ovviamente, and Spanish aparentemente, evidentemente and visiblemente. The development of their signification will be discussed, including German adverbs like offensichtlich. In these means of expression, the functional-semantic categories evidentiality and epistemic modality seem to overlap: on the one hand, they are used if the state of affairs talked about cannot be verified, that is, if there is still a moment of insecurity concerning the transmitted information. Then adverbials with a special structure (preposition + article + nominal form of a verb) will be analysed, and we will examine if they behave in the same way.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{Hassler2002,
  author    = {Haßler, Gerda},
  title     = {Evidentiality and reported speech in Romance languages},
  year      = {2002},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{Hassler2014,
  author    = {Haßler, Gerda},
  title     = {Evidentiality and the expression of speaker's stance in Romance languages and German},
  series = {Discourse Studies : an interdisciplinary journal for the study of text and talk},
  volume    = {17},
  journal   = {Discourse Studies : an interdisciplinary journal for the study of text and talk},
  number    = {2},
  publisher = {Sage Publications},
  address   = {London},
  issn      = {1461-4456},
  doi       = {10.1177/1461445614564522},
  pages     = {182 -- 209},
  year      = {2014},
  abstract  = {In recent years, the category of evidentiality has also come into use for the description of Romance languages and of German. This has been contingent on a change in its interpretation from a typological category to a semantic-pragmatic category, which allows an application to languages lacking specialised morphemes for the expression of evidentiality. We consider evidentiality to be a structural dimension of grammar, the values of which are expressed by types of constructions that code the source of information which a speaker imparts. If we look at the situation in Romance languages and in German, drawing a boundary between epistemic modality and evidentiality presents problems that are difficult to solve. Adding markers of the source of the speaker's knowledge often limits the degree of responsibility of the speaker for the content of the utterance. Evidential adverbs are a frequently used means of marking the source of the speaker's knowledge. The evidential meaning is generalised to marking any source of knowledge, what can be regarded as a result of a process of pragmaticalisation. The use of certain means which also carry out evidential markings can even contribute to the blurring of the different kinds of evidentiality. German also has modal verbs which in conjunction with the perfect tense of the verb have a predominantly evidential use (sollen and wollen). But even here the evidential marking is not without influence on the modality of the utterance. The Romance languages, however, do not have such specialised verbs for expressing evidentiality in certain contexts. To do this, they mark evidentiality - often context bound - by verb forms such as the conditional and the imperfect tense. This article shall contrast the different architectures used in expressing evidentiality in German and in the Romance languages.},
  language  = {en}
}
@misc{Hassler1999,
  author    = {Haßler, Gerda},
  title     = {Gambarara, D. (Hrsg.), Language philosophies and the language sciences, a historical perspective in honour of Lia Formigari; M{\"u}nster, Nodus-Publ., 1996},
  year      = {1999},
  language  = {en}
}