@article{Hassler2021,
  author    = {Hassler, Gerda},
  title     = {Meaning and Function},
  series = {Concordia discors vs. discordia concors : international journal for researches into comparative literature, contrastive linguistics, cross-cultural and translation strategies},
  journal   = {Concordia discors vs. discordia concors : international journal for researches into comparative literature, contrastive linguistics, cross-cultural and translation strategies},
  number    = {16},
  publisher = {Ştefan cel Mare University Press},
  address   = {Suceava},
  issn      = {2065-4057},
  pages     = {17 -- 50},
  year      = {2021},
  abstract  = {The use of the word functional in the most diverse theories and approaches has contributed in no small measure to the confusion in linguistics today. This article does not claim to give an overview of the different directions of functionalism in linguistics. Rather, the aim is to present what Coseriu's view characterised as functional in his time and to what extent his theory outlined a path that still makes sense in functional-cognitive linguistics today. This will involve an examination of Coseriu's difficult-to-identify concept of function. Furthermore, the article will also show that functional thinking is relevant for current grammatography.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{Hassler2008,
  author    = {Haßler, Gerda},
  title     = {Indicative verb forms as means of expressing modality in romance languages},
  isbn      = {978-1-443-84059-0},
  year      = {2008},
  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{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{Hassler2011,
  author    = {Haßler, Gerda},
  title     = {Acknowlegements},
  isbn      = {978-90-272-4606-6},
  year      = {2011},
  language  = {en}
}
@misc{Hassler1994,
  author    = {Haßler, Gerda},
  title     = {Nerlich, B., Semantic theories in Europe 1830 - 1930; Amsterdam, Benjamins, 1992},
  year      = {1994},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{Hassler2007,
  author    = {Haßler, Gerda},
  title     = {Texts of reference and serial texts in the constitution of a notional paradigm : the example of the French ideologues},
  isbn      = {978-90-272-4601-1},
  year      = {2007},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{Hassler2007,
  author    = {Haßler, Gerda},
  title     = {Analogy : the history of a concept and a term from the 17th to the 19th century},
  isbn      = {978-90-272-4603-5},
  year      = {2007},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{Hassler2012,
  author    = {Haßler, Gerda},
  title     = {Introduction},
  isbn      = {978-3-89323-140-9},
  year      = {2012},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{Hassler2008,
  author    = {Haßler, Gerda},
  title     = {Introduction},
  isbn      = {978-90-272-4606-6},
  year      = {2008},
  language  = {en}
}
@incollection{Hassler2018,
  author    = {Haßler, Gerda},
  title     = {History of european vernacular grammar writing},
  series = {Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Linguistics},
  booktitle = {Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Linguistics},
  editor    = {Aronoff, Mark and Abbi, Anvita},
  publisher = {Oxford University},
  address   = {New York},
  publisher      = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam},
  year      = {2018},
  abstract  = {The grammatization of European vernacular languages began in the Late Middle Ages and Renaissance and continued up until the end of the 18th century. Through this process, grammars were written for the vernaculars and, as a result, the vernaculars were able to establish themselves in important areas of communication. Vernacular grammars largely followed the example of those written for Latin, using Latin descriptive categories without fully adapting them to the vernaculars. In accord with the Greco-Latin tradition, the grammars typically contain sections on orthography, prosody, morphology, and syntax, with the most space devoted to the treatment of word classes in the section on "etymology." The earliest grammars of vernaculars had two main goals: on the one hand, making the languages described accessible to non-native speakers, and on the other, supporting the learning of Latin grammar by teaching the grammar of speakers' native languages. Initially, it was considered unnecessary to engage with the grammar of native languages for their own sake, since they were thought to be acquired spontaneously. Only gradually did a need for normative grammars develop which sought to codify languages. This development relied on an awareness of the value of vernaculars that attributed a certain degree of perfection to them. Grammars of indigenous languages in colonized areas were based on those of European languages and today offer information about the early state of those languages, and are indeed sometimes the only sources for now extinct languages. Grammars of vernaculars came into being in the contrasting contexts of general grammar and the grammars of individual languages, between grammar as science and as art and between description and standardization. In the standardization of languages, the guiding principle could either be that of anomaly, which took a particular variety of a language as the basis of the description, or that of analogy, which permitted interventions into a language aimed at making it more uniform.},
  language  = {en}
}
@misc{Hassler2015,
  author    = {Haßler, Gerda},
  title     = {Evidentiality and the expression of speaker's stance in Romance languages and German},
  series = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Philosophische Reihe},
  journal   = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Philosophische Reihe},
  number    = {138},
  issn      = {1866-8380},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-404492},
  pages     = {28},
  year      = {2015},
  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}
}
@article{Hassler2015,
  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 Publ.},
  address   = {London},
  issn      = {1461-4456},
  doi       = {10.1177/1461445614564522},
  pages     = {182 -- 209},
  year      = {2015},
  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}
}
@article{Hassler2002,
  author    = {Haßler, Gerda},
  title     = {Evidentiality and reported speech in Romance languages},
  year      = {2002},
  language  = {en}
}
@misc{Hassler2002,
  author    = {Haßler, Gerda},
  title     = {Koerner, E. F. K., (Hrsg.), History of linguistics in Spain; Amsterdam, Benjamins, 2001},
  year      = {2002},
  language  = {en}
}
@misc{Hassler2002,
  author    = {Haßler, Gerda},
  title     = {Butt, M. (Hrsg.), Time over matter: diachronic perspectives on morphosyntax; Stanford CSLI Publ., 2001},
  year      = {2002},
  language  = {en}
}
@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}
}
@article{Hassler1999,
  author    = {Haßler, Gerda},
  title     = {Lafaye's Dictionnaire des synonymes in the history of semantics},
  year      = {1999},
  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}
}
@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}
}