@incollection{HennemannMeisnitzer2022, author = {Hennemann, Anja and Meisnitzer, Benjamin}, title = {An introduction to contact-induced and cognitively motivated grammaticalization and lexicalization processes in Romance languages}, series = {Linguistic hybridity: contact-induced and cognitively motivated grammaticalization and lexicalization processes in Romance languages}, booktitle = {Linguistic hybridity: contact-induced and cognitively motivated grammaticalization and lexicalization processes in Romance languages}, publisher = {Heidelberg}, address = {Universit{\"a}tsverlag Winter}, isbn = {978-3-8253-4936-3}, pages = {7 -- 13}, year = {2022}, language = {en} } @phdthesis{Hennemann2020, author = {Hennemann, Anja}, title = {Topic and Focus Markers in Spanish, Portuguese and French}, series = {Potsdam linguistic investigations ; 30}, journal = {Potsdam linguistic investigations ; 30}, publisher = {Lang}, address = {Berlin}, isbn = {978-3-631-82392-7}, school = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam}, pages = {307}, year = {2020}, abstract = {This book is concerned with the diachronic development of selected topic and focus markers in Spanish, Portuguese and French. On the one hand, it focuses on the development of these structures from their relational meaning to their topic-/ focus-marking meaning, and on the other hand, it is concerned with their current form und use. Thus, Romance topic and focus markers - such as sp. en cuanto a, pt. a prop{\´o}sito de, fr. au niveau de or sentence-initial sp. Lo que as well as clefts and pseudo-clefts - are investigated from a quantitative and qualitative perspective. The author argues that topic markers have procedural meaning and that their function is bound to their syntactic position. An important contribution of this study is the fact that real linguistic evidence (in the form of data from various corpora) is analyzed instead of operating with constructed examples.}, language = {en} } @article{Hennemann2020, author = {Hennemann, Anja}, title = {Tal vez es x vs. Tal ves sea X. Construcciones de probabilidad y el uso de los modos}, series = {Romanica Olomucensia}, volume = {32}, journal = {Romanica Olomucensia}, number = {1}, publisher = {Univerzita Palack{\´e}ho v Olomouci}, address = {Olomouc}, issn = {1803-4136}, doi = {10.5507/ro.2020.003}, pages = {51 -- 71}, year = {2020}, abstract = {This paper is concerned with constructions that express probability and their interaction with the indicative and subjunctive mood, as well as with other contextual elements. In detail, the paper deals with the constructions [sin duda + indicative/subjunctive], [tal vez + indicative/subjunctive], [probablemente + indicative/subjunctive] and [posiblemente + indicative/subjunctive]. In their interaction with mood, the constructions are understood as different microconstructions. For example, [sin duda + indicative] and [sin duda + subjunctive] are seen as different microconstructions of the superordinate mesoconstruction [modal construction (of probability) + verb]. In a qualitative analysis examples from the CREA, CORPES XXI, and CdE corpora are examined regarding the interaction of [expression of probability] + [mood]. Following the Principle of No Synonymy of Grammatical Forms, the analysis confirms that the use of mood additionally influences the expressed degree of probability of the constructions. For instance, while probablemente generally expresses a slightly higher probability than posiblemente, a fine-tuned analysis shows that the expressed degrees of probability of [probablemente + subjunctive] and [posiblemente + indicative] are highly similar. This is also often confirmed by further contextual information. In summary, the paper shows that Cognitive Construction Grammar is a very suitable background against which to investigate modal phenomena, as cognitive approaches generally deal with the ways in which language users conceptualize the world from their own point of view, and as expressions of modality, more precisely, probability, are also closely related to speakers' attitudes or perspectives.}, language = {es} } @phdthesis{Hennemann2012, author = {Hennemann, Anja}, title = {A context-sensitive and funktional approach to evidentiality in Spanish or why evidentiality needs a superordinate category}, series = {Potsdam Linguistic Investigations}, volume = {10}, journal = {Potsdam Linguistic Investigations}, publisher = {Peter Lang}, address = {Frankfurt am Main, New York}, isbn = {978-3-631-62636-8}, pages = {462 S.}, year = {2012}, language = {en} } @article{Hennemann2012, author = {Hennemann, Anja}, title = {The interaction between the linguistic domains of evidentiality and deixis as exemplified by Spanish detective novels}, isbn = {978-3-89323-140-9}, year = {2012}, language = {en} } @article{Hennemann2010, author = {Hennemann, Anja}, title = {Una fuente de seguridad citada por la agencia afirm{\´o} que [...]. Usage des marqueurs {\´e}videntiels par les journalistes espagnols. Une {\´e}tude de linguistique de corpus au moyen de GlossaNet}, year = {2010}, language = {fr} } @article{Hennemann2012, author = {Hennemann, Anja}, title = {The epistemic and evidential use of Spanish modal adverbs and verbs of cognitive attitude}, series = {Folia linguistica}, volume = {46}, journal = {Folia linguistica}, number = {1}, publisher = {De Gruyter}, address = {Berlin}, issn = {0165-4004}, doi = {10.1515/FLIN.2012.5}, pages = {133 -- 170}, year = {2012}, abstract = {This article deals with Spanish modal adverbs and verbs of cognitive attitude (Capelli 2007) and their epistemic and/or evidential use. The article is based upon the hypothesis that the study of the use of these linguistic devices has to be highly context-sensitive, as it is not always (only) the sentence level that has to be looked at if one wants to find out whether a certain adverb or verb of cognitive attitude is used evidentially or epistemically. In this article, therefore, the context is used to determine which meaning aspects of an element are encoded and which are contributed by the context. The data were retrieved from the daily newspaper El Pais. Nevertheless, the present study is not a quantitative one, but rather a qualitative study. My corpus analysis indicates that it is not possible to differentiate between the linguistic categories of evidentiality and epistemic modality in every case, although it indeed is possible in the vast majority of cases. In verbs of cognitive attitude, evidentiality and epistemic modality seem to be two interwoven categories, while concerning modal adverbs it is usually possible to separate the categories and to distinguish between the different subtypes of evidentiality such as visual evidence, hearsay and inference.}, language = {en} } @article{Hennemann2016, author = {Hennemann, Anja}, title = {A cognitive-constructionist approach to Spanish creo empty set and creo}, series = {Folia linguistica}, volume = {50}, journal = {Folia linguistica}, publisher = {De Gruyter}, address = {Berlin}, issn = {0165-4004}, doi = {10.1515/flin-2016-0017}, pages = {449 -- 474}, year = {2016}, language = {en} } @book{HasslerDeneckerFernandesetal.2015, author = {Haßler, Gerda and Denecker, Tim and Fernandes, Goncalo and Neis, Cordula and Hennemann, Anja and Eskhult, Josef and Djubo, Boris and Spitzl-Dupic, Friederike and Pl{\"o}tner, Kathleen and Kemmler, Rolf and Cavaliere, Ricardo and Van Hal, Toon and Wolf, Johanna and Pellin, Tommaso and Swiggers, Pierre and Ehlers, Klaas-Hinrich and Albrecht, J{\"o}rn and Hamans, Camiel and Willems, Klaas and Link, Michael and Agud, Ana and Rajagopalan, Kanavillil}, title = {Metasprachliche Reflexion und Diskontinuit{\"a}t}, editor = {Haßler, Gerda}, edition = {1.}, publisher = {Nodus Publikationen}, address = {M{\"u}nster}, isbn = {978-3-89323-017-4}, publisher = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam}, pages = {321}, year = {2015}, abstract = {Dieser Band entstand auf der Basis von Beitr{\"a}gen, die zum XXIV. Internationalen Kolloquium des Studienkreises 'Geschichte der Sprachwissenschaft' vom 22. bis 24. August 2013 vorgetragen wurden. Ausschlaggebend f{\"u}r die Wahl des Themas war nicht ein Befolgen des Zeitgeistes, der immer wieder auf die Krise hinweist, die Europa durchlebt und die sich nat{\"u}rlich auch im metasprachlichen Bewusstsein niederschl{\"a}gt, sondern die Absicht, eine von der Feststellung von Kontinuit{\"a}ten in der Entwicklung der Sprachwissenschaft unterschiedene Forschungsperspektive einzunehmen. Krisenzeiten und Umbr{\"u}che f{\"u}hren allerdings tats{\"a}chlich auch zu ver{\"a}nderten Diskursstrategien und Bezeichnungsmustern, die auch von linguistischen Laien wahrgenommen und diskutiert werden. Sprachwandeltheorien spiegeln zwar ein Bewusstsein von Phasen sehr dynamischer sprachlicher Entwicklungen wider, nicht jedoch ein Interesse an dem gesellschaftlich bedingten initialen Moment, an dem anf{\"a}nglichen Ausl{\"o}ser von Sprachwandel. Eine Umbruchkonzeption, die Gesellschafts- und Sprachgeschichte in diesem Sinn aufeinander beziehen w{\"u}rde, wurde bisher nicht entwickelt. ... Viel mehr als dieser lebensweltliche Bezug des Verh{\"a}ltnisses von Sprache und Krise bildete jedoch die Sichtung der historiographischen Literatur der letzten Jahre und Jahrzehnte den Ausgangspunkt f{\"u}r das Thema dieses Bandes. Immer wieder werden begriffliche Kontinuit{\"a}ten, Einfl{\"u}sse zur{\"u}ckliegender Autoren auf sp{\"a}tere und die Verpflichtung moderner Theorien gegen{\"u}ber fr{\"u}heren Ans{\"a}tzen konstatiert. Meistens geschieht dies zu Recht, doch das wissenschaftshistorische Interesse f{\"u}r die Innovation oder auch den theoretischen Verlust, mit einem Wort die Diskontinuit{\"a}t, sollte nicht vernachl{\"a}ssigt werden. Dabei gibt es durchaus immer wieder Behauptungen des v{\"o}llig Neuen in sprachtheoretischen Publikationen, die eine Tradition und die jetzt neue, g{\"u}ltige Theorie, die sogenannte Vorgeschichte eines Theorems und den Beginn der eigentlichen Wissenschaft in Gegensatz zueinander stellen. Doch solche Behauptungen stammen von den Sprachwissenschaftlern selbst, sie dienen meist der Hervorhebung des eigenen Standpunkts und sind keine Ergebnisse professioneller Historiographie.}, language = {de} } @incollection{HasslerBoehmHennemann2017, author = {Haßler, Gerda and B{\"o}hm, Ver{\´o}nica Julia and Hennemann, Anja}, title = {On the evidential use of English adverbials and their equivalents in Romance languages and Russian}, series = {Evidentiality revisited : Cognitive grammar, functional and discourse-pragmatic perspectives (Pragmatics \& Beyond New Series ; 271)}, volume = {271}, booktitle = {Evidentiality revisited : Cognitive grammar, functional and discourse-pragmatic perspectives (Pragmatics \& Beyond New Series ; 271)}, editor = {Mar{\´i}n Arrese, Juana I. and Haßler, Gerda and Carretero, Marta}, publisher = {John Benjamins}, address = {Amsterdam, Philadelphia}, isbn = {9789027256768}, issn = {0922-842X}, doi = {10.1075/pbns.271.04boh}, publisher = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam}, pages = {87 -- 104}, year = {2017}, abstract = {The present study investigates the use of equivalents of the English adverbials seemingly and apparently with a specific morphological structure in Romance languages and Russian, i.e. Spanish al parecer, Portuguese ao parecer and ao que parece, French avoir l'air de, Italian all'apparenza and in apparenza as well as Russian по-видимому. The underlying hypothesis is that the function and syntactic behaviour of these adverbial locutions are motivated by their morphological composition. It is to investigate whether the adverbials may be used sentence-initially, parenthetically, as an adverbial with broad or narrow scope or as a component of a modalised predication. The adverbial locutions are treated as means of expression where evidentiality and epistemic modality represent overlapping functional-semantic categories.}, language = {en} }