@article{WoellsteinReis2010,
  author    = {Angelika W{\"o}llstein and Marga Reis},
  title     = {Zur Grammatik (vor allem) konditionaler V1-Gef{\"u}ge im Deutschen},
  series   = {Zeitschrift f{\"u}r Sprachwissenschaft : Organ der Deutschen Gesellschaft f{\"u}r Sprachwissenschaft},
  volume    = {29},
  publisher = {de Gruyter},
  address   = {Berlin},
  issn      = {1613-3706},
  url       = {https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:bsz:mh39-9433},
  pages     = {111 -- 179},
  year      = {2010},
  abstract  = {Standardly, verb-first (V1) conditionals are considered to be mere variants of wenn-conditionals; accordingly, left-peripheral V1-clauses are analyzed as embedded into the prefields of declarative apodosis clauses, just like their V-end counterparts. We challenge this view, proposing instead that dependent V1-clauses are syntactically unembedded/unintegrated, and, consequently, that postposed declarative apodosis clauses are either V2-declaratives with prefield ellipsis or V1-declaratives. We argue our case by presenting evidence that (i) wenn-clauses differ considerably from V1-clauses in semantic distribution, (ii) unlike wenn-clauses, V1-clauses do not meet the criteria for syntactic embedding, (iii) the alternatives entailed by (ii) for the structural analysis of a postposed apodosis both have empirical support. As for a syntactic analysis of V1-structures suited to these findings, we argue that a CP adjunction analysis is currently the best option available. We also point out connections between the semantic restrictions on V1-conditionals and the semantics of V1-interrogatives that are suggestive of a common semantic core, which raises hope that our background vision (ultimately, all dependent V-to-C clauses are semantically licensed substitutes for genuine subordinates) may also be true for V1-clauses.},
  language  = {de}
}