@article{OneaVolodina2016,
  author    = {Edgar Onea and Anna Volodina},
  title     = {Der Schein tr{\"u}gt n{\"a}mlich},
  series   = {Linguistische Berichte},
  volume    = {2009},
  number    = {219},
  issn      = {0024-3930},
  url       = {https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:bsz:mh39-52680},
  pages     = {291 -- 321},
  year      = {2016},
  abstract  = {The German particle n{\"a}mlich is puzzling because it seems to have two independent semantic functions which strictly correlate with specific syntactic environments: if n{\"a}mlich precedes an ,,orphan constituent\" (Haegeman 1991) it specifies an underspecified discourse referent in the previous clause, and if n{\"a}mlich appears in a whole clause its function is marking that the hostclause delivers an explanation to the previous clause. A polysemy- or even homonymy-analysis seems problematic precisely because of this strict correlation between syntactic environment and semantic function. In this paper we propose a unified analysis of n{\"a}mlich. We argue that n{\"a}mlich marks the property of the context that there is an implicit question to which the host of n{\"a}mlich delivers a direct (short) answer (Jacobson 2008). Crucially, constituents are good short answers to constituent-questions (Who?), while whole clauses are only good short-answers to ,,sentence\"-questions like Why p? Building on these intuitions we show how both readings of n{\"a}mlich can systematically be derived and implement our analysis formally.},
  language  = {de}
}