Research History of Comp-agreement

Ton Goeman (1997b): Historiografie van het onderzoek naar voegwoordvervoeging: een bibliografisch overzicht (1821-1996). In: Hoekstra, E. en C. Smits (red.)(1997): Vervoegde Voegwoorden. Lezingen gehouden tijdens het Dialectsymposion 1994 [Cahiers van het P.J. Meertens-Instituut 9], Amsterdam: P.J. Meertens-Instituut, 112-145. ●The history of research into Comp-agreement: a bibliographical review (1821-1996)●
[an annotated and thematic survey of the literature on Comp-Agreement until 1995-1996]

Download here (zipped)


This article has the form of an annotated bibliography. It is the history of the research on Comp-agreement in the period 1821-1996.
It takes two lines of approach: chronological and thematic. In the article, preceding this one, I delineated typological and historical linguistic aspects.
Comp-agreement was known to exist in Middle Dutch (and Middle High German) for 2nd person singular, but attestations of comp-agreement outside this category known only for a later period (cf. Koelmans 1968b).
This may provoke uncomfortable feelings, enlarged by its rarity in typological respects. To ease these feelings, the work already done in the past as shown here may be combined with the occurrence of rather old attestations as shown in the previous article.
German research suffered from the fact that the role of clitics, and thus the clitic group, was underestimated.
This originated possibly in the attention payed to the iconic full forms of the pronoun in the standard language and the repudiation of liaison-like pronunciation, in combination with less possibilities for clitic fusion by the existence of so called 'harter Einsatz'.
This stance leads to the postulation of special suppletive forms of clitics, instead of explaining them by phonological fusion in the clitic group.