{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02753195673549656, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0019665683382497543, 'mean_word_length': 5.3625, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Implications of Grammaticalization for Language Change


The emergence of the German double present and past perfect (hat vergessen gehabt ‘has forgotten had’; ist gefahren gewesen ‘is gone been’ – hatte vergessen gehabt ‘had forgotten had’; war gefahren gewesen ‘was gone been’) is still widely debated. Some scholars consider the development of these constructions a result of the decline of the Präteritum, whereas others claim that these were formed as a consequence of the loss of the aspectual system and the reconstruction process of the verbal categories. In this article, the author argues that the development of these constructions is the result of the grammaticalization of the Perfekt as a ‘commentary tense’ in the 14th Century. The increased frequency of the present perfect prompted the reanalysis of the past participles of haben (gehabt) and sein (gewesen), which began to appear alongside the present perfect, creating new periphrastic constructions, including the double present and past perfects.