Search

In 'n tweetal artikels (hierdie artikel en Breed & Van Huyssteen (voorgele)) stel ons ondersoek in na die wyse waarop twee perifrastiese konstruksies, te wete die V KOP besig om te V- en die V KOP aan die V-konstruksies, gebruik word om progressiewe betekenis in Afrikaans uit te druk. Die bespreking word gebaseer op 'n korpusondersoek waarin drie Afrikaanse perifrastiese progressiewe konstruksies (d.i. die twee genoemde konstruksies, sowel as die Vpos en V-konstruksie; sien Breed 2012 en Breed & Brisard voorgele) met mekaar vergelyk is. Drie ewekniekonstruksies word in Nederlands gevind, en daarom word die konstruksies ook, waar ter sake, met die Nederlandse konstruksies vergelyk. Aangesien Breed & Brisard (voorgele) fokus op die Vpos en-konstruksies, handel hierdie tweetal artikels oor die besig- en aan die-progressiewe. Terwyl die tweede artikel se fokus is om, aan die hand van die korpusondersoek se resultate, die spesifieke wyses aan te dui waarop die twee konstruksies gebruik word, is die hoofdoelwit van hierdie eerste artikel om die twee konstruksies se totstandkoming en ontwikkeling aan te toon. In hierdie artikel word die grammatikaliseringsproses aan die hand van die evolusie van die hoofwerkwoord het tot temporele hulpwerkwoord verduidelik, en daar word aangetoon dat die aan die-/aan het-konstruksies lokatiewe oorsprong het, terwyl die oorsprong van die besig-/bezig-konstruksies leksikaal gemotiveerd is. Progressive aspect is a grammatical category which signifies that an event is continuing or taking place (Comrie 1976:33-36; Bybee et al. 1994:126). In two articles, this article and Breed and Van Huyssteen (submitted), we investigate the manner in which two periphrastic constructions, namely the V COP besig om te V and the V COP aan die V constructions, are used to express progressive meaning in Afrikaans. The discussions are based on a corpus investigation in which the three Afrikaans periphrastic progressive constructions (the two already mentioned) and the V POS en V constructions are compared to each other (Breed 2012; Breed & Brisard submitted). Dutch has three similar constructions, and for this reason the constructions were also compared to the Dutch ones where relevant. Breed and Brisard (submitted) explain how the V POS en construction is used to express progressive meaning. In this article and in Breed and Van Huyssteen (submitted) the focus is therefore on the specific manner in which the besig and aan die constructions are used as progressive markers. The main objective of this first article is to show the origin and development of the two constructions, while the focus of the second article is to demonstrate - on the basis of the results of the corpus investigation - the specific ways in which the constructions are used. The grammaticalisation theory offers insight into the manner in which grammatical constructions develop. For this reason, the origin, development and use of the two relevant periphrastic constructions were investigated from this perspective. Grammaticalisation can be described as the process of language change during which lexical constructions develop systematically into constructions with grammatical meaning (Bybee et al. 1994; Hopper & Traugott 2003; Lehmann 1995). This process of language change is characterised by specific mechanisms or characteristics, for instance universal routes, unidirectional change, lexical origin, semantic generalisation, an increase in frequency and re-analysis. This first article firstly explains the theory of grammaticalisation. The grammaticalisation of the Afrikaans auxiliary het is given as an example to illustrate specific relevant aspects of grammaticalisation. Secondly, it explains how the aan die and besig periphrastic constructions originate and develop. One of the most general lexical origins ofprogressives is constructions with locative meaning (Bybee et al. 1994:129). The motivation behind the development of a progressive from locative constructions is probably the connotation of "be in the place of VERBing" or "be at VERBing" (Bybee et al. 1994:129-130). The hypothesis offered by Bybee et al. (1994:131) is that, apart from a few exceptions, all progressive constructions develop from locative meaning. The aan die progressive is a construction of locative origin. The structure of the periphrastic construction can be divided into three parts: firstly, the introductory copulative verb; secondly, the locative aan preposition; and thirdly, the nominalised verb which is preceded by the definite article die [aan + die] has received unit status andforms the analysed construction of the periphrase. The aan die progressive therefore supports the hypothesis that progressive constructions develop from locative meanings. The besig progressive 's lexical origin differs from that of the aan die progressive, as well as from the V POS en progressive (consult Breed 2012; Breed & Brisard submitted), due to the fact that this progressive construction does not have a locative origin. The word besig has a lexical meaning which implies that a subject is involved in a process which is continuing, and the development of this progressive construction is, therefore, lexically motivated.

Grammatikale konstruksies wat met postulêre werkwoorde (VPOS’e) vorm, kom voor in verskeie tale. Die Afrikaanse, sowel as die Nederlandse, VPOS-progressiewe konstruksie is reeds omvattend bespreek in onlangse taalkundebronne. Hoewel Griekwa-Afrikaans (GrAfr) en Standaardafrikaans (StAfr) beide as variasies van Afrikaans gereken word, en boonop dieselfde oorsprong deel (te wete sewentiendeeeuse Nederlands), en daar heelwat ooreenkomste bestaan in die manier waarop hierdie twee Afrikaanse variëteite die konstruksie gebruik, is daar tog ook ʼn hele aantal verrassende (vormlike en semantiese) verskille. Die doel van hierdie studie is om die unieke wyse waarop die VPOS-konstruksie in Griekwa-Afrikaans gebruik word om grammatikale betekenis uit te druk, aan te toon. Die studie word vanuit ʼn grammatikaliseringsperspektief aangepak aangesien hierdie vertrekpunt nuttig is om eerstens die ontwikkeling en tweedens die aanwending van grammatikale konstruksies te bespreek. Die grammatikaliseringsteorie verduidelik hoe woorde leksikale waarde verloor ten einde meer grammatikaal te word. Die kategoriale verandering (oftewel ouksiliëring) van die VPOS as leksikale hoofwerkwoord na grammatikale hulpwerkwoord, is ʼn merkbare gevolg van ʼn proses van grammatikalisering. Die gegrammatikaliseerde VPOS tree as die spil van die sin op en verrig tradisioneel die funksie om aan te toon i) of die handeling wat uitgedruk word, in die verlede, hede of toekoms plaasvind; ii) wat die spreker se perspektief op die handeling is, iii) wat die spreker se subjektiewe opinie of houding ten opsigte van die handeling is; en iv) of die handeling realiseer al dan nie. Hierdie vier funksies word onderskeidelik die tempus, aspek, modaliteit en polariteit van ʼn sin genoem. Omdat polariteit in Afrikaans deur die negatiewe partikel nie uitgedruk word, word daar in hierdie studie spesifiek ondersoek ingestel na die moontlike TAM-funksies wat die VPOS in GrAfr kan verrig. Hierdie studie het op ʼn vergelykende wyse te werk gegaan. Twee konkordansies is saamgestel om die gebruik van die VPOS-konstruksie in GrAfr te bestudeer in vergelyking met StAfr. Die GrAfr-konkordansie (ʼn gesproke korpus) bestaan uit 1000 sinne wat saamgestel is uit onderhoude wat met GrAfr’e moedertaalsprekers gevoer is in 1984 tydens die saamstel van die sogenaamde Van Rensburg-verslae. Die TKkonkordansie (geskrewe korpus) bestaan uit ʼn lukrake seleksie van 1000 sinne vanuit die TK-korpus wat VPOS-konstruksies bevat. Om die unieke gebruikswyse van die GrAfr vas te stel, is hierdie konkordansies volgens spesifieke parameters vergelyk. Eerstens is die frekwensieratio van die verskillende VPOS'e in die twee konkordansies vergelyk. Daar is gevind dat loop die mees frekwente VPOS in GrAfr is wat aandui dat dit die verste van die VPOS gegrammatikaliseer het. Die frekwensierangorde vir VPOS’e in GrAfr is loop > sit > staan > lê en die frekwensierangorde vir StAfr is sit > staan > loop > lê. Tweedens is die verhouding tussen leksikale en grammatikale gebruike vergelyk. Na aanleiding van die 66,93% van GrAfr’e voorbeelde wat grammatikale funksies verrig het, was dit duidelik dat die VPOS-konstruksie in GrAfr baie verder gegrammatikaliseer het as die konstruksie in StAfr. Derdens is daar ʼn vergelyking van die verskillende sinstipes gemaak en gekonkludeer dat beide konkordansies hoofsaaklik uit stelsinne bestaan, en dat die verskil in sinstipes in die twee konkordansies nie ʼn oorsaak kan wees van die aangeduide frekwensieverskille van VPOS’e nie. Vierdens en laastens is spesifieke sintaktiese interessanthede wat uniek is aan GrAfr ondersoek. Daar is byvoorbeeld gevind dat GrAfr, anders as StAfr, gereeld twee verskillende VPOS’e in een sin gebruik, byvoorbeeld "Dan staan loop hy jimmers". Daar was hier ook aanduidings van stringwerkwoordkonstruksies, byvoorbeeld “Ons had ʼn bietjie gelê stan oortree”, waar daar meer as een hulpwerkwoordelike VPOS aangewend word om ʼn grammatikale funksie te verrig. Verder is 'n hele aantal GrAfr’e voorbeelde gevind waar loop of selfs lê as wisselvorme van 'n die inchoatiewe gaan optree, byvoorbeeld “Hy lê kom nog”. Ander interessante verskynsels soos variasie in moontlike sinsstruktuur is ook ondersoek en enkele voorbeelde is gevind waar die grammatikale VPOS na die leksikale hoofwerkwoord geplaas word, byvoorbeeld “Ek kan nie lieg sit nie”. MA (Linguistics and Literary Theory), North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2015

MA (Linguistics and Literary Theory), North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2015 Grammatical constructions containing postural verbs (CPVs) are present in a variety of languages. The Afrikaans and Dutch CPV-progressive constructions have already been discussed in depth in recent linguistics studies. Although Griekwa-Afrikaans (GrAfr) and Standard Afrikaans are regarded as variations of Afrikaans, (both sharing a common origin (17th century Dutch)) and although there are numerous similarities in the ways in which these two Afrikaans varieties use this construction, there are still a number of surprising (structural and semantic) differences. The goal of this study is to indicate the way in which GrAfr uses the CPV-construction to express grammatical meaning. The study is approached from a grammaticalizational perspective since it is a handy starting point with which to discuss the development and application of the grammatical construction. The grammaticalization theory explains how words lose their lexical value to become more grammatical. The categorical change (or auxiliation) of the CPV as lexical verb to grammatical auxiliary verb, is a notable result of a grammaticalization process. A grammaticalized CPV acts as a finite verb of the sentence and traditionally, completes one of four grammatical functions, namely to indicate i) when the action being expressed, takes place – in the past, present or future; ii) the speaker’s perspective on the action, iii) the speaker’s subjective opinion or attitude in terms of the action; and iv) whether or not the action actually takes place or not. These four functions can accordingly be called the tense, aspect, modality and polarity of the sentence. Since Afrikaans polarity is expressed by the negative particle nie, this study will specifically focus on the possible TAM functions expressed by CPVs in GrAfr. This study was approached as a comparative study. Two concordances were compiled to study the use of the CPV construction in GrAfr compared to StAfr.. The Gr-concordance (a spoken corpus) consists of 1000 sentences collected during interviews with mother tongue speakers of GrAfr in 1984 during the compilation of the so-called Van Rensburg reports. The TK-concordance (a written corpus) contains 1000 randomly selected sentences containing CPVs from the TK-Corpus. To establish the unique manner in which GrAfr uses this construction, the two concordances were compared according to specific parameters. Firstly the frequency ratio of sit, staan (stand), loop (walk) and lê (lie) in the two concordances were compared. It was found that loop was the most frequent, which indicates that it is more grammaticalized than the other CPVs. The frequency order of CPVs in GrAfr is loop > sit > staan > lê and in StAfr it is sit > staan > loop > lê. Secondly the ratio between lexical and grammatical uses was compared. After noticing that 66, 93% of the GrAfr examples fulfilled grammatical functions, it became apparent that the CPV construction is much more grammaticalized than the construction in StAfr. In the third place the different types of sentences present in both concordances were compared and it was concluded that the different sentences types could not be the cause of the indicated frequency differences of CPV’s. In the fourth place, specific interesting syntactic occurrences in GrAfr were discussed. For example: it was found that GrAfr, other than StAfr, regularly uses two different CPVs in one sentence, as in “Dan staan loop hy jimmers”. There were also indications of string constructions, for example “Ons had ʼn bietjie gelê stan oortree”, where more than one auxiliary CPV is applied to fulfil a grammatical function. Furthermore, a number examples were found where loop and even lê were used as synonyms for the inchoative gaan, for example “Hy lê kom nog”. Other interesting cases, such as variation in possible sentence structure, were also explored and examples were found where the grammatical CPV was placed after the lexical verb – thus not in the traditional position of the finite verb – as in “Ek kan nie lieg sit nie”. Masters

PhD (Afrikaans and Dutch), North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2012 Temporal constructions in Afrikaans are ambiguous with respect to aspectual meaning. The past tense construction with het ge-, for instance, can be interpreted as progressive, perfective or anterior. In the same vein, the unmarked present tense construction can be interpreted as a construction with a progressive or a perfective meaning. This aspectual ambiguity of the Afrikaans verbal system has a significant effect on the way in which Afrikaans grammar is described or understood. The observation by native speakers, linguists, literary specialists and writers that the temporal constructions in Afrikaans are vague or ambiguous with regard to aspectual meaning has led to certain views about the expression of tense in the language. In Afrikaans literature, for example, there is a tradition to write prose primarily in the present tense, because of the perception that the past tense is not adequate to convey particular semantic nuances. Furthermore, certain speakers of Afrikaans and linguists believe that Afrikaans grammar has been simplified and just does not have aspect. However, Afrikaans possesses alternative strategies to specify aspectual meaning. The five prototypical ways of expressing aspectual meaning in Afrikaans are i) lexical constructions (such as adverbs and conjunctions); ii) constructions with affixes, iii) reduplication constructions; iv) passive constructions; and v) periphrastic constructions. Aspectual meaning in Afrikaans is an almost entirely unexplored research field. In my opinion, the literature on the expressions of aspectual meaning in Afrikaans contains two shortcomings. First, Afrikaans aspect needs to be described theoretically. Second, more research is needed concerning the specific ways in which aspectual meaning is expressed in Afrikaans. The scope of this entire research field is too large for a single study. For that reason, the present study aims to reveal the way in which periphrastic constructions are used to convey progressive meaning. As far as temporal meaning is concerned, it is possible to make a distinction between tempus meaning, which stands for deictic temporal meanings (i.e. past, present and future tense), and aspectual meaning, which stands for non-deictic temporal meanings such as duration, point of view and the internal structure of the situation. One can also distinguish between lexical and grammatical aspect. Lexical aspect has to do with the conceptual properties of a situation or, in other words, with the question whether it is static or dynamic, telic or atelic and durative. There are five situation types: states, activities, achievements, accomplishments and semelfactives. Grammatical aspect concerns the point of view from which the situation is perceived. One can make a distinction between perfective and imperfective grammatical aspect. The latter can be subdivided into imperfectives conveying habitual meaning and imperfectives conveying progressive meaning. Grammaticalisation theory is useful and a relevant tool to provide answers to the afore-mentioned research questions. First, it offers insight into the manner in which the ambiguous tempus constructions of Afrikaans came into being. Second, it can be used to show how the alternative aspectual constructions have developed and how they are currently employed in the language. For the purpose of this study, grammaticalisation is regarded as language change in which a construction loses its lexical meaning and comes to express grammatical meaning. Grammatical constructions can be used in more contexts than their lexical counterparts, as grammaticalised uses have been generalized contextually. Grammatical constructions lose the morphosyntactic properties typical of their lexical counterparts and assume grammatical properties. Grammaticalisation is a typological phenomenon and the lexical origin of a grammatical construction is often the same in different languages. Grammaticalizing constructions exhibit an increase in frequency. Afrikaans and Dutch are closely related languages and possess cognate periphrastic progressive constructions, viz. i) the aan het- / aan die- ii) VPOS te / VPOS en-; en iii) bezig- / besig- progressive constructions. To examine the use of periphrastic progressive constructions in Afrikaans from a grammaticalisation perspective, I compare the results of a study of these constructions in an Afrikaans corpus to those of previous studies of the periphrastic progressive constructions in Dutch. The respective constructions are compared on the basis of four criteria, viz. i) frequency; ii) verb collocations; iii) transitivity; and iv) combinatorial possibilities with other aspectual periphrastic constructions. The lexical origins of the various constructions are also considered. The comparison of the constructions on the basis of the afore-mentioned criteria makes it possible to demonstrate how the periphrastic progressive constructions in Afrikaans came into being and how they have developed into grammatical constructions conveying aspectual meaning and in which way the different Afrikaans periphrastic constructions express progressive meaning. Doctoral

Temporal constructions in Afrikaans are ambiguous with respect to aspectual meaning. The past tense construction with het ge-, for instance, can be interpreted as progressive, perfective or anterior. In the same vein, the unmarked present tense construction can be interpreted as a construction with a progressive or a perfective meaning. This aspectual ambiguity of the Afrikaans verbal system has a significant effect on the way in which Afrikaans grammar is described or understood. The observation by native speakers, linguists, literary specialists and writers that the temporal constructions in Afrikaans are vague or ambiguous with regard to aspectual meaning has led to certain views about the expression of tense in the language. In Afrikaans literature, for example, there is a tradition to write prose primarily in the present tense, because of the perception that the past tense is not adequate to convey particular semantic nuances. Furthermore, certain speakers of Afrikaans and linguists believe that Afrikaans grammar has been simplified and just does not have aspect. However, Afrikaans possesses alternative strategies to specify aspectual meaning. The five prototypical ways of expressing aspectual meaning in Afrikaans are i) lexical constructions (such as adverbs and conjunctions); ii) constructions with affixes, iii) reduplication constructions; iv) passive constructions; and v) periphrastic constructions. Aspectual meaning in Afrikaans is an almost entirely unexplored research field. In my opinion, the literature on the expressions of aspectual meaning in Afrikaans contains two shortcomings. First, Afrikaans aspect needs to be described theoretically. Second, more research is needed concerning the specific ways in which aspectual meaning is expressed in Afrikaans. The scope of this entire research field is too large for a single study. For that reason, the present study aims to reveal the way in which periphrastic constructions are used to convey progressive meaning. As far as temporal meaning is concerned, it is possible to make a distinction between tempus meaning, which stands for deictic temporal meanings (i.e. past, present and future tense), and aspectual meaning, which stands for non-deictic temporal meanings such as duration, point of view and the internal structure of the situation. One can also distinguish between lexical and grammatical aspect. Lexical aspect has to do with the conceptual properties of a situation or, in other words, with the question whether it is static or dynamic, telic or atelic and durative. There are five situation types: states, activities, achievements, accomplishments and semelfactives. Grammatical aspect concerns the point of view from which the situation is perceived. One can make a distinction between perfective and imperfective grammatical aspect. The latter can be subdivided into imperfectives conveying habitual meaning and imperfectives conveying progressive meaning. Grammaticalisation theory is useful and a relevant tool to provide answers to the afore-mentioned research questions. First, it offers insight into the manner in which the ambiguous tempus constructions of Afrikaans came into being. Second, it can be used to show how the alternative aspectual constructions have developed and how they are currently employed in the language. For the purpose of this study, grammaticalisation is regarded as language change in which a construction loses its lexical meaning and comes to express grammatical meaning. Grammatical constructions can be used in more contexts than their lexical counterparts, as grammaticalised uses have been generalized contextually. Grammatical constructions lose the morphosyntactic properties typical of their lexical counterparts and assume grammatical properties. Grammaticalisation is a typological phenomenon and the lexical origin of a grammatical construction is often the same in different languages. Grammaticalizing constructions exhibit an increase in frequency. Afrikaans and Dutch are closely related languages and possess cognate periphrastic progressive constructions, viz. i) the aan het- / aan die- ii) VPOS te / VPOS en-; en iii) bezig- / besig- progressive constructions. To examine the use of periphrastic progressive constructions in Afrikaans from a grammaticalisation perspective, I compare the results of a study of these constructions in an Afrikaans corpus to those of previous studies of the periphrastic progressive constructions in Dutch. The respective constructions are compared on the basis of four criteria, viz. i) frequency; ii) verb collocations; iii) transitivity; and iv) combinatorial possibilities with other aspectual periphrastic constructions. The lexical origins of the various constructions are also considered. The comparison of the constructions on the basis of the afore-mentioned criteria makes it possible to demonstrate how the periphrastic progressive constructions in Afrikaans came into being and how they have developed into grammatical constructions conveying aspectual meaning and in which way the different Afrikaans periphrastic constructions express progressive meaning. PhD (Afrikaans and Dutch), North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2012