Search

В предлагаемой статье на материале дорсетского диалекта рассматривается в синхронии функционирование перифрастической конструкции «do + инфинитив» как важного элемента грамматики юго-западных вариантов английского языка. Анализ корпуса примеров позволяет сделать вывод о том, что в «идеальном» письменном дорсетском диалекте, т.е. в той его форме, которая представлена в произведениях поэта и филолога У. Барнса и некоторых его подражателей, перифрастическая конструкция с глаголом do является специализированной видовременной формой с хабитуальной семантикой. Представляется, что для регулирования употребления дорсетских глагольных конструкций с перифрастическим do оказываются второстепенными факторы (контексты), постулируемые для формально сходных употреблений в литературном английском. В «идеальном» дорсетском диалекте синтетический презенс практически отсутствует, и в плане настоящего имеется единственное противопоставление: перифрастический презенс – прогрессив. В плане прошедшего имеет место противопоставление перифрастического и синтетического претерита, видовые различия между которыми позволяют говорить о наличии в дорсетском диалекте своего рода «имперфекта» и «аориста»., In the proposed article based on the material of the Dorset dialect, the synchronous functioning of the periphrastic construction "do + infinitive" as an important element in the grammar of the South-Western variants of English is examined. The analysis of the corpus of examples allows concluding that in the "ideal" written Dorset dialect, i.e., in that form which is presented in the works of the poet and philologist W. Barnes and some of his imitators, the periphrastic construction with the verb do is a special form with habitual semantics. It seems that the factors (contexts) postulated for formally similar uses in literary English are secondary for regulating the use of Dorset verb constructions with the periphrastic "do". In the "ideal" Dorset dialect, synthetic present tense is virtually absent, and there is only one opposition in its terms: periphrastic present tense – progressive. In terms of the past tense, there is an opposition between the periphrastic and synthetic preterite, the form differences between which allow to speak of a kind of "imperfect" and "aorist" forms in the Dorset dialect., Международный научно-исследовательский журнал, Выпуск 7 (121) 2022, Pages 155-159

espanolEste estudio tiene como objetivo investigar el desarrollo historico del orden de los verbos principal y auxiliar en oraciones negativas en euskera. En el articulo se muestra, tras realizar un analisis del orden de palabras en textos historicos, que en las oraciones principales se pierde el orden en el que la particula negativa va entre el verbo principal y el auxiliar (como en ikusi ez zuen), mientras que en las subordinadas dicho orden se mantiene. Se intenta explicar esta asimetria en terminos tipologicos y se toman en consideracion ciertos factores que afectan al orden de la negacion, como el tipo de oracion o el dialecto. EnglishThis study aims to investigate the historical development in Basque of the order of the main and auxiliary verb in negated clauses. By analyzing word order in a number of historical texts it is shown that the pattern according to which the negative particle follows the main verb and precedes the auxiliary (as in ikusi ez zuen) is lost in main clauses. At the same time, subordinate clauses are shown to preserve this pattern. An attempt is made to account for this asymmetry in typological terms. A number of factors that affect the order of negation, such as clause type and dialect, are also considered. euskaraLan honen helburua euskarazko ezezko perpausetako aditz nagusiak eta laguntzaileak historian zehar izan duten hurrenkera aztertzea da. Hizkuntzaren historiako hainbat testuren hitz-hurrenkerari begiratuz, aditz nagusia - ezezkoaren marka - aditz laguntzailea ordena (ikusi ez zuen modukoa) perpaus nagusietan desagertzen eta mendekoetan gordetzen dela erakusten da, eta, aldi berean, desberdintasun horri azalpen tipologikoa emateko saioa egiten da. Ezeztapenaren hurrenkerari eragiten dioten zenbait faktoreren inguruan ere (perpaus mota, euskalkia etab.) hausnarketa egiten da.

Predmet ovog rada jeste ispitivanje sintaksičkih funkcija infinitiva u starijem italijanskom jeziku analizom korpusa koji čine književna dela autora čije je stvaralaštvo obeležilo razvoj italijanskog proznog diskursa, s ciljem da se ukaže na promene nastale u strukturi, načinu upotrebe i zastupljenosti infinitivnih konstrukcija, što će pružiti sveobuhvatni prikaz njihovih izražajnih mogućnosti i sintaksičko-semantičkih vrednosti. Uočene infinitivne konstrukcije klasifikovane su i analizirane u okviru sledećih podgrupa: apsolutne infinitivne konstrukcije, modalne konstrukcije, implicitne zavisne rečenice, poimeničene infinitivne konstrukcije, nezavisna upotreba infinitiva, kao i perfirastične konstrukcije sa infinitivom. Kroz analizu strukture i upotrebe infinitivnih konstrukcija u odabranom jezičkom materijalu, rad prati razvoj italijanskog proznog diskursa, kao i uticaj latinske sintakse na kreiranje dominantnih sintaksičkih modela italijanskog jezika. Naglašenu upotrebu infinitivnih struktura u analiziranom korpusu objašnjavamo podražavanjem latinskih uzora. Polazimo od pretpostavke da su osnovne sintaksičke funkcije infinitiva nasleđene iz latinskog jezika, što dokazujemo ispitivanjem uticaja različitih sintaksičkosemantičkih činilaca na koherentnost posmatranih infinitivnih konstrukcija te i na funkcije njihovih članova. Širok spektar sintaksičko-semantičkih vrednosti infinitiva kao neličnog glagolskog oblika u kojem su kombinovane glagolske i nominalne karakteristike posmatramo na primerima poimeničenih infinitivnih struktura, uz poseban osvrt na parcijalnu nominalizaciju infinitiva karakterističnu za književni italijanski jezik. Upotrebom infinitivnih konstrukcija postiže se konciznost, jasnoća, neposrednost u pripovedanju, pojednostavljuje rečenična struktura, oslobođena složenih hipotaksičkih odnosa, i obogaćuje rečenični sadržaj različitim sintaksičkim i semantičkim vrednostima koje se ne mogu postići upotrebom ličnih glagolskih oblika, ili pak imenskih sintagmi. Podaci do kojih smo došli proučavanjem infinitivnih konstrukcija u starijoj italijanskoj prozi pružaju sistematičan pregled i širu sliku sintaksičkih vrednosti infinitiva, kao i mogućnosti za podrobnija ispitivanja pojedinih aspekata infinitivnih struktura, koji su u velikoj meri zanemareni u italijanskim gramatikama. The subject of this scientific paper is examining syntactic functions of infinitive in older Italian language by analyzing the corpus that consists of literary works of authors who marked the development of Italian prose discourse. Our objective is to point at changes in structure and the way infinitive constructions are used and represented, which will provide a comprehensive overview of their expressive characteristics and syntactic-semantic functions. Infinitive constructions we have found are classified and analyzed within the following subgroups: absolute infinitive constructions, modal infinitive constructions, implicit subordinate clauses, nominalized infinitive constructions, independent use of infinitive and periphrastic constructions with infinitive. By analyzing the structure and the use of infinitive constructions, the scientific paper looks into the development of Italian prose discourse, as well as the influence Latin syntax had on creating dominant syntactic models of the Italian language. Prominent use of infinitive structures in the analyzed corpus is explained by supporting Latin models. Our starting point is that the basic syntactic functions of infinitive are borrowed from Latin and we prove it by examining the influence various syntacticsemantic factors have on the coherence of analyzed infinitive constructions and the functions of their parts. A wide spectrum of syntactic-semantic functions of infinitive as an impersonal verb form with combined verbal and nominal characteristics is analyzed by examining examples of nominalized infinitive structures, with special reference to partial nominalization of infinitive which is characteristic of literary Italian. Using infinitive constructions means accomplishing conciseness, clarity, narrative immediacy, simplified sentence structure without complex hypotaxic relationships and it enriches sentences with various syntactic and semantic functions which is not possible to accomplish by using personal verb forms or nominal syntagmas. The data we obtained by analyzing infinitive constructions in older Italian prose provide a systematic overview and a wide picture of syntactic functions of infinitive, as well as a possibility of a more detailed examination of particular aspects of infinitive structures which have been largely neglected in Italian grammar books.

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.

Both Dutch and Afrikaans display three periphrastic progressive constructions, which indicate that an action is going on at a particular moment of time: (i) a prepositional construction with aan het/ die + zijn/wees, (ii) a construction with posture verbs (zitten/staan/liggen) with a to-infinitive (Dutch) or a coordinating verb (Afrikaans) and (Hi) a construction with bezig/besigyo/Zowec/ by a to-infinitive (see, among others, Bertinetto, Ebert & De Groot 2000; Breed 2012; Donaldson 1993). This paper focuses on the latter of these constructions, which until now has only received little attention in the grammatical literature. In the instances in (1) below, the bezig/besig-construction is used to express that a volitional action is/was going on for a certain amount of time. (1a) Sowat elf brandweerwaens was tot in die vroeë oggendure nog besig om die brand te blus. (Die Burger, 12/01/1998) lit. "About eleven fire engines were busy extinguishing the fire until long into the night. " (1b) Brandweerlieden zijn druk bezig een man te bevrijden uit defel gehavende personen- wagen. (Gazet van Antwerpen, gva2) lit. "The firemen are busy rescuing a man from the heavily damaged car. " However, progressive besig can also be used to express ongoing processes which do not involve a volitional agent - as shown in (b), Dutch bezig is hardly an option in such contexts. (2a) 'n Groot chaos is besig om onder sy neus te ontwikkel. (Die Burger, 06/02/1998) (2b) ??Een grote chaos is bezig om zich voor zijn neus te ontwikkelen. lit. "A great chaos is busy developing right under his very nose. " (3a) Haar nuutste album is besig om goed te verkoop. (Die Burger, 06/02/1998) (3b) ??Haar nieuwste album is bezig om goed te verkopen. lit. "Her newest album is busy selling well. " The aim of this paper is to examine the use of this construction in detail from the perspective of the grammaticalization theory, based on corpus data from six Dutch and two Afrikaans newspapers. Firstly, we show that besig in Afrikaans is used more often in a progressive construction than Dutch bezig. As is well-known, grammaticalization goes hand in hand with an increasing frequency (see, among others, Bybee 2003). Secondly, we show that the besig-progressive is more broadly applicable semantically than bezig in Dutch (host-class expansion, Himmelmann 2004). A semantic categorization of the types of verbs and subjects that are used with the construction indicates that the besig-progressive is used more frequently with verbs and subjects which seem incompatible with the basic "busy, acting"-semantics of the adjective besig; process verbs and inanimate subjects. It appears that besig has bleached from its etymological, "busy activity " meaning and is used as an aspectual marker denoting that something is going on, without focusing on the (complexity of the) activity, while Dutch bezig has to a large extent retained its "activity " semantics.

Au cours de l’histoire des dialectes occidentaux et centraux, les périphrases composées de la racine verbale / ou du participe et des auxiliaires *edin, *ezan, egin ont subi un changement dans la forme de leur verbe principal. Les bascologues qui ont étudié cette modification (Azkue 1924, 1935, Lafon 1943, Lakarra 1985a) l’ont présentée comme la généralisation de l’emploi du participe au sein de ces trois périphrases. Cependant, les données des textes des 15, 16, 17 et 18ème siècles semblent montrer des tendances différentes selon les dialectes et, surtout, selon les auxiliaires. Les périphrases à auxiliaires *edin et *ezan ont généralisé l’emploi du participe à des époques différentes, et celle à auxiliaire egin, elle, semble toujours avoir principalement employé le participe comme verbe principal. Ces données nous font donc état de trois périphrases grammaticalisées à partir de deux structures différentes : (i) racine verbale + auxiliaire (périphrases à auxiliaires *edin et *ezan), (ii) participe + auxiliaire (périphrase à auxiliaire egin). In the history of the occidental and central dialects of Basque, the verbal periphrases composed by the verbal stem / or the participle and the auxiliaries *edin, *ezan, egin have undergone a change in the form of their principal verb. Until now, the bascologists have presented this modification as the generalization of the use of the participle within these three periphrases. Anyway, the 15th, 16th, 17th and 18th century texts’ data seem to show different tendencies depending on the auxiliaries and the periods. The periphrasis based on the auxiliaries *edin and *ezan have generalized the use of the participle at different times, and the egin auxiliary based one seems to have always principally employed the participle as its lexical verb. Thus, these data give us good evidence for proposing that these three periphrases appeared and grammaticalized on the base of two different structures : (i) verbal stem + auxiliary (periphrases with the auxiliaries *edin and *ezan), (ii) participle + auxiliary (periphrasis with the auxiliary egin).

International audience; In the history of the occidental and central dialects of Basque, the verbal periphrases composed by the verbal stem / or the participle and the auxiliaries *edin, *ezan, egin have undergone a change in the form of their principal verb. Until now, the bascologists have presented this modification as the generalization of the use of the participle within these three periphrases. Anyway, the 15th, 16th, 17th and 18th century texts' data seem to show different tendencies depending on the auxiliaries and the periods. The periphrasis based on the auxiliaries *edin and *ezan have generalized the use of the participle at different times, and the egin auxiliary based one seems to have always principally employed the participle as its lexical verb. Thus, these data give us good evidence for proposing that these three periphrases appeared and grammaticalized on the base of two different structures : (i) verbal stem + auxiliary (periphrases with the auxiliaries *edin and *ezan), (ii) participle + auxiliary (periphrasis with the auxiliary egin).; Au cours de l'histoire des dialectes occidentaux et centraux, les périphrases composées de la racine verbale / ou du participe et des auxiliaires *edin, *ezan, egin ont subi un changement dans la forme de leur verbe principal. Les bascologues qui ont étudié cette modification (Azkue 1924, 1935, Lafon 1943, Lakarra 1985a) l'ont présentée comme la généralisation de l'emploi du participe au sein de ces trois périphrases. Cependant, les données des textes des 15, 16, 17 et 18ème siècles semblent montrer des tendances différentes selon les dialectes et, surtout, selon les auxiliaires. Les périphrases à auxiliaires *edin et *ezan ont généralisé l'emploi du participe à des époques différentes, et celle à auxiliaire egin, elle, semble toujours avoir principalement employé le participe comme verbe principal. Ces données nous font donc état de trois périphrases grammaticalisées à partir de deux structures différentes : (i) racine verbale + auxiliaire (périphrases à auxiliaires *edin et *ezan), (ii) participe + auxiliaire (périphrase à auxiliaire egin).

In 'n tweetal artikels (hierdie artikel en Breed & Van Huyssteen 2014) 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 V POS en V-konstruksie; sien Breed 2012 en Breed & Brisard 2015) met mekaar vergelyk is. Drie ewekniekonstruksies word in Nederlands gevind, en daarom word die konstruksies ook, waar ter sake, met die Nederlandse konstruksies vergelyk. In Breed (2012) word die grammatikaliseringsproses 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. In hierdie artikel word die frekwensie van die twee konstruksies ondersoek en daar word bewys dat daar aansienlike verskille tussen die verspreiding van die Afrikaanse en Nederlandse konstruksies is. Die werkwoorde waarmee elk van die konstruksies prototipies kombineer, word bestudeer en daar word bevind dat die Afrikaanse besig-konstruksie met 'n groot aantal werkwoordtipes kan kombineer, terwyl die aan die-progressiefkonstruksie meer gespesialiseerd 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 & Van Huyssteen 2014), 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 2015). Dutch has three similar constructions, and for this reason the constructions were also compared to the Dutch ones where relevant. Breed and Brisard (2015) explains how the V POS en construction is used to express progressive meaning. In this article and in Breed and Van Huyssteen (2014) the focus is therefore on the specific manner in which the besig and aan die constructions are used as progressive markers. 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. 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 (cf. Bybee et al. 1994:4-5; Croft 1990:257; Heine & Reh 1984:11-12; Hopper & Traugott 2003:1; Lehmann 1995:3). Breed and Van Huyssteen (2014) 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, namely universal routes, unidirectionality, lexical source, semantic bleaching, frequency and reanalysis. Secondly this article explains how the aan die and besig periphrastic constructions originate and develop. One of the most general lexical origins for progressive constructions is constructions with locative meaning (Bybee et al. 1994:129). The motivation behind the development of a progressive from locative constructions is probably due to 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 and forms the analysed construction of the periphrasis. 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 2015), 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 by means of a process which is continuing, and the development of this progressive construction is, therefore, lexically motivated. In this article, we investigate the frequency of these two constructions, as well as the verbs with which each of the constructions prototypically combine. The frequency of the two constructions was investigated in order to determine to what extent the constructions have been generalised. The aan die progressive (approximately 4,900 results in a corpus of circa 60 million words) appears significantly less frequently than the besig progressive (approximately 8,000 results). For the aan die construction a variant construction was also apparent, namely the aan 't progressive. This construction is, however, very scarce (only 330 results) and is seemingly archaic. Furthermore, it seems as though besig has been generalised to such an extent that the progressive use of this word (62%) in Afrikaans, is more frequent than the lexical use (38%). It seems as though the aan die construction forms strong collocations and has a few specialised uses, amongst others, to be combined with i) inchoative verbs (such as toeneem, afneem, taan and opbou); ii) idiomatic expressions such as aan die brand, aan die slaap andaan die rol; iii) process nouns such as aan die gang and aan die stuur, and iii) activity verbs. The aan 't progressive seems to be less specialised than the aandie progressive, although this construction is combined mainly with activity verbs. This construction is also generally found in contexts where a feeling of being "old-fashioned" or nostalgic is being conveyed, for example historical novels. The besig progressive combines with a great variety of verb types (i.e. activities, accomplishments and achievements). The frequency of transitive verbs with the besig progressive is also high in comparison to the other Afrikaans periphrastic progressive constructions.