DOCSLIB.ORG

Interrogative Words and Content Questions in Tundra Nenets

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Interrogative Words and Content Questions in Tundra Nenets Interrogative words and content questions in Tundra Nenets Nikolett Mus A PhD dissertation submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy of the University of Szeged University of Szeged Doctoral School in Linguistics Uralic Studies PhD Programme Supervisor: Beáta Wagner-Nagy, Prof. Dr. Szeged, 2015 This page intentionally left blank ii Acknowledgements The story of this dissertation began at the University of Szeged in 2001, when I missed a Finnish course, which was obligatory at the first year of Hungarian studies. Instead of Finnish I had to choose any other “related” language such as Udmurt, Mordvin or Nenets. At that time, I was reading a series of books written by Margit Sandemo. A really exciting part of this series is set in Siberia among Enets characters. I did not think the difference could be great between Nenets and Enets, therefore I decided to attend the Nenets language course held by Erika Körtvély. The course aroused my interest towards Samoyed linguistics and turned my attention to Samoyed syntax which was a less described field of study at that time. I owe special thanks to Erika who became my advisor later. I feel very fortunate to have had such a great teacher. I definitely have to thank to my supervisor, Beáta Wagner-Nagy, for taking on my research. She accompanied the developement of this dissertation and her comments were useful in writing. I hope that our work will continue in the future. In addition, I thank to my opponents for the first, departmental, defence, Anna Gazdik and Valentin Gusev, who provided extremely helpful reviews about the previous version of this work. I also owe thanks to my boss, Marianne Bakró-Nagy, as well as, to my colleagues at the Research Institute for Linguistics, Hungarian Academy of Sciences. I am grateful to Mária Sipos, Zsuzsa Duray, Csilla Horváth and Zsuzsa Várnai for having read various parts of this work and proposing changes and corrections. I am grateful to Veronika Hegedűs, who read this dissertation and corrected my English. Without her comments this study would be much less. Furthermore, I would like to thank Evdokija Lampay and Elena Evay for providing data on Tundra Nenets negation and for filling in my questionnaire whose parts have also been used for this dissertation. In addition, I would like to thank Oksana Dobzhanskaya for her intercession. I am also thankful to Tom Blauwendraat for helping me in writing the PERL script. For the funding of my study I thank the Eötvös Scholarship of the Hungarian State. My dissertation could not have been realised without Barbara Egedi, who has constantly helped, inspired and encouraged me. She provided me with valuable feedback in all aspects of my work. Our late-night discussions illuminated me and helped me to answer thousands of questions. In the course of our work she became my best friend. I cannot be grateful enough for her support and for all of those cunning plans we made together. I also would like to thank friends, especially Bori Németh, Eszter Simon and Dávid Takács. Many other people have contributed to the dissertation in its current state, to all of whom I would like to express my gratitude. Finally, I would like to express my deepest gratitude to my family: to my mom who supports me in every conceivable way and who encouraged me not to give up anything. I am also grateful to my sister who always believed in me more than I have. I am very glad for having her. Finally, thanks go to my brother-in-law, János, for being the member of this family. This dissertation is dedicated to my family. iii Contents Acknowledgements iii List of abbreviations vi 1. Introduction 1 2. The Tundra Nenets language 5 2.1. Demography and ethnography 6 2.2. Writing system, transcription, glossing conventions 12 2.3. The main typological features of Tundra Nenets 14 2.4. Previous research on (Tundra) Nenets and Samoyedic languages 26 3. Data, sources and methodology 31 3.1. Preliminary considerations 31 3.2. Sampling frame 33 3.2.1. Recorded texts 35 3.2.2. Imagined texts 36 3.2.2.1. Phrasebooks 36 3.2.2.2. Methodological handbooks 37 3.2.2.3. Reading books 38 3.2.2.4. Textbooks 39 3.3. Data collection strategies 41 4. The subject of the study 43 4.1. Speech act distinctions 44 4.2. The subtypes of interrogative clauses 47 4.3. Content questions 52 4.4. Defining the analysed constructions in Tundra Nenets 59 4.5. Previous research on Tundra Nenets (content) questions 64 4.6. Research questions 69 5. The lexico-semantics of interrogative words 70 5.1. Non-selective interrogative words 71 5.1.1. Possessor 74 5.1.2. Comitative and instrument 74 5.1.3. Beneficiary and goal 76 5.1.4. Non-human versus selection/quality 77 5.1.5. Non-human versus reason 79 5.2. Selective interrogative words 79 5.2.1. The non-restricted selective interrogative word 80 5.2.2. The restricted selective interrogative word 81 5.3. The qualitative interrogative word 82 5.4. The interrogative size specification 83 5.5. The quantitative interrogative word 84 5.5.1. The interrogative category of rank 85 5.5.2. The subspecification of interrogative time category 85 5.6. The interrogative place specification 86 5.7. The interrogative time specification 88 5.8. The interrogative manner specification 89 5.9. Other semantic categories 89 6. The parts-of-speech categories of interrogative words 91 6.1. The interrogative pronouns 93 6.1.1. Interrogative pronouns as constituents of the main clause 94 6.1.2. Interrogative pronouns as complements of phrases 103 iv 6.1.3. The attributive use of the non-human interrogative pronoun 105 6.1.4. The adverbial use of the non-human interrogative pronoun 107 6.2. The interrogative determiners 109 6.3. Interrogative adjectives 112 6.4. Interrogative quantifiers 115 6.5. Interrogative adverbs 118 6.5.1. Sentential interrogative adverbs 119 6.5.2. The predicational interrogative adverb 122 7. The syntactic position of interrogative phrases 126 7.1. Intransitive content questions 132 7.1.1. Existential content questions 146 7.1.2. Predicative possession expressed by content questions 149 7.2. Transitive content questions 153 7.3. Content questions with nonverbal predicates 169 7.3.1. Content questions with nominal predicates: equative and inclusive constructions 174 7.3.2. Predicative possession with definite possessed item expressed by content questions 180 7.3.3. Content questions with adjectival predicates 182 7.3.4. Content questions with quantifier predicates 183 7.3.5. Locative predicates expressed by content questions 184 7.3.6. Temporary possession expressed by content questions 188 7.3.7. Content questions with temporal predicates 188 7.3.8. Content questions with manner predicates 189 8. Conclusions 191 List of references 194 v List of abbreviations Abbreviations used in the glosses 1 first person IMPF imperfect 2 second person IND indicative mood 3 third person INDF indefinite ABL ablative INST instrumental ACC accusative INT interrogative mood ADJ adjective LIM limitative AN action nominal LOC locative AOR aorist NOM nominative BEN benefactive NARR narrative CAR caritive NEG.AUX negative auxiliary CNG connegative NEG.EX negative existential verb CO linking element NOM nominative COM comitative OBJ objective conjugation COMP comparative OBL oblique CONT continuative ORD ordinal number CVB converb PCP participle DAT dative PL plural DEF definite PROB probabilitive DIM diminutive PROS prosecutive DU dual PST past EMP emphatic clitic PX possessive suffix ESS essive REFL reflexive FREQ frequentative SEL selective FUT future SG singular GEN genitive SUP supine GER gerund TR transitive HAB habitual VX verbal agreement suffix HORT hortative Abbreviations used in the text agr agreeing element AL Anna Latysheva (Accessed 2015-06-01) E.La Ekaterina Laptander (Accessed 2015-06-01) Ev.L Evdokiya Lampay FT full text L locational adverbial NP noun phrase O object PD possessed item PR possessor pred predicate Q interrogative phrase S subject of intransitive and transitive clauses TE text excerpt X oblique adverbial constituent vi V finite verb VT Valentina Taleeva (Accessed 2015-06-01) vii 1. Introduction The aim of this study is to provide a description of Tundra Nenets (Northern Samoyedic, Uralic) content questions. Tundra Nenets is an indigenous, endangered, minority language spoken in the Russian Federation. The language belongs to the Northern Samoyedic group of the Uralic language family. Although a significant number of linguistic description of Tundra Nenets may, at first sight, appear, the language can be considered as a poorly documented and described language compared with the other Samoyedic or Finno-Ugric languages. This is particularly true for the syntax of Tundra Nenets, since there are two grammars available which focus on the description and analysis of the Tundra Nenets clauses (see Tereshchenko 1973 and Nikolaeva 2014). Despite the fact that these grammars describe the basic grammar of the main clause-types found in Tundra Nenets, comprehensive analyses of content questions are not provided. In addition, there are grammar books (e.g. Kupriyanova et al. 1957, Almazova 1961) used in primary schools, which do not satisfy the criteria for modern linguistic descriptions. These sources in question, furthermore, may provide the results of analyses based on historical data since the investigations summarised were carried out at least 50 years ago. In summary, my main aim is to remedy the deficiencies in the literature in respect of content questions in Tundra Nenets. Content questions are treated here as single wh-interrogatives, i.e. content questions which have only a single interrogative word. Traditionally, content questions are described as questions which (i) require a specific answer other than ʻYes/No’ and (ii) contain an interrogative phrase (cf.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Interrogative Words: an Exercise in Lexical Typology
    Interrogative words: an exercise in lexical typology Michael Cysouw [email protected] Bantu grammer: description and theory 3; Session on question formation in Bantu ZAS Berlin – Friday 13 Februari 2004 1 Introduction Wer, wie, was? Der, die, das! Wieso, weshalb, warum? Wer nicht fragt, bleibt dumm! (German Sesame Street) This is first report on a study of the cross-linguistic diversity of interrogative words.1 The data are only preliminary and far from complete – for most of the languages included I am not sure whether I have really found all interrogative words (the experience with German shows that it is not do easy to collect them all). Further, the sample of languages investigated (see appendix) is not representative of the world’s languages, though it presents a fair collection of genetically and areally diverse languages. I will not say too much about relative frequencies, but mainly collect cases of particular phenomena to establish guidelines for further research. (1) Research questions a. What can be asked by an interrogative word? Which kind of interrogative categories are distinguished in the world’s languages? Do we need more categories than the seven lexicalised categories in English – who, what, which, where, when, why and how? b. Can all attested question words be expressed in all languages? For example, the German interrogative word wievielte is hardly translatable into English ‘how manieth’. c. How do the the interrogative words look like? – Have all interrogative categories own lexicalised/phrasal forms, or are they homonomous with other interrogative categories? For example, English ‘how did you do it?’ and ‘how long is it?’ use the same interrogative word, but this is not universally so.
    [Show full text]
  • Subject-Verb Word-Order in Spanish Interrogatives: a Quantitative Analysis of Puerto Rican Spanish1
    Near-final version (February 2011): under copyright and that the publisher should be contacted for permission to re-use or reprint the material in any form Brown, Esther L. & Javier Rivas. 2011. Subject ~ Verb word-order in Spanish interrogatives: a quantitative analysis of Puerto Rican Spanish. Spanish in Context 8.1, 23–49. Subject-verb word-order in Spanish interrogatives: A quantitative analysis of Puerto Rican Spanish1 Esther L. Brown and Javier Rivas We conduct a quantitative analysis of conversational speech from native speakers of Puerto Rican Spanish to test whether optional non-inversion of subjects in wh-questions (¿qué tú piensas?) is indicative of a movement in Spanish from flexible to rigid word order (Morales 1989; Toribio 2000). We find high rates of subject expression (51%) and a strong preference for SV word order (47%) over VS (4%) in all sentence types, inline with assertions of fixed SVO word order. The usage-based examination of 882 wh-questions shows non-inversion occurs in 14% of the cases (25% of wh- questions containing an overt subject). Variable rule analysis reveals subject, verb and question type significantly constrain interrogative word order, but we find no evidence that word order is predicted by perseveration. SV word order is highest in rhetorical and quotative questions, revealing a pathway of change through which word order is becoming fixed in this variety. Keywords: word order, language change, Caribbean Spanish, interrogative constructions 1. Introduction In typological terms, Spanish is characterized as a flexible SVO language. As has been shown by López Meirama (1997: 72), SVO is the basic word order in Spanish, with the subject preceding the verb in pragmatically unmarked independent declarative clauses with two full NPs (Mallinson & Blake 1981: 125; Siewierska 1988: 8; Comrie 1989).
    [Show full text]
  • The Interrogative Words of Tlingit an Informal Grammatical Study
    The Interrogative Words of Tlingit An Informal Grammatical Study Seth Cable July 2006 Contents 1. Introductory Comments and Acknowledgments p. 4 2. Background Assumptions p. 5 3.The Interrogative Words of Tlingit p. 6 4. Simple Questions in Tlingit p. 6 4.1 The Pre-Predicate Generalization p. 7 4.2 The Preference for the Interrogative Word to be Initial p. 10 4.3 The Generalization that Interrogative Words are Left Peripheral p. 13 4.4 Comparison with Other Languages p. 14 5. Complex Questions and ‘Pied-Piping’ in Tlingit p. 16 6. Multiple Questions and the ‘Superiority Condition’ in Tlingit p. 23 7. Free Relatives and ‘Matching Effects’ in Tlingit p. 30 7.1 The Free Relative Construction in Tlingit p. 30 7.2 Matching Effects in Tlingit Free Relatives p. 36 8. Negative Polarity Indefinites in Tlingit p. 38 8.1 Negative Polarity Indefinites (‘NPI’s) and Interrogative Words p. 38 8.2 Tlingit Interrogative Words as Negative Polarity Indefinites p. 42 8.3 The Use of Interrogative Words in Negated Expressions p. 48 9. Tlingit Interrogative Words as Plain Existentials and Specific Indefinites p. 58 1 9.1 Tlingit Interrogative Words as Plain Existentials p. 58 9.2 Tlingit Interrogative Words as Specific Indefinites p. 62 10. Other Uses of Tlingit Interrogative Words in Non-Interrogative Sentences p. 65 10.1 Question-Based Exclamatives in Tlingit p. 65 10.2 Apparent Uses as Relative Pronouns p. 68 10.3 Concessive Free Relatives in Tlingit p. 74 10.4 Various Other Constructions Containing Waa ‘How’ or Daat ‘What’ p.
    [Show full text]
  • Multi-Word Verbs with the Verb 'Make', and Their Croatian Counterparts
    Multi-word verbs with the verb 'make', and their Croatian counterparts Najdert, Igor Undergraduate thesis / Završni rad 2018 Degree Grantor / Ustanova koja je dodijelila akademski / stručni stupanj: Josip Juraj Strossmayer University of Osijek, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences / Sveučilište Josipa Jurja Strossmayera u Osijeku, Filozofski fakultet Permanent link / Trajna poveznica: https://urn.nsk.hr/urn:nbn:hr:142:440686 Rights / Prava: In copyright Download date / Datum preuzimanja: 2021-09-28 Repository / Repozitorij: FFOS-repository - Repository of the Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences Osijek Sveučilište Josipa Jurja Strossmayera u Osijeku Filozofski fakultet Osijek Studij: Dvopredmetni sveučilišni preddiplomski studij engleskoga jezika i književnosti i hrvatskog jezika i književnosti Igor Najdert Višeriječni glagoli s glagolom make i njihovi hrvatski ekvivalenti Završni rad Mentor: doc. dr. sc. Goran Milić Osijek, 2018 Sveučilište Josipa Jurja Strossmayera u Osijeku Filozofski fakultet Osijek Odsjek za engleski jezik I književnost Studij: Dvopredmetni sveučilišni preddiplomski studij engleskoga jezika i književnosti i hrvatskoga jezika i književnosti Igor Najdert Multi-word verbs with make, and their Croatian counterparts Završni rad Znanstveno područje: humanističke znanosti Znanstveno polje: filologija Znanstvena grana: anglistika Mentor: doc. dr. sc. Goran Milić Osijek, 2018 J.J. Strossmayer University of Osijek Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences Study Programme: Double Major BA Study Programme in English
    [Show full text]
  • GF Modern Greek Resource Grammar
    GF Modern Greek Resource Grammar Ioanna Papadopoulou University of Gothenburg [email protected] Abstract whilst each of the syntactic parts of the sentence (subject, object, predicate) is a carrier of a certain The paper describes the Modern Greek (MG) case, a fact that allows various word order Grammar, implemented in Grammatical structures. In addition, the language presents a Framework (GF) as part of the Grammatical dynamic syllable stress, whereas its position Framework Resource Grammar Library depends and alternates according to the (RGL). GF is a special-purpose language for morphological variations. Moreover, MG is one multilingual grammar applications. The RGL 1 is a reusable library for dealing with the of the two Indo-European languages that retain a morphology and syntax of a growing number productive synthetic passive formation. In order of natural languages. It is based on the use of to realize passivization, verbs use a second set of an abstract syntax, which is common for all morphological features for each tense. languages, and different concrete syntaxes implemented in GF. Both GF itself and the 2 Grammatical Framework RGL are open-source. RGL currently covers more than 30 languages. MG is the 35th GF (Ranta, 2011) is a special purpose language that is available in the RGL. For the programming language for developing purpose of the implementation, a morphology- multilingual applications. It can be used for driven approach was used, meaning a bottom- building translation systems, multilingual web up method, starting from the formation of gadgets, natural language interfaces, dialogue words before moving to larger units systems and natural language resources.
    [Show full text]
  • Types of Interrogative Sentences an Interrogative Sentence Has the Function of Trying to Get an Answer from the Listener
    Types of Interrogative Sentences An interrogative sentence has the function of trying to get an answer from the listener, with the premise that the speaker is unable to make judgment on the proposition in question. Interrogative sentences can be classified from various points of view. The most basic approach to the classification of interrogative sentences is to sort out the reasons why the judgment is not attainable. Two main types are true-false questions and suppletive questions (interrogative-word questions). True-false questions are asked because whether the proposition is true or false is not known. Examples: Asu, gakkō ni ikimasu ka? ‘Are you going to school tomorrow?’; Anata wa gakusei? ‘Are you a student?’ One can answer a true-false question with a yes/no answer. The speaker asks a suppletive question because there is an unknown component in the proposition, and that the speaker is unable to make judgment. The speaker places an interrogative word in the place of this unknown component, asking the listener to replace the interrogative word with the information on the unknown component. Examples: Kyō wa nani o taberu? ‘What are we going to eat today?’; Itsu ano hito ni atta no? ‘When did you see him?” “Eating something” and “having met him” are presupposed, and the interrogative word expresses the focus of the question. To answer a suppletive question one provides the information on what the unknown component is. In addition to these two main types, there are alternative questions, which are placed in between the two main types as far as the characteristics are concerned.
    [Show full text]
  • Phrasal Imperatives in English
    PSYCHOLOGY AND EDUCATION (2021) 58(3): 1639-1655 ISSN: 00333077 Phrasal Imperatives in English 1Prof. Taiseer Flaiyih Hesan ; 2Teeba Khalid Shehab 1,2 University of Thi-Qar/ College of Education/ Department of English Abstract The present study has both theoretical and practical sides. Theoretically, it sheds light on phrasal imperatives (and hence PIs) as a phenomenon in English. That is, phrasal verbs are multi-word verbs that are generally composed of a verb and a particle. These verbs can be used imperatively instead of single-word verbs to form PIs. This study seeks to answer certain research questions: which form of phrasal verb can be allowed to be used as PIs? which type of phrasal verbs can be used “mostly” as PIs? in which function is the PI most frequent? It is hypothesized that certain forms of phrasal verbs can be used imperatively. Another hypothesis is that certain functions can be mostly realized by PIs. Practically speaking, this study is a corpus-based one. In this respect, corpus linguistics like Corpus of Contemporary American English (And hence COCA) can be regarded as a methodological approach since it is empirical and tends to use computers for analyzing. To fulfill the aims of this study, the researcher chooses twenty-three phrasal verbs which are used as PIs in COCA. These verbs are gathered manually through the wordlists of COCA. Using the technique of Microsoft Office Excel in the corpus analysis, it is concluded that PIs of the affirmative form are mostly used in the corpus data. As for the functions of these PIs, it seems that direct command has the highest occurrences there.
    [Show full text]
  • To Obtain a Picture of Three Stages of the Children's Language Development
    DOCUMENT RESUME ED 025 333 PS 001 494 By- Bellugi. Ursula The Development of Interrogative Structures in Children's Speech. Michigan Univ., Ann Arbor. Center for Human Growth and Development. Spons Agency-National Inst. of Child Health zinc' Human Development. Bethesda Md Repor t No- UM- CHG0- 8 Pub Date 30 Nov 65 Note- 35p EDRS Price MF-$0.25 HC-S1.85 Descriptors- *LanguageDevelopment.LanguageProficiency.LanguageResearch.PreschoolChildren. Psycholinguistics. Speech. StructuralAnalysis.Structural Grammar. Syntax. Transformation Generative Grammar. Verbal Development Identifiers-*Interrogative Structures The verbal behavior of three children was sampled. The samples wereanalyzed to obtain a picture of three stages of the children'slanguage development. specifically the interrogative structures. Each stage was about 4- or5-months long. starting at the 18th to 28th month. depending upon thechild's level of linguistic ability. The interrogative structures of primary interest were (1) intonation patterns. (2) auxiliary inversion. (3) negation. (4) WH word (what. who. why. etc) placement.and (5) tag questions. At stage one. inflections, auxiliaries. articles, and most pronouns were absent. The child used intonation tomark a question. There were no yes-or-no questions and only a few WH queL :ions. There were no tag questions_The child at this stage did not appear to understand the interrogatory structurewhen he heard It. At stage two. articles. pronouns, and negative preverbforms appeared. Auxiliaries were still not present. nor were tag questions. Stage three includedthe emergence of the use of auxiliaries,auxiliary inversion, and the do transformation.Inversion and transformation were found in yes-or-no questions but were absent in WH questions_ Tag questions were still absent.
    [Show full text]
  • A Quick Guide to Spanish Syntax Syntax Is the Order of Words and Phrases That Create a Sentence
    A Quick Guide to Spanish Syntax Syntax is the order of words and phrases that create a sentence. This quick guide will discuss the word pattern for basic Spanish sentences. This order, however, is flexible, which will be demonstrated later in this handout. Because sentences have many elements, such as pronouns, subjects, and verbs, please refer to the following key as you progress through this guide: S = subject O = object IN = interrogative V = verb I = infinitive form of the verb d = direct object pronoun n = negation p = preposition i = indirect object pronoun A = auxillary PP = present progressive Syntax and One-Verb Sentence Constructions Spanish word order follows a Subject-Verb-Object (SVO) pattern. Spanish word order is very similar to English word order, as English also follows SVO pattern. The sentence’s subject is the “doer” of the action; the verb is the action, and the object is the person or thing affected by the action. In addition, when a negation (n) is necessary, the negative is placed before the verb. While English typically adds an auxiliary verb (A), such as a conjugation of to be or to do, to a negation, Spanish does not. SVO Pattern Examples: Positive: English Spanish Maria reads the books. Maria lee los libros. S V O S V O Negative: English Spanish Eduardo does not eat meat. Eduardo no come el carne. S A n V O S n V O Provided by the Academic Center for Excellence 1 A Quick Guide to Spanish Syntax June 2018 Often, the subject in Spanish is implied by the verb conjugation.
    [Show full text]
  • Interrogative-Word-Aware Question Generation
    Let Me Know What to Ask: Interrogative-Word-Aware Question Generation Junmo Kang∗ Haritz Puerto San Roman∗ Sung-Hyon Myaeng School of Computing, KAIST Daejeon, Republic of Korea fjunmo.kang, haritzpuerto94, [email protected] Abstract Question Generation (QG) is a Natural Lan- guage Processing (NLP) task that aids ad- vances in Question Answering (QA) and con- versational assistants. Existing models focus on generating a question based on a text and possibly the answer to the generated question. They need to determine the type of interrog- ative word to be generated while having to pay attention to the grammar and vocabulary Figure 1: High-level overview of the proposed model. of the question. In this work, we propose Interrogative-Word-Aware Question Genera- ingful QG can play a key role in the advances of tion (IWAQG), a pipelined system composed of two modules: an interrogative word classi- QA (Lewis et al., 2019). fier and a QG model. The first module pre- QG is a difficult task due to the need for un- dicts the interrogative word that is provided derstanding of the text to ask about and generat- to the second module to create the question. ing a question that is grammatically correct and Owing to an increased recall of deciding the semantically adequate according to the given text. interrogative words to be used for the gener- This task is considered to have two parts: what ated questions, the proposed model achieves to ask and how to ask. The first one refers to new state-of-the-art results on the task of QG in SQuAD, improving from 46.58 to 47.69 in the identification of relevant portions of the text BLEU-1, 17.55 to 18.53 in BLEU-4, 21.24 to to ask about.
    [Show full text]
  • Teaching and Learning Phrasal Verbs: How They Are Presented in Teaching Books, Dictionaries and Mobile Applications, and a Proposal of Possible Alternatives
    FACULTADE DE FILOLOXÍA GRAO EN INGLÉS: ESTUDOS LINGÜÍSTICOS E LITERARIOS Teaching and Learning Phrasal Verbs: How they are presented in teaching books, dictionaries and mobile applications, and a proposal of possible alternatives. Laura de las Mercedes Buján Sánchez June, 2013 1 Table of Contents Abstract ...................................................................................................................................... 5 1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 7 2. Multi-word verbs .................................................................................................................... 9 2.1. Phrasal verbs ................................................................................................................. 10 2.1.1. Intransitive phrasal verbs ....................................................................................... 10 2.1.2. Transitive phrasal verbs ......................................................................................... 11 2.2. Prepositional verbs ........................................................................................................ 13 2.2.1. Differences between phrasal verbs and prepositional verbs .................................. 14 2.3. Phrasal-prepositional verbs ........................................................................................... 15 2.4. Other idiomatic verb constructions ..............................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Exploring Stative Possessives Have Got and Got in American English
    Aino Tuomola Is it got some words to it? Exploring Stative Possessives Have Got and Got in American English Aino Tuomola, 38775 Pro gradu-avhandling i engelska språket och litteraturen Handledare: Brita Wårvik Fakulteten för humaniora, psykologi och teologi Åbo Akademi 2019 Aino Tuomola ÅBO AKADEMI – FACULTY OF ARTS, PSYCHOLOGY AND THEOLOGY Master’s thesis abstract Subject: English Language and Literature Author: Aino Tuomola Title: “Is it got some words to it?”: Exploring Stative Possessives Have got and Got in American English Supervisor: Brita Wårvik Abstract: Stative possessive constructions have gone through immense grammatical changes over the past four centuries, from have to have got, and finally to a stative possessive main verb got. One of the main purposes of this present study is to explain the evolution of the stative possessives have got and got. Further aims of this thesis include examining and mapping the prescriptive grammars surrounding these verbs, as well as introducing, analysing, and comparing the uses of the two possessives. Data for the study consist of three different parts. Firstly, previous research on the development of the possessives is reviewed, discussed, and used as a starting point for introducing a new development hypothesis. Secondly, prescriptive grammars and previous research on the grammar of have got and got are used to formulate and compile a prescriptive grammar. Finally, data extracted from The Corpus of Contemporary American English are used to introduce descriptive grammars for the two possessives, as well as to compare their individual uses. The results support the view that we can regard the development of both possessive have got and got to be due to the process of grammaticalisation, with starting-point in the conventionalisation of a conversational implicature.
    [Show full text]