International

INFORMATION TO USERS This reproduction was made from a copy of a document sent to us for microfilming. While the most advanced technology has been used to photograph and reproduce this document, the quality of the reproduction is heavily dependent upon the quality of the material submitted. The following explanation of techniques is provided to help clarify markings or notations which may appear on this reproduction. 1. The sign or “target” for pages apparently lacking from the document photographed is “Missing Page(s)”. If it was possible to obtain the missing page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along with adjacent pages. This may have necessitated cutting through an image and duplicating adjacent pages to assure complete continuity. 2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a round black mark, it is an indication of either blurred copy because of movement during exposure, duplicate copy, or copyrighted materials that should not have been} filmed. For blurred pages, a good image of the page can be found in the adjacent frame. If copyrighted materials were deleted, a target note will appear listingithe pages in the adjacent frame. 3. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., is part of the material being photographed, a definite method of “sectioning” the material has been followed. It is customary to begin filming at the upper left hand comer of a large sheet and to continue from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. If necessary, sectioning is continued again—beginning below the first row and continuing on until complete. 4. For illustrations that cannot be satisfactorily reproduced by xerographic means, photographic prints can be purchased at additional cost and inserted into your xerographic copy. These prints are available upon request from the Dissertations Customer Services Department. 5. Some pages in any document may have indistinct print. In all cases the best available copy has been filmed. International Josifek, Jami Louise TOWARD A DESCRIPTIVE ANALYSIS AND ESP PEDAGOGY O F INFINITIVAL AND GERUNDIVE COMPLEMENTS TO NOUNS The Ohio State University F University Microfiims International300N.ZeebRoad,AnnArbor,Mt4eiœ Copyright 1983 by Josifek, Jami Louise All Rights Reserved TOWARD A DESCRIPTIVE ANALYSIS AND ESP PEDAGOGY OF INFINITIVAL AND GERUNDIVE COMPLEMENTS TO NOUNS DISSERTATION Presented in Partial FulHlment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Jami L. Josifek, A .B ., M.A. The Ohio State University 1983 Reading Committee: Approved By Donald R. Bateman Robert N. Kantor Betty S. Sutton Adviser College of Education ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ■ This is surprisingly the most difficult page of this work to write. There are not words to express the variety of aid, comfort, inspiration and support so many people have offered me. Without Robert N. Kantor*s invaluable comments, guidance and reassurance that there is a dissertation here (even in its early draft), I may not have had the strength to present this text. Also, it was gratifying to see my own principles being used to edit my prose during conferences with Betty S. Sutton, who offered insights and confirmation to many of the ideas here. And, of course, this work could not exist without the help of my advisor, Donald R. Bateman. In final thanks to my mentors, I must thank Arnold M. Zwicky, who has been instrumental to my learning and growth as a scholar since I first entered into graduate study. More than mere thanks go to Shelley A. Saltzman for the linguistic, compositional and emotional propping she afforded me. Among my other friends and colleagues, I thank Susy Sarwark, Vicki Yaklevich, Nancy Day, Barbara Mallet, Kristin Kirkoff, Wendy Wayman, Debbie Schaffer and Jean Godby for their grammatical judgments and encouragement. My thanks go also to my friends afar: to Jim Forster and Lynne Madden (California) for their suggestions on pedagogy, to Kerry Corthell (D.C.) and Sonja Peter and Jan Ferry (Australia) for all of their support. Also, I thank Donna R ogers, my ty p ist. Finally, I thank my parents, Charles and Jewel Josifek, and my sister, Lorraine Josifek, who esqpected no less of me. April 6, 1954 ................................... Bom - ChiUicothe, Ohio 1976 .................................................A.B., Miami University, Oxford, Ohio 1977-197 8 .......................................... Research Associate, Department of Linguistics, The OMo State University, Columbus, Ohio 1978-198 0 .......................................... Teaching Associate, Department of Linguistics, The 0 ^ State University, Columbus, Ohio 1979 ................................................. M .A ., The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio 1980-1983 .......................................... Teaching Associate, Department of English (ESL), The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio FIELDS OF STUDY Major Field: English Education Studies in Composition. Professor Donald R. Bateman Studies in English as a Second Language. Professor Betty S. Sutton Studies in Literary Criticism. Professor Walter A. Davis III Studies in Applied Linguistics, Discourse and Pragmatics Professors Robert N. Kantor and Arnold M. Zwicky TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS................................................................................. ü VITA................................................................................................................... m LIST OF TABLES......................................................................................... viii LIST OF FIGURES ..................................................................................... v ü INTRODUCTION......................................................................................... 1 Chapter I. THE COMPLEMENT STRUCTURES........................................ 5 1.0 Introductioii ..................................................................... 5 1.1 Attempts at a dejSnition ................................................ 7 1.1.1 The definitions ............................................... 9 1.1.2 Syntactic distribution .................................. 14 1.1.3 Semantic distribution .................................. 19 1.1.4 Summary............................................................ 29 1.2 Traditional linguistic scholarship ........................... 30 1.2.1 Reference to relative clauses .......... 31 1.2.2 Reference to aspect ........................... 36 1.2.3 Reference to prepositions .............. 41 1.2.4 Conclusions from traditional scholarship ................................................... 45 1.3 Modem linguistic scholarship ................................... 47 1 .3 .1 Subjectless g erunds and in fin itiv es. 48 1.3.2 Event-types ....................................................... 52 1.3.3 Factivity ............................................................ 58 1.3.4 Aspect ................................................................ 61 1.3.5 Prepositional analyses ....................... 65 1.3.6 Conclusions from current scholarship ................................................... 69 1.4 Summary of current knowledge ............................... 71 N o t e s .............................................................................................. 72 n . SENTENCE LEVEL AN ALYSIS ................................................ 74 2.0 Introduction .............................. 74 2.1 Events and nominal complement structures. 80 Page 2.1.1 Eveat-types of deverbal nouns .................................. 81 2.1.1.1 States................................................................. 83 2.1.1.2 Activities ......................................................... 86 2.1.1.3 Accomplishments ............................................ 89 2.1.1.4 Achievements ................................................ 93 2.1.1.5 Summary of event-types denoted in the head n o u n ...................... 95 2.1.2 Complement event-types ............................................... 96 2.1.3 Deverbal nouns and factivity ....................................... 104 2.1.4 Summary of event-types ............................................... 113 2.2 Perfective versus Imperfective ................................................... 115 2.2.1 Potential versus actual asp ect .................................. 117 2.2.2 Simple versus habitual asp ect .................................. 124 2.2.3 Generic versus durative aspect .................................. 131 2.2.4 Conclusions on aspect ................................................... 137 2.3 Prepositional meanings .................................................................... 139 2 .3 .1 O f ............................................................................................. 141 2 .3 .2 m ............................................................................................. 148 2 .3 .3 F o r ............................................................................................. 155 2 .3 .4 T o ............................................................................................. 163 2.3.5 Summary of meanings conveyed by prepositions ............................................................... 170 2.4 Summary of the sentence-level analysis .................................. 172 N o t e s .............................................................................................................. 174 III. CONTEXTUAL A N A L Y S IS ...................................................................

Load more