Adverbial constructions are a problematic subject in Tswana grammatical studies. Traditionally termed descriptives, it is not clear what the defining features of this category are. It is also a very vast category. There seems to be many different structures functioning as adverbials in Tswana, including particles, words, prepositional phrases and clauses. Tswana grammars in general often have little to say about the syntax of adverbials, in respect of, for instance, the propensity of Tswana adverbials for multiple occurrences in the same clause and the range of possible positions of Tswana adverbials in clause structure. Because of the vastness of the adverbial category we only deal with adverbials as elements of clause structure. A typical feature of adverbials is the considerable mobility they enjoy in relation to other elements in clause structure which affects their grammatical and semantic status in relation to such elements. By distinguishing different categories of adverbials, in clause structure it becomes clear that the same structural element may function within different adverbial categories. This necessitates a definition of adverbials which is based on their specific semantic functions within clause structure. The study is divided into five chapters. When dealing with the adverbial as a clause element in Tswana, we realise that it is not sufficiently described. The first two chapters therefore serve as an introduction to central theoretical issues where some relevant research is critically examined and related to the present study. In the next chapter, that is Chapter 3, we establish formal and semantic frameworks for the classification and descriptive treatment of adverbials in Tswana. In Chapter 4 we implement the structural, syntactic and semantic properties as well as the features adverbials have as modifiers to make a functional classification of adverbials in clause structure. The classification of adverbials as adjuncts, subjuncts, disjuncts and conjuncts from A Comprehensive grammar of the English language by Quirk, et al. (1985) (CGEL) is taken as the basis for this classification. Chapter 5 presents the overall conclusions and implications of the study. / African Languages / D.litt. et Phil. (African Languages)

La presente investigación estudia el uso adverbial como un tipo de variación léxica en un grupo de aprendientes suecos de español L2 en Chile. Así, nos preguntamos si la cantidad de años de input e interacción con hablantes nativos ejerce alguna influencia en la capacidad del aprendiente de usar el mismo tipo de adverbios, y con la misma frecuencia, que los hablantes nativos. Para eso extrajimos los 10 adverbios más usados en ambos grupos para observar si habían diferencias entre el grupo de aprendientes y el grupo de nativos, recurrimos a la variable tiempo de estadía con el fin de ver si ésta podía explicar el comportamiento de los aprendientes. La hipótesis que formulamos postula que cuanto más años de estadía en el ámbito L2, cuanto más nativo será el empleo adverbial. Los resultados extraídos con el t-test indican que en 8 casos las diferencias del uso adverbial en ambos grupos no resultaron ser significativas, mientras que en 2 casos (donde y abajo) las diferencias sí son significativas. Con la ayuda del test correlacional Pearson observamos si era posible establecer una correlación entre el tiempo de estadía en el ámbito L2 y el uso de estos 2 adverbios, por parte de los aprendientes. Los resultados indicaron que no se puede establecer una correlación entre ambas variables. Luego nos decidimos por analizar la variable nivel de escolarización en la L2 con el uso de estos 2 adverbios. Aquí, los resultados indican que únicamente se puede establecer una correlación en el caso del adverbio abajo.

El presente trabajo abarca el estudio de la variación en las construcciones adverbiales locativas. Esta variación se manifiesta en dos niveles: (1) la alternancia entre la construcción estándar ADVERBIO + preposición de + PRONOMBRE PERSONAL (por ejemplo, delante de mí), y su variante normativamente no recomendada ADVERBIO + PRONOMBRE POSESIVO (por ejemplo, delante mío); y (2) la alternancia entre la construcción posesiva con el sufijo -o (por ejemplo, delante mío), y la construcción posesiva con el sufijo -a (por ejemplo, delante mía), variante normativamente aún más disuadida. El objetivo fue estudiar estas dos variables lingüísticas y sus posibles predictores sociolingüísticos. Con esta finalidad, se han analizado datos provenientes de Twitter. La recolección de datos se llevó a cabo en febrero del 2017. Se recogieron 2357 observaciones de construcciones adverbiales locativas de 21 países de habla hispana (incluyendo los Estados Unidos), de las cuales 1006 eran de la variante posesiva. En cuanto a la variación entre construcciones preposicionales y posesivas, se clasificaron los datos según cuatro variables independientes: el género (o sexo) del tuitero, la procedencia geográfica del tuit, el tipo de adverbio precedente y el número gramatical del referente. Con relación al uso del sufijo -a del posesivo, las observaciones fueron clasificadas según dos variables adicionales: la vocal final del adverbio y el género del referente gramatical. Se ha construido un modelo estadístico de regresión logística que mide el efecto de las variables independientes investigadas sobre el uso de (1) la construcción con el posesivo y (2) la construcción con el posesivo del sufijo -a respectivamente. Referente a (1), la alternancia en los complementos, el análisis revela que la zona dialectal del tuitero, el tipo del adverbio precedente y el número gramatical son los factores estadísticamente significativos para predecir el uso de la construcción posesiva. En lo que concierne a (2), la alternancia en los sufijos del posesivo, los datos apuntan a que tanto la zona dialectal del tuitero como el género del referente gramatical condicionan el uso del posesivo con la desinencia -a. / The present thesis studies the morphosyntactic variation in adverbial locative phrases in Spanish. This variation occurs at two levels: (1) the alternation between the standard construction ADVERB + the preposition de + PERSONAL PRONOUN (as in delante de mí) and the normatively nonstandard construction ADVERB + POSSESSIVE PRONOUN (as in delante mío); (2) the alternation between the possessive construction with the suffix -o (as in delante mío), and the possessive construction with the suffix -a (as in delante mía), the last variant being normatively highly discouraged. The goal of this study was to investigate these two linguistic variables and their possible sociolinguistic predictors. The data was obtained by API searches of Twitter data in February of 2017 and yielded material from 21 Spanish-speaking countries (including the US). 2357 tweets containing the constructions of interest were gathered, of which 1006 were possessive constructions. Concerning the alternation between constructions with prepositions and possessives, the data was coded according to four independent variables: the gender (or sex) of the Twitter user, the location of the user, the type of adverb used in the phrase, and the grammatical number of the referent. As to the use of the suffix -a with possessives, two additional variables were coded for, the final vowel of the preceding adverb and grammatical gender of the referent. A statistical model was constructed in order to measure the effect of the independent variables on the use of (1) the possessive construction, and (2) the possessive construction with the suffix -a, respectively. The results of the first analysis indicate that the geographical region of the Twitter user, as well as the preceding adverb and the grammatical number of the referent, were statistically significant in predicting the use of the possessive construction. Furthermore, with regards to the variation in the suffix of the possessive pronoun, the analysis supports the view that the geographical region of the user and the grammatical gender of the referent are predictors that condition the use of the possessive pronoun with the suffix -a.

This thesis provides a complex overview of function of adverbial elements in initial position, with focus on theirs typology and distribution in anteposition in two lingual corpuses - publicistic and literary. Meanwhile analyzes eventual position of these anteponed adverbial elements behind the verb and finally based on quantitative results deduces factors, which influence acceptability of postposition of these adverbial elements. Based on this, it follows their postposition and provides a conclusion with differences in two types of text. In addition, that follows both observation and comparison of combinations of adverbial elements in initial zone in publicistic and literary corpus.

The present thesis analyses the use of the clausal comma in academic prose. The aim of this diploma thesis is to examine the hypothesis of relative inconsistency in the use of the comma in a multiple sentence formed by a native speaker of English. In Modern English, the descriptive approach prevails and therefore it is assumed that the comma usage varies. The factors that affect or, by interacting with other factors, contribute to the inclusion or the omission of the comma in a sentence are the length of the clause in both compound and complex sentences, the position of the clause in a sentence as well as the syntactic function of the adverbial clause in a complex sentence. The coordinate clauses are studied in terms of the presence and absence of the subject in the second conjoined clause and the semantic tightness of both clauses. Based on an analysis of 200 two-clause sentences (both compound sentences and complex sentences comprised of the matrix clause and an adverbial clause) excerpted from linguistic articles written by native speakers of English, the thesis categorises the sentences according to the dependency relation between the clauses, evaluates the frequency of the inclusion of the comma against its omission, and describes the potential factors that influenced the comma usage. The...

In recent years, computer software has been used to assist in the analysis of clinical language samples. However, this software has been unable to accurately identify complex syntactic structures such as adverbial clauses. Complex structures, including the adverbial clause, are of interest in child language due to differences in the development of this structure between children with and without language impairment. The present study investigated the accuracy of new software, called Cx, in identifying adverbial clauses. Two separate collections of language samples were used. One collection included 10 children with language impairment, 10 age-matched peers, and 10 language-matched peers. A second collection contained language from 174 students in first grade, third grade, fifth grade, and junior college. There was high total agreement between computerized and manual analysis with an overall Kappa level of .895.

In this thesis, different negation strategies used with the verbs hebben in Dutch and ha [have] in Swedish are examined. In both languages, pronominal negation with a negative indefinite pronoun (geen for Dutch and ingen for Swedish) or adverbial negation with a negative adverb (niet for Dutch and inte for Swedish) are common negation strategies. Sometimes it can be difficult to choose between the two and the question of when to use which method of negation arises. By using corpus data from newspapers in Dutch and Swedish, the frequency and use of both methods is studied. In particular, the contexts in which pronominal negation and adverbial negation respectively are found are analysed in a qualitative study of randomly selected examples from the corpora. The study shows that, based on the data, pronominal negation seems to be the most frequent method with the verb hebben/ha. Furthermore, adverbial negation with the verb ha seems to be slightly more common in Swedish than in Dutch. The methods seem to be mostly used in the same contexts in both languages in the data, however, in Swedish, adverbial negation is sometimes used together with some nouns in the indefinite form without the indefinite article which does not occur in the Dutch data. / In deze scriptie wordt negatie met het werkwoord hebben in het Nederlands en ha [hebben] in het Zweeds bestudeerd. In beide talen kunnen zowel pronominale ontkenning met een negatief onbepaald voornaamwoord (geen in het Nederlands en ingen in het Zweeds) als adverbiale negatie met een negatief bijwoord (niet in het Nederlands en inte in het Zweeds) gebruikt worden om negatie uit te drukken. Soms ligt de keuze tussen de twee methodes niet voor de hand. Een corpusonderzoek met data uit krantenteksten en nieuwsberichten in het Nederlands en het Zweeds wordt uitgevoerd om de frequentie en het gebruik van de twee methodes te onderzoeken. Om te zien in welke contexten pronominale ontkenning en adverbiale ontkenning voorkomen wordt een kwalitatieve studie op basis van een willekeurig gekozen steekproef van de corpusdata uitgevoerd. De studie toont dat het blijkt alsof pronominale negatie de meest frequente methode samen met hebben/ha is in de data. Verder blijkt adverbiale negatie met ha iets meer frequent te zijn in het Zweeds in vergelijking met in het Nederlands. De twee methodes blijken op basis van de studie in meestal dezelfde contexten worden gebruikt. Maar in het Zweeds kan adverbiale negatie soms met sommige zelfstandige naamwoorden in de onbepaalde vorm zonder lidwoord worden gebruikt, terwijl er geen voorbeelden van dit zijn in de Nederlandse data.

Le fonctionnement du morphème polyfonctionnel d= en syriaque des Évangiles de la Peshiṭta est décrit morphosyn-taxiquement et dans une perspective typologique, en synchronie et par comparaison, pour certains points, avec d’autres versions et avec d’autres langues sémitiques. Ancien démonstratif en proto-sémitique, d= est un relateur à plusieurs niveaux syntaxiques : support de détermination, marqueur des relations génitivales et relatives, introducteur de complétives et adverbiales. Un critère syntaxique distingue sémantiquement les syntagmes génitivaux aliénables et inaliénable même si cette distinction tend à s’estomper, à des degrés différents selon les catégories sémantiques d’inaliénables, termes de parentés et parties du corps. Si les structures syntaxiques sont semblables pour les relatives restrictives et les non-restrictives, il est impossible de relativiser ces dernières pour les relatives objet, dative et adjointe. La stratégie à trou syntaxique constitue la stratégie primaire dans la hiérarchie d’accessibilité, et toutes les fonctions de la tête dans la matrice, sauf l’objet de comparaison, sont relativisables.Les fonctions de complémenteur de d= sont plus larges qu’en sémitique ancien. d= s’emploie avec 12 des 14 types de prédicats de la classification typologique de Noonan au lieu de 3 en sémitique ancien. Le syriaque est conforme à la hiérarchie implicationnelle, Complement Deranking-Argument Hierarchy. Le critère syntaxique de saturation de la valence verbale et des critères sémantiques et contextuels permettent de distinguer les adverbiales des complétives. Lorsque d= forme des locutions conjonctives avec des prépositions ou des adverbes, la polysémie des valeurs est désambigüisée grâce au contexte, à l’exception de la conjonction monosémique temporelle mo d=. Dans le discours rapporté, le discours Reproduit est majoritairement introduit sans d=, alors qu’il l’est avec d= pour le discours Reformulé. Le grec n’a eu aucune influence sur son utilisation. / The behaviour of the polyfunctional morpheme d= in the Syriac language of the Gospels of the Peshiṭta is described in a typological perspective, in synchrony and in comparison, for some properties, with other varieties of Syriac and with other Semitic languages. d=, a former demonstrative in Proto-Semitic, is a relator at various syntactic levels: a determination place-holder, a genitival and relative marker, an introducer of completive and adverbial clauses.Chapter 1 introduces the topic of the study and the theoretical framework and chapter 2 discusses the state of art.Chapter 3 is dedicated to the study of the genitive phrase. We discovered that a syntactic criterion allows to distinguish semantically between alienable and inalienable phrases, to different degrees according to the semantic categories of the inalienable set, i.e. kinship and body part terms.In chapter 4, we showed that even though syntactic structures are similar for restrictive and non-restrictive relative clauses, it is impossible to relativize the latter for object, dative and adjoint relatives clauses. The syntactic gap strategy constitutes the primary strategy in the accessibility hierarchy and all the functions of the head in the main clause, except the object of comparison, are relativizable.Chapter 5 deals with the functions of d= as a complementizer and an introducer of adverbial clauses. The complementizer uses are wider than in Old Semitic. d= is employed with 12 of the 14 types of predicates of Noonan's typological classification as against 3 in Old Semitic. Syriac conforms to the implicational hierarchy named Complement Deranking-Argument Hierarchy. For adverbial clauses, the syntactic criterion of saturation of the verbal valency as well as semantic and contextual criteria permit to distinguish adverbial clauses from complement clauses. When d= forms conjunctive locutions with prepositions or adverbs, the polysemy of values is disambiguated thanks to the context. Only the conjunction mo d= is monosemous (with a temporal meaning).In the last chapter (chap. 6) on reported speech, we showed that direct reported speech is mostly introduced without d=, whereas it is always the case for indirect speech. Greek did not have any influence on the use of d=. / Il funzionamento del morfema polifunzionale d= del siriaco nei Vangeli della Peshiṭta è descritto in una prospettiva tipologica, in sincronia e attraverso la comparazione, in alcuni punti, con altre versioni e con altre lingue semitiche. Tale morfema deriva dal pronome dimostrativo proto-semitico *ḏV e funge da relatore in diversi livelli sintattici: supporto di determinazione, indicatore delle relazioni genitivali e relative, introduttore delle proposizioni completive e avverbiali. Il capitolo 1 introduce la problematica della ricerca e dell’ambito teorico; il capitolo 2 presenta uno stato dell’arte sull’argomento.Il capitolo 3 è consacrato allo studio del sintagma genitivale. Un criterio sintattico ha permesso di distinguere semanticamente i sintagmi genitivali alienabili e inalienabili, anche se questa distinzione tende ad attenuarsi, in diversi punti, secondo le categorie semantiche d’inalienabile, termini di parentela e parti del corpo.Nel capitolo 4 abbiamo mostrato che, se da una parte le strutture sintattiche sono simili per le relative restrittive e le non-restrittive, dall’altra è impossibile relativizzare le ultime per le relative complemento oggetto, complemento di termine e complemento circostanziale. La strategia con gap sintattico è la strategia primaria nella gerarchia d’accessibilità e tutte le funzioni della testa nella proposizione matrice, tranne l’oggetto della comparazione, sono relativizzabili.Il capitolo 5 tratta le funzioni di d= come complementatore e introduttore di proposizioni avverbiali. Gli impieghi del complementatore sono più ampi rispetto al semitico più antico. Il morfema d= si impiega infatti per 12 dei 14 tipi di predicato della classificazione tipologica di Noonan invece dei 3 del semitico più antico. Il siriaco è conforme alla gerarchia implicativa, Complement Deranking-Argument Hierarchy. Per le proposizioni avverbiali, il criterio sintattico di saturazione della valenza verbale e dei criteri semantici e contestuali permettono di distinguere le avverbiali dalle completive.Quando d= forma delle locuzioni congiuntive con delle preposizioni o degli avverbi, la polisemia dei valori è disambiguato grazie al contesto, fatta eccezione della congiunzione monosemica temporale mo d=Nell’ultimo capitolo, sul discorso indiretto, mostriamo che il discorso “riprodotto” è introdotto senza d= nella maggior parte dei casi, mentre si usa d= nel discorso “riformulato”. Il greco non ha alcuna influenza sul suo utilizzo.

Le fonctionnement du morphème polyfonctionnel d= en syriaque des Évangiles de la Peshiṭta est décrit morphosyn-taxiquement et dans une perspective typologique, en synchronie et par comparaison, pour certains points, avec d’autres versions et avec d’autres langues sémitiques. Ancien démonstratif en proto-sémitique, d= est un relateur à plusieurs niveaux syntaxiques : support de détermination, marqueur des relations génitivales et relatives, introducteur de complétives et adverbiales. Un critère syntaxique distingue sémantiquement les syntagmes génitivaux aliénables et inaliénable même si cette distinction tend à s’estomper, à des degrés différents selon les catégories sémantiques d’inaliénables, termes de parentés et parties du corps. Si les structures syntaxiques sont semblables pour les relatives restrictives et les non-restrictives, il est impossible de relativiser ces dernières pour les relatives objet, dative et adjointe. La stratégie à trou syntaxique constitue la stratégie primaire dans la hiérarchie d’accessibilité, et toutes les fonctions de la tête dans la matrice, sauf l’objet de comparaison, sont relativisables.Les fonctions de complémenteur de d= sont plus larges qu’en sémitique ancien. d= s’emploie avec 12 des 14 types de prédicats de la classification typologique de Noonan au lieu de 3 en sémitique ancien. Le syriaque est conforme à la hiérarchie implicationnelle, Complement Deranking-Argument Hierarchy. Le critère syntaxique de saturation de la valence verbale et des critères sémantiques et contextuels permettent de distinguer les adverbiales des complétives. Lorsque d= forme des locutions conjonctives avec des prépositions ou des adverbes, la polysémie des valeurs est désambigüisée grâce au contexte, à l’exception de la conjonction monosémique temporelle mo d=. Dans le discours rapporté, le discours Reproduit est majoritairement introduit sans d=, alors qu’il l’est avec d= pour le discours Reformulé. Le grec n’a eu aucune influence sur son utilisation. / The behaviour of the polyfunctional morpheme d= in the Syriac language of the Gospels of the Peshiṭta is described in a typological perspective, in synchrony and in comparison, for some properties, with other varieties of Syriac and with other Semitic languages. d=, a former demonstrative in Proto-Semitic, is a relator at various syntactic levels: a determination place-holder, a genitival and relative marker, an introducer of completive and adverbial clauses.Chapter 1 introduces the topic of the study and the theoretical framework and chapter 2 discusses the state of art.Chapter 3 is dedicated to the study of the genitive phrase. We discovered that a syntactic criterion allows to distinguish semantically between alienable and inalienable phrases, to different degrees according to the semantic categories of the inalienable set, i.e. kinship and body part terms.In chapter 4, we showed that even though syntactic structures are similar for restrictive and non-restrictive relative clauses, it is impossible to relativize the latter for object, dative and adjoint relatives clauses. The syntactic gap strategy constitutes the primary strategy in the accessibility hierarchy and all the functions of the head in the main clause, except the object of comparison, are relativizable.Chapter 5 deals with the functions of d= as a complementizer and an introducer of adverbial clauses. The complementizer uses are wider than in Old Semitic. d= is employed with 12 of the 14 types of predicates of Noonan's typological classification as against 3 in Old Semitic. Syriac conforms to the implicational hierarchy named Complement Deranking-Argument Hierarchy. For adverbial clauses, the syntactic criterion of saturation of the verbal valency as well as semantic and contextual criteria permit to distinguish adverbial clauses from complement clauses. When d= forms conjunctive locutions with prepositions or adverbs, the polysemy of values is disambiguated thanks to the context. Only the conjunction mo d= is monosemous (with a temporal meaning).In the last chapter (chap. 6) on reported speech, we showed that direct reported speech is mostly introduced without d=, whereas it is always the case for indirect speech. Greek did not have any influence on the use of d=. / Il funzionamento del morfema polifunzionale d= del siriaco nei Vangeli della Peshiṭta è descritto in una prospettiva tipologica, in sincronia e attraverso la comparazione, in alcuni punti, con altre versioni e con altre lingue semitiche. Tale morfema deriva dal pronome dimostrativo proto-semitico *ḏV e funge da relatore in diversi livelli sintattici: supporto di determinazione, indicatore delle relazioni genitivali e relative, introduttore delle proposizioni completive e avverbiali. Il capitolo 1 introduce la problematica della ricerca e dell’ambito teorico; il capitolo 2 presenta uno stato dell’arte sull’argomento.Il capitolo 3 è consacrato allo studio del sintagma genitivale. Un criterio sintattico ha permesso di distinguere semanticamente i sintagmi genitivali alienabili e inalienabili, anche se questa distinzione tende ad attenuarsi, in diversi punti, secondo le categorie semantiche d’inalienabile, termini di parentela e parti del corpo.Nel capitolo 4 abbiamo mostrato che, se da una parte le strutture sintattiche sono simili per le relative restrittive e le non-restrittive, dall’altra è impossibile relativizzare le ultime per le relative complemento oggetto, complemento di termine e complemento circostanziale. La strategia con gap sintattico è la strategia primaria nella gerarchia d’accessibilità e tutte le funzioni della testa nella proposizione matrice, tranne l’oggetto della comparazione, sono relativizzabili.Il capitolo 5 tratta le funzioni di d= come complementatore e introduttore di proposizioni avverbiali. Gli impieghi del complementatore sono più ampi rispetto al semitico più antico. Il morfema d= si impiega infatti per 12 dei 14 tipi di predicato della classificazione tipologica di Noonan invece dei 3 del semitico più antico. Il siriaco è conforme alla gerarchia implicativa, Complement Deranking-Argument Hierarchy. Per le proposizioni avverbiali, il criterio sintattico di saturazione della valenza verbale e dei criteri semantici e contestuali permettono di distinguere le avverbiali dalle completive.Quando d= forma delle locuzioni congiuntive con delle preposizioni o degli avverbi, la polisemia dei valori è disambiguato grazie al contesto, fatta eccezione della congiunzione monosemica temporale mo d=Nell’ultimo capitolo, sul discorso indiretto, mostriamo che il discorso “riprodotto” è introdotto senza d= nella maggior parte dei casi, mentre si usa d= nel discorso “riformulato”. Il greco non ha alcuna influenza sul suo utilizzo.

The present study focuses on functions and English translation counterparts of the Czech lexeme aby. It is a relatively frequent word in the Czech language which is described as a subordinating conjunction expressing purpose, effect, manner, and also as a particle with a number of discourse functions. The current description, however, does not seem complete and this study therefore aims to analyse its use in more detail. Lexicographic and grammatical sources served as a basis for the classification of aby as a conjunction and as a particle. After an analysis of 200 examples it soon became evident that this listing is not complete and the use of aby is more complex than originally expected. The present paper thus treats all the functions of aby and also exemplifies each of them using extracted corpus data. In the study, aby in its conjunction and particle use is firstly treated separately to analyse each of them in more depth. This analysis, consequently, provides basis to point out their common features as well as their differences. The English translational counterparts are another point of interest in the study, in particular, their adequacy, regularity, and lexicalization.