This semantic analysis of because contains a general study of its potential as the focus of a sentence, and a specific study of its causative and non-causative meaning. In Chapter I, I discuss previous linguistic research on because and because-clauses. One conclusion that seems clear from the data is that because can be the central point of attention in a sentence. I investigate this prominence in Chapter II. I begin by redefining the term "focus," synthesising criteria from other definitions. The redefinition denotes phonological and syntactic rules which speakers apply to emphasize certain parts of a sentence. Then I demonstrate that these rules apply to because, thereby establishing that because can he focussed. In Chapter III, I turn to a more restricted problem. I investigate the semantic features of because which are common to reason-and causal-explanations. I propose that, in its underlying form, because has the feature [+cause]. Sentences in which because appears with the features [+cause] do not contain the lexical items "cause" or "reason." I also describe two conditioned variants of because. One, having the feature [+cause], occurs with the noun or verb cause. The other, having the feature [-cause], occurs with the noun reason. The results of this study confirm evidence accumulating from other linguistic investigations that grammatical words are semantically full, and that they can be described by theoretical terminology appropriate to non-grammatical words. A number of recent publications have appeared on the semantic description of complementation structures, coordinating conjunctions, and determiners. There is comparatively little recent publication on subordinating conjunctions. Even less information is available on lexical items which have been classified both as subordinating conjunctions and as reason adverbials. Within this classification, the word because is an especially important member. From the point of view of linguistics, it is significant as one of the few subordinatores which can occur as a one-word utterance. I investigate the implications of this status under the theoretical term "focus." Furthermore, although no one has claimed that "because is semantically empty, no one has agreed upon its precise meaning, nor has anyone studied the word in depth. Because is also significant from the point of view of linguistic philosophy. The problem of defining reason- and causal-explanations has a long scholarly history. The results of this investigation demonstrate that because is a crucial word for this problem. I show that when because occurs in a sentence either with the lexical items "reason" or "cause," because assimilates in sense to these items. Thus, in these environments, the sense of because is conditioned. But when because occurs in sentences which do not contain those lexical items, because can be synonymously paraphrased either by "reason" or by "cause." Therefore, because is a word whose meaning is common both to reason- and causal-explanations. / Arts, Faculty of / Linguistics, Department of / Graduate

Several linguists have noted that eh is a distinct characteristic of Canadian English, e.g., Allen (1959), Avis (1972), and Love (1973). Despite this common observation, little detailed analysis has been done on either eh's syntactic or sociolinguistic distribution. Avis (1972), for example, discusses a number of the syntactic environments of eh, but based on its occurrence in selected works of literature. Thus far there has been no detailed study on the systematic use of eh as it is found in the spoken language, used by a diversity of speakers. This paper gives a grammatical and sociolinguistic analysis of the use of eh, based on data collected in Vancouver, B.C., over a period of four months. The data consist of more than 550 occurrences of eh from 74 informants of various language and social backgrounds. Most informants were native speakers of Canadian English, with the others being primarily speakers of either American or British English. The grammatical analysis presents the syntactic and semantic characteristics of eh and its uses. It is in part based on research on tags (e.g., Huddleston 1970, Cattell 1973), questions (e.g., Hudson 1975), and conversational analysis (e.g., Sacks 1967). Important properties of sentences that determine the analysis and use of eh include syntactic mood, semantic force, and sincerity conditions. Also, eh can only be understood by extending the analysis to include the relation between sentences within a discourse. The sociolinguistic analysis is based on information about the speakers who use eh and on the social context in which it occurs, i.e., formal versus informal usage. Social variables in the use of eh are age, class, sex, regional and language background of the speaker. [Table on eight types of eh] The sociolinguistic analysis indicates that eh is used mostly in informal speech, that some speakers use eh more than others, and that the variables of class and regional background may determine the use of certain types of eh, particularly the Anecdotal eh, which was found to be the most stigmatized form. / Arts, Faculty of / Linguistics, Department of / Graduate

Thesis (Th. D.)--Theologische Hogeschool, Kampen, 1959. / At head of title: Theologische Academie uitgaande van de Johannes Calvijn Stichting te Kampen. "Stellings" ([2] leaves) inserted. Includes bibliographical references and indexes.

Thesis--University of Michigan. / Extra t.p. with thesis statement inserted. Includes bibliographical references (p. 123-124).

Thesis--University of Michigan. / Extra t.p. with thesis statement inserted. Includes bibliographical references (p. 123-124).

Thesis (Th. M.)--Dallas Theological Seminary, 1983. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 56-58).

No description available.

Thesis (PH. D.)--University of Chicago, 1903. / Vita. Includes bibliographical references. Also available on the Internet.

Thesis (Th. M.)--Calvin Theological Seminary, 1987. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 131-135).

Thesis (Th. M.)--Dallas Theological Seminary, 2006. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves [93]-98).