THESIS ABSTRACT This thesis studies the progressive in present-day spoken British English. Recent studies of the progressive in present-day English have discovered that there has been a significant increase in frequency of the use of the progressive especially in spoken English. The increase is deemed partly due to the use of the progressive with anti-progressive verbs, with which the progressive was traditionally not applied, and to the rise of the subjective function. The aim of the diploma thesis is to determine which traditional anti-progressive verbs are used most frequently with the progressive in present-day British English as well as to determine the proportion of these verbs to verbs commonly used with the progressive. Furthermore, three frequent anti-progressive verbs - be, think and feel - were selected to analyse the functions of the progressive when used with anti-progressive verbs. The data is extracted from the Spoken BNC 2014 as it enables examination of the use of progressive in present-day spoken British English.

Temporal constructions in Afrikaans are ambiguous with respect to aspectual meaning. The past tense construction with het ge-, for instance, can be interpreted as progressive, perfective or anterior. In the same vein, the unmarked present tense construction can be interpreted as a construction with a progressive or a perfective meaning. This aspectual ambiguity of the Afrikaans verbal system has a significant effect on the way in which Afrikaans grammar is described or understood. The observation by native speakers, linguists, literary specialists and writers that the temporal constructions in Afrikaans are vague or ambiguous with regard to aspectual meaning has led to certain views about the expression of tense in the language. In Afrikaans literature, for example, there is a tradition to write prose primarily in the present tense, because of the perception that the past tense is not adequate to convey particular semantic nuances. Furthermore, certain speakers of Afrikaans and linguists believe that Afrikaans grammar has been simplified and just does not have aspect. However, Afrikaans possesses alternative strategies to specify aspectual meaning. The five prototypical ways of expressing aspectual meaning in Afrikaans are i) lexical constructions (such as adverbs and conjunctions); ii) constructions with affixes, iii) reduplication constructions; iv) passive constructions; and v) periphrastic constructions. Aspectual meaning in Afrikaans is an almost entirely unexplored research field. In my opinion, the literature on the expressions of aspectual meaning in Afrikaans contains two shortcomings. First, Afrikaans aspect needs to be described theoretically. Second, more research is needed concerning the specific ways in which aspectual meaning is expressed in Afrikaans. The scope of this entire research field is too large for a single study. For that reason, the present study aims to reveal the way in which periphrastic constructions are used to convey progressive meaning. As far as temporal meaning is concerned, it is possible to make a distinction between tempus meaning, which stands for deictic temporal meanings (i.e. past, present and future tense), and aspectual meaning, which stands for non-deictic temporal meanings such as duration, point of view and the internal structure of the situation. One can also distinguish between lexical and grammatical aspect. Lexical aspect has to do with the conceptual properties of a situation or, in other words, with the question whether it is static or dynamic, telic or atelic and durative. There are five situation types: states, activities, achievements, accomplishments and semelfactives. Grammatical aspect concerns the point of view from which the situation is perceived. One can make a distinction between perfective and imperfective grammatical aspect. The latter can be subdivided into imperfectives conveying habitual meaning and imperfectives conveying progressive meaning. Grammaticalisation theory is useful and a relevant tool to provide answers to the afore-mentioned research questions. First, it offers insight into the manner in which the ambiguous tempus constructions of Afrikaans came into being. Second, it can be used to show how the alternative aspectual constructions have developed and how they are currently employed in the language. For the purpose of this study, grammaticalisation is regarded as language change in which a construction loses its lexical meaning and comes to express grammatical meaning. Grammatical constructions can be used in more contexts than their lexical counterparts, as grammaticalised uses have been generalized contextually. Grammatical constructions lose the morphosyntactic properties typical of their lexical counterparts and assume grammatical properties. Grammaticalisation is a typological phenomenon and the lexical origin of a grammatical construction is often the same in different languages. Grammaticalizing constructions exhibit an increase in frequency. Afrikaans and Dutch are closely related languages and possess cognate periphrastic progressive constructions, viz. i) the aan het- / aan die- ii) VPOS te / VPOS en-; en iii) bezig- / besig- progressive constructions. To examine the use of periphrastic progressive constructions in Afrikaans from a grammaticalisation perspective, I compare the results of a study of these constructions in an Afrikaans corpus to those of previous studies of the periphrastic progressive constructions in Dutch. The respective constructions are compared on the basis of four criteria, viz. i) frequency; ii) verb collocations; iii) transitivity; and iv) combinatorial possibilities with other aspectual periphrastic constructions. The lexical origins of the various constructions are also considered. The comparison of the constructions on the basis of the afore-mentioned criteria makes it possible to demonstrate how the periphrastic progressive constructions in Afrikaans came into being and how they have developed into grammatical constructions conveying aspectual meaning and in which way the different Afrikaans periphrastic constructions express progressive meaning. / PhD (Afrikaans and Dutch), North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2012

Temporal constructions in Afrikaans are ambiguous with respect to aspectual meaning. The past tense construction with het ge-, for instance, can be interpreted as progressive, perfective or anterior. In the same vein, the unmarked present tense construction can be interpreted as a construction with a progressive or a perfective meaning. This aspectual ambiguity of the Afrikaans verbal system has a significant effect on the way in which Afrikaans grammar is described or understood. The observation by native speakers, linguists, literary specialists and writers that the temporal constructions in Afrikaans are vague or ambiguous with regard to aspectual meaning has led to certain views about the expression of tense in the language. In Afrikaans literature, for example, there is a tradition to write prose primarily in the present tense, because of the perception that the past tense is not adequate to convey particular semantic nuances. Furthermore, certain speakers of Afrikaans and linguists believe that Afrikaans grammar has been simplified and just does not have aspect. However, Afrikaans possesses alternative strategies to specify aspectual meaning. The five prototypical ways of expressing aspectual meaning in Afrikaans are i) lexical constructions (such as adverbs and conjunctions); ii) constructions with affixes, iii) reduplication constructions; iv) passive constructions; and v) periphrastic constructions. Aspectual meaning in Afrikaans is an almost entirely unexplored research field. In my opinion, the literature on the expressions of aspectual meaning in Afrikaans contains two shortcomings. First, Afrikaans aspect needs to be described theoretically. Second, more research is needed concerning the specific ways in which aspectual meaning is expressed in Afrikaans. The scope of this entire research field is too large for a single study. For that reason, the present study aims to reveal the way in which periphrastic constructions are used to convey progressive meaning. As far as temporal meaning is concerned, it is possible to make a distinction between tempus meaning, which stands for deictic temporal meanings (i.e. past, present and future tense), and aspectual meaning, which stands for non-deictic temporal meanings such as duration, point of view and the internal structure of the situation. One can also distinguish between lexical and grammatical aspect. Lexical aspect has to do with the conceptual properties of a situation or, in other words, with the question whether it is static or dynamic, telic or atelic and durative. There are five situation types: states, activities, achievements, accomplishments and semelfactives. Grammatical aspect concerns the point of view from which the situation is perceived. One can make a distinction between perfective and imperfective grammatical aspect. The latter can be subdivided into imperfectives conveying habitual meaning and imperfectives conveying progressive meaning. Grammaticalisation theory is useful and a relevant tool to provide answers to the afore-mentioned research questions. First, it offers insight into the manner in which the ambiguous tempus constructions of Afrikaans came into being. Second, it can be used to show how the alternative aspectual constructions have developed and how they are currently employed in the language. For the purpose of this study, grammaticalisation is regarded as language change in which a construction loses its lexical meaning and comes to express grammatical meaning. Grammatical constructions can be used in more contexts than their lexical counterparts, as grammaticalised uses have been generalized contextually. Grammatical constructions lose the morphosyntactic properties typical of their lexical counterparts and assume grammatical properties. Grammaticalisation is a typological phenomenon and the lexical origin of a grammatical construction is often the same in different languages. Grammaticalizing constructions exhibit an increase in frequency. Afrikaans and Dutch are closely related languages and possess cognate periphrastic progressive constructions, viz. i) the aan het- / aan die- ii) VPOS te / VPOS en-; en iii) bezig- / besig- progressive constructions. To examine the use of periphrastic progressive constructions in Afrikaans from a grammaticalisation perspective, I compare the results of a study of these constructions in an Afrikaans corpus to those of previous studies of the periphrastic progressive constructions in Dutch. The respective constructions are compared on the basis of four criteria, viz. i) frequency; ii) verb collocations; iii) transitivity; and iv) combinatorial possibilities with other aspectual periphrastic constructions. The lexical origins of the various constructions are also considered. The comparison of the constructions on the basis of the afore-mentioned criteria makes it possible to demonstrate how the periphrastic progressive constructions in Afrikaans came into being and how they have developed into grammatical constructions conveying aspectual meaning and in which way the different Afrikaans periphrastic constructions express progressive meaning. / PhD (Afrikaans and Dutch), North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2012

Cette thèse s’inscrit dans le cadre des travaux de révision de la structure de la racine sémitique en général, et arabe en particulier. Dans l’introduction, nous avons entamé une relecture critique des efforts des grammairiens arabes en quête du seuil minimal du sens, et qui ont abouti à poser la racine trilitère comme étant ce seuil ultime et inanalysable. Ce choix a été fait malgré tous les signes d’instabilité que comporte ce concept - tels que son incapacité à expliquer la réversibilité de l’ordre des consonnes et leur variation phonétique indépendamment du sens. C’est un choix synchronique anhistorique qui exclut la notion de temps, et émane d’une conception révélationniste (tawqîf) du langage. Au XIXe siècle, l'évolutionnisme darwiniste, étendu à la philologie, met à mal cette conception figée de la racine. En intégrant la notion de temps, nombre d’Orientalistes, suivis par quelques philologues arabes de l’époque, ont montré à travers une approche comparative que la racine trilitère est une forme évoluée d’une base primitive bilitère (ou monosyllabique). Depuis, plusieurs explications ont été proposées pour la formation de la racine trilitère à partir d’une base bilitère (croisement, incrémentation, affixation). Certains linguistes comme Hurwitz ont essayé d’identifier et de systématiser par déduction les éléments ternaires et leurs valeurs sémantiques. Dans notre travail, qui s'inscrit dans le cadre de la théorie des matrices et des étymons, nous démontrons à travers l’analyse synchronique de près de 1000 items que la racine trilitère est analysable en termes d’étymons bilitères et de créments, ou affixes. Les éléments affixables ou incrémentables à la base sont phonétiquement les mêmes (gutturales, sonantes, labiales, nasales) et corrélés souvent aux mêmes valeurs grammaticales (factitif, statif, moyen) ou sémantiques (l’intensif). La troisième position de la racine est la position privilégiée dans ce processus d’affixation/incrémentation. La racine trilitère n’est donc pas le seuil minimal du sens, et s’avère réductible à une base biconsonantique rendue trilitère grâce à un segment crément ou affixe. Ceci peut avoir un effet sur notre conception du lexique arabe, désormais réorganisable autour des bases bilitères soit abstraites (les traits phonétiques), soit concrètes (les étymons primitifs), qui sont à leur tour transformables en radicaux trilitères grâce à une liste préalable de créments et affixes spécifiant la signification primordiale véhiculée par la base bilitère. / This thesis is part of the revisionist work on the structure of the Semitic root in general, and the Arabic root in particular. In the introduction, we present a critical review of the efforts of Arab grammarians in their quest of a minimum linguistic threshold associated with meaning, a quest that resulted in establishing the triliteral root as the ultimate unanalysable unit. This choice was made despite the many obvious shortcomings of this theoretical framework, such as its inability to explain the reversal of the order of consonants, or their phonetic variation (regardless of its meaning). It is an anhistorical, synchronic choice that excludes the notion of time, and finds its roots in a revelationnist (tawqîf) linguistic framework. In the end of the nineteenth century, the extended Darwinist theory has undermined this static conception of the root. By integrating the notion of time, a number of Orientalists - followed by some Arab philologists of that period - showed, through a comparative methodology, that the triliteral root has evolved from a primitive monosyllabic (or biconsonantal) root. Since then, several explanations have been proposed for the formation of the triliteral root from a biliteral base (crossed bilateral roots, affixation of formative increments or determinatives).Some linguists, such as Hurwitz, tried to identify and to systematize by deduction the ternary elements and their semantic values. In this work, which is carried within the framework of the Matrix and Etymons Theory , we demonstrate through the synchronic analysis of nearly 1,000 trilateral items that the triliteral root is analyzable in terms of biliteral etymons and of separable increments or affixes added at the beginning (prefixation), the middle (infixation) or the end (suffixation) of bilateral bases.The characteristic elements that can be affixed or incremented on the base are phonetically similar (gutturals, sonorants, labial, and some dentals) and correlated often with the same grammatical (factitive, stative, reflexive or middle voice) or semantic (intensive) values. The third position of the root is the position favored in this process of affixation / incrementation. Thus, the triliteral root is not the minimal threshold of meaning, and can be broken down to a biconsonantal base, which became triliteral thanks to an incremental or affixal segment. These findings may affect our perception of the Arabic lexicon, which can now be rearranged around biliterals bases, either abstract ( i.e. phonetic features), or concrete (i.e. historical primitive etymons) that are in turn convertible into triliteral radicals through a preliminary list increments and affixes that specify the primary meaning conveyed by the bilateral base.