Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T19:35:51.315Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Progressive Attraction: On the Use and Grammaticalization of Progressive Aspect in Dutch, Norwegian, and German

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 May 2013

Bergljot Behrens ,
Monique Flecken  and
Mary Carroll
Bergljot Behrens*
Affiliation:
University of Oslo
Monique Flecken*
Affiliation:
Heidelberg University/Radboud University
Mary Carroll*
Affiliation:
Heidelberg University
*
Department of Literature, Area Studies, and European Languages, University of Oslo, pb 1003, 0315 Oslo, Norway, [[email protected]]
Radboud University, Donders Centre for Cognition, Montessorilaan 3, 6525 HR Nijmegen, The Netherlands, [[email protected]]
Institut für Deutsch als Fremdsprachenphilologie, Heidelberg University, Plöck 55, 69117 Heidelberg, Germany, [[email protected]]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper investigates the use of aspectual constructions in Dutch, Norwegian, and German, languages in which aspect marking that presents events explicitly as ongoing, is optional. Data were elicited under similar conditions with native speakers in the three countries. We show that while German speakers make insignificant use of aspectual constructions, usage patterns in Norwegian and Dutch present an interesting case of overlap, as well as differences, with respect to a set of factors that attract or constrain the use of different constructions. The results indicate that aspect marking is grammaticalizing in Dutch, but there are no clear signs of a similar process in Norwegian.*

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Germanic Linguistics , Volume 25 , Issue 2 , June 2013 , pp. 95 - 136
Copyright
Copyright © Society for Germanic Linguistics 2013 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Bertinetto, Pier Marco, Ebert, Karen, & de Groot, Casper. 2000. The progressive in Europe. Tense and aspect in the languages of Europe, ed. by Dahl, Östen, 517–558. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bjerre, Tavs, & Bjerre, Anne. 2007. Pseudocoordination in Danish. Proceedings of the HPSG ‘07 Conference, ed. by Müller, Stefan, 6–24. Stanford: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Boogaart, Ronny. 1991. Progressive aspect in Dutch. Linguistics in the Netherlands, ed. by Drijkoningen, Frank & van Kemenade, Ans, 1–9. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Boogaart, Ronny. 1999. Aspect and temporal ordering: A contrastive analysis of Dutch and English. The Hague: Holland Academic Graphics.Google Scholar
Booij, Geert. 2008. Constructional idioms as products of linguistic change: The aan het + infinitive construction in Dutch. Constructions and language change, ed. by Bergs, Alexander & Diewald, Gabriele, 79–104. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan. 1994. The grammaticization of zero. Perspectives on grammaticalization, ed. by Pagliuca, William, 235–254. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bybee, Joan, Perkins, Revere, & Pagliuca, William. 1994. The evolution of grammar: Tense, aspect, and modality in the languages of the world. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Carroll, Mary, Natale, Silvia, & Starren, Marianne. 2008. Acquisition du marquage du progressif par des apprenants germanophones de l'italien et néerlandophones du français. AILE 26. 31–50.Google Scholar
Carroll, Mary, & von Stutterheim, Christiane. 2011. Event representation, event-time relations and clause structure: A cross-linguistic study of English and German. Event representation in language: Encoding events at the language-cognition interface, ed. by Bohnemeyer, Jürgen & Pederson, Eric, 68–83. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Comrie, Bernard. 1976. Aspect. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Dahl, Østen (ed.). 2000. Tense and aspect in the languages of Europe. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Ebert, Karen. 1996. Progressive aspect in German and Dutch. Journal of Germanic Linguistics and Literature 1. 41–62.Google Scholar
Ebert, Karen. 2000. Progressive markers in Germanic languages. Dahl 2000, 605–653.Google Scholar
Flecken, Monique. 2011a. What native speaker judgements tell us about a progressive aspectual marker in Dutch. Linguistics 49. 479–524.Google Scholar
Flecken, Monique. 2011b. Event conceptualization by early bilinguals: Insights from linguistic and eye tracking data. Bilingualism: Language & Cognition 14. 61–77.Google Scholar
de Groot, Casper. 2000. The absentive. Dahl 2000, 641–667.Google Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin. 1992. Grammaticalization theory and heads in morphology. Morphology now, ed. by Aronoff, Mark, 69–82. Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
Hilpert, Martin, & Koops, Christiane. 2008. A quantitative approach to the development of complex predicates. The diachrony of complex predication (Diachronica 25), ed. by Bowern, Claire, 242–261.Google Scholar
Hopper, Paul, & Traugott, Elizabeth Closs. 1993. Grammaticalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hundt, Marianne. 2004. Animacy, agentivity, and the spread of the progressive in Modern English. English Language and Linguistics 8. 47–69.Google Scholar
Klein, Wolfgang. 1994. Time in language. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Krause, Olaf. 2002. Progressive Verbalkonstruktionen im Deutschen: Ein korpusbasierter Sprachvergleich mit dem Niederländischen und dem Englischen. Tübingen: Niemeyer.Google Scholar
Kvist-Darnell, Ulrika. 2008. Pseudosamordningar i svenska, säskilt sådana med verben sitta, ligga och stå. PhD dissertation, Stockholm University, Stockholm.Google Scholar
Leclerq, Pascale. 2008. L'influence de la langue maternelle chez les apprenants adultes quasi-bilingues dans une tâche contrainte de verbalisation. AILE 26. 51–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leys, Odilon. 1985. De konstruktie staan te + infinitief en verwante konstrukties. Verslagen en Mededelingen van de Koninklijke Akademie voor Nederlandse Taal- en Letterkunde 3. 265–277.Google Scholar
Lemmens, Maarten. 2005. Aspectual posture verb constructions in Dutch. Journal of Germanic linguistics 17. 183–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lødrup, Helge. 2002. Norwegian pseudocoordinations. Studia Linguistica 56. 121–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Natale, Silvia. 2009. Gebrauchsdeterminanten der verbalperiphrase stare + gerundio. Tübingen: Narr Verlag.Google Scholar
van Pottelberge, Jeroen. 2004. Der Am-Progressiv. Tübingen: Narr Verlag.Google Scholar
Sasse, Hans Jürgen. 2002. Recent activity in the theory of aspect: Accomplishment, achievement, or simply non-progressive state? Linguistic Typology 6. 199–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmiedtová, Barbara. 2011. Do L2 speakers think in the L1 when speaking in the L2? VIAL International Journal of Applied Linguistics 8. 97–122.Google Scholar
Smith, Carlota. 1991. The parameter of aspect. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Press.Google Scholar
von Stutterheim, Christiane, Carroll, Mary, & Klein, Wolfgang. 2009. New perspectives in analyzing aspectual distinctions across languages. The expression of time, ed. by Klein, Wolfgang & Li, Ping, 195–216. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
von Stutterheim, Christiane, Andermann, Martin, Carroll, Mary, Flecken, Monique, & Schmiedtová, Barbara. 2012. How grammaticized concepts shape event conceptualization in language production: Insights from linguistic analysis, eye tracking data, and memory performance. Linguistics 50. 833–867.Google Scholar
Telemann, Ulf, Hellberg, Staffan, & Andersson, Erik. 1999. Svenska Akademiens grammatik. Stockholm: Norsteds.Google Scholar
Tonne, Ingeborg. 1999. A Norwegian progressive marker and the level of grammaticalization. Languages in Contrast 2. 131–161.Google Scholar
Tonne, Ingeborg. 2006. Elucidating progressives in Norwegian. A Festschrift for Kjell Johan Sæbø: In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the celebration of his 50th birthday, ed. by Solstad, Torgrim, Grønn, Atle, & Trygve, DagHaug, Truslew. Oslo: Oslo University College/Unipub.Google Scholar
Tonne, Ingeborg. 2007. Analyzing progressives in Norwegian. Nordic Journal of Linguistics 30. 185–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs, & Heine, Berndt. 1991. Approaches to grammaticalization, vol. II: Focus on types of grammatical markers. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Vannebo, Kjell Ivar. 1969. Aksjonsart i norsk: Ein syntaktisk funksjonsanalyse. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.Google Scholar
Vendler, Zeno. 1957. Verbs and times. The Philosophical Review 66. 143–160.Google Scholar