ITEM VIEW

'n Minimalistiese analise van ekspletiewe negativering in Afrikaans

dc.contributor.advisorBiberauer, Theresaen_ZA
dc.contributor.authorPotgieter, Jean-Marieen_ZA
dc.contributor.otherStellenbosch University. Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences. Dept. of General Linguistics.en_ZA
dc.date.accessioned2018-11-27T08:51:40Z
dc.date.accessioned2018-12-07T06:55:19Z
dc.date.available2018-11-27T08:51:40Z
dc.date.available2018-12-07T06:55:19Z
dc.date.issued2018-12
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10019.1/105015
dc.descriptionThesis (MA)--Stellenbosch University, 2018.en_ZA
dc.description.abstractENGLISH ABSTRACT: The aim of this thesis was to investigate expletive negation (EN) as it manifests in Afrikaans. Consider (1): (1) Wat ek nie1 alles geleer het nie2! what I not everything learned have POL “All the things I’ve learned!” Five broad contexts were identified in which EN can manifest: adversative predicate constructions (with e.g. weier (“refuse”) and twyfel (“doubt”)), adverb constructions (with e.g. skaars (“barely”) and onmoontlik (“impossible”)), conjunction constructions (with e.g. voordat (“until”) and tensy (“unless”)), negative exclamatives (NEs), and nee-constructions (“no-constructions”). It was found that these EN constructions can be divided into two broad groups: (i) constructions with adversative predicates, adverbs and conjunctions, which serve to reconcile the semantic negativity of the sentence with a syntactic negator, and (ii) NEs and nee-constructions which serve to serve specific speaker-hearer oriented (i.e. SAP-related) functions. In addition, it was investigated how 36 native speakers of Afrikaans interpret EN constructions and how grammatical they deem these constructions. It was found that the constructions with adversative predicates and adverbs were only marginally accepted, whilst NEs and nee-constructions were accepted much more readily. The acceptability or not of conjunction constructions depended on the number of negators – constructions with both nie1 and nie2 were considered much more acceptable than those with only nie2. The formal analyses of the EN constructions were done within the framework of Minimalist Syntax. According to the analysis, the EN elements in NEs and nee-constructions are the same element in the lexion as those that feature in standard negation, but they have a more specialised role (in accordance with the Superset Principle – see Caha (2009)). These EN elements are structurally higher as they fulfill speaker-hearer-oriented functions. In contrast with the negators in NEs and nee-constructions, it was found that the constructions with adversative predicates that only utilise nie2, and with nie1 subsequently being absent, can’t be associated with [neg-Pol]. These nie2 elements are rather valued as [open-Pol]. as [open-Pol] is compatible with non-veridical constructions.en_ZA
dc.description.abstractAFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Die doel van hierdie tesis was om ekspletiewe negativering (EN) te ondersoek soos wat dit in Afrikaans manifesteer. Sien byvoorbeeld (1): (1) Wat ek nie1 alles geleer het nie2! Vyf breë kontekste is geïdentifiseer waarbinne EN kan manifesteer: teenstellende predikaat-konstruksies (met bv. weier en twyfel), bywoordkonstruksies (met bv. skaars en onmoontlik), voegwoordelike konstruksies (met bv. voordat en tensy), negatiewe uitroepe (NE’s), en nee-konstruksies. Daar is bevind dat hierdie EN-konstruksies in twee breë groepe verdeel kan word: (i) konstruksies met teenstellende predikate, bywoorde en voegwoorde, wat dien om die semantiese negatiwiteit van die sin te versoen met ’n sintaktiese negativeerder, en (ii) NE’s en nee-konstruksies wat dien om bepaalde spreker-hoorder-georiënteerde (d.i. SAP-verwante) funksies te verrig. Verder is daar ondersoek hoe 36 moedertaalsprekers van Afrikaans EN-konstruksies interpreteer en hoe grammatikaal hierdie konstruksies beskou word. Daar is bevind dat konstruksies met teenstellende predikate en bywoorde slegs marginaal aanvaar is, terwyl NE’s en nee-konstruksies baie geredelik aanvaar is. Die aanvaarbaarheid al dan nie van die voegwoordelike konstruksies het afgehang van die aantal negativeerders – konstruksies met beide nie1 en nie2 is as baie meer aanvaarbaar geag as dié met slegs nie2. Die formele analises van die EN-konstruksies is gedoen binne die raamwerk van Minimalistiese Sintaksis. Die EN-elemente in NE’s en nee-konstruksies is volgens die analise dieselfde elemente in die leksikon as dié wat in standaard negativering voorkom, maar met ’n meer gespesialiseerde rol (na aanleiding van die Superstel-beginsel – sien Caha (2009)). Hierdie EN-elemente word wel struktureel hoër aangetref omdat hulle spreker-hoorder-georiënteerde funksies verrig. In teenstelling met die negativeerders in NE’s en nee-konstruksies is daar bevind dat die konstruksies met teenstellende predikate of bywoorde wat slegs nie2 inspan in die manifestering van EN, in die afwesigheid van nie1 nie met [neg-Pol] verbind kan word nie. Die nie2-elemente word eerder gewaardeer met [oop-Pol], aangesien [oop-Pol] verenigbaar is met nie-waarheidsgetroue konstruksies.en_ZA
dc.format.extent115 pages : illustrationsen_ZA
dc.language.isoaf_ZAen_ZA
dc.publisherStellenbosch : Stellenbosch Universityen_ZA
dc.subjectAfrikaans language -- Negativesen_ZA
dc.subjectAfrikaans language -- Expletive negationen_ZA
dc.subjectMinimalist syntaxen_ZA
dc.subjectUCTDen_ZA
dc.title'n Minimalistiese analise van ekspletiewe negativering in Afrikaansaf_ZA
dc.typeThesisen_ZA
dc.rights.holderStellenbosch Universityen_ZA


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

ITEM VIEW