A Diachronic Study of English Progressive -ing: focusing on its function
0
조회
0
다운로드
3
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Concerning the same events in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, for example, in the year of A.D. 994, different manuscripts depict them differently, and modern scholars translate them differently depending on their understanding of the OE Anglo-Saxon Chronicle using either the simple preterit tense or the preterit progressive aspect. What is interesting about the usage of the PE progressive as regards to the OE progressive is that the PE present progressive may express the idea that something shocking or irritating often happens or annoyance at a repeated action. As in the case of contrast of the Parker MS (Ã or A-Prime) and the Laud (Peterborough) MS. (E), the Parker uses the simple preterit tense fuhton “attacked” whereas the Laud (Peterborough) uses the past progressive feohtende wæron “were attacking” describing the same events. Concerning the same events, especially in the year of A.D. 994, we come to the conclusion that a scribe, for example, of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle (the Parker MS. Ã or A-Prime) adopted a historic, objective style using simple preterit tense. Another scribe, for instance, of Laud (Peterborough) MS. (E) expressed his attitude of anger, shock, or annoyance toward the events, adopting subjective, emotional, expressive style using the “emotional progressive”. To the question why there is a difference between these constructions concerning the same event, the answer might be that it is the difference of the scribes’ objective or subjective attitude toward the events. In this respect, the usage of English progressive has remained the same from OE to PE. The English language has changed just the form, the outward clothes from OE -ende to PE -ing. As many scholars have observed, while the progressive has been expanding its area with increasing use of it as the English language is approaching PE, but its main functions remain the same.
Abstract
Concerning the same events in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, for example, in the year of A.D. 994, different manuscripts depict them differently, and modern scholars translate them differently depending on their understanding of the OE Anglo-Saxon Chronicle using either the simple preterit tense or the preterit progressive aspect. What is interesting about the usage of the PE progressive as regards to the OE progressive is that the PE present progressive may express the idea that something shocking or irritating often happens or annoyance at a repeated action. As in the case of contrast of the Parker MS (Ã or A-Prime) and the Laud (Peterborough) MS. (E), the Parker uses the simple preterit tense fuhton “attacked” whereas the Laud (Peterborough) uses the past progressive feohtende wæron “were attacking” describing the same events. Concerning the same events, especially in the year of A.D. 994, we come to the conclusion that a scribe, for example, of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle (the Parker MS. Ã or A-Prime) adopted a historic, objective style using simple preterit tense. Another scribe, for instance, of Laud (Peterborough) MS. (E) expressed his attitude of anger, shock, or annoyance toward the events, adopting subjective, emotional, expressive style using the “emotional progressive”. To the question why there is a difference between these constructions concerning the same event, the answer might be that it is the difference of the scribes’ objective or subjective attitude toward the events. In this respect, the usage of English progressive has remained the same from OE to PE. The English language has changed just the form, the outward clothes from OE -ende to PE -ing. As many scholars have observed, while the progressive has been expanding its area with increasing use of it as the English language is approaching PE, but its main functions remain the same.
참고문헌 (21)
- Bosworth, J., "The Gospels. Gothic, Anglo-Saxon, Wycliffe and Tyndale Versions" (1907), Gibbings and Company
- Burrow, J. A., "A Book of Middle English" (1996), Blackwell
- Chomsky, N., "The Minimalist Program" (1995), MIT Press
- Denison, D., "English Historical Syntax: Verbal Constructions" (1993), Longman
- EjnarMunksgaard, "A Modern English Grammar on Historical Principles, 7 vols. Heidelberg", pp.1909, Jespersen, O
- Krusinga, E., "An English Grammar, Vol. I, Part I" (1955), Groningen
- Mitchell, B, "Some Problems Involving Old English Periphrases with beon", wesan and the Present Participle, 1976, pp.77, 478~491
- Mitchell, B., "A Guide to Old English" (1992), Blackwell
- Mossé, F., "Historie de la forme périphrastique ‘etre + participe présent’ en germanique, I, Introduction, ancien germanique, vieil-anglais. (Collection Linguistique, La Société Linguistique de Paris, 43.)" (1938), C. Klincksieck
- Mossé, F., "Historie de la forme périphrastique ‘etre + participe présent’ en germanique, II, moyen-anglais et anglais moderne. (Collection Linguistique, La Société Linguistique de Paris, 43.)" (1938), C. Klincksieck
- Mossé, F., "Handbook of Middle English" (1975), Johns Hopkins University
- Mustanoja, T. F., "A Middle English Syntax: Part I Parts of Speech" (1960), Societe Neophilologique
- Nickel, G, "An Example of a Syntactic Blend in Old English", Indogermanische Forschungen, 72, pp.261~274 (1967)
- Pyles, T, "The Origins and Development of the English Language, Fifth Edition" (2004), Thomson Wadsworth
- Quirk, R., "A Grammar of Comtemporary English" (1972), Longman
- Scheffer, J., "The Progressive in English" (1975), North-Holland
- 신성균, "기능의 혼동 인가 혹은 경제성인가? -영어 현재분사의 통시적 연구-", 영어영문학연구, 51(1), pp.233~246 (2009), 한국중앙영어영문학회
- Visser, F. Th., "An Historical Syntax of the English Language, 4 Volumes" (1963), E. J. Brill
- White, T. S., "The Sword in the Stone" (1962), Fontana Books
- The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, "Annotated by Anders Winroth. This text is part of Viking Sources in Translation. 2006 Anders Winroth Anders" (2006), Winroth@Yale.edu
- The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, "Eyre and Spottiswoode", pp.83~ (1961), London