Abstract

This paper sheds new light on the provenance of the be going to + infinitive (INF) construction with future time reference, and more precisely on the question of whether it was borrowed from Old (OF), during the Middle English (ME) period. Although this assumption is debatable, several authors have claimed that a transfer of this construction from French to English is plausible and probable since the contact situation that arose between 1066 and 1400 was most intense and must have had an impact on ME. This paper focusses on the (structural) syntactic and semantic parallelism in the source and target languages, since they are a prerequisite for structural borrowing, even if form and meaning may be modified in this process. With respect to structure, the OF construction aler +INF can be considered a potential source of the ME constructions go +INF and go + to +INF, regardless of the presence of to , which can already be considered an infinitive marker we will shown in detail. The meaning of the constructions is ambiguous in both languages between a movement of going with a subsequent event and an aspectual interpretation, which is inchoative. This inchoative aspect is also a plausible interpretation for many occurrences of ME go +INF. The aspectual constellation also explains the fact that the Modern English construction only appears in the continuous form, which represents the event as if we put ourselves within the event and viewed it in its development. [...] The use of the progressive form represents the activity a state'' (Haegeman/Gueron 1988, 534f). This is what Jespersen calls a temporal frame around a given time. The development go +( to )+INF be going to INF therefore occurs for independent reasons and is bound to the obligation to use the continuous form in this particular aspectual context. On the basis of the investigation presented in this paper, we can make the following assertions about the development of the ModE be going to +INF construction: A. The aspectual meaning of go +( to )+INF is due to one or more of the following factors: a. language contact, i.e. OF (Anglo-Norman) aler +INF forms; b. grammaticalisation of a movement verb similar to OF processes, but independent of them; c. language-internal lexical influence: confusion of ME gan 'go' with 'begin'. B. The development of go +( to )+INF to the ModE be going to +INF is an independent process, posterior to the development of the ME construction.

Highlights

  • This paper addresses the question of whether it could be argued for the assumption that the rise of the be going to + infinitive construction in English is the result of contact-induced change

  • In historical situations of intense language contact, it is impossible to exclude either of the two possibilities

  • As we stated in the introduction, the plausibility of assumptions in favour of the language contact hypothesis relates to the analysis of linguistic structures, and to the consideration of language varieties and the socio-linguistic context, as well as of extra-linguistic factors

Read more

Summary

Introduction

This paper addresses the question of whether it could be argued for the assumption that the rise of the be going to + infinitive construction in English is the result of contact-induced change. According to Prins (1948) numerous phrases, proverbs and proverbial sayings were borrowed from French in ME times like e.g. the verbal phrase s’arrêter court > to stop short or faire la paix > to make peace (Old English (OE) friþ geniman) The phrases he lists must be analysed as calques which means that morphemic constituents of borrowed words or phrases are translated item by item into equivalent morphemes in the new language ( called loan translation). The assumed rarity of structural borrowings is a further reason to use text corpora in order to find more evidence for (or against) the language-contact hypothesis (this desideratum is expressed by Hoffmann 2005 : 174, who is hesitant about considering the development of complex prepositions like by virtue of as structural borrowings from OF) We have conducted such a comparative study of OF and ME texts investigating a number of annotated and non-annotated corpora..

English constructions with go and similar verbs
Old English constructions
19 Table 1
Expressing direction
Changes from Old to Middle English
Middle English corpus data
The socio-linguistic background: bilingualism
The diachrony of periphrases with aller
Aspectual meaning
Borrowing of periphrases
Old French corpus data
Findings
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call