메뉴 건너뛰기
.. 내서재 .. 알림
소속 기관/학교 인증
인증하면 논문, 학술자료 등을  무료로 열람할 수 있어요.
한국대학교, 누리자동차, 시립도서관 등 나의 기관을 확인해보세요
(국내 대학 90% 이상 구독 중)
로그인 회원가입 고객센터 ENG
주제분류

추천
검색

논문 기본 정보

자료유형
학술저널
저자정보
저널정보
한국중앙영어영문학회 영어영문학연구 영어영문학연구 제54권 제3호
발행연도
2012.1
수록면
353 - 386 (34page)

이용수

표지
📌
연구주제
📖
연구배경
🔬
연구방법
🏆
연구결과
AI에게 요청하기
추천
검색

초록· 키워드

오류제보하기
The diachronic changes of Verb Movement, negation, and the periphrastic DO in English were analyzed in this study. In OE and ME, the main verb moved to INFL or C, but English lost its V-Raising ability in ENE. At the end of the 15th century, the plural marking disappeared in English verb morphology. Consequently, verbs cannot move to INFL in NE. The OE negative particle ne must immediately precede the finite verb. In OE, the emphatic negator noht could occur after the verb to strengthen the preceding ne. In ME, not came to be the regular nonemphatic negator, hence preverbal ne was unnecessary and disappeared. The structure “do x”, which was first introduced by the influence of French faire x in the South-Western dialect in the late 13th century, was argued to be the origin of the periphrastic DO. The grammaticalization of the periphrastic DO was closely related to the loss of V-Raising in ENE. After the loss of V-Raising, the optional DO was grammaticalized as the NE periphrastic DO for negative sentences. When there is no auxiliary verb, DO is inserted under Tense to support the negator not in NE. This is called “DO-Support.”

목차

등록된 정보가 없습니다.

참고문헌 (27)

참고문헌 신청

이 논문의 저자 정보

최근 본 자료

전체보기

댓글(0)

0