SYNTACTIC AND SEMANTIC FEATURES OF VERBS OF POSSESSION IN ENGLISH AND IN VIETNAMSE

By employing a number of qualitative research methods: the descriptive method, the comparative method and survey methods, the thesis has found out the basic syntactic and semantic featur

MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING

HANOI OPEN UNIVERSITY

TRAN THI THU HANG

SYNTACTIC AND SEMANTIC FEATURES OF VERBS OF POSSESSION IN ENGLISH AND IN VIETNAMSE

(ĐẶC ĐIỂM CÚ PHÁP VÀ NGỮ NGHĨA CÁC ĐỘNG TỪ DIỄN ĐẠT

SỞ HỮU TRONG TIẾNG ANH TƯƠNG VÀ TIẾNG VIỆT)

M.A THESIS Field: English Language

Code: 8220201

Hanoi, 2018

MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING

HANOI OPEN UNIVERSITY

TRAN THI THU HANG

SYNTACTIC AND SEMANTIC FEATURES OF VERBS OF POSSESSION IN ENGLISH AND IN VIETNAMSE

(ĐẶC ĐIỂM CÚ PHÁP VÀ NGỮ NGHĨA CÁC ĐỘNG TỪ DIỄN ĐẠT

SỞ HỮU TRONG TIẾNG ANH TƯƠNG VÀ TIẾNG VIỆT)

M.A THESIS Field: English Language Code: 8220201

Supervisor : Dr DANG NGOC HUONG

Hanoi, 2018

STATEMENT OF AUTHORSHIP

I, the undersigned, hereby certify my authority of the study project report

entitled SYNTACTIC AND SEMANTIC FEATURES OF VERBS OF

POSSESSION IN ENGLISH AND IN VIETNAMSE submitted in partial

fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master in English Language Except where the reference is indicated, no other person‟s work has been used without due acknowledgement in the text of the thesis

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABSTRACT 1

Chapter 1: INTRODUCTION 2

1.1 Rationale 2

1.2 Objectives of the study 4

1.3 Research questions 5

1.4 Methods of the study 5

1.5 Scope of the study 6

1.6 Significance of the Study 6

1.7 Design of the study 7

Chapter 2: LITERATURE REVIEW 8

2.1 Previous studies 8

2.2 Theoretical background 9

2.2.1 Overview of syntax 9

2.2.2 Overview of semantics 12

2.3 An overview of English Verb 14

2.3.1 Stative verbs 16

2.3.2 Dynamic verbs 17

2.4 Verbs of possession in English and their Vietnamese equivalents 18

2.4.1 An overview of possession in English 18

2.4.2 A brief description of verbs denoting possession in Vietnamese 19

2.5 Summary of the chapter 20

Chapter 3: METHODOLOGY 21

3.1 Research methods 21

3.2 Subjects 22

3.3 Research procedure 22

3.4 Data collecting instruments and analysis 23

3.4.1 Summary of findings 23

3.4.2 Discussions about findings 24

3.5 Summary of the chapter 30

Chapter 4: POSSESSIVE VERBS IN ENGLISH AND THEIR EQUIVALENTS IN VIETNAMESE 31

4.1 The syntactic features of POSS-verbs and their Vietnamese equivalents

31

4.1.1 The verb TO HAVE 31

4.1.2 The verb TO OWN 32

4.1.3 The verb TO POSSESS 33

4.1.4 The verb TO BELONG TO 34

4.1.5 Syntactic comparison between POSS-verbs in English and their Vietnamese equipvalents 34

4.2 The semantic features of POSS-verbs and their Vietnamese equivalents 35

4.2.1 The verb TO HAVE 35

4.2.2 The verb TO OWN 37

4.2.3 The verb TO POSSESS 38

4.2.4 The verb TO BELONG TO 39

4.2.5 Semantic comparison between POSS-verbs in English and their Vietnamese equipvalents 40

4.3 Suggestions for learning POSS-verbs for Vietnamese learners of English 40

4.3.1 Suggestions for teaching POSS-verbs for Vietnamese learners of English 40

4.3.2 Suggestion on improving grammar points related to POSS-verbs 41

4.3.4 Suggestions for translating POSS-verbs for Vietnamese learners of English 43

4.4 Summary of the chapter 44

Chapter 5: CONCLUSION 45

5.1Summary of Findings 45

5.2Concluding remarks 45

5.3Recommendation for further study 47

REFERENCES 48

APPENDICES 52

LIST OF TABLES

Table 2.1 The common types of English verbs 16

Table 2.2 Vietnamese verb types according to Le Dinh Tu 19

Table 3.1 Common errors made by English learners when using POSS-verbs 23

Table 4.1 Summary of the Semantic Features of TO HAVE (as a POSS-verb) 36

Table 4.2 Vietnamese Translational Equivalents of TO HAVE 37

Table 4.3 Vietnamese Translational Equivalents of TO OWN 38

Table 4.4 Summary of the Semantic Features of TO POSSESS 39

Table 4.5 Vietnamese Translational Equivalents of TO POSSESS 39

LIST OF FIGURES Figure 4.1 The Schema of the Sentences with Have 31

Figure 4.2 The Core Image-Schema of Have (Tanaka et al 1989:215) 35

ABSTRACT

In English studies, there have been a great number of books and research works on possessive case in English and on English expressions of possession so

far However, the analysis of verbs expressing possession: to have; to own; to

possess and to belong to in particular is barely touched upon This thesis aims to

describe and analyze on the grammatical structures and semantic characteristics of those verbs in comparision with their Vietnamese equivalents By employing a number of qualitative research methods: the descriptive method, the comparative method and survey methods, the thesis has found out the basic syntactic and semantic features of English verbs of possession, the similarities and differences between them with their Vietnamese equivalents The author has detected some

common mistakes in using and translating the verbs to have; to own; to possess and

to belong to Vietnamese learners of English may make Based on the language

theory and practical experiences of the writer as an English teacher, this thesis would draw out some solutions for avoiding making mistakes in teaching, learning and translating these possession verbs Some practical suggestions to amend the situation will also be proposed This study expects to contribute, to some extent, to further colouring the language learning picture by adding some findings and analyses in the verbs denoting possession Furthermore, this thesis also proposes some comparison with the Vietnamese equivalents of verbs denoting possession, which is helpful for learning and translating those words in context

Chapter 1: INTRODUCTION 1.1 Rationale

According to Gentner in 1982 when he considered all parts of a sentence in general, it is the verb that has a tendency to be hypothesized to be the semantic variant in linguistics The verbs to describe the state of possession are of no exception However, since there are a number of findings and research on expression of possession in particular; this thesis will extend the scope to how the semantic variant in linguistics of expression possession express itself in the form of verbs, nouns and clauses and have some comparison with their equivalent in Vietnamese

Apart from discovering the semantic differences in a variety way to express possession in English, this thesis also put an emphasis on the grammatical structure and semantic characteristics in a wide range of words to have an insight into the internal organization of both literal and figurative meaning of expression of possession

Linguistic characteristics should never be the mere factor to be taken into account when the writer works on this thesis Apart from the observation of linguistic characteristics, the writer also puts her focus on the clarification of the field in sociology with the comparison between English expression of possession and its equivalent in Vietnamese It has been recorded that there are no precedent hypotheses on the interaction between the semantic structure of expression of possession and the ecological context in which the expression is used between Vietnamese and English Hence, it is important to emphasize on this thesis‟s new finding on a concrete relationship between the cultural factors and linguistics ones related to varying ways to express possession in English and Vietnamese

The issues between grammatical form and lexical meaning of any English expression are always such a challenge for both language students and experts in the field Although words and clause to express the state of possessing lying in one of the most common expression used in English speaking countries (de Leon, 2001), there are still a number of mistakes in usage due to different meaning that the expression carries and multiple ways to express it There are two common problems The first one is making mistakes when using the expression of possession whose meaning is different from what one wants to express The second one is choosing the expression of possession which has two meanings or more that can be

applied in the immediate context Other than the nature of the complex relationship between semantic structure and meaning, it is the confusion of the speaker itself that

is at fault Therefore, this thesis is necessary in the sense that it could help English speakers, especially those who are using English as a second language, to have an insight into the meaning and usage of expression of possession in order to decide the exact words they need to use In the scope of the thesis, it will be useful particularly to Vietnamese learners of English

In recent time, with the increasing popularity of internet and its helpful services, people are joining a communication net at a global level with a constant use of English However, it is still difficult for English speakers when they have to choose appropriate words to apply in the immediate context in order to exactly transfer their thought and feelings from their mother tongue to English and vice versa While Vietnamese language seems to focus on the verb, English has tendency to put

an emphasis on nouns and noun phrases (McDonough, C et al, 2011) While there

has been studies on expression of possession in noun phrase, its aspect of verb phrase and clause remains virtually untouched Thus in this writing, the author would broaden her research by not only studying the expression of possession in nouns but also considering it in verbs in both English and Vietnamese While there

is a wide range of ways to express possession, this thesis would focus on three specific ways which are the three verbs “TO HAVE”, “TO OWN”, “TO

POSSESS” Throughout this writing, the author would refer to these three focused

as POSS-verb Being aware of other alternatives such as compound possessive

(example: “The Queen castle”) and the double possessive (example: “the castle of

the Queen‘s”), the clinic “‟S” and the possessive word “OF” the author recommends

reading work of Koptjevskaja-Tamm and Payne to study more about these alternatives

As in other Germanic languages, English offers its speakers a number of ways

to express the state of possessing something The issue here is to determine the factors that have the most substantial influence on the speaker‟s choices of ways to expression the state of possessing In other words, what is being mentioned at the moment is the preferred word order that a language speaker would choose In English and many other languages, the length of the constituents of a word or a phrase may have a great effect on what the word order would be The same thing is applicable to clausal word order According to “Expression of possession in

English: The significance of the right edge” (Borjars, K et al, 2013) in a model that

has a random variable, parts of knowledge of grammar of the native speakers are attributed to be formed by these preferences To advocate this statement, people can look at the fact that some languages categorize the same weight constraint but in other languages, it only represents preferences A wealth of literature relevant to this matter can be easily found The work of Givón in 1979 is an early study in this field Other more recent works are Bresnan, Dingare & Manning in 2001, Bresnan

& Nikitina in 2009, Bresnan & Ford in 2010 and Wasow in 2002 Tendencies relating to the distribution of POSS-S in English parallel categorical grammaticality

in other languages Therefore, it is safe to say that there are various factors affecting the choice of speakers when they have to consider among “TO HAVE”, “TO OWN”, “TO POSSESS”, “S” and “OF” In the scope of this thesis, the author would rely on convincing reasoning and document base to propose feasible factors From that, the author would draw out some suggestions to help Vietnamese learners

of English improve their proficiency in this particular matter

On account of all the aforementioned reasons, the author has decided on the

topic for her thesis as “Syntactic and semantic features of verbs of possession in

English and in Vietnamese” The thesis is aimed at syntactically and semantically

analyzing English expression of possession (POSS-verbs) with their Vietnamese equivalents With the explanation about the language characteristics as well as recommendation on expression of possession in English, the thesis is also expected

to offer Vietnamese users of English with better understanding of appropriate application of words, phrases and clauses to expression possession and comprehensive insight to usage of these words for an effective and correct translation

1.2 Objectives of the study

The aim of this thesis, as suggested from the tittle, is to analyze the syntactic and semantic features of English expressions of possession (POSS-verbs) with reference

to their Vietnamese equivalents so that Vietnamese users and translators can draw out meaningful implications to apply those expressions in an effective and correct way

To achieve the aforementioned objectives, this study focuses on the following goals:

 Analyzing the syntactic features of poss-verbs in English with reference to their Vietnamese equivalents

 Finding out semantic features of poss- verbs in English with reference to their Vietnamese equivalents;

 Suggesting some recommendations on the development of English teaching, learning as well as translating those verbs

1.3 Research questions

On account of the aforementioned objectives of the thesis, the writer is going

to propose answers for the following questions:

1 What are the syntactic features of English verbs of possession (POSS-verb)

with reference to their Vietnamese equivalents?

2 What are the semantic features of English verbs of possession

(POSS-verbs) with reference to their Vietnamese equivalents?

3 What are the recommendations for learning, teaching, and translating those

verbs that would be helpful for Vietnamese users of English?

In order to accomplish the purpose, the author would investigate how expressions of possession (POSS-verbs) are structured, why they are used in specific cases and to what extent they are similar or different from their equivalents

in Vietnamese To be more specific, the thesis firstly studies the syntactic and semantic characteristics of POSS-verbs in English and their Vietnamese equivalents Secondly, the thesis conducts a survey to find out if Vietnamese learners of English encounter any problems in mastering POSS-verbs when they learn and use these expressions On the basis of survey results, the thesis is expected

to introduce a number of strategies to help them improve the situation

1.4 Methods of the study

In terms of methodology, the author utilizes qualitative research method, comparative method and survey methods as the main methods for her thesis Qualitative research method is used with an aim to describe and analyze syntactic and semantic features of English expressions of possession (POSS-verbs) On account of the features found and analyzed, the author employs comparative method

to clarify the similarities and differences between English expressions of possession (POSS-verbs) with their Vietnamese equivalents Afterwards, with the purpose of discovering the common mistakes and errors those Vietnamese learners of English have a tendency to make with English expressions of possession (POSS-verbs) From those findings, there would be some suggestions to be proposed so that the readers can avoid making those mistakes again This will be done when the author

employs survey methods to test students to find out what difficulties they encounter

in learning and translating the English expressions of possession (POSS-verbs) under the study Apart from the three mentioned methods, statistical techniques are used to process numbers and percentage of data, designing tables and figures for the illustration of arguments under discussion, etc The author also resorts to other research techniques to help consolidate her study‟s result

1.5 Scope of the study

Expressions of possession have been received quite a substantial attention from many researchers with a variety of opinions However, their concentration is mainly put on a study of linguistic semantics in noun and noun phrases It is noticed that from the point of view of natural language semantics, POSS-verbs are in full conformity with independently established semantic generalizations This study has its foundation from the works of the following researchers: George A Miller (1990), Heine (1997), Viberg (1981) and Fujiwara., T et al (2014) Regarding Vietnamese research, this study is drawn on the works of: Diep Quang Ban (2009), Cao Xuan Hao (2010), Hoang Van Van (2011) and Tran Huu Manh (2007)

The scope of this thesis is restricted to syntactic and semantic analysis of characteristics of the particular English expression of possession with reference to their Vietnamese equivalents The English expressions under the research scope of

the thesis are the four verbs to have; to own; to possess; to belong to which are going to be referred in this thesis as POSS-verbs Although there are many other verbs to express the state of possessing such as to take, to get, to hold, to receive,

the author would only choose the three particular POSS-verbs as the subject of study because those are the popular words with a high frequency of usage and appearance in general English conversation, speech and document

1.6 Significance of the Study

1.6.1 Theoretical significance

The thesis combines, classifies and analyzes linguistic features POSS-verbs,

which are English verbs of possessing, including "to have; to own; to possess; to

belong to” This study is expected to focus on the syntactic and semantic features of

those verbs, and create a comparison with Vietnamese translational equivalents to compare and contrast the differences and similarities between two languages regarding those three verbs to facilitate the using and translating of English expression of possession

1.6.2 Practical significance

From the result of this thesis, Vietnamese users and learners of English can have an insight into the meaning and usage of POSS-verbs to recognize distinctive features of each POSS-verb so that they can select the most appropriate verb to express their opinion, feelings and even implications exactly to the context

The author would like to contribute her thesis to the development of Engilsh learning and teaching at high schools and language centers in Vietnam It is strongly believed that this study can effectively accompany those who have an interest in examining the learning, teaching and translating English and have a desire to consolidate their skill in those fields

1.7 Design of the study

Chapter 1: Introduction provides information about the background, objectives,

significance of the research and research question as well as research scope, methodology and data overview, limitations on the research problem

Chapter 2: Literature Review and Theoretical Models clarifies key concepts and

theoretical framework, which is in line with the proposed framework

Chapter 3: The methodology of conducting the research and survey includes

the process and analysis of the subjects, research procedure, data collecting instruments and summary of findings as well as discussion

Chapter 4: The semantics and syntactics features of possession verbs and their Vietnamese equivalents, including common errors made by learners of English

as well as suggested solutions for the issues

Chapter 5: Conclusion draws out the conclusion, limitation of the research and

suggestions for further study

Chapter 2: LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1 Previous studies

In 1990, George A Miller presented 15 different criteria basing mostly on semantic feature to divide verbs into In terms of semantic structure, Jackendoffian proposed a verb list of manner, motion and configuration Larger

in quantity, Bibber in 1998 introduced seven major semantic domains in which each verb has a tendency to have more than one definite meaning “Modern English a practice reference guide” by Marcella Frank offered another outlook

on this matter by categorizing verbs according to complement of verb or form of verb Specifically, the difference of each listed verb is observed basing on the kind of complement that verb may have In 1967, Vendler classified English verbs into four categories which are activities, accomplishments, achievements, and states Apart from the rest, one file of this method fits to what linguists have called as semantic domains verbs of states

In 1997, Nguyen Kim Than predicated that Vietnamese verbs had their own way of formation and classification In 2013, Nguyen Lan Trung in his research on Vietnamese nominal phrases also mentioned some differences between Vietnamese expression of possessions and other Indian and European languages Other Vietnamese related studies are about semantic and lexical features of verbs Huynh

Vu Chi Tam in 2004 had a study on semantic features of state related verbs and expressions in English and their Vietnamese equivalents There are a number of researches on parts of speech of Vietnamese, especially with verb groups A study

that analyzed the semantic and syntactic features of four English verbs “to say, to

tell, to speak, to talk” and their Vietnamese equivalents had been done by Tran Thi

Phuoc Hanh in 2002 Under the title ―A Study of Semantic and Syntactic Features of

Motion Verbs in English and Their Vietnamese Equivalents‖, Luu Thuy My Hanh

in 2006 observed and gave analysis on semantic and syntactic features of motion verbs in English and Vietnamese equivalents Nguyen Thi Mai (2008) devoted her

study on a linguisticfeatures of the three English verbs “carry, bring, take” and their

translational equivalents in Vietnamese In 2005, Nguyen Thi Hong Duc

contributed to the research data base with her study named “English Spatial Verbs

and Their Vietnamese Equivalents‖ in which she provided more knowledge about

cognitive grammar in English spatial verbs and their Vietnamese equivalents

In terms of the four words ―to have, to own, to possess, and to belong to‖, the

author found no research that had the same field of study, which motivates her to determine this particular field as her topic of MA thesis

2.2 Theoretical background

2.2.1 Overview of syntax

According to the research of Richard Moot and Christine Retore, syntax is studied as the due arrangement of words in sentences in their necessary relations Other papers by George Yule claim that syntax is the study of that part of grammar which treats the construction of sentences, the relationship between linguistic forms, how they are arranged in sequence and which sequences are well-formed The ways that words are connected to make bigger units such as phrases, clauses and sentences are called syntactic characteristics of words All approaches considered, it

is safe to say that syntax is the arrangement of words to make a standard sentence in linguistics In other words, it refers to the general rules that govern how words come together to form phrases, clauses, and sentences in linguistics In addition, syntax is also referred to parts of speech or word classification

Arrangement of words

How words come together to well form a sentence in a language is a meaning logical arrangement that conforms to natural and socially accepted rules Arrangement of words can be a sequence of occurrence of events or various stages

in a process, a sequence of objects in a class or group, a sequence in ascending or descending order or a sequential order of words according to dictionary, etc To put

it simply, the order of subject, verb and object in a sentence are the essence of syntax For instance, with a word arrangement like “student am a I.”, people can

still understand the correct sentence would be “I am a student.” In general,

however; it is not seen as a well-formed sentence when it is examined under standard English syntax

Part of Speech Features

According to Yule (2010), English words in general can be categorized into from eight to twelve syntactic files as parts of speech, namely: Adjective (A), Adverb (Adv.), Coordinate conjunction (C), Determiner (D), Interjection (I), Noun (N), Ad position (preposition, postposition, circum position) (P), Particle (Par), Pronoun (Pr), Subordinate conjunction (Sub), Verb (V), etc The work of appointing

the proper file that each word in text belongs in is called word tagging Below is an

example of classifying a speech into syntactic files:

Concepts of the sentence

So far, there have been numerous definitions of the sentence in English since different grammarians look at the sentence from different perspectives For example, a sentence is defined as a group of words that is put together to mean something A sentence is the basic unit of language which expresses a complete thought It does this by following the grammatical rules of syntax

A sentence is the largest independent unit of grammar: it begins with a capital letter

and ends with a period, question mark, or exclamation point Through the definition

of the sentence, it can be understood that the sentence comes first and then grammar and words as its elements are not categorized according to their word classes or the role they play in the sentence

The thesis follows the definition in the dictionary in which the sentence is said

to be a group of words that usually contains a subject and a verb and expresses a complete idea; in writing, the sentence begins with a capital letter and ends with a stop or question mark (Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English, p.1587) Based on this concept of the sentence, the sentence structure coincides with that of

an independent clause

Elements of the sentence

Traditional grammar describes the sentence with two parts For example, Hopper (2000) claims that a sentence has two parts: the topic of the sentence is the subject and what is said about the subject is the predicate Maclin (1992) states that

predicate mean the verb phrase and all the complements and modifiers connected to

it A predicate can be just a single word, or it can include several words in a verb phrase, objects or predicate nominatives and their modifiers, and adverbs in the form of single words, phrases, and clauses (Maclin, 1992, p.245) According to the definition of sentence structure this way, the two parts of a sentence could be illustrated as in the example below:

Sentence

Subject predicate

Operator predication

Example: He had given the girl an apple

In modern theories of grammar, grammarians look at the sentence in structural and functional aspects of its constituents Modern grammarians such as Quirk in

1985 and Eastwood in 1994 relate the structure of the simple sentence to that of the single independent clause with central elements as subject (S), verb (V), object (O), complement (C) and adverbial (A) and categorize the constituents which function as elements of clause structure are phrases As a result, the five formal categories of phrase are defined as verb phrases (VP), noun phrases (NP), adjective phrases (AdjP), adverb phrases (AdvP) and prepositional phrases (PP) Each phrase is named after a class of word which has a primary and indeed obligatory function in it (Quirk, p.60) The structure of each category of phrase, according to Quirk (1985) could be briefly described as follows:

Verb phrases consist of a main verb which either stands alone as the entire

verb phrase or is preceded by up to four verbs in an auxiliary function: The ship

may have been being sunk

Noun phrases consist of a head, which is typically a noun, and of elements which (either obligatory or optionally) determine the head and (optionally) modifier

(e.g a good trip that I once had: postmodification), or of complement, another element in the phrase (e.g a better story than that: postmodification with

complementation) The elements of a noun phrase are determinative, premodification, head, postmodification/complementation Pronouns act as heads of noun phrases

Adjective phrases consist of an adjective as head, optionally preceded and

followed by modifying elements: The weather was too hot to be

enjoyable-premodification-head-complementation; The weather was incredibly cold

enough-premodification-head-postmodification) (p.63)

Adverb phrases are similar to adjective phrases in their structure except that

they have an adverb as their head: I spoke to him quite often

indeed-premodification-head-postmodification; I spoke to him as clearly as I could:

premodification-head-complementation

Prepositional phrases consist of a prepositional followed by a prepositional

complement, which is usually a noun phrase: I met her for lunch (p.64)

As has been described above, the predicate of a sentence includes the verb phrase However, some grammarians hold a different view, considering the

predicate to be the verb phrase, a verb phrase can be the predicate of the clause or sentence which contains both the verb and either a direct or indirect object (the verb‟s dependents)

2.2.2 Overview of semantics

Semantic words are related by one central meaning and each one contains its own meaning, which makes it carry individual characteristics In 1992, Baker even used the strong word “personality” to describe the features that each word has, emphasizing that each word has their own “personality” to characterize it “Non-equivalence at word level means that the target language has no direct equivalent for a word which occurs in the source text” Baker said The scientist discussed further that the nature of non-equivalence create various issues for translators because it governs the type and level of difficulty Baker also proposed methods to solve the listed problems Apart from source language and target language, most of problems also have connection to cultural factors

To name some prominent problems, people can first look at cultural specific concepts in particular situation and the use of loan words in the source text It is common to find circumstances in which there is lexicalization of concepts in source language but the equivalents are impossible to find in target language Many other problems can be named When giving arguments on the translation of words in semantic and communicative context, Neurbert (1999) wrote: “Thus, it appears as if the right or adequate choice of words determines the success of translation” As a result, he supposed that despite the certain meaning that each word carries, a sensible translator ought not to only and mechanically depend on it since words are connected with one another in a text and their meaning can be modified due to the context Consequently, the scientist posed the question: “What is their „matter‟? What is the „matter‟ behind the words, what do they stand for?” Sweetser, another linguist, had her opinion that “words are unique vehicles of meaning, can shed the meaning neatly into new containers which the translator has located in [the target language]” In 1999, Neurbert also argued that a word would gain more lexical meaning when it is used in larger units From that point of view, in the same year, the linguist claimed that translating words should no longer be used and it is more appropriate for people to speak of “translated texts or rather words in texts”

From a linguistic perspective, a distinction should be made to distinguish between lexical and grammatical meaning Lexical meaning refers to the meaning

of words that belong to one of the lexical word classes: verb, noun, adjective and adverb Lexical meanings of words are usually found in a dictionary When describing lexical meaning, people have to consider the linear or structural relations

of one word after another in the sentence; for example, when we use the word

speak, for example, the next word which may combine could be a noun, e.g English

(speak English) or an adverb, e.g loudly, (speak loudly), but not e.g table (*speak

table) or heavily (*speak heavily) People have to take into consideration the functional relations of lexical words, in the same function or position in the

sentence For example, both the word red and blue are adjectives; they can replace

each other to describe the colour of an object and in the same function other words

can be used, e.g a red / blue / cotton / nice… scarf in a sentence In contrast,

grammatical meaning includes the meaning of grammatical items, for example, the

meaning of function words: preposition, article, particle… and inflectional affixes:

-s ending, prefixes…, grammatical functions: e.g subject, verb, object… and

different clause or sentence types: e.g nominal, non-finite, subordinate,

declarative, interrogative…

Taking into account certain non-linguistic aspects of meaning Geoffrey Leech (1981) lists seven different types of meaning Denotative meaning which is also called referential, descriptive , conceptual meaning or sense, refers to the

logical, cognitive aspect of words, e.g bread, rose…, In contrast, connotative

meaning which is called associative meaning denotes the associations and

secondary meanings the word implies: e.g slim, thin, skinny Words can have social

meaning; for example, the same thing can bear different names depending different locations One example of this is that Vietnamese people call the bowl for rice eating differently in different regions While the emotive or affective meaning together is sometimes realized through the use of denotative or connotative meaning

of words, people can understand the emotion or attitude of the word users The term reflective meaning refers to that of collocations which is conveyed by characteristic

word combinations, e.g fast food (not *quick food) indicating one kind of food

Finally, thematic meaning denotes the organization of a message in terms of

information structure For example, three sentences: I like this food, This food I

like, and It is this food that I like which have different position of subjects mean

differently

There are three types of features when speaking of semantic descriptions of words (definitions):

a Category features allocate the word to a suitable semantic category, e.g a

carrot belongs to the category [VEGETABLES]

b Function features allocate a usual state or activity to the word, e.g a tree

grows [GROW(X)] and releases oxygen [RELEASE (X OXYGEN)]

c Property features name the properties differentiating the reference of the

word, e.g an elephant has a trunk [TRUNK(X)] and a pair of ivory [IVORY(X)]

2.2.3 Compare and contrast between Semantics and Syntax

To differentiate syntax and semantics, it is essential to acknowledge that syntax and semantics are the two fundamental elements to make the validity of a sentence Syntax is the branch of linguistics that covers the grammatical arrangements of words within sentences, and how speech is used in communication Semantics deals with the study of meaning and the way to combine words to create meaningful discourse It studies the relationship between signs and symbols and what they represent It is also used in logic as the principles that determine truth-values of formulas within a logical system In short, while the term syntax refers to grammatical structure, the term semantics refers to the meaning of the vocabulary symbols arranged with that structure Nonetheless, if a sentence has syntactic validitiy, it does not necessarily imply the semantic validity of that sentence In other words, grammatical correctness does not mean sensibility

2.3 An overview of English Verb

The verb in English usually has an alleged function in the sentence It is usually seen being written next to the subject (following the S + V + O principle from left to right) They can be modified by adverbs, multi-verb constructs, and noun modifiers English verbs undergo many derivative processes such as attribution, causality, as well as processes involving a wide range of derivative genres - imperfections, advances, imitations, distributions and continuity

Besides, in a sentence, verb can perform independently when it is a unit Verbs

in English do not place strict requirements on symmetrical arguments to form grammatical clauses, as these arguments are not mandatory According to Hopper and Thompson (1980), the broader concept of causality (verb in general) is the

transition, defined as semantic parameters that affect the "effect that action takes" Morphology accounts to the simplest forms of verb

It can be said that the studies and hypotheses of Lakoff and Johnson (1999) are the foundation of the study of verb classification in this thesis However, there is one substantial exception where instead of assigning verbs into categories by language and speculating biological probes, the author starts the definition proposed with biological systems and uses these systems to classify verbs To put it simply, verbs in this thesis are classified by the biological systems they correspond to.To classify verbs, it can be based on the form or properties of each verb, which are

clearly demonstrated in “English Verb Classes and Alternations” by Levin in 1993

Levin in 1993 claimed that linguists prefer to classify verbs according to their language characteristics This approach may live up to the linguistic criteria, but it is unable to provide insight into how we receive in mind the activity and the biological schema correlated with the diagrams This new approach which is based on biological systems and anthropological systems can help to explain which verbs are determined by biological and verbal factors Accordingly, verbs are not defined by biological elements that can act as metaphorical extensions or special grammar methods In contrast, verbs are usually defined as part of a speech (or class) that describes an action or occurrence or indicates a state of being Nonetheless, the difficulty here is to find the criteria to define a word as a verb

Generally, it is more sensible to define a verb by what it does than by what it

is For example, the words “rain” and “snow” can be a noun or a verb A collection

of the verbal derivations can be found in English Allomorphs for different syllabic structures of the base are provided for each derivational morpheme Both stative verbs and dynamic ones can use derivations To exclusively describe the formation

of words under derivations is the main objective of the thesis See the table of subsections below to understand the progress effects of the derivations

Table 2.1 The common types of English verbs

1

To decide the mood or tense of

another verb in a phrase

English verb that is not an auxiliary verb, having a real meaning and not depending on another verb

2

To indicate an action, process, or

To expresses tense and can occur

on its own in a main clause

Not to show a distinction in tense and can occur on its own only in

a dependent phrase or clause

4

To form its past tense and past

participle by adding -d or –ed

(or in some cases -t) to the base

To be followed by a direct object Not to take a direct object

2.3.1 Stative verbs

People can base on the relation of stative verbs to the progress, or the exception

or the incompatibility of the verb with society to give different definition to stative verbs In 1964, Joos claimed that stative verbs are defined as the words that “resist the temporal aspect” and “reality is never used in the present continuous” Huddleston and Pullum in 2002 shared the opinion and gave a similar definition where state verbs have a different name as “verbs rarely used in the present continuous” Notwithstanding, this phenomenon still receives quite a lot varying explanations, which makes the accuracy of the grammar attributed to these verbs only relative Another criterion is proposed by Joo to distinguish stative verbs This criterion is for stative verbs that cannot have future references without such short periods as Will or Be going to The groups are:

the verb “think” as an example The verb “think” is popularly used with two basic meanings typically portrayed in the two following sentences: “He's thinking about

Jones.‖ and “He thinks Jones is a cheater.‖ In the first sentence, “thinking” is used

as a process In the second one, “thinks” describes a state Therefore, while

“thinking” in the first sentence can be used to describe what is being done; “thinks”

in the second cannot

With the same idea, Quirk et al argued that “We can draw conclusions about the distinction between the dynamic meaning and the static meaning of verbs, but it should be noted that we often refer to the meaning of dynamics and meaning” Huddleston and Pullum (2002) discussed static and dynamic situations, instead of verbs However, this approach is unlikely to result in any distinction since any verbs can be used in a dynamic or static state depending on the specific context and principle

In her lesson of “Stative Verbs: Definition & Examples”, Lauren Posey has divided stative verbs into four types which are opinion (Ex: think, know, believe), possession (Ex: have, own, possess), sensory (Ex: hear, feel, smell) and emotion (Ex: love, hate, want)

2.3.2 Dynamic verbs

Based on their distinction with stative verbs, dynamic verbs are defined with the following properties Firstly, they can attach the progressive morpheme directly to the root Secondly, dynamic verbs need to be relativized or derived with the progressive to modify nouns in NPs

Besides, with the default structure of the third clause, the verb is separated from the stative verb In dynamic clauses - unlike static propositions - the third object is cross-referenced by the third from before being bound (third person, neutral) Both positive and negative statement, even questions correspond to this general rule When one of the third person pronouns with an appropriate name, or the noun acts represents an object as an indefinite pronoun, cross-references do not take place Also, transposition-related factors can mask it, for instance, a non-dynamic, unidentified or lack of participant involvement in general or verbal statements Verb and stative verbs can be distinguished with the above criteria An additional observation of the division of these verbs involves the tendency to associate with particular phonetic structures Unlike stative verbs, which are primarily disyllabic roots with / a / or / prefixes, verbs do not express a specific

phonetic structure, but display a series of the structure represents a possible word structure Dynamic verbs are encoded in situations which involve changes over time It is changes in those dynamic situations that add the stagnancy Additionally, according to Lyons in 1977 there is more likelihood for dynamic situations happen than it is for static situations

2.4 Verbs of possession in English and their Vietnamese equivalents

2.4.1 An overview of possession in English

In Oxford Advanced Learner‟s Dictionary (2005, page 1174) possessive is

defined as an adjective, or pronoun, or form of a word that shows that something

belongs to someone or something and possession is defined to have six senses, two

of which are related to ownership: 1) having something: „If something is in your possession, you own it or you obtained it from somewhere‟ and 2) something you

own: „something that you own or have with you at a particular time‟

(pp.1349-1350) These two meanings have a close link with the terms Ownership and Physical possession that will be discussed as follows

It is true that Possession can be construed in various ways even in the most straightforward case where the object is concrete Miller & Johnson-Laird (1976:

565) use the following example to illustrate this: He owns an umbrella but she's

borrowed it, though she doesn't have it with her (See also Heine, 1997 on

possession) It can be said that He owns an umbrella refers to Ownership; whereas she borrowed it refers to Temporary possession Ownership presupposes

certain socially regulated rights to use an object which is regarded as the property of

a certain individual These rights can be transferred permanently (e.g as a gift) or temporarily (e.g as a loan) The exact conventions are complex and vary a great

deal among different cultures The last part of the example, she doesn't have it with

her, refers to Physical possession Availability for immediate use or, in more

general terms, control seems to be the crucial notion behind this meaning In the prototypical case, Possession involves both Ownership and Physical possession,

which can be combined as in the traditional text-book example: Peter gave Mary an

apple (in her hand and she could keep it) Temporary possession is a possible but

marked interpretation with a verb such as give (Peter gave Mary a book as a loan)

Physical possession should be regarded as different from uses where mere

Location is involved as in “Charles has a spider on his ear‖ In this case, even inanimate possessors are allowed: “The table has a vase on it‖ Physical possession,

on the other hand, should be contrasted with the Part/whole relation that is constitutive and tends to be permanent whereas Location usually is temporary:

“Charles has pointed ears‖, ―The table has three legs‖

All of the aspects of possession mentioned will be referred as concrete possession provided that the possessor and possessed entity are concrete When a verb of possession has an abstract subject or object, this will be referred to as abstract possession which is a cover term for a number of different uses

In the scope of this thesis, the author puts the three verbsto have; to own; to possess and to belong to into study with the understanding that they all have semantic

meanings of ownership and physical possession

2.4.2 A brief description of verbs denoting possession in Vietnamese

According to Le Dinh Tu (2009), Vietnamese verbs are divided into independent and dependent verbs and smaller groups as follows:

Table 2.2 Vietnamese verb types according to Le Dinh Tu

Types of Vietnamese verb Independent

Verb of existence Verb of

relation Verb denoting

complementary existence or continuity of things

Verb of existence

Verb denoting the end of the existence of things, phenomenon

Vietnamese translational words of POSS-verbs are assessed to be dependent verbs which do not express a complete meaning (meaning of action, activity, or state) so in principle, can not stand alone to assume a grammatical function; therefore, it requires another word (noun, verb, etc.) followed to complement meaning Under branch of independent verbs, existential verbs denote factual existence of things or phenomena There are three kinds of existential verbs:

 Verbs denote the complementary existence or continuity of things, phenomena:

 Verbs of existence

 Verbs denotes the end of the existence of things, phenomenon

Among these three types, existential verbs are assessed to be the most appropriate for translational Vietnamese words of POSS-verbs However, the distinction above is only relative, since in reality some Vietnamese verbs can be both independent verbs and non-independent verbs and equivalents of POSS-verbs

in Vietnamese fall into this specific case

2.5 Summary of the chapter

First of all, to give an insight into possession and verbs denoting possession in English and Vietnamese, Chapter 2 gives an overview into basic knowledge concerning different types of verbs in both languages The literature review of this paper expands on the work of Lakoff and Johnson (1999) regarding the foundation

of the study of verb classification in this thesis The theory of causative and possessive aspects of “TO HAVE”, semantic dimension of Ownership and Physical possession in “TO OWN”, and semantic features of “TO POSSESS” and “TO BELONG TO” are listed The following chapter will present in detail the syntactic and semantic features of English verbs denoting possession in line with their Vietnamese equivalents Secondly, the syntactic and the semantic features of the four English POSS-verbs, namely TO HAVE, TO OWN, TO POSSESS and TO BELONG TO have been dealt with in Chapter 2 The discussion of findings on the syntactic and semantic features of POSS-verbs includes the analyses of the similarities and differences in aspects of syntax and semantics of these verbs in English and Vietnamese It can be concluded that although the semantic aspects of these POSS-verbs seem similar at first, they are not the same in nature Even though they share some common translational equivalents in Vietnamese, those Vietnamese equivalents can also be easily distinguished in specific contexts

Chapter 3: METHODOLOGY

Since the thesis aims to firstly investigate the syntactic and semantic features

of the English verbs of possession, then point out the syntactic and semantic similarities and differences between English verbs of possession with their Vietnamese equivalents, and finally give some pedagogical implications for learning these English verbs, different research methods will be employed and the

research tasks will be undertaken as follows

Another significant method utilized is survey method In this thesis, the author had participants answer questions administered through a properly constructed questionnaire After all answers are collected, the author describes the responses given To be more detailed, the survey is designed properly to the English level of the subjects The questions are written and expressed in a clear and easy way to comprehend In the first part of the questionnaire, questions with two choices help

to reduce the the difficulty for the targeted students Regarding the translation in the second part, taking into account that translation is one of the challenging skills for

language learners, the author only requires students to translate one sentence in the given text And to support their understanding of the story context and content, she takes the text from popular English stories that Vietnamese students are likely to be familiar with The author even provides a Vietnamese translation of surrounding text to facilitate students with general idea about the immediate context of the story Together with all the methods above, some other supportive methods such as analytical and synthetic methods and the consultation method appear to be very useful to the author during the process

3.2 Subjects

Subjects of research in the thesis belong to two types The first type includes all the syntactic and semantic features of English verbs of possession and their Vietnamese equivalents The second type includes 122 students whose ages range from 16 years old to 18 years old at intermediate level of English in Le Quy Don

High School Time of the research is in January 2018

3.3 Research procedure

Approximately one month was spent on this research procedure The first step

is to determine the scope of knowledge in the survey as well as its targeted students Scope of the knowledge is one of the most significant questions to address It has to cover what would bring the answer to the thesis questions without irrelevant field of English One prominent problem is the only available survey takers is highschool students Therefore, the survey questions need to be simpler and eaiser to understand That is the reason why the author provides supporting translation of context

The next step is to choose the scope of knowledge that the research wants to test the targeted students Then, the types of exercises and questions are decided on

in terms of grammatical points After the test papers were designed, they were delivered to the students; the test papers were used to collect data for the study The test papers are attached as in the Appendix The survey includes 3 tasks including one Grammar test, one Vietnamese translation task in which students have to translate a sentence from an English novel into Vietnamese and one English translation task in which students have to translate a single sentence or dialogue from Vietnamese into English

The final step for the author is to collect the results to detect the most common errors made on the verbs denoting possession in English by the students aged

ranging from 16 years old to 18 years old at B1intermediate level (CEFR) at Le Quy Don High School The common mistakes are divided into categories of “Grammar errors related to Verb Tense and Structure” and “Vocabulary errors related to Word Choice” Basing on the root of the mistakes, there are proposals for feasible solutions to help students improve their language proficiency

3.4 Data collecting instruments and analysis

Two sources were involved in doing statistics in the study The researcher first did the statistics on the final test papers on common errors on forms of POSS-verbs made by learners of English when using the verbs of possession in English by the

100 students aged ranging from 16 years old to 18 years old at B1 level (CEFR) at

Le Quy Don High School Secondly, the statistics were done by analyzing the results collected from the survey with the exercises In statistics processing, the researcher classified the common mistakes to formulate the bases for suggesting solutions to the problems

The survey includes three parts The first part has 10 questions on the grammatical points and usage as well as collocation of possession verbs It is designed with the underlined parts and two choices of Correct and Incorrect, making the content easier for students The second part requires students to translate four English sentences from four extracts in popular novels into Vietnamsese The third and final part asks students to translate simple Vietnamese sentences into English

3.4.1 Summary of findings

Table 3.1 Common errors made by English learners when using POSS-verbs

Common errors Grammar errors related to

Verb Tense and Structure

Vocabulary errors related

to Word Choice Percentage of Having-

The highest percentage of grammar errors is in the sentence “Don‟t talk to

your father while he is having a shave He‟ll cut himself” and the lowest percentage

of errors in the sentence “Does you have a job yet?” Moreover, the highest

percentage of vocabulary errors is in “Don‟t talk to your father while he is having a

shave He‟ll cut himself” and the lowest percentage of vocabulary errors is in “I

must get a ticket I don’t own”

Grammar errors related to verb tense form including “POSSESS” and

“BELONG TO” account for the largest part The lowest error percentage belongs to

“HAVE” with 14%

Furthermore, in the vocabulary errors related to “POSSESS” has the highest percentage which is 41% The percentage of errors related to “BELONG TO” stands at the second with 29% and that of “OWN” take place of HAVE in

“grammar errors”being the last with only 10%

The results of Test paper with Translation errors are also interesting The

proportion of Translation errors in the four English text extracts is quite high, at approximately 99% The figure just decreases slightly when it comes to English translation of Vietnamese dialogues and sentences, with 80%

Looking at each translated word, it is interesting to see that the percentage of errors in TO HAVE translation is the lowest with 60%, followed by that of TO BELONG TO Surprisingly, that of CÓ is extremely high at 90% The figures of TO OWN, TO PROCESS and LÀM CHỦ/THUỘC VỀ share the same high rank from 89% to 90% Relying on the results of the analysis above of the test paper in Appendix of this thesis, the most common errors could be detected for students and teachers to reflect on Through the exercises of grammar and translation of the test paper, it is possible to see what the students lack to select appropriate ways of learning, translating and teaching POSS-verbs in English

3.4.2 Discussions about findings

Based on the survey tests done by the students, it is noticed that they have made the following mistakes when using POSS-verbs in English:

3.4.2.1 Grammar errors related to verbs tense& structure:

Referring to grammar, the errors in using English POSS-verbs may be categorized as follows:

 Subject-Verb Agreement Errors occur when the subject does not agree with the verb in person or number

Ex: * She possess three children

Correction: She possesses three children

 Verb Tense Errors occur when an incorrect time marker is used The verbs

of possession are not used in the progressive form

Ex: *Are you having a driving license?

Correction: Do you have a driving license?

 Verb Form Errors occur when a verb is incorrectly formed

Ex: * I must draw some money I don’t had any

Correction: I must draw some money I don’t have any

 Sentence Structure Errors refer to a broad range of errors that occur for a

variety of reasons: wrong word form, word loss or redundancy, wrong word order, lack of a direct object etc

Ex 1: Wrong: I must get a ticket I don’t own (Lack of a direct object) Correction: I must get a ticket I don’t own one

Ex 2: Who belongs to this land?

Correction: Who does this land belong to?

 Causes of grammar errors related to verb tense form:

According to the survey, the author recognizes four types of grammatical errors that that targeted students made They are errors related to Subject-verb agreement, Verb Form, Verb Tense and Sentence Structure The causes of those mistakes would be clearly indicated

With regard to causes for Subject-verb agreement and Verb Form, the author supposes that the participants in the survey merely focus on the meaning of each word in the sentence without being aware that each English word in a sentence must

be in line with others in terms of English grammar In addition, the nature of Vietnamese gramma does not require Vietnamese speaker to conjugate the main verb to be compatible with the subject This may attribute to the reason why these Vietnamese learners of English tend to overlook the conjugation of the main verb in

a sentence as the mentioned examples:

Example of Subject-verb agreement errors:

* She possess three children

 Correction: She possesses three children

Example of Verb Form Errors:

* I must draw some money I don’t had any

 Correction: I must draw some money I don’t have any

When it comes to causes of Verb Tense Errors, the author can see that the majority of targeted students get confused between when to use Present Simple and Present Continuous for POSS-verbs They made mistakes like:

Example: Are you having a driving license?

One of the possible reason for this issue is the students are unaware of the fact that verbs of possession are not used in the progressive form because they are stative verbs which are used to describe a state However, even when being acknowledged the forbidden of progressive tenses in the usage of POSS-verbs, the targeted students may also have confusion when they see that “having”, “owning”,

“possessing” are still used in English speech This issue needs another explanation relevant to stative verbs, dynamic verbs and the diversity of part of speech that each

word bears In the specific example of “Are you having a driving license?”, it is

clear that “TO HAVE” is used as a stative verb, not a dynamic verb, therefore,

“HAVE” can only be in the simple tenses Hence, the correct sentence should be:

 Correction: Do you have a driving license?

Regarding sentence structure errors, the focus would be imposed on the lack

of a direct object behind each POSS-verb As a POSS-verb, TO HAVE, TO OWN and TO POSSESS always demand a direct object right behind it The students might not be informed of this Furthermore, in Vietnamese grammar, it is not mandatory to add the object behind the word “CÓ” when the speaker had already mentioned it before In Vietnamese, it can be “Vé á? Tôi không có.” (Rough English translation: Ticket? I don‟t have) It probably the reason why the students made this mistake:

Example: I must get a ticket I don’t own

 Correction: I must get a ticket I don’t own one

3.4.2.2 Vocabulary errors related to word choice

This part only focuses on analyzing the vocabulary errors related to word choices Errors, which are related to grammar points and others points of vocabulary will not be analyzed in detail in this part

 Word Form Errors occur when the wrong part of speech is chosen

Ex: I'm afraid this is the only suitcase I am possession

Correction: I'm afraid this is the only suitcase I possess

 Word Choice Errors refers to a broad range of errors, from completely

incorrect word use, to connotation being off, to substitution of antiquated forms