Chapter
2.1. Introduction
pp.：
47 – 47
2.3. Actionality
pp.：
49 – 53
2.4. Perfective Progressives vs. synthetic forms
pp.：
53 – 67
2.5. Comparison to the Slavic system
pp.：
67 – 70
2.6. Comparison to English phrasal verbs
pp.：
70 – 78
2.7. Spanish ir + gerund
pp.：
78 – 80
2.8. Concluding remarks
pp.：
80 – 81
3. Aspect and actionality in the grammaticalization of the Romance Progressive
pp.：
81 – 83
3.2. Spanish vs. Italian
pp.：
83 – 85
3.1. Perfective and Imperfective Progressive
pp.：
83 – 83
3.3. Further developments in American Spanish: [- ASPECT] [- ACTIONALITY]
pp.：
85 – 102
3.4. States, habituals and Progressives
pp.：
102 – 115
3.5. The Progressive in the other Romance languages
pp.：
115 – 124
3.6. “Progressive forms” in Romance: some conclusions
pp.：
124 – 148
3.7. Some definitions of Romance gerundial periphrases
pp.：
148 – 149
3.8. Some definitions of Spanish estar + gerund
pp.：
149 – 156
3.9. Concluding remarks
pp.：
156 – 161
4. The interaction of aspect and actionality in some other Romance periphrases
pp.：
161 – 164
4.1. Portuguese Present Perfect
pp.：
164 – 164
4.2. Mexican Present Perfect
pp.：
164 – 179
4.3. Sicilian Present Perfect
pp.：
179 – 200
4.4. Non-durative periphrases?
pp.：
200 – 201
4.5. Concluding remarks
pp.：
201 – 218
5. Motion auxiliaries and actional restrictions
pp.：
218 – 219
5.2. Italian andare + gerund
pp.：
219 – 221
5.1. Introduction
pp.：
219 – 219
5.3. Motion periphrases in the other Romance languages
pp.：
221 – 255
5.4. ‘Come’ + gerund in Romance
pp.：
255 – 301
5.5. Concluding remarks
pp.：
301 – 311
Conclusion
pp.：
311 – 313
Sources of material
pp.：
316 – 346
References
pp.：
346 – 348
Index of subjects
pp.：
348 – 375
Verbal Periphrases in Romance
：Aspect, Actionality, and Grammaticalization
( Empirical Approaches to Language Typology EALT )
Disclaimer: Any content in publications that violate the sovereignty, the constitution or regulations of the PRC is not accepted or approved by CNPIEC.
