The meaning of keep on and go on:

The verb particle constructions keep on and go on are very similar in meaning to

both keep and continue. Yet, as some linguists note (e.g. Brinton 1988, Cappelle

1999) there are also some subtle differences between them that need to be given closer attention.

Cappelle in her study on keep and keep on notes that although they are similar both

semantically and syntactically keep and keep on are also different. According to

her the main difference between the two constructions lies in the fact that keep has

more like an auxiliary status (it has an incomplete sort of meaning so that it must be completed by something else) keep on has a full, lexical sort of meaning

(meaning something like ‘not give up’, ‘continue’). An argument in favour of treating keep on as a full verb is that it can be used on its own (it does not need any

other verb for it to be meaningful)48.

Sentences (25-26) show that when it has the meaning of continuing a certain activity event or event state, keep requires a verb to complete its meaning (the lack

of such a verb makes these sentences ungrammatical), keep on however can appear

on its own (in this sense go on is similar to keep on, consider (27) where go on

appears on its own)49.

(25) I think after the initial check’s been made it’s important to keep on (*keep) and maintain a check on it.

(26) She sits down in the total dark and asks me to please keep on (*keep) and so I

do. (Capelle: 301)

48 _{Cappelle (1999) brings several arguments to support the view that keep on + ing (and also go on)}

is a complex verb phrase, consisiting of two VPs. An important argument in favor of treating keep on + ing as a complex verb phrase is that on belongs to keep and not -ing. Cappelle shows that

although there are cases when on can appear both after keep and after -ing as in sentences there are

also cases when on cannot be separated from keep. In sentences (23- 24) on belongs to keep and not

to the following -ing phrase:

(21) She kept on walking. (22) She kept walking on. (23) She kept on winning.

(24) *She kept winning on. (Capelle:4)

49

In Cappelle’s view, the fact that keep on but not keep can appear on its own, has also to do with

the diachronic development of these aspectualizers: keep as an older construction has already

135

(27) If you go on (= continue behaving) like this you won't have any friends left at

all. (Mirriam Webster’s Dictionary)

Another question related to keep on (and also go on) is the meaning and function of

on within the construction. ‘On’ is often considered to carry emphatic stress within a construction (28); Cappelle argues that although ‘on’ serves for emphasis this can be achieved by other means as well (by the use of ‘just’ (29) as well as by the repetition of –ing as in (30) so that according to her this cannot be the only

difference that exists between keep and keep on. Also, as Cappelle notes, it is

difficult to say which of the verb phrases carries more emphatic stress (keep + ing

or keep on + ing). Example of this is (31) where both keep on + ing and keep + ing

can be considered to carry emphatic stress:

(28) So the morning keeps dragging on and on and on. (29) He just kept singing.

(30) He kept singing and singing.

(31) He is the type who will keep on learning, keep picking things up. (Cappelle: 290)

Cappelle argues that the meaning of ‘on’ is to express a spatial or temporal progress reading; it prolongs the part towards the end point of a situation (but this does not mean that ‘on’ would generate a telic reading). This is supported by the fact that keep on appears with accomplishments (see the discussion below)50.

Go on seems to be very similar to keep on (go on is often defined as a synonym of keep on and continue). The Cambridge Advanced Learner’s Dictionary

(http://dictionary.cambridge.org) defines go on as to ‘continue or move on to the

next thing’; as will be shown, this definition contains both the meaning of go on + ing (expressing an ongoing occurrence) and that of go on + to infinitive (expressing

movement towards the next object or event).

50

Another difference between the constructions is made by Brinton (1988). Following the presupposition and consequences approach outlined by Freed, Brinton suggests that an important difference between the two constructions is that while keep on presupposes prior initiation of the

136

Just like keep on, go on can also be considered a complex verb phrase, also shown

by the fact that go on can also appear on its own. Within this construction the

particle ‘on’ is also considered to have an important function: Duffley (2006: 100) argues that the particle ‘on’ within the go on construction expresses ‘the idea of a

further or successive position resulting from the movement denoted by ‘go’51.

Similarly to Requejo (2006), who attributes an important role to the particle in the compound and also Duffley, here it will also be assumed that the particle contributes greatly to the meaning expressed by the construction. The particle ‘on’ has a meaning of its own, it expresses the spatial extension of the verb it is attached to (the core meaning of the particle (in this interpretation the schematic meaning of the construction). The particle ‘on’ within the keep on + ing and also go on + ing

constructions expresses the further occurrence of the event, by stretching its nucleus part. Depending on the aktionsart category of the complement verb, the particle ‘on’ can express the durative nature of both a repetitive occurrence and of a single occurrence.

51

Following the outlines of Cognitive Grammar, Maria Requejo (2006) states that the meaning of verb-particle constructions is not arbitrary but greatly depends on the meaning of the particle, which has an original spatial meaning (which is present also in some of their metaphorical senses) (e.g. the particles ‘on’, ‘in’, ‘out’, ‘up’, ‘down’ etc.) The non-spatial metaphorical senses of the particles are derived by metonymic or metaphoric transfer from their originally spatial senses (particles form a big semantic network of related senses).

Cappelle differentiates between particles that are specified for having or lacking an end point boundary and those that are not. The particle ‘on’, belonging to the former group is considered to lack an end boundary and as such to have only atelic uses.

137

7.3. The complementation of Continuative Aspectualizers