The category of aspect.

The aspective meaning shouldn’t be confused with the temporal. Aspect shows the character of the action from the point of view of its progress & completion. In Russian – 2 aspects: the perfective & the imperfective. They differ both in meaning and in form. In Engl. there are no such clear-cut distinctions. For that reason not all linguists recognize the category of the aspect. In Russ. most do recognize, say that it can be expressed by lexical and grammatical means. Lex. means: verbs fall into 2 groups: terminative & durative. Term. verbs denote an action implying a certain limit. Durative don’t imply any such limit. Usually – pairs of such verbs (to find – term., to search – dur.). Gramm. means: in the course of history both Cont. and Perf. Forms have been analyzed as aspective. In modern linguistics the category of aspect is analyzed in terms of the oppositional theory => the category of aspect is built on opposition of Cont. aspect & the Non-Cont. aspect (common aspect à unmarked (weak) member). Cont. – marked (strong) member. Бархударов pointed out the peculiar marker – kind of morpheme è discontinuous morpheme be + -ing. These morphemes don’t include the root of the notional verb => the difference in meaning: Cont. aspect – its meaning is defined as an action in progress, developing at a given moment; the common aspect doesn’t express duration. Different ways of expressing aspect. The aspective meaning of the verb should not be confused with its temporal meaning. Aspect can be defined in the following way: aspect shows the character from the point of view of its progress and completion. Russian grammarians recognized the fact that there are both lexical and grammatical means of expressing aspect. Lexical means. We distinguish terminative and durative verbs. Terminative verbs express an action implying a certain limit. In case of durative verbs no limit is implied. There are also grammatical means of expressing aspect relations. It should be noted that both Continuous and Perfect forms have been analyzed by different grammarians as aspective. But, of course, the most widely recognized view is that the Continuous forms belong to the category of aspect. If we analyse it in terms of the Oppositional theory we should note the opposition between Continuous and non-Continuous forms. Various interpretations of the continuous forms. 3 stages can be distinguished in the evolution of views on the continuous. 1^st approach – of traditional grammar. It places the continuous forms among the tense forms of the verb. That’s why – “continuous tenses” => “the tense view of the continuous” and the meaning of the continuous was defined as that of simultaneity with some other action. Those who oppose this point of view analyze the form of the perfect cont. They point out that perfect is quite alien to simultaneity, it expresses priority but as the continuous is usually used with perf. It cannot express simultaneity, it expresses only aspectuality – an action in progress. 2^nd approach was put forward by prof. Ivanova – she says the continuous renders a blend of temporal and aspective meanings => “the tense-aspect blend view”. The merits: Иванова pointed out the aspective meaning of the cont. & showed the actual connection of aspect & tense in the semantics of the verb. 3^rd approach – the oppositional theory was applied by linguists Смирницкий, Ярцева, Ильиш, Бархударов – if we analyze it in terms of oppositional theory we should note the opposition between continuous and non-continuous forms.

<== попередня сторінка	\|	наступна сторінка ==>
The category of tense. Prosteriority.	\|	The Category of Mood

Не знайшли потрібну інформацію? Скористайтесь пошуком google:

Генерація сторінки за: 0.004 сек.