The category of tense. Prosteriority.

-- The immediate expression of grammatical time, or tense, is one of the typical functions of the finite verb. It is necessary to strictly distinguish between the general notion of time, the lexical denotation of time, and the grammatical time proper. The general notion of time is that the latter, as well as space, are the basic forms of the existence of matter, they both are inalienable properties of reality and as such are absolutely independent of human perception. All the lexical expressions of time are divided intо:

present-oriented (absolutive) and non-present-oriented (non-absolutive) expressions of time. The absolutive time denotation distributes the intellective perception of time among three spheres: the sphere of present, with the present moment included within its framework; the sphere of the past, which precedes the sphere of the present by way of retrospect; the sphere of the future, which follows the sphere of the present by way of prospect. Thus, words and phrases like now, last week, in our century, in the past etc are absolutive names of time. The non-absolutive time denotation does not characterize an event in terms of orientation towards the present. This kind of denotation may be either relative or factual. The relative expression if timecorrelates two or more events showing some of them either as preceding the others (priority), or following the others (posteriority), or happening at one and the same time with them. Here belong such words and phrases as after that, before that, some time later etc. The factual expression of time either directly states the astronomical time of an event or else conveys this meaning in terms of historical landmarks. Under this heading should be listed such words and phrases as in (the year of) 1066, during the First World War, at the early period of civilization etc. The grammatical expression of verbal time (tense) is effected in two correlated stages. At the first stage, the process receives an absolutive time characteristic by means of opposing the past tense to the present tense. The marked member of this opposition is the past form. At the second stage, the process receives a non-absolutive relative time characteristic by means of opposing the forms of the future tense to the forms of no future marking. THE PROBLEM OF THE FUTURE AND FUTURE-IN-THE-PAST The combinations of the verbs SHALL / WILL with the infinitive have of late become subject of heated discussions. Many linguists do not include the Future Tense in the system of tenses. In “PHYLOSOPHY OF GRAMMAR” Espersen points out that the Future Tense does not exist in English for there is no grammatical form of the Future standing on the same grammatical fitting with the forms of the Present and the Past. He analysed the phrase SHALL / WILL + INFINITIVE and said that it couldn’t be treated as the analytical form of the Future according to the theory of the splitting of functions. SHALL / WILL is not deprived of the lexical meaning because they retain their modal meaning; SHALL – obligation; WILL – volition.

Бархударов basically agrees with Espersen. His objection consists in the demonstration of the double marking of this WOULD-BE tense form by one and the same category: the combinations in question can express at once both the future time and the past time ( the form FUTURE-IN-THE-PAST), which hardly makes any sense in terms of a grammatical category. Indeed, the principle of identification of any grammatical category demands that the forms of the category in normal use should be mutually exclusive. The category is constituted by the opposition of its forms, not by their co-position.

Блох agrees with the both but he develops their ideas. He believes that SHALL / WILL + INFINITIVE belongs to a new specific temporal category – the category of prospective time. This category is built on the opposition of forms with SHALL / WILL-marker and forms without this marker. As to the difference in meaning the forms with SHALL / WILL-marker express an AFTER-ACTION whereas the forms without this marker express NON-AFTER-ACTION.

The prospective time is relative – the future action is relative to the present or the past time. If they are relative to the present time we speak of the form of the FUTURE. If they are relative to the past time we speak of the FUTURE-IN-THE-PAST. The category of the prospective time is not the one singled out by Блох. The other one, pointed out by this scholar is the category of the primary time. It provides for the absolutive expression of the time of the process, or, it refers the action to the moment of speech. It is built on the opposition of two forms: PRESENT versus PAST.

12. The category of phase/time-correlation.

The oppositional nature of the perf. was disclosed by prof. Смирницкий («Морфология англ. яз.» & other). He argues the perf. builds up its own gramm. category – of phase or time-correlation which is distinct from the category of tense and aspect. + says the category is built on opposition of perf. and non-perf. forms. Perf. – marked (strong) member – built with aux. “to have” and the Past Part. of the verb. As to the meaning, it expresses priority to a certain moment & correlates the action with that moment => the name of the category – time-correlation. Smirnitsky’s approach – his new interpretation was prompted by the analysis of the perf. cont. He proceeds from the 2^nd characteristic feature of the gramm. category in his reasoning – “the members of the opposition are mutually excluding”: 1 member cannot express the gramm. meaning of the opposite + 2 meanings cannot coexist in 1 form. “The perf. cannot be either an aspect form granted (в том случае, если) the cont. expresses the category of aspect or a temporal form granted the cont. expresses the category of tense” => the category in question is distinct from both tense & aspect, it’s a new category – of time-correlation. BLOKH – also on oppositional theory but the meaning of the perf. he treats differently – retrospective coordination. Blokh specifies that though the category of retrospective coordination is independent, semantically it’s intermediate between aspect & tense.

<== попередня сторінка	\|	наступна сторінка ==>
Substantivization of Adjectives	\|	The category of aspect.

Не знайшли потрібну інформацію? Скористайтесь пошуком google:

Генерація сторінки за: 0.02 сек.