CHAPTER 3. THE VERB AND ITS GRAMMATICAL CATEGORIES 2 страница
In English, as well as in most European languages, the concept of time finds a very elaborate expression. It is presented by units of various lingual levels: grammatical forms, nouns, adjectives and adverbs of time, prepositions and conjunctions of general temporal semantics, prefixes and word combinations. Taken together they constitute the functional-semantic category of temporality. The centre of this category is taken by the grammatical category of tense in which this concept finds the most specified and regular expression. Besides the grammatical category of tense the concept of time is also represented in two other verbal categories of English: aspect and time correlation though in a different way which will be specified later.
The grammatical category of tense is a category which expresses the relation between the time of the action and the moment of speech (now) or any other point of reference taken for the basis of temporal relations (then). Strictly speaking, the word moment in this definition is not very precise as both now and then denote not only points in time but rather stretches of time and the boundaries of these stretches are not clearly outlined (compare the use of present in universal statements like "Experience fades. Memory stills (Ch. Romney-Brown) where the 'now' actually occupies the whole of the time axis, it refers to all times, so time eventually stills in such utterances). The presence of the words now and then in the characteristic of the category suggests that it has a deictic character, the now and then are not stable but shifting because they present the speaker's moment of speech (for this some scholars introduce the term 'the time of communication' to replace the 'the moment of speech' [King 1983,104-106]). In this respect tense may be compared to the most prototypical deictic words - the pronouns. This fact differentiates the category of tense from the other two verbal categories in which the concept of time also finds its representation - the categories of aspect and time correlation. Only the category of tense has a deictic character. It locates situation in time with reference to the time of communication, the speaker's time. Aspect involves different ways of "viewing the internal temporal constituency of a situation" [Comrie 1976, 5], whereas time-correlation places the action on the time axis with reference to its correlation with another action or another indication of time on the time axis as prior to them.
|
|
|
Due to its complexity the problem of the grammatical category of tense has always been in the focus of linguistic discussions. Linguists differ greatly in the questions related to the scope of this category and, consequently, to the number of categorial forms they find in English This number varies from two to twelve in various interpretations. The controversy of opinions is related to two main factors: 1) the relations between tense and the other two verbal categories in which the concept of time is represented (aspect and time correlation) and 2) the status of shall/will + Infinitive, i.e. the problem of Future tense. Let us dwell on these two problems in more detail.
We have already stated that the concept of time, being of great importance for the speakers of English (and many other languages), finds its representation in three grammatical categories: tense, aspect and time correlation, but in each of these categories it is represented differently, different aspects of this concept are foregrounded: tense represents the relation of the action to the moment of speech (the speaker's now), aspect reflects the internal temporal structure of the situation as presented by the speaker, the speaker's 'vision' and interpretation of the temporal situation and time correlation presents the action in its correlation to another action or point in time as prior to it. Thus, these three categories present three ways of interpreting the concept of time and representing it in the grammatical system of the verb.
The close interrelation of these three categories finds its iconic expression in the form of the verb where they are presented simultaneously (syncretically). E.g. the grammatical form It has been raining for hours expresses an action which began prior to the moment of speech, has been going on for a certain period of time up to the moment of speech and is still going on, i.e. simultaneous to the moment of speech. This syncretism finds its reflection in the name of the grammatical form - Present Perfect Continuous. In practical grammars of English all such complex forms are usually referred to as tenses.
The fact of their close interrelation gives grounds to interpret such forms as various 'tenses' and in this case the number of tenses in English invariably grows. E.g., A.V.Korsakov presents the grammatical category of tense in English as a complex system which includes absolute and anterior tenses (based on the opposition of Indefinite and Perfect forms), and static and dynamic tenses (based on the opposition of Indefinite and Continuous forms) [Korsakov 1969]. This view is somewhat similar to the presentation of tenses in the grammars of French, where the system of tenses is also based on several oppositions and the authors speak about simple and complex tenses, point and continuous tenses etc.( for more detail see: [Fax 2000, 339-342]).
|
|
|
However, for the sake of theoretical clarity in this question it is necessary to bring to mind the postulates of the grammatical category suggested by A.I.Smirnitsky. According to one of the main postulates a categorial form cannot express simultaneously several meanings of the same grammatical category though it can express several meanings of different grammatical categories [cmhphhijkhh 1959, 9]. In fact it appears a very simple and very logical postulate when it is applied to other grammatical categories. Indeed, if the form of a noun expresses singularity, it cannot express plurality at one and the same time. If the form of a verb is passive, it cannot express an active meaning at one and the same time. Applied to the grammatical form it has been raining this postulate invariably brings us to a conclusion that the meanings of present, perfect and continuous, expressed by this form must be referred to three different categories, but not to one and the same, though they do coexist in the form (which is just one of the many cases of syncretism in the language).
Another disputable question concerns the fate of the future tense in English. Many scholars, following the opinion expressed by OJespersen [Ecnepcen 1958, 304-306] deny the combination shall/will + Infinitive the status of a grammatical form of future. Their main argument is that the verbs shall and will in these combinations have not lost their modal meanings completely and cannot be treated as pure auxiliaries and, consequently, the combinations shall/will +Infinitive belong to modal constructions and must be studied together with other modal expressions which also have a reference to the future (see, for example: [Palmer 1987, 37-38]). The proponents of this view conclude that morphologically English has no future form of the verb and the meaning of futurity is expressed by a variety of means including the present tense, the semi-auxiliary to be going - to Inf. and the combinations of modal verbs with infinitives [Greenbaum 1996, 253-260]. L.S.Barkhudarov who also denies the existence of a special future form in English adds another argument. He says that the combination, shall/will -^Infinitive does not meet the requirements of an analytical form because it is not based on a discontinuous morpheme [Bapxy^apoB 1975, 126- 127].
|
|
|
The voices in defense of the future form in the tense paradigm of English are no less numerous. Now let us consider some arguments in favour of the future.
First, there is a marked tendency in Modern English to unify the formation of the future and to use -will with all persons. The modal verbs shall and will however differ considerably in their modal meanings. The wide use of the contracted forms (/'// go there; he'll do it) also speaks in favour of the auxiliary status of the verb,-as the modal verbs are usually not contracted.
Second, there are a lot of cases when the combination shall/will ( or the unified will) with the Infinitive expresses mere futurity and is devoid of any modal meanings . Let's analyze the following example: "Then I went into the cinema next door. They'll probably remember - they had to get me change" (G. Greene). The modal meaning of probability is expressed by the modal word probably^ which makes us suppose that the verb will (and the form is contracted!) expresses pure futurity.
Third, since the grammatical category of tense is related to objective time and its conceptualization by the human mind and this conceptual category (at least in the European mentality) has three planes: present, past and future, it is logical to believe, that the grammatical category of tense also has a trichotomous structure and includes special grammatical forms for the present,
|
|
|
past and future. The present coincides with the time of communication, past is prior to it (before 'now') and future follows it (after 'now').
Yet, there is no denying a very special character of the future time as ontological phenomenon, compared to the present and past. The famous British astrophysicist Sir Arthur Eddington is known to have expressed an idea that there exists a purely physical distinction between present, past and future as physical entities. This distinction is based on the enthropy principle which asserts that as time goes by, energy undergoes transformation from an orderly into a less orderly form In Eddington's view, earlier is different from later because earlier energy is more highly organized. He asserts that "the present moment always contains an element of novelty and the future is never wholly predictable" (quoted from: [Campbell 1982, 90]). So the hypothetical character, the element of probability appears to be an inherent feature of the ontological time, which finds its representation in our perception of this temporal plane and its grammatical expression.
The works in cognitive grammar also point out the specificity of future, its hypothetical character. In the analysis of the grammatical category of tense cognitivists start from the interpretation of time as a psychological phenomenon. They consider the concept of time as a means of categorizing human experience and in the interpretation of the grammatical category of tense they focus on the 'viewer factor' and relate the essence of tense to the psychological concept of the viewer's personal perceptive space. In this interpretation the present tense is based on the inclusion of the event in the perceptive space of the viewer (the viewer is present during the action, the event is directly perceived by the viewer). Correspondingly past is something 'which is gone by', i.e. the event already excluded from the perceptive space of the viewer. The future time (and tense) is not based on the viewer's immediate experience, it presents the sphere of the predicted, expected events (for more detail see: [KpaBHeHKo 1996, 72-82]).
An attentive reader may be tempted to ask a question here: are the two notions: the speaker in the traditional grammar and the viewer in cognitive grammar somehow correlated? I think they are. The difference lies in the focus of the linguist's attention: the term 'viewer' suggests that the researcher is focused on the conceptualization of time, on how time is perceived by the human mind whereas the term 'speaker' suggests that the linguist is primarily interested in the presentation of this concept by grammatical forms in the act of speech. However, there are cases when the speaker and the viewer do not coincide in one person and the viewer then refers not to the speaker but to the recipient of the utterance (e.g. Now he was absolutely alone in the world where 'now' is correlated with the viewer and 'was' - with the speaker). Such cases reveal the dialogical character of human consciousness (which is reflected in the literal meaning of the Russian word 'cosnanue'1 , i.e. 'co-snanue'), human communication and human language: every utterance presupposes a listener, every text is created for a reader etc. The interpretation of the tense within the cognitive frame does not seem to contradict this traditional definition radically as it is sometimes asserted.
Historically the tense paradigm included only two forms: present and past (the remnants of the two-tense system are still observable in the use of the Present tense to denote a future action in clauses of time, concession and condition, e.g. But if you change your mind I'll be very happy). The pragmatic needs of the people to make predictions, suppositions and plans resulted in the development of the grammatical forms of the future and for expressing future the speakers of the language naturally chose the linguistic means which had this meaning of prediction, or probability, i.e. the modal verbs (for more detail see: [KpaBHemco 1996, 56-83]. Interestingly, in the Ukranian language the future is called mau6ymue (maybeing). It is probably this specificity of the future time that found reflection in the definition of future given by A. Bierce in "The Devil's Dictionary". Acting up to his reputation of a great pessimist he defined future as "that period of time in which our affairs prosper, our friends are true and our happiness is assured".
So we may conclude our discussion of the status of the future tense by saying that the hypothetical character, the meaning of prediction is a characteristic feature of the future both as a physical and a psychological phenomenon and it naturally finds its representation in the grammatical future, but it can hardly be used as an argument for excluding this form from the tense paradigm.
The present-day paradigm of tense comprises three categorial forms: present, past and future. The present tense expresses an action simultaneous to the time of communication, the past tense - an action prior to the time of communication and the future - an action subsequent to the time of communication.
The present tense, coinciding with the time of communication presupposes the immediate perception of the events by the speaker/the viewer, of the speaker's knowledge of the events pertaining to the time of communication, whereas past and future tenses denote events which are not perceived directly, they have either moved out of the perceptive space (past) or have not yet come into it (future).
Each tense form has a rich semantic potential which is realized in the process of language functioning. The forms of the present denote actions simultaneous to the time of communication. Yet in must be admitted that the time of communication, the 'now' is rather a relative notion: it may be a point on the time axis (Now I understand), it may be a stretch of time (What does your friend do?) and it may occupy the whole of the time axis - the case of panchronic present which occurs in universal statements (Humans follow great illusions and suffer), proverbs ( Still waters run deep), scientific rules (Water boils at 100°). As the 'now' in such statements stretches to the whole of the time axis, the concept of time loses its dynamic character and becomes static. Graphically it may be presented in the following way:
now
past . present future
For this reason some scholars think it necessary to clarify the idea of the 'moment of speech' and suppose that it is more appropriate to define the present tense as including the moment of speech but not necessary coinciding with it [IIIajiaMOB 2004, 281-285].
Besides this primary meaning, the forms of the present tense are regularly transposed into the sphere of the future. In the process of transposition the forms expose their secondary, syntagmatic meanings. The future action expressed by the present tense forms usually becomes less hypothetical and more predictable, it is an action which is bound to happen either according to schedule (The train arrives in a few minutes), or according to the speaker's determination to fulfil or not to fulfil an action. E.g. "Now what? " "Now we clear the dishes "; ThereJs_ no more news of Jessie Craig this season, Miss " (I. Shaw). When are you seeing him again? (E. Segal).
This effect of the inevitability of the future action is achieved due to the fact that the form of the present brings the action into the perceptive space of the speaker/hearer, the meaning of predictability, characteristic of the future, is weakened and the future action expressed is thus presented as real.
The present forms may also be transposed into the past-time context when the actions referring to the past are described in the present tense. This is the case of the so-called "dramatic present". E.g.
Anyway, some years passed and we were playing poker with the wives one evening, and suddenly Joe looks at me and says,' What do you do about that guy?' (A. Miller).
Such uses of the present tense are usually described as stylistically marked. This expressive effect is achieved by the fact that, using the present tense the speaker/writer brings the event that took place in the past into his own and the listener's/reader's perceptive space. It is mental synchronization of the action and the viewer that creates the effect of immediate presence, thus making the description of the past events more visual, or, as J.Fowles aptly
calls it, more relentless, e.g. The flight was announced and he went down to where he could watch for Beth. He had brought her holiday luggage in the car, and she came out with the first passengers. A wave. He raised his hand: a new coat, surprise for him, a little flounce and a jiggle to show it off. Gay Paree. Free woman. Look, no children. She comes with the relentless face of the present tense; with a dry delight, small miracle that he is actually here. He composes his face into an equal certainty (J. Fowles).
In the first-person narration the effect of the reader's immediate presence may be heightened by the change of the personal pronoun / to you. Due to this change the reader is involved into the narration even more and becomes an immediate participant which creates the effect of certainty. E.g. So I told Sugar-Boy how -to get through town and to the Row where all my pals lived or had lived. We pulled through the town where the lights were out except for the bulbs hanging from the telephone poles, and on out Bay Road where the houses were bone-white back among the magnolias and live oaks.
At night you pass through a little town where you once lived, and you expect to see yourself wearing those knee pants, standing all alone on the street corner under the hanging bulbs, where the bugs bang on the tin reflectors and splatter to the pavement to lie stunned...
You come into the town at night and there are the voices. We had got to the end of the Row, and I saw the house bone-white back among the dark oak boughs (R.P. Warren).
Дата добавления: 2019-02-12; просмотров: 393; Мы поможем в написании вашей работы! |
Мы поможем в написании ваших работ!