Semantic and grammatical peculiarities of the English verb. (Навчальный посибник з теории англ мови) – P .51-54
Lecture 8
The category of aspect.
Aspect is a verbal grammatical category showing the way in which the action develops (Прибыток И.И., с. 86).
В.Д.Аракин: Категория вида –такая лексико-грамматическая категория, которая передает характеристику протекания действия или процесса, обозначенного глаголом, - повторяемость, длительность, многократность, мгновенность действия или результативность, не/завершенность или предельность, то есть отношение действия к его внутреннему пределу (С.121).
There are 2 sets of forms in the MnE verb which are contrasted with each other on the principle of use or non-use of the pattern “be + Participle I”:
Writes :: is writing
Has written :: has been writing
Will write:: will be writing
Wrote:: will be writing
These two sets of forms clearly belong to the same verb write. What is the basic difference between writes and is writing? The definition of the meaning of is writing given in different grammar books,is that it denotes an action proceeding continuously at a definite period of time, within certain time limits.
On the other hand, Writes denotes an action not thus limited, but either occurring repeatedly or everlasting, without any notion of lasting duration at a given moment.
The basic difference between the 2 sets of forms appears to be this: an action going on continuously during a given period of time, and an action not thus limited and not described by the very form of the verb as proceeding in such a manner.
How should this essential difference in meaning between the two sets of forms be described?=It is a difference in the way the action is shown to proceed.
This is the grammatical notion described as the category of aspect with reference to the Slavonic languages and to Old Greek in which the category is clearly expressed.
According to O . Akhmanova : Вид – грамматическая категория глагола, обозначающая особые свойства глагола, характер протекания данного процесса, т.е. в его отношении к внутреннему пределу, результату, длительности, повторяемости и т.д.
|
|
|
AS IS WELL KNOWN not all verbs are commonly used in the form of “be + Participle I”. Verbs denoting a) abstract relations (e.g. belong), b) sense perception or C) emotion ((e.g. see, hear, hope, love, like, fear) seldom appear in this form.
But examples are there:e.g.: It was as if she were seeing herself for the first time.
What is meant here is a sense perception (were seeing) going on (involuntarily) for some time. It is not a momentaneous action. The form “be + Participle I” is very appropriate here.
Some more examples.
Both were visibly hearing every word of the conversation and ignoring it at the same time.
(Let’s replace indefinite forms in the following variant: Both visibly heard every word of the conversation and ignored it at the same time). The descriptive character of the original text has disappeared after the substitution.
Mr. March was looking absent and somber again. (A temporary state of things is meant).
The two aspects dwelt above may be described by the terms common aspect and continuous aspect.
DIFFERENT INTERPRETATIONS
O. Jespersen treated the type is writing as a means of expressing limited duration. O. Jespersen, H. Sweet deny the existence of the category of aspect. They look upon continuous forms as tense forms. If it were so, continuous forms would represent a unity of two tenses:
present & Continuous in Present Continuous;
Past & Continuous in Past Continuous;
Future &Continuous in Future Continuous;
But we know that no grammatical form exists that could combine initself two meanings of the same grammatical category.
2.A similar view by prof. Irtenyeva, who thinks thatthe basic meaning of the type
is writing is that of a simultaneity of an action with another action. These views are plausible for some cases for a complex clause when is writing in the subordinate clause and writes in the main clause. This can only be found when the narration refers to the past time e.g. Once she was in the car andAndrew was bending over her, her sense of freedom left her.
|
|
|
But the view propounded by these authors does not fit in with the use of the present
is writing which is never used in a complex sentence of that structure. In sentences with the present tenses like e.g.: What is he doing? He is reading. - there is no other action with which is writing could be simultaneous or to which it might be a time frame. Prof. Irtenyeva says that in such a case the action expressed by the is writing type is simultaneous with the act of speech (Irtenyeva N.F. Грамматика англ языка, 1956, с. 83).
But the act of speech is not mentioned in the speech. Besides, simultaneity with the act of speech is the definition of the present tense and not of the type is writing as such. Thus this view which does not take into account the category of aspect does not appear to be convincing.
3)Prof. I. Ivanova recognizes the existence of the category of aspect in English, but treats it in a peculiar way. According to Prof. I. Ivanova, the form is writing is an aspect form of the continuous aspect but writes is not an aspect form at all. She calls it a purely tense form.
Concerning this view it must be said that it agrees with the view put forward above: The distinction between writes and is writing is a distinction of aspect. But Prof. I. Ivanova denies the existence of common aspect. This seems rather a difference of wording than of essence. No aspect seems something like another version of common aspect.
The difficulty of formulating the meaning of the common aspect is one more case of distinction between a marked and non-marked member of an opposition.
The continuous aspect is marked both in meaning and in form (be+ P I), whereas the common aspect is non-marked both in meaning and in form. Thus the theory of common and continuous aspect may be upheld.
Аракин В . Д . (С.125), +Жигадло , Иофик , Иванова И.П . consider that the category of aspectforms an inseparable whole with thecategory of tense.
считают, что вида как особой грамматической категории в англ языке – нет. Как длительный, так и перфектный разряд не является видовым, а лишь имеет грамматическое значение вида, тесно переплетающееся с категорией времени, которая рассматривается как ведущая в этой системе.
|
|
|
But the majority of linguists consider that despite this, the grammatical categories of tense and aspect can and should be separated.
3)V.D. Arakin (Сравнительная типология англ и русского языков . – М., 1989. – С.121-122) completely denies the existence of the category of aspect in English.
Система видов в русском языке имеет свой отличительный признак – наличие соотносительных пар глаголов в совершенном и несовершенном виде, которые образуют соотносительные ряды форм, пронизывающих всю систему глагольных форм при тождестве их лексического значения, например: носить – нести; давать-дать;
Почти каждый глагол в английском языке может принимать как форму общего вида, так и форму длительного вида. Иными словами, глаголы в английском языке соотносительных пар не образуют. (с.125).
The majority of linguists speak of two aspects in English: continuous and non- continuous (=common aspect).
The continuous aspect is marked both in form (‘be + Participle I’) & in meaning (it represents an action in its development).
The non-continuous aspect is unmarked both in form (no characteristic pattern ‘be + Participle I’) & in meaning (it represents an action as simply occurring with no reference to its duration).
I.B. Khlebnikova draws the conclusion that the opposition of continuous vs non-continuous aspects can be qualified as a privative opposition one member of which is characterized by the presence of a certain feature, the other – by the absence of the same FEATURE feature.
|
|
|
Since the relations between the members of the privative opposition of aspect are not polar but isomorphous, i.e. have points of conti’guity (соприкосновения), the opposition of aspect can be neutralized on the syntagmatic axis.
According to the rules of neutralization, the unmarked non-continuous aspect finds itselfin the position of neutralization, because it has a more general meaning and no specific formal exponent.
Thus neutralization of duration are those case when the Pres. Ind. is used instead of the Pres. Cont. in describing the things that happen (in stage remarks): e.g.:
Smith passes to Webster and Webster shoots and it’s a goal!
But neutralization of duration is more common on the axis of the past. Cf.:
In the case of non-terminative verbs:
They were dancing while he was playing the guitar – no neutralization.
They danced while he was playing the guitar – partial neutralization.
They were dancing while he played the guitar – partial neutralization.
They danced while he played the guitar – complete neutralization.
=Aspect neutralization is typical of non-terminative verbs.
With terminative verbsaspect neutralizationis impossible for it brings about a change of meaning. Cf.:
We were meeting them at the concert hall, but we didn’t know which entrance tghey were waiting at. (were meeting = describes an arranged action that was about to take place at some late time).
I met her at the bus stop this morning. (met = an action that took place in the past). Lecture 9.
The category of tense.
The category of tense may be definedas a verbal category which reflectsthe objective category of time and expresses on this background the relations between time of the action and the time of the utterance.
The main divisions of the objective time are three: past, present and future. However tense systems of different languages are far from identical.
The diapason of grammatical meanings differentiating meanings of time within the cxategory of tense i.e the number of tenses is great: from 16 to two.
Tenses.
1) Attribution of different meanings to all 16 tense forms is a stage left in history a long time ago from which only names of these verb forms have survived.
At present they represent tenses as an 8-, 7-, 6-, 4-, 3- and 2- tense system.
Tense system
3)8 tense system by Prof. I. P. Ivanova ( Вид и время в современном английском языке . – Л ., 1961 & В . Н . Жигадло , И . П . Иванова , Л . Л . Иофик . Современный английский язык . Теоретический курс грамматики .- М ., 1956.).
8 tense system was propounded by Prof. Ivanova. The idea of a temporal center lies in the basis of her tenses system model. By the temporal center she understands the moments of the Past and Future with which directly are correlated the actions expressed by the Past and Future tense forms. The introduction of the concept of a temporal center brought about the idea of the system which includes independent and dependent elements.
Independent elements are represented by all the Present tenses, because all of them are correlated with the moment of speech, + The Future and the Past Indefinite forms which are also directly connected with the moment of speech.
But the Past Indefinite is at the same time a dependent member. It becomes dependent when it is used as a dependent Past in the rules of the Sequence of tenses. All the rest of the tense forms are dependent forms because they are correlated with only their temporal centers. Their connection with the moment of speech is indirect.
Thus, the dependent Past forms include:
The Past Continuous, Past perfect, Past perfect Continuous, all the Future-in-the –Past forms because their temporal center lies in the past.
Dependent Future forms include:
The Future Continuous, Future Perfect, Future Perfect Continuous forms directly related with the temporal center of the Future.
The introduction of the idea of the “temporal center” made it possible to representthe category of tense as an 8-tense system.
Criticism
According to B.A. Ilyish, in the 8 tense system propounded by Prof. Ivanova, The Fut-Ind-in –the –Past, The Fut-Cont-in –the –Past, The Fut-Perfect-in –the –Past, The Fut-Perfect -Continuous-in –the –Past do not easily fit into the system of tenses represented by a straight line running out of the past into the future. With reference to these tensesit may be said that the past is a new center of the system. The idea of temporal centers propounded by Prof. Ivanova as an essential element of the English tense system seems fully justified in analyzing the Future-in-the –past tenses.
Дата добавления: 2018-10-26; просмотров: 624; Мы поможем в написании вашей работы! |
Мы поможем в написании ваших работ!