Muutke küpsiste eelistusi

E-raamat: Present Perfective Paradox across Languages

(Postdoctoral Researcher, Université Libre de Bruxelles and University of Antwerp)
Teised raamatud teemal:
  • Formaat - PDF+DRM
  • Hind: 108,07 €*
  • * hind on lõplik, st. muud allahindlused enam ei rakendu
  • Lisa ostukorvi
  • Lisa soovinimekirja
  • See e-raamat on mõeldud ainult isiklikuks kasutamiseks. E-raamatuid ei saa tagastada.
Present Perfective Paradox across LanguagesSuurem pilt
Teised raamatud teemal:

DRM piirangud

  • Kopeerimine (copy/paste):

    ei ole lubatud

  • Printimine:

    ei ole lubatud

  • Kasutamine:

    Digitaalõiguste kaitse (DRM)
    Kirjastus on väljastanud selle e-raamatu krüpteeritud kujul, mis tähendab, et selle lugemiseks peate installeerima spetsiaalse tarkvara. Samuti peate looma endale  Adobe ID Rohkem infot siin. E-raamatut saab lugeda 1 kasutaja ning alla laadida kuni 6'de seadmesse (kõik autoriseeritud sama Adobe ID-ga).

    Vajalik tarkvara
    Mobiilsetes seadmetes (telefon või tahvelarvuti) lugemiseks peate installeerima selle tasuta rakenduse: PocketBook Reader (iOS / Android)

    PC või Mac seadmes lugemiseks peate installima Adobe Digital Editionsi (Seeon tasuta rakendus spetsiaalselt e-raamatute lugemiseks. Seda ei tohi segamini ajada Adober Reader'iga, mis tõenäoliselt on juba teie arvutisse installeeritud )

    Seda e-raamatut ei saa lugeda Amazon Kindle's. 

This book presents an analysis of how speakers of typologically diverse languages report present-time situations. It begins from the assumption that there is a restriction on the use of the present tense to report present-time dynamic/perfective situations, while with stative/imperfective situations there are no such alignment problems. Astrid De Wit brings together cross-linguistic observations from English, French, the English-based creole language Sranan, and various Slavic languages, and relates them to the same phenomenon, the 'present perfective paradox'. The proposed analysis is founded on the assumption that there is an epistemic alignment constraint preventing the identification and reporting of events in their entirety at the time of speaking. This book discusses the various strategies that the aforementioned languages have developed to resolve this conceptual difficulty, and demonstrates that many of the features of their tense-aspect systems can be regarded as the result of this conflict resolution. It also offers cognitively plausible explanations for the conceptual structures underlying the interactions attested between tense and aspect.

Arvustused

De Wit has managed to something remarkable,which is to construct a comparative analysis of an underexamined issue of tense and aspect that has typological promiseA great merit of this study is that the analysis manages to take each language (family) on its own terms, instead of focusing on subsets of the relevant data and reductivist generalizations...With regard to its theoretical potential, her development of a cognitive-linguistic epistemic approach to aspectual semantics is a welcome departure from the traditional approach of relying almost entirely on configurations on the timeline * Stephen M. Dickey, University of Kansas, Lawrence, Folia Linguistica * This typological focus demonstrates the far-reaching consequences of the book. It isrecommended for anyone interested in temporality and crosslinguistic semantics. * Daniel Altshuler, Hampshire College and University of Massachusetts, Amherst, Language *

General Preface x
Acknowledgments xii
List of Glosses
xiii
1 Introduction
1(9)
1.1 The present perfective paradox: A first glance
1(3)
1.2 Selected languages
4(1)
1.3 A cognitive-semantic approach to cross-linguistic variation
4(4)
1.4 The structure of the study
8(2)
2 An epistemic approach to the categories of tense and aspect
10(25)
2.1 Tense
10(7)
2.1.1 Temporal and non-temporal uses of tense constructions
10(3)
2.1.2 A modal account of the present tense
13(4)
2.2 Aspect
17(15)
2.2.1 Lexical and grammatical aspect: A unified aspect model
18(3)
2.2.2 Grammatical aspect
21(1)
2.2.2.1 Perfective and imperfective aspect
21(2)
2.2.2.2 Other types of grammatical aspect
23(5)
2.2.3 Lexical aspect
28(4)
2.3 The perfect
32(3)
3 The present perfective paradox: The state of the art
35(19)
3.1 The incompatibility problem
35(5)
3.2 Previous analyses of the incompatibility problem
40(11)
3.3 Objectives of the current study
51(3)
4 The present perfective paradox in English
54(34)
4.1 Usage types of the English simple present
55(6)
4.1.1 Present-time reference
55(2)
4.1.2 Historical present
57(1)
4.1.3 Futurate
58(1)
4.1.4 Non-counterfactual conditionals
58(1)
4.1.5 Habitual and generic contexts
58(1)
4.1.6 The use of the simple present versus the present progressive in comparable contexts
58(2)
4.1.7 Overview of the usage types of the English simple present
60(1)
4.2 Previous analyses of the semantics of the English present tense
61(4)
4.2.1 Analyses of the temporal meaning of the simple present
61(1)
4.2.2 Analyses of the aspectual meaning of the simple present
62(1)
4.2.3 The simple present versus the present progressive: Aspectual and modal accounts
63(2)
4.3 The semantics of the English present tense and the rise of the present perfective paradox
65(13)
4.3.1 A semantic analysis of the English simple present
65(1)
4.3.1.1 Basic modal and temporal meaning
66(1)
4.3.1.2 Aspectual meaning
67(1)
4.3.1.3 The modal contrast between the simple present and the present progressive
68(2)
4.3.1.4 The development of the present progressive and the rise of the perfective meaning of the simple present in English
70(1)
4.3.2 Interactions between the simple present and types of lexical aspect in different contexts
71(1)
4.3.2.1 States versus events
71(2)
4.3.2.2 Present-time reference with events in non-virtual contexts
73(3)
4.3.2.3 Present-time reference with events in virtual contexts
76(2)
4.4 Two types of solution for the incompatibility problems
78(9)
4.4.1 A structural interpretation
78(2)
4.4.2 Type shifting
80(1)
4.4.2.1 The present perfect
81(2)
4.4.2.2 The present progressive
83(4)
4.5 Conclusion
87(1)
5 The present perfective paradox in French
88(24)
5.1 Usage types of the French simple present
89(6)
5.1.1 Present-time reference
89(1)
5.1.2 Historical present
90(2)
5.1.3 Futurate
92(2)
5.1.4 Non-counterfactual conditionals
94(1)
5.1.5 Habitual and generic contexts
94(1)
5.1.6 Overview of the usage types of the French simple present
94(1)
5.2 Previous analyses of the semantics of the French simple present
95(3)
5.3 The semantics of the French simple present and how it avoids the rise of the present perfective paradox
98(11)
5.3.1 The basic modal and temporal meaning of the simple present
98(1)
5.3.2 The aspectual ambiguity of the simple present
99(1)
5.3.2.1 Aspectual ambiguity and the continuative present perfect
100(1)
5.3.2.2 Epistemic implications of the aspectual ambiguity
101(2)
5.3.3 The French simple present and the present perfective paradox
103(2)
5.3.4 The modal contrast between the simple present and the present progressive
105(4)
5.4 A diachronic explanation for the aspectual ambiguity of the simple present
109(2)
5.5 Conclusion
111(1)
6 The present perfective paradox in Sranan
112(28)
6.1 Preliminary observations
112(3)
6.2 Methodology: Actional classification and corpus analysis
115(3)
6.2.1 Classes of lexical aspect
115(2)
6.2.2 Corpus data and elicitations
117(1)
6.3 Usage types of zero
118(7)
6.3.1 Present-time reference
118(2)
6.3.2 Present perfect
120(1)
6.3.3 Narrative contexts
121(1)
6.3.4 Past perfective outside narrative contexts
122(1)
6.3.5 Non-counterfactual conditional clauses
123(1)
6.3.6 Overview of the usage types of zero
124(1)
6.4 Previous analyses of zero, ben, and e
125(5)
6.5 Analysis: Zero as a present perfective marker
130(9)
6.5.1 Zero as a present perfective marker and the rise of the present perfective paradox
130(2)
6.5.2 Two types of solution for the present perfective paradox
132(1)
6.5.2.1 Type shifting: The progressive/habitual e
132(1)
6.5.2.2 Alternative `non-present' interpretations
133(6)
6.6 Conclusion
139(1)
7 The present perfective paradox in Slavic
140(44)
7.1 Slavic-style aspect in this study
143(5)
7.2 Usage types of the present (perfective) tense across Slavic languages
148(18)
7.2.1 In northeastern Slavic (Russian and Polish)
148(1)
7.2.1.1 Future-time reference
148(3)
7.2.1.2 Habitual
151(2)
7.2.1.3 Historical present
153(1)
7.2.1.4 Realis conditionals
154(1)
7.2.1.5 Actual present
155(2)
7.2.2 In northwestern Slavic (Czech)
157(1)
7.2.2.1 Future-time reference
157(1)
7.2.2.2 Habitual
158(1)
7.2.2.3 Historical present
159(1)
7.2.2.4 Non-counterfactual conditionals
160(1)
7.2.2.5 Actual present
160(1)
7.2.3 In southwestern Slavic (Bosnian/Croatian/Serbian)
161(1)
7.2.3.1 Habitual
162(1)
7.2.3.2 Historical present
162(1)
7.2.3.3 Realis conditionals
163(1)
7.2.3.4 Actual present-time reference
163(1)
7.2.4 Overview
164(2)
7.3 The rise of the present perfective paradox in Slavic
166(10)
7.3.1 Arguments in favor of a present-tense analysis
166(1)
7.3.2 Why does the present-time reporting of perfective events seem more problematic in the eastern Slavic languages than in the western Slavic languages?
167(9)
7.4 Two types of solution for the incompatibility problems
176(6)
7.4.1 Imperfective and perfect construals
176(1)
7.4.1.1 Imperfectivization
176(1)
7.4.1.2 The limited type-shifting function of the perfect in South Slavic
177(1)
7.4.2 Non-present readings: The `prospective strategy' and the `structural strategy'
177(1)
7.4.2.1 The exploitation of the `prospective strategy' in different Slavic languages
177(4)
7.4.2.2 The `structural strategy' and eastern--western differences
181(1)
7.5 Conclusion
182(2)
8 Conclusion and wider relevance
184(16)
8.1 The rise and resolution of the present perfective paradox across languages
185(10)
8.1.1 The conceptual problems underlying the present perfective paradox
185(1)
8.1.2 Preemptive blocking of the present perfective paradox: Present-tense constructions with an imperfective value
186(1)
8.1.3 The role of (types of) lexical and grammatical aspect
187(2)
8.1.4 Present-time event reports in specific (perfective) contexts
189(3)
8.1.5 Solutions to the present perfective paradox
192(1)
8.1.5.1 Alternative `non-present' readings: The `prospective', `retrospective', and `structural strategy'
192(2)
8.1.5.2 Type-shifting constructions that enable present-time reference
194(1)
8.2 Wider relevance and future research
195(5)
References 200(13)
Index 213
Astrid De Wit holds a Ph.D in linguistics from the University of Antwerp (2014). She spent a year as a visiting scholar at the University of Colorado at Boulder, and is currently working as a postdoctoral researcher at the Université Libre de Bruxelles under a grant from the National Fund for Scientific Research. She has published widely on tense, aspect, and modality in a variety of languages, and her work has appeared in journals such as Journal of Linguistics, Studies in Language, and Journal of Germanic Linguistics.
Lisainfo e-raamatute kohta Lisainfo e-raamatute kohta
Püsilink: https://www.kriso.ee/db/97801910774252e.html
Märksõnad: