CAS LX 502CAS LX 502SemanticsSemantics

9a. Tense and aspect9a. Tense and aspect

Ch. 8 etc.Ch. 8 etc.

TenseTense Chris was hungry.Chris was hungry. Chris is hungry.Chris is hungry.

Both seem to be asserting that a Both seem to be asserting that a state of hunger exists, but at state of hunger exists, but at different times.different times. The hungry state existed before now.The hungry state existed before now. The hungry state exists now.The hungry state exists now.

The morphological distinction The morphological distinction (past/present) corresponds to (past/present) corresponds to this meaning difference.this meaning difference.

The semantics of the The semantics of the futurefuture

Chris will be hungryChris will be hungry This seems to say that the state of This seems to say that the state of hunger exists in the future.hunger exists in the future.

But the present can sometimes be But the present can sometimes be used to indicate future as well.used to indicate future as well. Chris registers for classes on Sunday.Chris registers for classes on Sunday. Chris leaves for vacation tomorrow.Chris leaves for vacation tomorrow.

Two things:Two things: Present doesn’t mean “now.”Present doesn’t mean “now.” Future doesn’t need “will.”Future doesn’t need “will.”

English tenseEnglish tense It seems actually that in English, It seems actually that in English, willwill is not really a future is not really a future tensetense marker, but rather just a modal. Like marker, but rather just a modal. Like modals it seems to have past and non-modals it seems to have past and non-past forms.past forms. Pat will be hungry.Pat will be hungry. Pat would be hungry.Pat would be hungry.

Furthermore, future doesn’t need Furthermore, future doesn’t need willwill:: Pat leaves for India next week.Pat leaves for India next week. Pat is going to go to India next week.Pat is going to go to India next week. Pat hopes to go to India.Pat hopes to go to India.

Past vs. non-pastPast vs. non-past

English past really does seem English past really does seem to mean something like “before to mean something like “before now” (or at least somehow now” (or at least somehow “anterior”), but English “anterior”), but English “present” seems to be just non-“present” seems to be just non-past (rather than “now”).past (rather than “now”).

Connecting time to Connecting time to sentencessentences

The simplest way to think of time The simplest way to think of time is as a specification of an is as a specification of an event/state.event/state.

So, a verb describes an So, a verb describes an event/state, and tense tells us event/state, and tense tells us something about when that something about when that event/state is in time relative to event/state is in time relative to the the speech timespeech time..

Past would mean the Past would mean the event timeevent time precedes the precedes the speech timespeech time..

Turning off the stoveTurning off the stove I didn’t turn off the stove.I didn’t turn off the stove.

Clearly this means something more Clearly this means something more sophisticated than “I have never turned sophisticated than “I have never turned off the stove.” It seems to be limited off the stove.” It seems to be limited to some contextually relevant time.to some contextually relevant time.

Partee suggested that tense is a bit Partee suggested that tense is a bit like a pronoun that “points” to like a pronoun that “points” to something—something like “they” does. A something—something like “they” does. A relevant time (interval).relevant time (interval). Every girl dropped her lollipop.Every girl dropped her lollipop. Every time John left, he left the door Every time John left, he left the door open.open.

ReichenbachReichenbach A quite well known approach to tense is A quite well known approach to tense is due to Hans Reichenbach, who was also due to Hans Reichenbach, who was also trying to account for aspect at the trying to account for aspect at the same time.same time.

He proposed that tense and aspect set He proposed that tense and aspect set up relations between three times:up relations between three times: Speech timeSpeech time Reference time (a.k.a. “Topic time”)Reference time (a.k.a. “Topic time”) Event timeEvent time

An easy illustration:An easy illustration: Tracy ate a cookie.Tracy ate a cookie. E=R, R<SE=R, R<S Tracy had eaten a cookie.Tracy had eaten a cookie. E<R, R<SE<R, R<S

Topic timeTopic time

It seems as if the “reference time” It seems as if the “reference time” need not be a point, but rather an need not be a point, but rather an interval.interval.

We can differentiate between states We can differentiate between states and events (states are generally and events (states are generally unchanging, at least locally).unchanging, at least locally).

Past seems to be something like:Past seems to be something like: E is within T, T<S (events)E is within T, T<S (events)

Yesterday, Tracy coughed.Yesterday, Tracy coughed. T is within E, T<S (states)T is within E, T<S (states)

Yesterday, Tracy had a cold.Yesterday, Tracy had a cold.

Sequence of tenseSequence of tense John said that Mary was in Seattle.John said that Mary was in Seattle.

Either Mary was in Seattle Either Mary was in Seattle at the time John at the time John said thissaid this, or Mary was in Seattle , or Mary was in Seattle prior to the prior to the time John said thistime John said this..

But there are But there are twotwo pasts here. pasts here. It seems that in English, you can It seems that in English, you can “ignore” a past under a past.“ignore” a past under a past. John said he bought a fish that was still John said he bought a fish that was still alive.alive.

Not true in all languages: in Japanese, Not true in all languages: in Japanese, you need to use non-past under past to you need to use non-past under past to get simultaneous.get simultaneous. Only I got a question that I understood.Only I got a question that I understood.

Two meanings here. Tense acting like a pronoun again?Two meanings here. Tense acting like a pronoun again?

Would could shouldWould could should

Interestingly, this can also Interestingly, this can also provide an argument that provide an argument that will/would, can/could, may/might will/would, can/could, may/might are really tense variants:are really tense variants: I think she is/was hungryI think she is/was hungry I thought she was hungryI thought she was hungry *I thought she is hungry*I thought she is hungry I think she can/could winI think she can/could win I thought she could winI thought she could win *I thought she can win*I thought she can win

AspectAspect

One of the main reasons Reichenbach One of the main reasons Reichenbach needed three time points was to needed three time points was to accommodate aspect as well.accommodate aspect as well. Pat was hungry.Pat was hungry. T within E, T<ST within E, T<S Pat had been hungry.Pat had been hungry. E<T, T<SE<T, T<S Pat has been hungry.Pat has been hungry. E<T, T=SE<T, T=S Pat is hungry.Pat is hungry. T within E, T=ST within E, T=S

The idea is that tense is The idea is that tense is responsible to relating T and S, and responsible to relating T and S, and aspect for relating E and T.aspect for relating E and T.

Perfect vs. ProgressivePerfect vs. Progressive If we suppose that tense situates a If we suppose that tense situates a reference/topic time with respect to reference/topic time with respect to the speech time, aspect seems to the speech time, aspect seems to situate an event around the reference situate an event around the reference time.time. Perfect: event completed at reference time.Perfect: event completed at reference time.

Pat had eaten a cookie.Pat had eaten a cookie. Progressive: event ongoing at reference Progressive: event ongoing at reference time.time.

Pat was eating a cookie.Pat was eating a cookie.

Progressive seems to turn events into Progressive seems to turn events into something like states—it isn’t really something like states—it isn’t really compatible with states.compatible with states. Pat had been hungry.Pat had been hungry. *Pat was being hungry.*Pat was being hungry.

Classifying event typesClassifying event types Atelic:Atelic:

States States ((wantwant, , lovelove, , hatehate, , knowknow, , believebelieve)) ActivitiesActivities ( (runrun, , walkwalk, , swimswim, , push a push a cartcart))

Telic:Telic: AchievementsAchievements ((recognizerecognize, , findfind, , stopstop, , reach the topreach the top))

AccomplishmentsAccomplishments ( (run a milerun a mile, , walk to the walk to the storestore, , paint a picturepaint a picture, , draw a circledraw a circle)) Something like an activity + an achievementSomething like an activity + an achievement

Classifying eventsClassifying events

The different situation types The different situation types essentially define the essentially define the different kinds of “shadow” the different kinds of “shadow” the situation casts on the situation casts on the timeline.timeline.

Diagnosing event typesDiagnosing event types

Statives and achievements are generally Statives and achievements are generally incompatible with the progressive.incompatible with the progressive. Pat knows French. Pat is hungry.Pat knows French. Pat is hungry. #Pat is knowing French. #Pat is being #Pat is knowing French. #Pat is being hungry.hungry.

#Pat is reaching the top.#Pat is reaching the top. Pat is walking. Pat is walking to the Pat is walking. Pat is walking to the store.store.

(Individual-level) statives don’t sound (Individual-level) statives don’t sound good in the imperative.good in the imperative. Be tall! Know French!Be tall! Know French!

Lexical aspect vs.Lexical aspect vs.sentence aspectsentence aspect

Lexically, predicates have an inherent Lexically, predicates have an inherent situation type (situation type (aktionsartaktionsart or or lexical lexical aspectaspect).).

However, a sentence can denote a situation However, a sentence can denote a situation type that differs from the lexical aspect type that differs from the lexical aspect of its predicate. Structure also plays a of its predicate. Structure also plays a role, role, sentence aspectsentence aspect can be can be coercedcoerced.. Pat knocked on the door.Pat knocked on the door. (achievement/semelfactive)(achievement/semelfactive)

Pat is knocking on the door.Pat is knocking on the door. (iterative, (iterative, activity)activity)

Pat drank beer.Pat drank beer. (activity) (activity) Pat drank a beer.Pat drank a beer. (accomplishment) (accomplishment)

Inchoative vs. Inchoative vs. resultativeresultative

Different predicates can also Different predicates can also concentrate on different parts of concentrate on different parts of an event.an event. Melting Melting is is inchoativeinchoative, focuses on the , focuses on the beginning.beginning.

The ice is melting. The ice is melting. (The ice has melted).(The ice has melted).

Baking a cakeBaking a cake is is resultativeresultative, focuses , focuses on the endpoint.on the endpoint.

Pat is baking a cake.Pat is baking a cake. (Pat has not baked (Pat has not baked a cake).a cake).

TelicityTelicity An event that has a natural endpoint An event that has a natural endpoint is said to be is said to be telictelic. An event that . An event that does not is said to be does not is said to be atelicatelic.. Pat pushed the cart.Pat pushed the cart. Pat pushed the cart into the corner.Pat pushed the cart into the corner.

Frame adverbials Frame adverbials ((in 5 minutesin 5 minutes) and ) and durative adverbials durative adverbials ((for 5 minutesfor 5 minutes) ) can usually distinguish these:can usually distinguish these: Pat pushed the cart (#in 5 minutes) (for Pat pushed the cart (#in 5 minutes) (for 5 minutes).5 minutes).

Pat pushed the cart into the corner (in 5 Pat pushed the cart into the corner (in 5 minutes) (#for 5 minutes).minutes) (#for 5 minutes).

Aspect and telicityAspect and telicity

Even for a telic event (Even for a telic event (cross cross the streetthe street), the sentence ), the sentence aspect can affect whether a aspect can affect whether a sentence implies that the sentence implies that the endpoint was reached.endpoint was reached. Pat crossed the street.Pat crossed the street. Pat has crossed the street.Pat has crossed the street. Pat was crossing the street.Pat was crossing the street.

Aside: Verbs of Aside: Verbs of creationcreation

Suppose Pat dumps some flour into a Suppose Pat dumps some flour into a mixing bowl.mixing bowl.

We can say that We can say that Pat is making pancakesPat is making pancakes or that or that Pat is making a cakePat is making a cake..

Which is it?Which is it?

Jack is building a house.Jack is building a house. There’s an event There’s an event ee and an individual and an individual xx such that such that ee is building event, it includes is building event, it includes the utterance time, the Agent of the utterance time, the Agent of ee is is Jack, the Theme of Jack, the Theme of ee is is xx, and , and xx is a is a house.house.

The house Jack London The house Jack London was building when he was building when he

died.died. In northern California, one can visit Jack London State In northern California, one can visit Jack London State Park and see the house that Jack London was building when he Park and see the house that Jack London was building when he died. At least this is what the tourist guides say. It isn’t died. At least this is what the tourist guides say. It isn’t much of a house—only a foundation and parts of some walls. much of a house—only a foundation and parts of some walls. But native speakers of English call it a house. Ordinary But native speakers of English call it a house. Ordinary language seems to be governed here by something like Plato’s language seems to be governed here by something like Plato’s theory of forms: material things that “aspire after” ideals theory of forms: material things that “aspire after” ideals are named after those ideals, in spite of their failure to are named after those ideals, in spite of their failure to live up to the ideal itself. In short, people describe live up to the ideal itself. In short, people describe unfinished houses as “houses,” and my analysis assumes that unfinished houses as “houses,” and my analysis assumes that this is the correct usage.this is the correct usage.

The problem is not ontological—everyone agrees that the The problem is not ontological—everyone agrees that the thing in question exists. The issue is whether it is a house. thing in question exists. The issue is whether it is a house. (Parsons 1990:174)(Parsons 1990:174)

Cf also Douglas Adams, Cf also Douglas Adams, Last Chance to SeeLast Chance to See, p. 146., p. 146.

Was Max crossing the Was Max crossing the street?street?

It seems that simply venturing out into It seems that simply venturing out into the road isn’t necessarily crossing the the road isn’t necessarily crossing the street.street.

But the beginnings are the same.But the beginnings are the same. And if there’s a catastrophe with a And if there’s a catastrophe with a bus, the road is never actually bus, the road is never actually crossed.crossed.

Yet it seems that Max was crossing the Yet it seems that Max was crossing the street, when he was hit by the bus. Not street, when he was hit by the bus. Not simply venturing into the road.simply venturing into the road. There seems to be some kind of modality There seems to be some kind of modality here: Crossing the street is the “normal” here: Crossing the street is the “normal” conclusion of what Max was doing, even if he conclusion of what Max was doing, even if he doesn’t make it in every possible world.doesn’t make it in every possible world.

Predicates and objectsPredicates and objects If we think about the denotation of If we think about the denotation of applesapples as compared to as compared to an applean apple, only , only the latter has a definite boundary. the latter has a definite boundary. How big is How big is an applean apple? How big is ? How big is applesapples? Similarly, how big is ? Similarly, how big is soupsoup??

Events are sort of like this too. A Events are sort of like this too. A telic event has a size, a boundary. telic event has a size, a boundary. Reach the topReach the top vs. vs. climbclimb..

We can think of events as sort of like We can think of events as sort of like abstract individuals.abstract individuals. I saw Pat eat lunch.I saw Pat eat lunch. Fido’s barking kept me awake.Fido’s barking kept me awake.

Mass and countMass and count Nouns can be distinguished into two Nouns can be distinguished into two types, those that can be counted types, those that can be counted ((countcount)),, and those that can’t ( and those that can’t (massmass).). I have two tomatoes.I have two tomatoes. #I have two barleys.#I have two barleys.

One thing that differentiates them is One thing that differentiates them is what happens if you cut them in half:what happens if you cut them in half: If you divide your tomato, neither If you divide your tomato, neither resulting thing is a tomato.resulting thing is a tomato.

If you divide your barley, both resulting If you divide your barley, both resulting things are barley.things are barley.

HomogeneityHomogeneity Soup + soup = soupSoup + soup = soup Tomato + tomato = 2 tomatoes.Tomato + tomato = 2 tomatoes.

We can call the property that mass nouns We can call the property that mass nouns have have homogeneityhomogeneity..

Pretty much the same property can be Pretty much the same property can be said to hold of states and activities, said to hold of states and activities, but not accomplishments or achievements.but not accomplishments or achievements. Eating + eating = eatingEating + eating = eating Being tall + being tall = being tallBeing tall + being tall = being tall Walking to the store + walking to the store Walking to the store + walking to the store = walking to the store twice.= walking to the store twice.

Finding a quarter + finding a quarter = Finding a quarter + finding a quarter = finding two quartersfinding two quarters

Combining predicates Combining predicates and objectsand objects

Interestingly, for something like Interestingly, for something like eateat (an activity, homogeneous), if (an activity, homogeneous), if it is combined with a homogeneous it is combined with a homogeneous object, the result is a homogeneous object, the result is a homogeneous activity, but when it is combined activity, but when it is combined with a bounded object, the result is with a bounded object, the result is a bounded event (accomplishment).a bounded event (accomplishment). Pat ate soup (for an hour) (#in an Pat ate soup (for an hour) (#in an hour).hour).

Pat ate the apple (??for an hour) (in Pat ate the apple (??for an hour) (in an hour).an hour).

Coercion/shiftingCoercion/shifting

Things that are normally count Things that are normally count nouns can be treated as mass nouns can be treated as mass nouns if coerced, and vice versa.nouns if coerced, and vice versa. There is too much apple in the There is too much apple in the salad.salad.

I ordered two soups.I ordered two soups. And, then:And, then:

I ate a soup in five minutes.I ate a soup in five minutes. I ate apple for five minutes.I ate apple for five minutes.

Sentences as denoting Sentences as denoting eventsevents

One way of looking at what One way of looking at what sentences mean is as sentences mean is as event event descriptionsdescriptions.. Pat ate an apple.Pat ate an apple. (There was) an eating, it affected an (There was) an eating, it affected an apple, it was instigated by Pat.apple, it was instigated by Pat.

Like definite descriptions denote Like definite descriptions denote individuals, sentences denote individuals, sentences denote events.events. The student in the corner.The student in the corner.

Sentences as denoting Sentences as denoting eventsevents

Some events are described by Some events are described by Pat swamPat swam.. Some of those are described by Some of those are described by Pat swam Pat swam fastfast..

If we look at sentences in this way, we If we look at sentences in this way, we can understand why can understand why Pat swam fastPat swam fast entails that entails that Pat swamPat swam. All of the . All of the events described by events described by Pat swam fastPat swam fast also also fit the description of fit the description of Pat swamPat swam.. Pat struck the door.Pat struck the door. Pat struck the door violently.Pat struck the door violently. Pat struck the door with a hammer.Pat struck the door with a hammer. Pat struck the door violently with a hammer.Pat struck the door violently with a hammer.