THEME 12. THE VERB: ASPECT

Plan

1. Aspect as a morphological category: basic notions connected with the category of aspect

2. The problems of aspective characterization of the verb

lexical aspective meaning / grammatical aspective meaning

3. Treatment of aspect in Modern English

4. The use of the Continuous forms in Modern English

The grammatical category of aspect in English is a linguistic representation of the conceptual category which is defined as Aspectuality, the latter reflecting the objective category of Manner of action.

It is constituted by an opposition of two forms of the same verb:

Progressive:: Non-Progressive

or Continuous:: Non-Continuous

e.g. is writing:: writes

I’m writing:: I write

You’re writing:: You write

He’s writing:: He writes

We/You/They ’re writing:: We/You/They write,

that is the Continuous aspect form is marked analytically by the V_be + V_ing marker whereas the Non-Continuous form is unmarked. The categorial meaning of the Continuous forms in English is to show how the speaker views the action, or process, as being in progress, development, while the opposite forms express their categorial meaning irrespective of this distinction.

The writer may use the Continuous aspect form to describe something that is actually taking place, something serving as background for another action or to present ideas, unfold thoughts or expound the evolving, emerging or developing concepts.

The problem of Aspect in English has always been one of the most disputable and controversial. The discrepancy in views upon aspects in English is elicited by the diversity of their definitions.

First of all, Aspect should be defined as a morphological category of the verb which shows whether the action is taken in its progress, its development (“Continuous”) or it is simply stated, its nature being unspecified (“Non-Continuous”) (B. S. Khaimovitch, B. I. Rogovskaya).

One can meet with different lines of approach to the category of aspect in English:

1. Aspect is interpreted as a category of semantics rather than that of grammar (M. Deutschbein, A. G. Kennedy, G. Curme).

2. Aspect is not recognized at all as a morphological category (H. Sweet).

3. Aspect is blended with tense as an inalienable part of the tense-aspect system (I. P. Ivanova).

4. Aspect and tense are two different morphological categories (B. A. Ilyish, A. I. Smirnitsky, V. N. Yartseva).

Let’s examine each treatment (viewpoint):

1. Thus, according to G.O. Curme, aspect indicates the aspect, the type, the character of the action. There are four aspects:

1) Durative, representing the action as continuing, as in He is eating. To express different shades of the idea of continuance other forms can be used, especially remain, keep, keep on, continue.

2) Point-action aspects, calling attention not to the act as a whole, but to only one point (either the beginning or the final point). Among these G. Curme distinguishes

a) ingressive aspect: He awoke early He came into a waking state early. The verbs to be used in this function are begin, start, commence; get, grow, fall, turn, become, run, go, come, set, take up;

b) effective aspect: The two friends fell out.

3) Terminate aspect, indicating an action as a finished whole, e.g. He didn’t even wince. He hit the mark.

4) Iterative aspect, indicating an indefinitely prolonged succession of acts, like: e.g. He pooh-poohs at everything.

It is self-evident that this classification concerns itself with semantics of the verbs, not morphological form.

2. Those who wouldn’t admit of the category of aspect in Modern English treat the continuous forms as tense forms, expressing actions simultaneous with some other actions or situation. They term continuous forms as progressive, expanded, long, durative or relative.

The objections to this viewpoint are as follows:

1) The forms wrote:: was writing are opposed not as tense forms. Both of them express the same tense: that of the past.

2) The idea of simultaneity doesn’t go very well with the ‘perfect continuous’ forms which make an indispensable part of the system of the continuous forms.

3) Even the non-perfect continuous may be used without special indications of simultaneity: e.g. I’m staying with his sister – who married my cousin. (J. Galsworthy)

4) Simultaneous actions are often expressed by the non-continuous forms of the verb: e.g. Her voice pursued him as he walked up and down. (J. Galsworthy)

Cf. Soames passed into the corner where side by side hung his real Goya and the copy of the fresco “La Vendimia”. And next to it was hanging the copy of “La Vendimia”. Both the sentences show that the continuous and non-continuous forms may express the same relation of the action to time.

All this testifies to the fact that the category expressed by the opposition of continuous:: non-continuous is not that of tense.

Likewise do B.S. Khaimovich and B.I. Rogovskaya disagree with those who recognize the category of aspect but still think that it cannot be severed from tense. That’s partly so, because in actual speech all the grammatical meanings of a word always go together: e.g. the form ‘tells’ is aid to be in non-past tense, non-passive voice, non-subjunctive, 3^rd person singular or non-plural, etc. It doesn’t follow, however, that we are unable to separate the category of mood from that of tense or voice, or the category of voice from that of aspect.

By bringing ‘told’ against ‘tells’ we single out the category of tense, so by bringing ‘is telling’ against ‘tells’ we single out the category of aspect. Thus aspect is closely connected with tense, but so it is with voice, time correlation, mood, person, number etc. The difference between the categories of aspect and tense is more pronounced when we examine the infinitive: to write:: to be writing, to have written:: to have been writing.

The aspect can be and actually is separated from tense. It is the form of the infinitive that shows it clearly: to be writing – to write; to have been writing – to have written. We see that in the infinitive aspect is linked with time correlation, not with tense.

Consequently we share the viewpoint by B.A. Ilyish, A.I. Smirnitsky and others, and treat tense and aspect as different grammatical categories.

So the categories of tense and aspect characterize an action from different points of view. The tense of a verb shows the time of the action, while the aspect of a verb deals with the action in progress or development.

It is most appropriate for referring to natural phenomena, and if used so, it adds to a narration a colour of reflexion, meditation. To put it differently, the Continuous form may fulfill a poetic function, which helps the reader visualize the situation. Here’s an example from J. B. Priestley:

The fine autumn afternoon was losing its bright gold and turning into smoke and distant fading flame, so that it seemed for a moment as if all London bridge were burning down.

The English poet Percy Bysshe Shelley makes an extensive use of the Continuous forms to describe the turbulent stormy weather, the former giving rhythm and music to whole of the poem:

The waters are flashing,

The white hail is dashing,

The lightnings are glancing,

The hoar-spray is dancing –

Away!

The whirlwind is rolling,

The thunder is tolling,

The forest is swinging,

The minster is ringing –

Come away!

The invariant semantic feature of the verb as a part of aspect is Verbiality which implies the ability to denote activity, being in some process or state. It is evident that the verbs denoting a person or a thing in some state or in some space which are commonly called existential verbs, cannot be semantically associated with Durativeness or Progressiveness. Here belong some verbs denoting physical or mental perception (to see, to taste, to know, to doubt, to assume, to believe, to expect, to consider etc.), verbs expressing permanent feelings (to love, to adore, to hate, to loathe) and some miscellaneous verbs (to consist, to belong, to possess, to own, to matter, to suit, to concern etc.). They are semantically incompatible with the categorial meaning of the Continuous aspect forms. Aspect finds its realization only in the paradigm of the verbs denoting actions and processes.

It may be argued that the so-called “aspective character” of the verb is one of the main factors which regulate the use of Aspect in the English language. Meanwhile, the aspective character of the verb is of primary relevance for the contextual actualization of the Continuous forms, the latter being apt to shifting. (On the correspondence of the Continuous forms and the aspective character of the verb see В. Н. Жигадло, И. П. Иванова, Л. Л. Иофик / Современный английский язык / Теоретический курс грамматики. М.: ИЛИЯ, 1956, с. 98; 106).

References:

1. Бархударов Л. С. Очерки по морфологии современного английского языка. – М.: Высш. шк., 1975. – C. 91-148.

2. Блох М. Я. Теоретическая грамматика английского языка: Учеб. – 4-е изд. испр. / М. Я. Блох. – М.: «Высшая школа», 2003. – C. 169-190.

3. Блох М. Я. Практикум по теоретической грамматике английского языка: Учеб. пособие / М. Я. Блох, Т. Н. Семенова, С. В. Тимофеева. – М.: Высш. шк., 2004. – С. 169-170; 176-216.

4. Иванова И. П., Бурлакова В. В., Почепцов Г. Г. Теоретическая грамматика современного английского языка: Учебник. / И. П. Иванова, В. В. Бурлакова, Г. Г. Почепцов. – М.: «Высшая школа», 1981. – C. 49-50; 57-62.

5. Смирницкий А. И. Морфология английского языка. – М.: ИЛИЯ, 1959. – С. 316-328.

6. Хаймович Б. С., Роговская Б. И. Теоретическая грамматика английского языка: Учеб. пособие. / Б. С. Хаймович, Б. И. Роговская. – М.: Высш. шк., 1967. – С. 134-138.

7. Graustein H., Hoffmann A. Schentke М. English Grammar. / A University Handbook. – Leipzig: VEB Verlag Enzyklopädie, 1977. – P. 165-173.

8. Ilyish B. A. The Structure of Modern English. – M.-Л.: Просвещение, 1965. – C. 82-91.

9. Sweet H. A New English Grammar. Logical and Historical. – Oxford: At the Clarendon Press, 1955. – P. 101-103.

Не нашли, что искали? Воспользуйтесь поиском: