{"title":"Tense and Aspect in Morphology","authors":"M. Mithun","doi":"10.1093/acrefore/9780199384655.013.548","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Distinctions of time are among the most common notions expressed in morphology cross-linguistically. But the inventories of distinctions marked in individual languages are also varied. Some languages have few if any morphological markers pertaining to time, while others have extensive sets. Certain categories do recur pervasively across languages, but even these can vary subtly or even substantially in their uses. And they may be optional or obligatory.\n The grammar of time is traditionally divided into two domains: tense and aspect. Tense locates situations in time. Tense markers place them along a timeline with respect to some point of reference, a deictic center. The most common reference point is the moment of speech. Many languages have just three tense categories: past for situations before the time of speech, present for those overlapping with the moment of speech, and future for those subsequent to the moment of speech. But many languages have no morphological tense, some have just two categories, and some have many more. In some languages, morphological distinctions correspond fairly closely to identifiable times. There may, for example, be a today (hodiernal) past that contrasts with a yesterday (hesternal) past. In other languages, tense distinctions are more fluid. A recent past might be interpreted as ‘some time earlier today’ for a sentence meaning ‘I ate a banana’, but ‘within the last few months’ for a sentence meaning ‘I returned from Africa’. Languages also vary in the mobility of the deictic center. In some languages tense distinctions are systematically calibrated with respect to the moment of speaking. In others, the deictic center may shift. It may be established by the matrix clause in a complex sentence. Or it may be established by a larger topic of discussion. Tense is most often a verbal category, because verbs generally portray the most dynamic elements of a situation, but a number of languages distinguish tense on nouns as well.\n Aspect characterizes the internal temporal structure of a situation. There may be different forms of a verb ‘eat’, for example, in sentences meaning ‘I ate lamb chops’, ‘I was eating lamb chops’, and ‘I used to eat lamb chops’, though all are past tense. They may pick out one phase of the situation, with different forms for ‘I began to eat’, ‘I was eating’, and ‘I ate it up’. They may make finer distinctions, with different forms for ‘I took a bite’, ‘I nibbled’, and ‘I kept eating’. Morphological aspect distinctions are usually marked on verbs, but in some languages they can be marked on nominals as well.\n In some languages, there is a clear separation between the two: tense is expressed in one part of the morphology, and aspect in another. But often a single marker conveys both: a single suffix might mark both past tense and progressive aspect in a sentence meaning ‘I was eating’, for example. A tense distinction may be made only in a particular aspect, and/or a certain aspect distinction marked only in a particular tense. Like other areas of grammar, tense and aspect systems are constantly evolving. The meanings of markers can shift over time, as speakers apply them to new contexts, and as new markers enter the system, taking over some of their functions. Markers can shift for example from aspect to tense, or from derivation to inflection. The gradualness of such developments underlies the cross-linguistic differences we find in tense and aspect categories.\n There is a rich literature on tense and aspect. As more is learned about the inventories of categories that exist in individual languages and the ways speakers deploy them, theoretical models continue to grow in sophistication.","PeriodicalId":331003,"journal":{"name":"Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Linguistics","volume":"41 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-06-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Linguistics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780199384655.013.548","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Distinctions of time are among the most common notions expressed in morphology cross-linguistically. But the inventories of distinctions marked in individual languages are also varied. Some languages have few if any morphological markers pertaining to time, while others have extensive sets. Certain categories do recur pervasively across languages, but even these can vary subtly or even substantially in their uses. And they may be optional or obligatory.
The grammar of time is traditionally divided into two domains: tense and aspect. Tense locates situations in time. Tense markers place them along a timeline with respect to some point of reference, a deictic center. The most common reference point is the moment of speech. Many languages have just three tense categories: past for situations before the time of speech, present for those overlapping with the moment of speech, and future for those subsequent to the moment of speech. But many languages have no morphological tense, some have just two categories, and some have many more. In some languages, morphological distinctions correspond fairly closely to identifiable times. There may, for example, be a today (hodiernal) past that contrasts with a yesterday (hesternal) past. In other languages, tense distinctions are more fluid. A recent past might be interpreted as ‘some time earlier today’ for a sentence meaning ‘I ate a banana’, but ‘within the last few months’ for a sentence meaning ‘I returned from Africa’. Languages also vary in the mobility of the deictic center. In some languages tense distinctions are systematically calibrated with respect to the moment of speaking. In others, the deictic center may shift. It may be established by the matrix clause in a complex sentence. Or it may be established by a larger topic of discussion. Tense is most often a verbal category, because verbs generally portray the most dynamic elements of a situation, but a number of languages distinguish tense on nouns as well.
Aspect characterizes the internal temporal structure of a situation. There may be different forms of a verb ‘eat’, for example, in sentences meaning ‘I ate lamb chops’, ‘I was eating lamb chops’, and ‘I used to eat lamb chops’, though all are past tense. They may pick out one phase of the situation, with different forms for ‘I began to eat’, ‘I was eating’, and ‘I ate it up’. They may make finer distinctions, with different forms for ‘I took a bite’, ‘I nibbled’, and ‘I kept eating’. Morphological aspect distinctions are usually marked on verbs, but in some languages they can be marked on nominals as well.
In some languages, there is a clear separation between the two: tense is expressed in one part of the morphology, and aspect in another. But often a single marker conveys both: a single suffix might mark both past tense and progressive aspect in a sentence meaning ‘I was eating’, for example. A tense distinction may be made only in a particular aspect, and/or a certain aspect distinction marked only in a particular tense. Like other areas of grammar, tense and aspect systems are constantly evolving. The meanings of markers can shift over time, as speakers apply them to new contexts, and as new markers enter the system, taking over some of their functions. Markers can shift for example from aspect to tense, or from derivation to inflection. The gradualness of such developments underlies the cross-linguistic differences we find in tense and aspect categories.
There is a rich literature on tense and aspect. As more is learned about the inventories of categories that exist in individual languages and the ways speakers deploy them, theoretical models continue to grow in sophistication.
时间的差别是跨语言形态学中最常见的概念之一。但是,在各个语言中所标记的区别也各不相同。有些语言几乎没有任何与时间有关的形态学标记,而其他语言则有大量的形态学标记。某些类别确实在各种语言中普遍出现,但即使是这些类别,在使用上也可能有微妙甚至很大的差异。它们可能是可选的,也可能是必须的。时间语法传统上分为两个领域:时态和时态。时态能及时定位形势。时态标记将它们放置在时间线上,相对于某个参考点,一个指示中心。最常见的参照点是讲话的时刻。许多语言只有三种时态:过去时态用于讲话之前的情况,现在时态用于与讲话时刻重叠的情况,将来时态用于讲话时刻之后的情况。但是许多语言没有形态时态,有些只有两类,有些有更多。在某些语言中,词法上的区别与可识别的时代相当接近。例如,可能有今天(星期日)的过去与昨天(星期日)的过去形成对比。在其他语言中,时态的区别更加灵活。最近的过去可能被解释为“今天早些时候”,意思是“我吃了一根香蕉”,但“在过去的几个月里”,意思是“我从非洲回来”。语言在指示中心的移动性上也各不相同。在一些语言中,时态的区别是根据说话的时刻系统地加以校准的。在其他情况下,指示中心可能会转移。它可以通过复合句中的矩阵子句来确定。或者它可以通过一个更大的讨论话题来建立。时态通常是一个动词范畴,因为动词通常描绘了一个情境中最动态的元素,但许多语言也区分名词上的时态。相位表征一种情况的内部时间结构。动词“eat”可能有不同的形式,例如,在句子中表示“我吃羊排”,“我正在吃羊排”和“我曾经吃羊排”,尽管这些都是过去式。他们可能会挑出情况的一个阶段,用不同的形式来表达“我开始吃”、“我正在吃”和“我吃完了”。他们可能会有更细微的区别,用不同的形式来表达“I took a bite”、“I nibble”和“I keep eating”。形态方面的区别通常标注在动词上,但在某些语言中也可以标注在名词上。在一些语言中,这两者之间有明显的区别:时态在词法的一部分表达,而aspect在另一部分表达。但通常一个单独的标记同时表达了这两种含义:例如,在一个句子中,一个后缀可能同时表示过去时和进行时,意思是“我在吃东西”。时态的区别只能在一个特定的时态中进行,和/或一个特定的时态区分只能在一个特定的时态中标记。和语法的其他领域一样,时态和相位系统也在不断发展。随着说话者将它们应用到新的语境中,以及新的标记进入系统,取代它们的一些功能,标记的意义会随着时间的推移而变化。例如,标记可以从aspect转换为时态,或者从派生转换为屈折变化。这种发展的渐进性是我们在时态和体类方面发现的跨语言差异的基础。在时态和体方面有丰富的文献。随着人们对各种语言中存在的类别清单以及使用者使用这些类别的方式的了解越来越多,理论模型也在不断发展。