Nominal and temporal anaphora

Partee, Barbara H.

doi:10.1007/bf00627707

Cited by 496 publications

(295 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

263

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Borik (2006: 174-179) provides a critical survey of Reichenbachian approaches treating E-R in terms of anteriority, such as Hornstein (1990), Klein (1995), Schoorlemmer (1995), Arefiev (1998) among others and argues convincingly that for the analysis of Russian aspect the E-R-configuration does not work well. She then appeals to an approach based on the idea that the subset relation in E ⊆ R should replace the anteriority relation, mentioning Hinrichs (1981) and Partee (1984) as early proponents of that idea. Borik (2006: 179-198) makes the inclusion position concrete by adopting the framework made available by Tanya Reinhart in unpublished work and by applying this framework to Russian.…”

Section: Reichenbach's Motivation For the Positional Use Of Point Rmentioning

confidence: 99%

A binary approach to Spanish tense and aspect: on the tense battle about the past

González

Verkuyl

2017

Borealis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. The present paper aims at accounting for the Spanish Imperfecto, Perfecto, Pluscuamperfecto and the Indefinido by applying three binary tense oppositions: Present vs Past, Synchronous vs Posterior and Imperfect(ive) vs Perfect(ive). For the sixteen Spanish tense forms under analysis a binary approach leads to covering twelve of them. Their relation with the preterital forms outside the range of the three oppositions is accounted for by two surgical operations: (a) the notion of Imperfect(ive) is severed from the notion of ongoing progress by restricting it to underinformation about completion and by seeing continuous tense forms as involving a more complex semantics; (b) the notion of (non-)stative is strictly severed from interference of information coming from the arguments of a verb. These theoretical moves make the way free for a formal-semantic insight into the interaction of Spanish tense and aspect. It also paves the way for a principled distinction between completion and anteriority. Restricted to tense forms pertaining to the past, our analysis sheds light on the struggle for survival of tense forms outside the binary system. Keywords: tense, aspect, perfecto, pluscuamperfecto, imperfecto, indefinido, completion, aorist, anteriority, stative, nonstative, discrete, continuous, progressive, terminative, durative RESUMEN. El presente trabajo pretende describir y explicar las siguientes formas verbales del castellano: Imperfecto, Perfecto, Pluscuamperfecto e Indefinido aplicando tres oposiciones temporales binarias: Presente vs Pasado, Sincrónico vs Posterior e Imperfecto/imperfectivo vs Perfecto/perfectivo. Este acercamiento binario cubre doce de las dieciséis formas temporales del castellano analizadas. La relación entre las formas verbales que entran en el sistema binario y las formas de pretérito que no entran en el sistema se explica por dos operaciones quirúrgicas: (a) la noción de Imperfecto/imperfectivo se separa de la noción de progresivo continuo, restringiendo el valor del Imperfecto/imperfectivo a la subinformación sobre su terminación e implicando una semántica más compleja para las formas temporales progresivas; (b) la noción de (no) estatividad está estrictamente separada de la interferencia de la información aspectual procedente de los argumentos de un verbo. Estos movimientos teóricos dan vía libre a una comprensión formal-semántica de la interacción del tiempo y del aspecto en castellano. También allana el camino para una distinción argumentada entre las nociones de terminación y anterioridad. Limitado a formas verbales del pasado, nuestro análisis ilumina la batalla por la supervivencia de las formas temporales fuera del sistema binario.

show abstract

Section: Reichenbach's Motivation For the Positional Use Of Point Rmentioning

confidence: 99%

A binary approach to Spanish tense and aspect: on the tense battle about the past

González

Verkuyl

2017

Borealis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In other words, the temporal entities are actually in the object language, not just in the meta-language. Arguments for a ref-erential approach to temporal anaphora have been made by Partee (1984) and Kamp and Reyle (1993). Evidence from the anaphoric properties of tenses argues that we need a representation that is able to store, access and manipulate time points for later reference.…”

Section: Temporal Structurementioning

confidence: 99%

Time and the event: The semantics of Russian prefixes

Ramchand¹

2005

NLY

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper, I draw on data from prefixation in Russian to argue for a basic distinction between event structure and temporal structure. I present a linguistic semantics of verb and argument structure interpretation on the one hand, and a formal semantic implementation of 'telicity' on the other, which makes sense of the generalisations apparently common to both domains. I will claim that the temporal domain embeds the event structure domain, and that the latter constrains the former. At the same time, the different formal primitives that operate at the levels proposed form the basis for a principled linguistic distinction between the two tiers of composition: the event structure level encodes subevental relations and predicational relations within those subevents; the temporal structure level introduces a t variable explicitly and relates it to the structure built up by the event level. Whether the event structure is homogenous or not will have an impact on whether the temporal variable chosen will be 'definite' or 'indefinite.' This latter claim then forms the basis for a new conception of the difference between perfective and imperfective verb forms in Russian.

show abstract

“…Similarly, the phenomenon of narrative progression is often, in one way or another, attributed to the anaphoric nature of tense (Partee 1984, Hinrichs 1986, Kamp and Reyle 1993 Sheila walked into the room. She sneezed.…”

Section: Anaphoricitymentioning

confidence: 99%