Tense, aspect and time adverbials

Heny, Frank

doi:10.1007/bf00390694

Cited by 19 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…She refers to Heny (1982), who, in turn, claims that knowing that Reagan was shot only once, on June 11, 1981, only the sentence in (52)a comes out true if it is uttered on June 12, whereas (52)b would be false.…”

Section: Iv322 S-ementioning

confidence: 99%

Aspect and Reference Time

Borik¹

2006

106

125

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Iv322 S-ementioning

confidence: 99%

Aspect and Reference Time

Borik¹

2006

106

125

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…e.g. Richards (1982), Heny (1982), Mittwoch (1988, Kamp and Reyle (1993). In Portuguese, the duration connective haver would be used to express the anchored (imperfective) durationa Ana está em Paris há dois anos -, whereas the duration connective durante would be used to express non-anchored (perfective) durationa Ana esteve em Paris durante dois anos.…”

Section: Simple (Atelic) Durationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Portuguese Expressions of Duration and its English Counterparts

Móia

2005

Journal of Portuguese Linguistics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper focuses on the expression of duration in (European and Brazilian) Portuguese. English is used for comparative purposes, since many of the issues to be discussed have been intently studied for this language. The paper has two main, parallel, goals: (i) a description of the Portuguese subsystem of duration, with an identification of the main structures involved in the expression of this semantic value, and (ii) an attempt to distinguish several conceptually differentthough closely relatedtemporal subdomains within the semantic area under study. This second goal has obviously implications for the grammatical description that go well beyond the analysis of Portuguese. Two distinctions will be explored in some detail: one between strict duration and durative temporal location, which is not assumed by all authors, and another between the duration of telic and atelic eventualities. Other (semantic and/or syntactic) subtypes of strict duration that will be discussed are: argumental vs. adjunct, continuous vs. discontinuous, time-anchored vs. non-time-anchored, and planned vs. non-planned duration. * I thank João Peres for insightful comments on previous versions of this paper and Graham Katz for his judgements on the English sentences.

show abstract

“…For (Heny, 1982) and (Richards, 1982), the Present is appropriate in any context that gives us a time that extends the speech time towards the Past, i.e., an Extended Now (XN) in the sense of (McCoard, 1978). (For the precise semantics, see (14).)…”

Section: Present Tensementioning

confidence: 99%

“…A number of further approaches to the have-perfect can be found in the literature. (Heny, 1982) and (Richards, 1982) claim that have expresses the Perfective (PF), whereas the XN-PERF-information stems from the present tense. (Kamp and Reyle, 1993) relate the have-perfect to resultativity.…”

Section: Other Approaches To the Have-perfectmentioning

confidence: 99%

Introduction: the modules of Perfect constructions

Αλεξιαδου¹,

Rathert²,

Stechow³

2003

Perfect Explorations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This volume presents a collection of papers dealing with the semantics, syntax and morphology of perfect constructions in several languages (e.g. Arabic, English, Bulgarian, German, Greek, Italian, and Russian). The volume has its origin in two workshops, one on the Perfect organized by the University of Thessaloniki in May 2000, and one on Participles organized by the University of Tübingen in April 2001. However, the book is independently structured and features a different set of contributors than did those events. 1 The papers present the state of the art in current research on Perfect constructions. Although the approaches differ in their details, a general consensus emerges concerning structural aspects of tense/aspect/aktionsart distinctions (T/A/A). In our introduction we discuss these aspects in detail. Furthermore, we introduce the temporal meaning components that the contributors use in their analysis. We address issues that relate to the interpretation of simple tenses, the perfect, viewpoint aspect, aktionsarten, aspectual and durative adverbials. As will become evident, the amazing complexity of perfect constructions relates to the ways the morpho-syntax of such constructions expresses their semantics. 2. Perfect constructions Perfect constructions interact with Tense (present/past), with viewpoint aspect, with aktionsarten and with temporal adverbs of different sorts. Any analysis of these constructions has to take into account all these factors, which are often only partly understood. There are two main perfect constructions that the contributions to this volume focus on: one expressed by the have-perfect and one by the beperfect. Note that what we call here have and be-perfects do not strictly correspond to the phenomenon of auxiliary selection. Rather with beperfects we describe adjectival passives, which can have readings that relate to uses of the perfect (see e.g. Anagnostopoulou's contribution). We discuss these in turn.

show abstract

Tense, aspect and time adverbials

Cited by 19 publications

References 2 publications

Aspect and Reference Time

Aspect and Reference Time

Portuguese Expressions of Duration and its English Counterparts

Introduction: the modules of Perfect constructions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About