English and German Tense-Aspect Systems: A Comparison

  Content  

1.  Introduction  2

2.  Time in Order  2

3.  Defining Tense  2

3.1.  Concepts of Temporal Relations  3

3.2.  Tense in English  4

3.3.  Tense in German  5

4.  Defining Aspect  6

4.1.  Grammatical Aspect Perfective vs Imperfective  7

4.2.  Aktionsart  8

5.  A Comparison of English and German Tense-Aspect Systems  9

5.1.  Characterising The Perfect  9

5.2.  Future Time Reference in English  13

5.3.  Future Time Reference in German  14

5.4.  The Progressive  15

6.  Conclusion  18

7.  Bibliography  20

1

1. Introduction

Ordnungsbeziehungen anzuschauen ist doch das beste.

Die Ordnung ist alles... Alles ist Beziehung. (Thomas Mann - Doktor Faustus, Kap. VII)

Within the last two decades many attempts have been made to define a generally accepted concept of universal temporal and aspectual systems. There are comprehensive studies about the grammatical functions of tense and aspect, their categories and their meaning. In regard to their tense systems English and German show amazing parallels in the inventory of forms but there are major differences in their use and function. The following paper gives a survey of English and German tense and aspect systems and presents traditional and current theories and controversies on them. Moreover, an attempt will be made to debate in detail function and use of the perfect, future and progressive construction in these two languages.

2. Time in Order

The concept of time can be demonstrated by a simple diagram (Fig.1) locating every event before the present moment 0 to the left of 0 and locating every event after the present moment to the right of 0. Situations are not always punctual and separate but may occupy a time span or happen simultaneously, e.g. situation B precedes C, situation D and E overlap etc.

Such conditions enable the location of situations in time relative to each other or relative to a specific moment, e.g. the present moment. There are several means of expressing location in time. First, lexically composite expressions, e.g. five minutes after John left, make accurate time specifications possible. Second, lexical items, such as now, today, yesterday, last year, enable the calculation of location in time through the meaning of such expressions. And finally, grammatical categories, i.e. tenses, classify temporal location in a constructed system. (Comrie 1985:8) Grammaticalisation refers to integration into the grammatical system, that is, lexical items develop into grammatical items. (Dahl 2000:8)

3. Defining Tense

The International Encyclopedia of Linguistics (1992) gives the following entry for ‘Tense’:

Tense refers to the grammatical expression of the time of the situation described in the proposition, relative to some other time. This other time may be the moment of

2

speech: e.g., the past and future designate time before and after the moment of speech, respectively. (Klein 1994:2)

Most linguists would agree with this definition. Tense is grammaticalised expression of location in time. Not all languages have such a grammatical device, e.g. Hopi lacking straightforward past, present and future categories. (Comrie 1985:4)

3.1. Concepts of Temporal Relations

Back in the 40s, it was Reichenbach, who introduced a concept of temporal relations expressed by tenses and his work has been the basis for many following studies on this topic. Reichenbach`s analysis consists of two major features: first, the view that tenses express relations such as ‘before’ (<), ‘after’ (>), ‘is included in’ (=) and ‘is simultaneous with’ (SIMUL). Second, that there are three points in time that are relevant to the choice of tense, namely the time of utterance (TU), the time of the event/situation (TSit) and the point of reference (R). Unfortunately the latter is not defined very clearly. (R) is a third point in time indicating some other event. (König 1994:156-157) Reichenbach claims that (R) is necessary to distinguish pluperfect and simple past. Indeed, it is relevant for the analysis of the pluperfect in sentences such as,

(1) When Mary came to the party, John had left.

John`s leaving, expressed by the pluperfect, is the ‘event’ and Mary’s coming happens at a different point in time. (Klein 1994:25) But the use of a ‘reference time’ is not needed for sentences such as

(2) The child is playing in the garden.

(3) Last year, Henry was in Vienna.

(4) My sister will come next month.

There is only one event involved and the reference time is simultaneous with the event time. Thus follows:

(5) Present Tense: TU SIMUL TSit SIMUL TR

Past Tense:

Future Tense: TU < TSit SIMUL TR

3

According to Comrie (1985) simple present, past and future tense are subsumed within the category of „absolute tenses“. Absolute tenses include „as part of their meaning the present moment as deictic centre“, i.e. these tenses relate situations always to the present moment (moment of speech, TU): either to the same time as the present moment, or prior to the present moment, or subsequent to the present moment. The present moment is taken as reference point. In opposition to this, Comrie created the concept of „relative tense“, i.e. the reference point is not necessarily the present moment, but some other point in time indicated by the context. An utterance such as

(6) On the next day Jack looked out of his bedroom window.

includes an adverbial of relative time reference and the reference point is the day before the day of ‘John`s looking out of the window’. (cf. 14)

Klein (1994) introduced a slightly different analysis. He denies the necessity of relative tenses because they are „anaphoric“.(cf. 121) In his opinion, tense does not apply to the relation between TSit and TU. He replaced Reichenbach`s expression of „reference point“ by „topic time“ (TT). TT is the time under consideration:

(7)

The light was on.

This utterance is in the past and TT clearly precedes TU. However, the light could still be on at TU, that is, TU is included in TSit. The situation in this sentence does not have to be necessarily before the moment of speech, although it is in the past. Following this, Klein (1994) defines tense as follows: „Tense does not express a temporal relation between the time of situation and the time of utterance; rather, it expresses a relation between the time of utterance and some time for which the speaker wants to make an assertion - the topic time.“(cf. 24)

3.2. Tense in English

Apparently, there is no standardised view about how many tenses English has because the question of whether formal or semantic criteria are relevant for the definition of tense is still unsolved. Furthermore, the discussion of the status of a future tense in English is not finished yet. Structuralists only accept two tenses: past and non-past. This view is based on the fact that English has a two-term morphological contrast in the inflection of verbs, e.g. he play-s vs. he play-ed, and thus there are only two tenses, whereas other time constructions are simply combinatorial constructions. The future is considered a combination of present tense

4

and the modal verbs will/shall, the perfect (present perfect, past perfect) is a combination of have and one of the two tenses. Moreover, there are two aspectual categories, namely, the progressive and the perfect, that combine freely with each other and both tenses. (König 1994:153-154)

The view that English has three tenses is found in Klein (1994). He states that these tenses are expressed by the inflectional morphology of the finite verb, by stem change or by a periphrastic construction (in the future). His definition of tenses is as follows (cf. 124):

(8) Present tense: TU incl TT

Past tense:

Future tense:

Furthermore, some argue that there are six tenses in the English system: present, past, present perfect, past perfect (pluperfect), future and future perfect. This view held by e.g. Comrie and most traditional grammar books, is based on the model of Latin grammar and allows one aspectual category, the progressive. (König 1994:155)

Eventually, few linguists, such as Declerck, postulate as many as eight tenses for English, adding ‘conditional tense’ and ‘conditional perfect’ to the six tenses found in traditional grammars. (Declerck 1991:295) Matthews (1994) distinguishes between past vs. non-past, perfect vs. non-perfect and progressive vs. non-progressive.

3.3. Tense in German

The German tense system has been the subject of numerous studies for centuries. Already in 1572 the grammarian Ölinger wrote about the „plupluperfects“ (Perfekt II). (Klein 1994:125) However, regarding the question of tenses in German we find a similar picture like in English. There is no generally accepted analysis and figures range from one to nine tenses. To begin with, traditional grammars, such as the Duden, give six tenses: Präsens, Präteritum, Perfekt, Plusquamperfekt, Futur I and Futur II.(Thieroff 1992:46) These are often divided into absolute (direct) and relative (indirect) tenses. Präsens, Präteritum and Futur I demonstrate Verlauf, that is, the course or passage of an action, whereas Perfekt, Plusquamperfekt and Futur II relate to completion (Vollzug). (Thieroff 1992:46-47)

Klein (1994) argues that Plusquamperfekt and Futur II combine a tense meaning with an aspectual meaning and therefore are not to be labelled tense. (cf. 129) In contrast to this,

5