In their analysis of the perfect in English and German Klein and Vater postulate that the English present perfect and the German Perfekt are very much the same except that the Perfekt has two additional usages. They refer to Anderson (Anderson, 1982:228) and list five major usages of perfect in the English language to which exist corresponding usages in the German Perfekt and give the following examples – the example for the present continuous is left out because it does not concern the analysis given in this paper:
1. Experiential
Have you ever been to Japan?
Sind sie je in Japan gewesen?
2. Current relevance of anterior
He has studied the whole book. (So he can help.)
Paul hat sich mit Biologie befasst. (Paul kennt sich damit aus.)
3. New situation, „hot news“
The Etna has just erupted!
Eben hat es geblitzt!
4. Result-state
He has gone. (or) He is gone. (is not here)
Er ist weggegangen. (Er ist weg.)
The two additional functions they see are that the Perfekt can easily relate to the future and often functions like the English simple past as can be shown by the following examples:
1. The Colossus of Rhodos weighed 100 tons.
Der Koloss von Rhodos hat 100 Tonnen gewogen
2. Tomorrow at ten, Peter will have left London.
Morgen um zehn hat Peter London verlassen.
In their proceeding they postulate that the tense systems of English and German do not mainly differ with respect to the perfect but that the role of the present tense is to blame for the observation made in the beginning. They base this conclusion on an excerpt from Comrie who wrote about the compositional structure of the perfect – being a composite of a present tense auxiliary and a past participle – that “the present auxiliary conveys the present meaning, while the past participle conveys that of past action” (Comrie, 1976:107).
Klein and Vater’s assumption is that in the English language the present tense is closely bound to the moment of speech whereas in German it is relatively free in this regard (Klein/Vater, 1998:221). This led to a lively discussion in the course with two main points. The first being whether it is justified to state that English and German differ crucially in their usage of the present tense, and the second, assuming this difference really exists, whether it is the reason for the additional functions of the Perfekt.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction
2. Theoretical preliminaries
2.1 Prerequisites
2.1.1 Representation of time
2.1.2 Definition of tense
2.2 The Reichenbach theory
2.3 Modifications to Reichenbach’s theory
3. Present tense
3.1 Analysis of the present tense
3.2 Präsens in German
3.3 Present in English
3.4 Comparison of English present and German Präsens
3.5 Klein and Vater’s view of the Präsens and the simple present
4. The relevance of the present for the interpretation of the perfect - a review of “The Perfect in English and German”
5. Concluding remarks
6. References
Objectives and Scope
The paper examines the hypothesis that differences between the English present perfect and the German "Perfekt" are fundamentally rooted in the distinct functional roles of the present tense in both languages. It investigates whether the German "Präsens" is more flexible than the English simple present regarding temporal reference and if this flexibility accounts for the additional functions of the German "Perfekt".
- Comparative analysis of tense systems in English and German.
- Evaluation of Reichenbach's theory and subsequent modifications by Klein and Vater.
- Detailed breakdown of the diverse usages of "Präsens" in German and simple present in English.
- Critical review of Klein and Vater’s postulation regarding the interaction of present tense and the perfect.
Excerpt from the Book
3.2 Präsens in German
Zeller gives a number of different usages for the Präsens and groups them into four categories which will be explained in the following section (Zeller, 1994:49ff):
First, the Präsens can be used to make “tenseless” statements about the world, what Zeller calls atemporal statements. In this case the Präsens is not used to define an event time because we can not speak exactly about events. This usage can be divided in two groups. Firstly the usage in statements that are generally valid – often called generic - statements for example statements that are part of a logical system like mathematics or statements about biology or physics as the following examples show:
Zwei mal Zwei ist Vier.
Die Erde dreht sich um die Sonne.
The second usage is the use of the Präsens in statements with proverbial character – often called gnomical statements -, which are closely linked to the generic statements because the stated facts are marked as generally valid, too.
Den letzten beissen die Hunde.
Summary of Chapters
1. Introduction: Presents the central hypothesis that the German Perfekt’s additional functions compared to the English present perfect are linked to the nature of the present tense in each language.
2. Theoretical preliminaries: Establishes the terminological framework, introducing Reichenbach’s model and the modifications proposed by Ehrich, Vater, and Klein.
3. Present tense: Provides an in-depth analysis of the varying usages of the German Präsens and English simple present, highlighting their differences and similarities.
4. The relevance of the present for the interpretation of the perfect - a review of “The Perfect in English and German”: Critically reviews the work of Klein and Vater, assessing their claim that the tense component of the perfect is the source of cross-linguistic differences.
5. Concluding remarks: Summarizes the findings and suggests that the debate remains controversial, indicating that the explanation for the Perfekt's versatility requires further comprehensive study.
6. References: Lists the academic literature and linguistic sources utilized for the analysis.
Keywords
Tense, Aspect, Modality, Präsens, Simple Present, Perfect, Klein and Vater, Reichenbach, German, English, Linguistics, Topic Time, Time of Utterance, Historical Present, Temporal Reference.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the core subject of this paper?
The paper provides a critical review of the research by Klein and Vater regarding the functional differences between the German "Perfekt" and the English present perfect.
What are the central themes discussed?
The work focuses on tense systems, the interaction between aspect and tense, the definition of the present tense, and how these elements influence the interpretation of the perfect tense.
What is the primary research goal?
The goal is to determine if the differences in usage between the German Perfekt and the English present perfect are caused by the distinct temporal constraints of the present tense in both languages.
Which linguistic methods are employed?
The author uses a comparative linguistic approach, relying on Reichenbach's theory of time points and the "Topic Time" modifications suggested by Klein and Vater.
What topics are covered in the main body?
The main body covers theoretical foundations, detailed categorization of "Präsens" and simple present usages, and a critical analysis of Klein and Vater’s theoretical framework.
Which keywords best characterize this work?
Key concepts include "Tense", "Aspect", "Präsens", "Perfect", "Klein and Vater", and "Temporal Reference".
How does the author define the "Präsens" in German?
The author references Ballweg, defining the German Präsens as valid if a time interval of the sentence overlaps with a time of observation, allowing for significant flexibility in position.
What is the author's final conclusion regarding Klein and Vater's hypothesis?
The author concludes that Klein and Vater's claim is debatable and that there is no consensus among linguists as to whether the present tense is solely responsible for the differences in the perfect.
- Quote paper
- Philipp Helle (Author), 2005, The present tense in English and German and its relevance for the interpretation of the perfect, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/52519
