Relative Tense and Aspectual Values in Tibetan Languages: A Comparative Study 9783110908183, 9783110178685

Citation preview

Relative Tense and Aspectual Values in Tibetan Languages

W G DE

Trends in Linguistics Studies and Monographs 150

Editors

Walter Bisang Hans Henrich Hock Werner Winter (main editor for this volume)

Mouton de Gruyter Berlin · New York

Relative Tense and Aspectual Values in Tibetan Languages A Comparative Study by

Bettina Zeisler

Mouton de Gruyter Berlin · New York

Mouton de Gruyter (formerly Mouton, The Hague) is a Division of Walter de Gruyter G m b H & Co. KG, Berlin.

© Printed on acid-free paper which falls within the guidelines of the ANSI to ensure permanence and durability.

I S B N 3-11-017868-0 Bibliographic information published by Die Deutsche Bibliothek Die Deutsche Bibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliografie; detailed bibliographic data is available in the Internet at .

© Copyright 2004 by Walter de Gruyter G m b H & Co. KG, D-10785 Berlin All rights reserved, including those of translation into foreign languages. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording or any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Cover design: Christopher Schneider, Berlin. Printed in Germany.

Dedicated to the people of Ladakh

Preface An earlier version of this study was accepted in 1999 as doctoral dissertation at the Freie Universität Berlin. However, I was not fully satisfied with the way I excluded English from the group of aspect languages without offering an alternative concept, such as " F R A M I N G " and so I continued to turn this problem in my mind. As a result I have rewritten (and enlarged) the whole section 1.3.4 with a discussion of the conceptual similarities and differences of ASPECT and FRAMING. I have likewise enlarged section 1.4.6 on German, taking the opportunity to discuss some problems of the "double perfect" and dialectal variance and added section 1.5 on converging pragmatic functions (information and attention structuring). Section 1.6 on the interrelation of temporal and aspectual concepts has been revised, especially by enlarging section 6.2 on the relation between ASPECT or FRAMING and ABSOLUTE TENSE (and the alleged logical impossibility to refer to a present situation by a "complexive", i.e. non-continuative present tense form) but also by (exceptionally) condensing a section, namely section 6.5 on QUANTIFICATION (as most of its arguments shifted to section 1.3.4.4.1). As a result, it was necessary to adjust the terminology in the remaining parts and so, in the light of the changes noted above and the literature update, additional remarks and examples found their way into almost all sections. Meanwhile, I had the opportunity to consider a group of rather enigmatic Old Tibetan texts not included in the original study, and was surprised to find revealing examples and contexts of some rare and previously obscure constructions (use of Negation Marker mi with past stem, non-directive use of the so-called "imperative" stem), which I had been obliged to leave unanalysed due to the paucity of the evidence. The new findings have led to some re-arrangements in section II.3: a separate section (II.3.2) for the future stem, the introduction of section II.3.6 (past stem in inactual contexts), and the reformulation of section IV. 1 with the introduction of sections 1.1-3 on the origin of the "imperative" and "past" stems and the development of the classical set of temporal and modal stem forms. (Needless to say that these findings are reflected also in part I.) The new section II.3.4.5 on the Tibetan grammarians' view on "present tense" is due to an interesting question raised by Prof. Dr. Klaus Butzenberger at the defence of this thesis. This gave me the opportunity to discuss

viii

Preface

some more unsolved problems in section II.3.4.4 (apparent neutralisations of the framing opposition). Finally I thought it appropriate to add a further excursus on morphological problems as section II.3.3.4. The general sections were updated according to the results of the current research and fieldwork on Ladakhi verb semantics. Despite all these additions and improvements, the original line of argument and thus my conclusions have remained the same.

Tiibingen, May 2004

Bettina Zeisler

Acknowledgements Writing this thesis would not have been possible without a two-year (19951997) grant from the state Berlin (NaFöG). For the 1996 fieldwork in Ladakh I was granted additional money by the DAAD (Deutscher Akademischer Austauschdienst) to cover the greater part of the expenses. I should add that during my studies at the Freie Universität Berlin I profited from an extremely liberal system of university education, which in the last years has become the object of massive criticism mainly for its alleged "ineffectiveness". Without this "ineffectiveness", however, the present work would have never come into existence. I would therefore like to express my gratitude to the unknown German taxpayers, particularly to those who would prefer their money to be spent on more immediately useful research. I hope that the results do not only pay back the financial investment but also the very personal mental investment of my altogether three teachers of Classical Tibetan and Buddhist Philosophy, who, one by one, fostered an ever growing interest in the classical language while introducing me to the subtleties of Buddhist scholastic thought. With respect to the present study, I am particularly indebted to Prof. Dr. Klaus Butzenberger (Universität Tübingen) for drawing my attention to the Lower Ladakhi version of the Kesar saga, instigating the first publication, and constantly encouraging the resulting Ladakhi research project and its interdisciplinary approach, while leaving me complete freedom to develop my own ideas and methods. All the same, without the generous cooperation of Prof. Dr. Hahn (Universität Marburg) in an earlier phase, the research project would not have come into life. I would further like to express my thanks to Prof. Dr. Roland Bielmeier (Universität Bern), who not only accepted the burden of co-evaluating the doctoral thesis, but also kindly made his data on several Ladakhi dialects available to me and gave me valuable information. I appreciate the trust placed in me, also by Dr. Silke Herrmann (previously Universität Bonn) and Dr. Felix Haller (Universität Bern), who likewise graciously shared their unpublished material. One of the latter's observations concerning modern Amdo Tibetan turned out to be the missing link for the understanding of the Old and Classical Tibetan verb stems and a possible reconstruction of their Proto-Tibetan values (see also Part IV, section 1.1). Special thanks goes to all the Ladakhi informants (see also Part III, section 1.1.2) for their cooperation and patience, to the narrators for sharing their cultural heritage, and further to meme (grandfather) Tondup Tsering

χ

Acknowledgements

Phanpa from Khalatse and his family as representatives of all those Ladakhi men and women who granted me their not unlimited but nevertheless impressive hospitality. Quite a few people have contributed to the study by discussing various linguistic topics, listening patiently, commenting, criticising, or even acting as informants: Prof. Dr. Wolfgang Hock (Humboldt Universität Berlin), late Prof. Dr. Helmut Nespital (Freie Universität Berlin), Prof. Lambert Schmitthausen (Universität Hamburg), Prof Dr. Balthasar Bickel (Universität Leipzig), Priv.Doz. Dr. Peter Ritter (Universität Frankfurt/Main), Dr. Mohammad Wannous (Freie Universität Berlin), Dr. Mirella Lingorska (Universität Tübingen), Ulrich W. Schulze (Berlin). I would also like to thank Prof. Dr. Jens-Uwe Hartmann (Universität München) for coming all the way to Berlin to share his competence with the examining board, Dr. Werner Winter (Universität Kiel) for looking carefully through the almost final version, and Dr. Samuel Featherston (SFB 441 Universität Tübingen) for many improvements in style (needless to say that I am liable for the remaining errors). Further help came from Nawang Tsering from Nurla, who transcribed the Laidoh narration, Rebecca Norman (SECMOL, Ladakh), who selected some of the informants and provided valuable information on Ladakhi, Kristin Meier and additionally Gudrun Melzer (then students at the Freie Universität Berlin), who helped to minimise the misspellings in the Tibetan and Ladakhi quotes, and many other persons whose questions or objections gave rise to yet another elaboration or footnote. I appreciate the idealism and possible self-exploitation of all those who have gone before me, whose efforts and insights have paved the way and made it so much easier to reach out for the fruits. I am likewise grateful to those authors who I have reviewed rather critically: only a real debate gives the opportunity to refine one's own arguments. This study too can never be a final statement, but merely a contribution to the collective effort for a better understanding of human languages, and the Tibetan languages in particular, an invitation for further discussion, and a base for new research.

Table of contents Preface Acknowledgements Table of contents Abbreviations and conventions Introduction

vii ix xi xix 1

Parti The concepts of TENSE, ASPECT, and MOOD (ΤΑΜ)

1 2 3

Markedness and meaning Events and presentation of events in language Some possible conceptualisations of events

21 25 26

3.1

TYPE OF ACTOR, TYPE OF EVENT, TYPE OF SITUATION

26

3.2

ABSOLUTE a n d RELATIVE TENSE

44

3.2.1

RELATIVE TENSE

46

3.2.2

ABSOLUTE TENSE

51

3.2.3 3.2.4

The continuum between absolute and relative temporal reference Reichenbach's representation of temporal relations

56 60

3.3

PHASE a n d QUANTIFICATION

63

3.4

ASPECT a n d FRAMING

68

3.4.1

+totality perspective of ASPECT and holistic perspective of FRAMING

3.4.2 3.4.3 3.4.4 3.4.4.1 3.4.4.2 3.4.4.3 3.5

72

0-totality perspective of ASPECT and +internal perspective o f FRAMING

76

The external perspectives: preparatory and resulting stage.. Away from a universal theory of "aspect": conceptual differences of ASPECT and FRAMING QUANT and the definition of ASPECT Unsuccessful attempt and telicity Minimal contexts, elementary functions, and conceptualisations of higher order ACTU ALIS ATION: the current relevance of the resulting state

81 82

83 91 93 98

xii

Table of contents

4 4.1 4.2 4.2.1 4.2.2 4.3 4.4

Prototypes of ASPECT and FRAMING Model I: Slavic languages Model II: Ancient Greek and Romance languages Ancient Greek Romance languages The combination of model I and II: Bulgarian Model III: Arabic and other "tenseless" languages

106 114 115 121 130 135

4.5

English: the counter-model o f FRAMING

142

4.6

German: a language without ASPECT or FRAMING

151

5 5.1 5.2 5.3

Convergence: pragmatic functions of ΤΑΜ concepts Shifting the narrated time Shaping of information: on and off the main story line Shaping of attention: involvement and detachment of narrator and audience Sequential and circumstantial mode in non-narrative discourses Interrelation and interaction: towards a delimitation of ΤΑΜ concepts

164 165 168

5.4 6 6.1

105

170 172 174

Interaction o f ASPECT and FRAMING with TYPE OF EVENT (or SITUATION)

174

6.2 6.3

Interrelations of ASPECT and FRAMING with TENSE-A Structural versus relational: ASPECT/FRAMING and TENSE-R

177 185

6.4

ACTUALISATION, ASPECT, a n d TENSE-R

189

6.5 6.6

and its relation to ASPECT/FRAMING and TENSE-A A synopsis of different types of aspect and aspectless languages A tentative ranking of languages according to the presence or absence of elementary aspectual features Multifunctionality and the paradoxa of markedness

194

6.7 6.8

QUANT

195 202 210

Part II The Tibetan system of RELATIVE TENSE and aspectual values

1 1.1 1.2 1.2.1 1.2.2

General features of Tibetan languages Classification of Tibetan languages Transliteration and phonemic transcription Modern "Lhasa" Tibetan phonemes East Tibetan: Kham-Nangchenpa phonemes (Causemann 1989)

215 215 222 229 234

Table of contents

xiii

1.2.3 1.2.4 2

East Tibetan: Amdo-Rebkong phonemes (Roerich 1958).... West Tibetan phonemes The Tibetan "verb"

236 240 250

2.1

TYPE OF ACTOR, TYPE OF EVENT, a n d CASE

250

2.2 2.3 2.3.1 2.3.2 2.3.3 2.3.4 2.3.5 2.4

Basic oppositions: the ideal set of four verb stems The "non-finite" or "nominal" character of the stems Zero-marking and "case" markers combining with the stems Conjunctive morphemes {ste}, i.e. lhagbcas, and nas Connective morphemes {ein} and {kyin} Verbal nouns Other expressions of co-occurrence and sequence Negation

259 270 273 276 284 287 294 297

2.5

Agreement and EVIDENTIALITY

299

3 3.1 3.2 3.3

Old and Classical Tibetan Periphrastic constructions of TENSE and PHASE Future stem: modal and temporal functions Present stem and present tense forms in non-past time context Actual Present: events happening at the time of speaking ... Inactual Present: habits and generic facts (Negation Marker mi) Inactual Present: (Immediate) Future (Negation Marker mi (~ma)) /Prohibitive (Negation Marker ma) Excursus: Morphological puzzles in Old Tibetan Nominalisation of chained prohibitions Present stem and present tense forms in past time context... "Non-finite" use of the present stem /Past Continuative /Past Habitual Some cases of apparent neutralisation: redefining FRAMING for Old and Classical Tibetan The Tibetan grammarians' view of daltaba 'present' /Narrative Present and narrative conventions Marking of emotional content and unexpected events Contrast of behaviour Looking into an ongoing scene The coming onto the scene Setting of the scene Quoting of another person's speech

305 305 315

3.3.1 3.3.2 3.3.3 3.3.4 3.3.4.1 3.3.4.2 3.4 3.4.1 3.4.2 3.4.3 3.4.4 3.4.5 3.4.6 3.4.6.1 3.4.6.2 3.4.6.3 3.4.6.4 3.4.6.5 3.4.6.6

325 327 334 337 344 346 352 355 355 358 359 365 374 377 378 387 388 391 394 397

xiv

Table of contents

3.5 3.5.1 3.5.2 3.5.3 3.6 3.6.1 3.6.2 3.6.3 3.6.4 3.6.5 3.7 3.7.1

3.7.2 3.7.3 3.8 4 4.1 4.2 4.2.1 4.2.2 4.2.3 4.2.4 4.2.5 4.3 4.3.1 4.3.1.1 4.3.1.2 4.3.2 4.3.2.1 4.3.2.2 4.3.3 4.4 4.4.1 4.4.2

Past stem in past time context Aorist-like function: neutral past Imperfect-like functions: habitual and de conatu Perfect-like function: ACTUALISATION Past stem in inactual contexts /Future Perfect Generic facts (/Generic Perfect) Use of the stem forms in conditional clauses Possible use of the Negation Marker mi with the past stem. /Prohibitive (Negation Marker ma) Excursus: Morphological arguments for aspectuality in Tibetan Formal similarity versus functional equivalence: the unsettled function(s) of formant -s(-) and the distribution of the Negation Markers The non-relation between TYPE OF EVENT and the number of stems Verbs that do not take the past tense suffix -s Conclusion: the set of oppositions in Old and Classical Tibetan Modern Tibetan - "Lhasa" dialect TENSE and aspectual values: overview The main temporal constructions Functions of the mere present stem Future tense constructions Present tense and immediate future constructions Common and Experiential Past Perfect constructions Compound expressions of derived PHASE Complementary verbs /che":; chäV, /tso/, /yon/, and noun /tsap/ Prospective Recent Past and Immediate Future Complementary verbs /tä: /, /su: /, and /sa: / Continuative: complementary verbs /tä:/ and /su:/ Resultative: complementary verbs/täV and/sa:/ Completive: complementary verbs/tshär/and/sin/ Present tense forms in past time context /Past Habitual /Past Continuative

400 401 403 416 422 422 426 429 434 446 450

450 454 457 463 469 469 472 472 476 476 480 483 486 486 486 488 489 489 492 493 497 497 498

Table of contents

4.4.3 4.4.3.1 4.4.3.2 4.4.3.3 4.4.3.4 4.4.3.5 4.5 4.6 4.7 4.8 5 5.1 5.2 5.2.1 5.2.2 5.2.3 5.2.3.1 5.2.3.2 5.2.3.3 5.2.4 5.2.5 5.3 5.3.1 5.3.2 5.3.3 5.4 5.4.1 5.4.2 5.4.3 5.4.3.1 5.4.3.2 5.4.3.3 5.5 5.6

Conventional use of present tense constructions in past time context Marking of dramatic points or unexpected events The coming onto the scene The setting of the scene More than two persons speaking Quotation "Non-finite" uses of the present stem The "non-finite" use of the past stem Excursus: the pragmatic feature of ergative split Conclusion: the set of oppositions in "Lhasa" Tibetan East Tibetan: Amdo and Kham TENSE and aspectual values: overview The main temporal constructions Functions of the mere present stem: directives, habits, and future time reference Future tense constructions Present tense constructions Actual Present: events going on at the time of speaking Inactual Present: habits and generic facts Inactual Present: (immediate) future time reference Past tense constructions Perfect constructions Compound expressions of derived PHASE Prospective: auxiliary verb byed | byas Resultative, Continuative and Iterative: complementary verbs hdug | bsdad and bzag Completive: complementary verbs tshar and gton \ btan | thon Present tense forms in past time context Past habits Past continuative events Conventional use of present tense constructions in past time context Marking of emotional content or unexpected event and setting of the scene Looking into an ongoing scene Coming onto the scene "Non-finite" use of the past and present stem Conclusion: the set of oppositions in East Tibetan

χν

500 501 504 505 507 509 510 511 514 519 526 527 530 531 536 538 538 544 548 549 559 563 563 564 567 570 570 574 576 576 578 580 582 582

xvi

Table of contents

Part III West Tibetan (Ladakhi, Purik, Balti)

1 1.1 1.1.1 1.1.2 1.1.3 1.2 1.2.1 1.2.2 1.2.3 2

General features The data Written Ladakhi Data collected in the field Literature on West Tibetan Defining the area: Phonological and morphological isoglosses Phonetic isoglosses Morphophonemic and lexical isoglosses Language shift The verb

605 607 613 618 619

2.1

Stems, TYPE OF ACTOR, neutralisation of stems

619

2.2 2.3

Aesthetive: Dative/Locative "subject" Ergative split TENSE and aspectual values: the main temporal constructions Compound expressions of derived PHASE Prospective Resultative and Continuative: complementary verbs /duk ; duks/ and /bor ; bors/ Completive: complementary verb/tshar/ Modal markers

626 628

641 647 650

Markers of (Non)-EVIDENTIALITY

650

Markers of DISTANCE Counterfactuals: the Remoteness Markers as Distance Markers Markers of PROBABILITY and ESTIMATION Particularities of negation The main temporal constructions Functions of the mere present stem Speech acts that accompany performance of religious acts.. Controlled actions and generic truth (Negation Marker /mi-/) Immediate future: affirmative sentences (Immediate) future: negated sentences and alternative questions Idiomatic use

658

2.4

2.5 2.5.1 2.5.2 2.5.3 2.6 2.6.1 2.6.2

2.6.3 2.6.4 2.7 3 3.1 3.1.1 3.1.2 3.1.2.1 3.1.2.2 3.1.2.3

595 595 595 598 600

633

637 637

664 666 669 672 672 672 673 673 675 678

Table of contents

xvii 682

3.3.4 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.7.1 3.7.2 3.7.3 3.7.4

Word questions Immediate future: questions about obligatory actions and requests of permission (Negation Marker /ma-/) Imperative,/Optative,/Prohibitive, and/Adhortative "Non-finite" use of the present stem: conditional clauses.... Other "non-finite" uses Future tense constructions Definite Future Inferential Future Expressions of probability: Continuative Future and Future Perfect Common Present/Future Future time reference Actual present time reference (Non-visual) Experiential Present and (non-visual) Experiential Present/Future Habits and generic facts Expanded Present Recent past Imperfect Simple and Marked Past Aorist-like use of the Simple and Marked Past Imperfect-like functions of the Simple and Marked Past Perfect-like use of the Simple and Marked Past "Non-finite" use of the past stem

719 723 726 730 735 741 742 749 760 765

3.8

ACTUALISATION

767

3.8.1 3.8.2 3.8.3 3.9 4 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.3.1

Common Perfect, Marked Perfect, and Past Perfect The continuative function of the Common Perfect (II) Patient-oriented Common and Marked Perfect Periphrastic Past Narrative and other conventions Reported speech acts Narrational Imperfect Narrative Present Marking of emotional content and unexpected, ridiculous, or supernatural events Looking into a scene Coming onto the scene Setting of the scene and other breaks in the main story line Narrative Perfect Conclusion: the set of oppositions in West Tibetan

767 783 786 792 797 797 800 809

3.1.2.4 3.1.3 3.1.4 3.1.5 3.1.6 3.2 3.2.1 3.2.2 3.2.3 3.3 3.3.1 3.3.2 3.3.3

4.3.2 4.3.3 4.3.4 4.4 5

685 687 692 695 696 696 706 707 710 711 715

810 814 822 826 829 834

xviii

Table of contents

Part IV A comparative view

1 1.1 1.2 1.3

2 2.1 2.1.1 2.1.2 2.1.3 2.1.4 2.1.5 2.1.6 2.1.6.1 2.1.6.2 2.1.6.3 2.2 2.2.1 2.2.2 2.2.3 3

Some suggestions concerning the development of the verb stems The original semantics of the "imperative" stem The original semantics of the "past" stem of controlled action verbs Reinterpretation of the various stem forms in terms of TENSE-R and MOOD: The ideal set of four plus two stem forms The development of the Modern Tibetan languages Morphology: stems and the compound constructions The distribution of the verb stems Compound constructions Auxiliary verbs and morphemes Evidential Markers Compound expressions of PHASE Excursus: SCVs (serialised conjunctive verbs) Types of complementary verbs The fluid character of the SCVs ASPECT, Aktionsart, or just a matter of personal style? Relative and absolute temporal coding Temporal and aspectual functions of stems and compound constructions Temporal reference and the distribution of the Negation Markers and auxiliaries Conventional use of present tense forms in past time context Final conclusion

Authors' index (thematic) References

847 849 862

874 876 876 876 880 884 888 891 892 894 919 926 929 929 936 939 945 955 961

Abbreviations and conventions Tibetan texts: AFL Ancient folk-literature from north-eastern Tibet, Thomas (1957), OT BTSU Btsunmo Bkahi-thanyig, Laufer (1911), CT CH A Spoken Tibetan texts, Chang et al. 1981, LT DTH Documents de Touen-Houang, Bacot et al. (1940), OT ETI A corpus of Early Tibetan Inscriptions, Richardson (1985), OT GZER Gzermyig, Francke (1924-30), CT LL V Lower Ladakhi Version, Francke ( 1 9 0 5 ^ 1), WT NANG Dialekt und Erzählungen der Nangchenpas, Causemann (1989), ET Ν ARO Die Legenden des Näropa, Grünwedel (1933), CT RAM A The story ofRäma in Tibet, de Jong (1989), OT REBK Le parier de l 'Amdo, Roerich (1958), ET RGYA Rgyalu Cobzan, Bielmeier (1985), WT SHEL Seidan Lamo, Herrmann (n.d.), WT - by courtesy of Silke Herrmann TVP Die tibetische Version des Papageienbuches, Herrmann (1983), CT Tibetan languages: CT Classical Tibetan (written, 11 th-19th century A.D.) CtrT Modern Central Tibetan (colloquial: Ü/Tsang and koine) ET Modern East Tibetan (colloquial: Amdo and Kham) LT Modern (Central) Tibetan (colloquial: "Lhasa" and koine, incl. Exile Tibetan) MLT Modern Literary Tibetan (20th century A.D.) OT Old Tibetan (written, mid 8th till end of 10th century A.D.) WT Modern West Tibetan (written Ladakhi, 19th/20th century A.D., and colloquial: Balti, Purik, Ladakhi, 20th century) East Tibetan EAT EKT NANG NDZO REBK THEM

varieties: Eastern Amdo Tibetan Eastern Kham Tibetan Nangchenpa, Kham (Qinghai, China) Ndzorge, Amdo (Sichuan, China) Rebkong, Amdo (Gansu/Sichuan, China) Themchen, Amdo (China) - by courtesy of Felix Haller

West Tibetan BAL CIK CIK-B CIK-H DAH DOM KAR KAR-R KHAL

varieties: Balti, without specification (Baltistan, Pakistan) Ciktan, in Purik (Ladakh, India) Ciktan - by courtesy of Roland Bielmeier Ciktan - by courtesy of Silke Herrmann Dah, Brokyul (Shina speaker), Western Sham (Ladakh, India) Domkhar, Western Sham (Ladakh, India) Kargil, in Purik (Ladakh, India) Kargil, Rangan (1979) Khalatse, Western Sham, dialect boundary between Western and Eastern Sham (Ladakh, India) Khalatse, sampled by Nawang Tsering - by courtesy of Roland Bielmeier Kharmang valley, Eastern Balti (Baltistan, Pakistan), Ghulam Hassan Lobsang (1995)

KHAL-B KHRM

XX

Abbrevations and conventions

KHYU KPL KPL-B LAD LEH LLV NUR-B

NYE PUR RGYA SAS SKAR SKAR-B SPR TRA Dictionaries, BAI CDTD D3 HOS LED LSI GNN GOL GShS JÄK RAM REA SCD SHA SPR TCH TMAQ

Khyungrung, Western Nubra (Ladakh, India) Khapalu (Khaplu), Eastern Balti (Baltistan, Pakistan), Read (1934) Khapalu, Bielmeier (1985), glossary Ladakhi, without specification (Ladakh, India) Central Ladakhi, Leh area (Ladakh, India) early 20th century Western Sham (Laidoh/Khalatse) mixed with Central Ladakhi(Ladakh,India) Nurla, Eastern Sham, dialect boundary between Western and Eastern Sham, sampled by Nawang Tsering (Ladakh, India) - by courtesy of Roland Bielmeier Nyeraks, Southern Sham (Ladakh, India) Purik, unspecified (Ladakh, India), Bailey (1920) Khapalu (KPL-B), Eastern Balti (Baltistan, Pakistan) Saspol, Eastern Sham (Ladakh, India) Skardu, Central Balti (Baltistan, Pakistan), Sprigg (1967) Skardu, Bielmeier, in preparation (CDTD) Khapalu, Sprigg (2002a) Trangtse area, in Changthang (Ladakh, India) vocabularies, and other lists: Bailey (1920: 34-45, glossary) Bielmeier (in preparation) Dongrub Phuntshogs (1990) Hoshi & Tondup Tsering (1978) Norberg-Hodge & Thupstan Paldan (1991) Linguistic Survey of India (1909) Goldstein & Ngawangthondup Narkyid (1984) Goldstein (1994) Goldstein, Melvin C., Shelling, T.N., Surkhang, J.T. (2001) Jäschke(1881) Ramsay (1890) Read (1934: 89-108, glossary) Sarat Chandra Das (1902) Sharma (1998: 130-184, glossary) Sprigg (2002a) Zhang Yisun et al. (1993) TMA questionnaire, Dahl (1985: 198-206)

Donor languages for loanwords in West Tibetan: Arab. Arabic Bur. Burushaski Engl. English Hin. Hindi Mong. Mongolian Pers. Persian Port. Portuguese Skr. Sanskrit Turk. Turkish Ur. Urdu

Abbrevations Grammatical terms (capital and low case letters reflect importance speech act participant: speaker, 1 "subjective" or "conjunct", nonexperiential perspective 2—»3 speech act participant: addressee in statements, marked as other person 2~>3wq speech act participant: addressee in word questions, "objective" experiential perspective speech act participant: addressee 2—»lq in questions, marked as (potential) speaker other person, "objective" or "dis3 junct", experiential perspective other person and 3—1 accidental event (all persons): nc—>1 "subjective" non-experiential perspective, certain knowledge 1—3q speech act participant: speaker in questions, marked as (potential) addressee, i.e. other person 1—>3nc speaker (accidental event): "objective", "detached" experiential perspective no indication: the construction is neutral with respect to speech act participants or is defined for only one participant without having a counterpart Ablative Marker Abl acclaiming inteijection of naraccl rator or audience AcPa Accidental Past Adht Adhortative AdhtM Adhortative Marker Aes Aesthetive Marker anterior Ant, ant Anti antithetical morpheme Aor Aorist Caus, caus Causative, causative verb cc conjunctive case marker CFut Common Future CD conjunctive case marker with function of: conditional C/I Comitative/lnstrumental Marker CImpf Common Imperfect

of function) Cmpl Cnd-Ant Cnd-Prs Com comp

and conventions

xxi

completive Conditionnel Anterieur Conditionnel Present Comitative Marker conjunctive case marker or postposition with comparative function con connective morpheme conExpPrs Experiential Present connective conMPrs/Fut Marked Present Future connective conExpPerf Experiential Perfect connective conPrs/Fut Present/Future connective Cont continuative CPerf Common Perfect Common Present CPrs CPrs/Fut Compound or Common Present/ Future Common Past CPa ctr [+control] def, DefM Definite Marker DefFut Definite Future del delimitative Aktionsart Des desiderative/necessitative Dir Directive (Imperative, (Optative) Marker D/L Dative/Locative Marker DNLR final -d, -n, -I, -r (not allowing post-final -s in CT, the last three allowing post-final -d in OT) echo echo word EFut Expanded Future Elmpf Expanded Imperfect emp emphasis marker empNg emphatic negation EPrs Expanded Present EPa Expanded Past EstM Estimation Marker Erg Ergative Marker evt event excl exclusive plural marker Exp experiential ExpCPerf Experiential Common Perfect ExpM Experiential Marker ExpMPerf Experiential Marked Perfect ExpPerf Experiential Perfect

xxii

Abbrevations and conventions

ExpPrs Experiential Present ExpPrs/Fut Experiential Present/Future ExpPa Experiential Past function of / F Final Marker Fut, fut future Fut-Ant Future Anterieur FutPerf Future Perfect Gen Genitive Marker Genr generic GenrPerf Generic Perfect GenrPrs/Ful Generic Present/Future Hab Habitual hon, h honorific hum marker of humbleness ImmFut Immediate Future Imp Imperative Impf Imperfect, Imparfait incl inclusive plural marker Inf inferential InfCPerf Inferential Common Perfect InfFut Inferential Future InfM Inferential Marker InfPrs Inferential Present InfPa Inferential Past InfPerf Inferential Perfect Inftv Infinitive Ingr ingressive Instr Instrumental Marker intj interjection Ipftv Imperfective Iter iterative/habitual Konj Konjunktiv LC lhagbcas, conjunctive morpheme Loc Locative Marker L/P Locative/Purposive Marker limiting quantifier Iq MPrs/Fut Marked Present/Future MPerf Marked Perfect MPa Marked Past η nonNar narrative NarCPerf Narrative Common Perfect NarCPrs/Fut Narrative Common Present/Future NarEPrs Narra/Zve Expanded Present nc [-control]

nExp non-experiential nExpCPerf Non-Experiential Common Perfect nExpMPerf Non-Experiential Marked Perfect nf "non-finite" negation, negated ng Negation Marker mi Ngl Ng2 Negation Marker ma nom nominalisation Nrl narrational NrlCImpf Narrational Common Imperfect NrlCPerf Narrational Common Perfect NrlSPa Narrational Simple Past ntr neutral nvExpM non-visual Experiential Marker nvExpCPerf non-visual Experiential Common Perfect non-visual Experiential Present nvExpPrs nvExpPrs/Fut non-visual Experiential Present/ Future omtp onomatopoetic Opt Optative padding (pad) Pat patient-oriented PatCPerf Patient-oriented Common Perfect PatMPerf Patient-oriented Marked Perfect Passe Compose PC Perf Perfect Pftv Perfective plural marker pl Pot, pot Potentialis, potential verb Pphr periphrastic PphrFut Periphrastic Future Pphrlmp Periphrastic Imperative PphrPrs Periphrastic Present PphrPa Periphrastic Past PQP Plus-que-Parfait, Pluperfect, Plusquamperfekt Prohibitive Prhb PrbM Probability Marker Prog Progressive Prosp Prospective Prs, prs present PrsHab Present Habitual PrsPerf Present Perfect PS Passe Simple

Abbrevations and conventions Pa, pa PaDur PaHab PaPerf pur QF,Q QoM QU/PH RRecPa Res, res RM Rt Rtp SCV SFut sim SpA Spl SpT SPrs/Fut SPa St ΤΑΜ T-A T-R θ V Vol VN VNact/pass VNfut VNntr VNprs VNpa X

+ -

0 &

{}

preterite/past Past Durative Past Habitual Past Perfect purposive Question (Final) Marker Quote Marker

[] ()

fj

QUANT/PHASE

reduplication Recent Past resulting state, ongoing (temporal) Remoteness Marker relative time point relative time period Serialised Conjunctive Verb Simple Future simultaneous speech act (communication act) speech introduction speech termination Simple Present/Future Simple Past stem

italics

// /,// I

« », < >

TENSE, ASPECT, a n d MOOD ABSOLUTE TENSE (TENSE-A) RELATIVE TENSE (TENSE-R)

Theme/Topic Marker verb / vowel marked intentionality or force verbal noun, participle "active'V'passive" Participle Future Participle (VN of future or present stem) participle of neutral stem Present Participle (VN of present stem) Past Participle (VN of past stem) context dependent consonant, repeating the immediately preceding one positive marking / primary function negative marking zero-marking prevalent use of zero-marked forms allomorph, depending on the

-! ; ? ?? * # 0

xxiii

phonetic context (Sandhi) phonetic transcription / added words and letters in glosses: synthetic representation (see other conventions: "grammatical categories") / in translations: implicit meaning nonphonemic suprasegmental features due to sentence intonation transliteration of written Tibetan, classical, modern, Ladakhi (not used for examples) / in the examples: interlinear gloss, additional marking phonemic transcription (not used for examples) "or" parallel version sad, the Tibetan punctuation mark, also used to indicate different verb stems (see below) indicate (quoted) direct, indirect speech, or thoughts, etc. in narrations or in examples of conversations, independently of the use of quotes by the authors, not to be confounded with the quotation marks: " " , ' ' interjections of the audience after stem designation indicates "inegular" stem form literal translation, grammatically incorrect in English etymology unclear, no written Tibetan equivalent grammatically or stylistically not well formed, questionable hypothetical reconstruction of written Tibetan ungrammatical and/or senseless non-narrative context, i.e. more typical for conversations and interactions, but isolated from the discourse context this sign will only appear in the translations metrical filler.

xxiv

Abbrevations and conventions

Stem forms are taken from Jäschke (1881) = JAK if not otherwise indicated, but only differentiated forms will be given. The stem forms will always be cited in the order: St.Prs St.Pa - (St.Fut - ) St.Imp. In the case of two-stem verbs, Tibetan verb lists most often assign present for future stem and past for imperative stem, in other cases of reduced differentiation, the past stem is assigned for the future stem. These forms will be indicated only when necessary and are replaced by a " - " to indicate the gap. Stem forms of written Tibetan or Ladakhi are separated by the Tibetan sad replaced by a semicolon in phonemic transcription. Written Ladakhi stem forms not attested in the LLV, but confirmed by the Ladakhi informants will be given in square brackets. Other conventions: Tibetan "words", i.e. semantic units of one or many syllables that can be defined by wordconstituting features (see section II. 1.2), are generally transcribed as units. This may happen independently of the representation by the authors cited (but their hyphenation is always taken as a strong indicator for "words"). Hyphens are used whenever the "word" character may be in doubt, as in the case of the limiting quantifier {gcig} 'one, a, some' or in the case of word repetition. Hyphens are likewise used for some complex verb syntagma and for compound verbal expressions such as gnid 'sleep (noun)' + log 'to return' or khug 'find' —»'to sleep, fall asleep', which may, however, be interrupted by adverbs and morphemes. Names are generally written with the first letter capitalised. For conventions of transcription and transliteration see section II. 1.2. Tibetan texts are generally quoted by page and line (e.g., DTH: 122.2-5), counting all lines written in Tibetan (including titles, but excluding any notes). In the case of the LLV, the chapters are additionally indicated by Roman numbers (e.g., LLV II: 30.5). If the authors cited have indicated sentence numbers or lines and folio, their representation follows the page number, separated by a diagonal stroke (e.g., RAMA: 124/A248-251). Note that in NARO the respective line numbers are given at the end of each line, whereas the number of the folio is given at the beginning of the folio. Thus the last line is not numbered. In the case of REBK, line numbering refers to pairs of lines, since Roerich (1958) provides the Amdo transcription with a transliteration of the Modern Literary Tibetan equivalents. Generally the texts will be quoted in their ideal form, i.e. without the mistakes of speaker or writer that might be indicated in the original edition. In the examples, phonemic transcription of MT, ET, and WT precedes interlinear gloss followed by transliteration of (reconstructed) written Tibetan or Ladakhi: = three lines. In examples of OT/CT, of the LLV, or when the authors give no phonemic transcription, transliteration precedes interlinear gloss: = two lines. In the examples, transliteration and transcription are not further marked by italics or "//". Italics are reserved for the interlinear gloss and for additional marking of relevant parts in transliteration, transcription, and translation. Grammatical categories or rather linguistic concepts are presented in capital letters, the respective grammatical forms will be presented with initial capital letters. ΤΑΜ functions that are not represented by morphologically distinct forms are indicated by a preceding " / " . To facilitate the understanding of the texts, the glosses are functional and synthetic, rather than merely formal and analytical. This means that if a particular morpheme has different functions, I will not use a portmanteau description, but will indicate the respective function of the morpheme in its context. By contrast, different morphemes may be glossed alike if they have the same function. As the ΤΑΜ values of complex verbal forms cannot be derived from the

Abbrevations and conventions

xxv

particular elements, only synthetic glosses are given. Synthetic glosses are indicated by brackets, which follow immediately after the lexeme. Note that the order of functional elements within the brackets is a logical not necessarily a linear one, particularly the Negation Markers are always listed first, even if they take the second but last position of the complex construction.

Introduction gnasdon de thag-bcadpa-yinte (thag-)chod-ma son Though (we) solved (=tried to solve) the problem, it was not solved. (Tournadre 1994) The present study has several aims and addressees. Presenting a comparative approach to a universal theory of TENSE, ASPECT, and MOOD, it will combine the methods of comparative linguistics with the methods of philology. Given my academic background as a philologist, the study first of all addresses scholars of Classical Tibetan philology. It will offer them a detailed functional description of the Classical Tibetan verb forms in their discourse context. Since Tibetan linguistics is still in its very beginning, even the most eminent scholars of Tibetology do not dispose of a very deep understanding of the syntax and semantics of the Tibetan verbal system, and are compelled to be content with rough translations, irrespective of the literary qualities of the texts, their rhythm and style. Unexpected use or absence of case markers and especially unexpected verb forms have to be overlooked. Often enough unexpected verb forms are taken for "scribal errors" due to the corruption of an earlier inflectional system that has been blurred through phonetic change (e.g., Beyer 1992: 177-180). This might be, in fact, true in some or many cases, but the presumption as such imputes an even lesser understanding of Tibetan grammar on the part of the Tibetan authors and their copyists. The question of case marking and the use of verbal auxiliaries in Modern "Lhasa" and Exile Tibetan has been addressed in two detailed studies (Agha 1993; Tournadre 1996a) and several articles most of which are likewise only concerned with Modern Tibetan languages. As far as I know, no attempt has been made yet to treat in detail some of the intricate grammatical problems of Classical Tibetan (there might be, however, literature in Chinese, Russian, or other languages I am unfortunately not familiar with). Of the available grammar books, only Beyer (1992) and Denwood (1999) present actual linguistic approaches, since Tournadre's comments to Skalbzang 'Gyurmed's (1992) traditional presentation are only of complementary character. For obvious reasons, these three works cannot go very deep into details. In contrast to the general grammar books, the present study will be concerned only with the underlying temporal and aspectual concepts of verbal expressions in Classical Tibetan and related languages and thanks to that restriction, it will show that a great number of "anomalous" or unexpected verb forms in Classical Tibetan, do make sense in the context of their utterance, such as the

2

RELATIVE

TENSE

and aspectual values irt Tibetan languages

use of the present stem and other present tense constructions in past time context, the use of the past stem in future time context, the possible use of the Negation Marker mi with the past stem, the use of the imperative stem in non-directive contexts, and a set of narrative conventions. This will certainly lead to a refined understanding of Tibetan texts and hopefully also enhance the still wanting stylistic analysis of Tibetan literature. The second group addressed are the specialists of Tibetan dialectology, who will find, besides the diachronic comparison spanning a period of more than one thousand years, a compilation and comparison of the verb system of four different Tibetan dialect groups, from the west to the east: (a) phonetically "archaic" West Tibetan with the varieties of Balti, Purik, and Ladakhi on which the study centres, (b) "Lhasa" Tibetan (or the Central as well as Exile Tibetan koine), as well as (c) Kham and (d) Amdo representing "innovating" and "archaic" East Tibetan (the southern groups of Daijeeling and Bhutan were reluctantly left aside for reasons of practicability only). The study might be further of interest for the scholars concerned with the reconstruction of Proto-Tibetan and with Tibeto-Burman studies. But the study also addresses comparative linguists interested in the problems of ASPECT and TENSE.1 I will not discuss the question which one of the two concepts would be more basic or universally more adequate. On the contrary, I will show that there might be other basic concepts of which both ASPECT and TENSE, i.e. ABSOLUTE TENSE, might be composed, and that there are some languages, e.g. the Tibetan ones, that are neither aspect nor absolute tense languages. Thus the concept of RELATIVE TENSE, underestimated as a mere "sub-system" (Smith 1991) of "derived" and "secondary tense-distinctions" (Lyons 1977), will be shifted out of the shadow and put in the centre of the argumentation. Even though it might be impossible to make universally valid claims, the discussion of the Tibetan verb systems will show that the actual linguistic concepts are still in need of a certain refinement. One of the refinements offered in the study is the distinction between the concept of ASPECT proper (Slavic, Romance, and Arabic type) and the seemingly related concept of FRAMING (English type). According to the traditional Tibetan (as well as European) grammatical descriptions, the Tibetan verb has at most four forms or stems that are named according to their presumed function: hdaspa 'gone' for "Past Tense", daltaba 'what is now' for "Present Tense", mahonspa 'what has not [yet] come' for "Future Tense", hence the traditional term dusgsum 'three tenses' for the verbal system, and skultshig 'word of command' for "Imperative". Yet, at a

Grammatical categories or rather linguistic concepts are presented in capital letters, the respective grammatical forms will be presented with initial capital letters.

Introduction

3

closer look, it turns out that such a description in terms of ABSOLUTE TENSE is not adequate as, e.g., the so-called "Future Tense" seems to be rather an instance of MOOD (necessitative) than of temporal reference, a fact that is related to the conventional use of the future stem to translate Sanskrit passive sentences. But even more disturbing is the fact that the "Past Tense" might appear in future context and the "Present Tense" with present, past, and future orientation. In translations from Sanskrit, incongruent verb stems are quite often used (cf. Beckh 1908: 27 and particularly Taube 1953/54). Thus the indigenous concept of ABSOLUTE TENSE as a whole might be doubted of as naive or as a mere translation of Sanskrit terminology, which cannot be applied to a Non-Indo-European language. The question, therefore, is: do we have a better concept, namely, does the concept of ASPECT, likewise developed for Indo-European languages, make more sense than the concept of TENSE?

For speakers of most Indo-European languages the concept of ABSOLUTE TENSE seems to be self-evident. Though this concept has some flaws (not all tense forms refer to the respective points or relations of time, and tense forms tend to be multifunctional), it seems to be a pragmatic one, and even a nonlinguist may have some vague idea of its extension. On the other hand, there has been an attempt to set up a seemingly more fundamental concept of ASPECT that would account universally for all language families, cf. the following statement of Lyons (1977: 705): Aspect is, in fact, far more commonly to be found throughout the languages of the world than tense is: there are many languages that do not have tense, but there are very few, if any, that do not have aspect.

The concept of ASPECT is further expected to solve the logical problems that appear with the concept of ABSOLUTE TENSE in the formalisation of lan-

guage (Johnson 1981: 147). For similar reasons, it has been claimed for Tibetan that the function of the first two stems is or has at least originally been one of ASPECT, while, nevertheless, it is held to be more practical to use the terminology of ABSOLUTE TENSE (Hahn 1985; Beyer 1992). The main problem with the concept of ASPECT is that even linguists do not agree upon its extension, depending on whether they deal with Slavic languages only, with Non-Slavic Indo-European languages, or with Non-Indo-European languages. As the discussion will show, ASPECT, unlike many other conceptualisations in language, is not a primitive concept, and further, there are hardly ever one-to-one relations between aspectual or temporal marking and semantic functions. Additionally, formalised conceptualisations in language or the so-called grammatical categories are vague, interrelated, and, more

4

RELATIVE

TENSE

and aspectual values in Tibetan languages

often than not, multifunctional, quite in contrast to logical categories that are defined in such a way that they are precise and have discrete values. The morphological puzzle of the Tibetan verb stems that is yet to be solved has led many scholars into despair as Dürr (1954) concedes with mild self-irony. It is thus no wonder that most of the pioneering works start with interesting ideas, but end up with inconsistencies. The idea that Classical Tibetan or at least the unknown stage of Proto-Tibetan was an "aspect" rather than a tense language was propagated by several scholars for the first time around 1950, before the discussion of A S P E C T became fashionable in linguistics. E.g., Uray (1953b: 53 note 15) ponders: It seems not unlikely that the so-called time-categories may turn out to be, in fact, mere aspect-categories, and he refers to the grammar of Bacot (1946), which is based on the traditional Tibetan concepts and to the morphologic study of Durr (1950). However, this notion of "aspect" seems to be based on several severe misunderstandings. Bacot (1946: 50) suggests: Le verbe a deux aspects ou deux faces, mais il reste le centre autour duquel gravitent les deux termes satellites, agent et objet. [...] La particularite du verbe tibetain est de tenir compte, dans une large mesure, du rapport qui existe dans la realite entre la voix et le temps et de deduire celui-ci de celle-lä. En effet, un verbe qui exprime Taction passee de Γ agent, exprime en merae temps Τ etat actuel et permanent de l'objet (comme notre participe passe). Et le verbe qui exprime Taction presente de Tagent, exprime en meme temps Τ etat futur de Tobjet. Une meme forme peut done presenter deux interpretations logiques et deux aspects concomitants d'une meme action. Pour une meme forme, le temps variera selon le terme considere, agent ou objet. Le temps est pour une part fonction de la voix, c'est-ä-dire fonction du terme, bdag ou gzan, envisage (emphasis added). Besides the fact that Bacot seems to have misunderstood or mistranslated the relevant passages of the Tibetan commentaries (Tillemans 1988: 497), his use of the word "aspect" is non-theoretical: Bacot refers to an opposition of, perhaps, VOICE (bdag and gzan), which could be relevant in respect of verbal nouns. But obviously his description is so ambivalent that Regamey (1950: 97) uses this term "aspect" first for the VOICE distinction, but shifts the meaning back to ABSOLUTE TENSE only one page later. Du point de vue de "moi" e'est une action passee, du point de vue du "vase" e'est un etat present. Ce η'est pas le temps qui est exprime, e'est 1' aspect [=VOICE] (emphasis added).

Introduction

5

La notion de voix (subjective ou objective) se superpose aux distinctions d'aspect [=ABSOLUTE TENSE] (emphasis added). Further, Bacot ( 1 9 4 6 : 59) refers to "aspect" as an expression of the internal or external structure of an event (PHASE): Enfin le theme verbal, c'est-a-dire son present, a l'aspect duratif qu'il perd aux autres temps a moins qu'il ne soit explicitement exprime par une particule circonstancielle. Summarising his somewhat tangled morphological study (Durr 1950), Dürr ( 1 9 5 4 : 5 5 ) interprets the various Tibetan verb forms likewise as "aspects": Die Deutung im temporalen Sinne der Formen des flektierten Zeitworts trifft ebenfalls nicht uneingeschränkt zu: es handelt sich hier in der Hauptsache um Aspekte, erst sekundär ergeben sich daraus die temporalen Funktionen. But since he has rearranged all verbal forms that are in a way related in a set of up to ten different stems (Dürr 1954: 67), it becomes evident that his notion of "aspect" is rather that of Aktionsart (PHASE/QUANTIFICATION) or TYPE OF EVENT. Thomas ( 1 9 5 7 : 4 6 ) comes very close to the basic function of the Tibetan verb stems when he describes the future stem or rather the prescripts g-/d- as "prospective", i.e. as signifying posteriority "relative to a context", and the past stem as well as the prescript b- as signifying "priority to some event, which may appertain even to future time". But then he claims that in past time context the past stem would rather signify "completedness of action", and he compares it to the Ancient Greek Aorist, not to the Perfect. And while the (post-) final -s passes here (pp. 6 1 - 6 6 ) merely as a "preterite" suffix, its function is given as "Preterite or Aoristic (Perfective)" in Thomas ( 1 9 4 8 : 198). And thus we are back to "aspect". Such terminological confusion, however, is not peculiar to Tibetology or typical for that time, but is, indeed, characteristic for the actual linguistic discussions of ASPECT and TENSE.

The idea that a present tense form or the reference to actual present time presupposes that the event is necessarily durative, i.e. ongoing or incomplete and as such "imperfective" is related to the misunderstanding of the +totality or holistic perspective (i.e., the perfective verb forms of aspect languages and the unmarked constructions in framing languages) as a complete-d (and thus past) event. The most common confusions in linguistics are those between the concepts of ASPECT and TYPE OF EVENT, PHASE, and RELATIVE TENSE, those between the functions of perfect and perfective constructions, those between the notions of "complete" and "completed", and those between actual or fictional present time reference and the logical possibility or

6

RELATIVE

TENSE

and aspectual values in Tibetan languages

impossibility of events to take place as a whole at any given point of time. Though, e.g., Comrie (1976: 18) explains: The perfective does indeed denote a complete situation with beginning, middle, and end. The use of 'completed', however, puts too much emphasis on the termination of the situation, whereas the use of the perfective puts no more emphasis, necessarily, on the end of a situation than on any other part of the situation, rather all parts of the situation are presented as a single whole,

on the other hand, he writes (p. 66): Since the present tense is essentially used to describe, rather than to narrate, it is essentially imperfective, either continuous or habitual, not perfective.

But as can be deduced from his arguments (pp. 71 and 121), in many aspect languages, the +totality perspective is restricted to Past and Future Tense. In the absence of an opposition there is no point in labelling the Present Tense "essentially imperfective". It seems, that by that time, Comrie is not yet aware of the difference between mere implicature and basic or secondary meanings, which he elaborates in his later study (1985: 18-26). In Tibetology, Hahn (1985: 61-63) and Beyer (1992: 26If.), two of the very few authors who give any reasons for their choice of terminology, seem to have similar concepts (cf. also Miller 1970). Describing Modern Tibetan languages, most authors (cf. besides Givon 1980, 1984, also DeLancey 1985b, Kitamura 1977, Kitamura et al. 1977, Hoshi & Tondup Tsering 1978) use the term "perfective" or "perfect" for the past stem and "imperfective" or "imperfect" for the present stem without any comment. Goldstein (e.g., Goldstein & Tsering Dorje Kashi 1973) has for a long time been the only one who uses the terminology of ABSOLUTE TENSE: "past" vs. "non-past". He has recently found a fellow in Denwood (1999) who describes the verbal system in terms of prototypical tenses with aspectual values for non-prototypical temporal reference. The only study on ASPECT in Tibetan that has come to my knowledge is an article of Chang & Chang (1981; resumed in Chang & Chang 1993) dealing with the variety spoken in Lhasa and/or in the exile communities. Much of the confusion in previous studies on ASPECT and related concepts is due to the lack of an accepted common terminology. Even in recent research we can find the term "aspect" or "aspectual" for what is also known as "situation types" or "state of affairs" and will be called here "TYPE OF EVENT". Sometimes the concepts of ASPECT and TYPE OF EVENT are first defined as being different, but subsequently the former term is used also for the latter, or both terms are treated to be subcategories of a common category

Introduction

7

"aspect". But the worst case is when the fact that there are different concepts is neglected and the concepts are confused (see also the polemics of Zandvoort 1962). Apparently some of these misconceptions are typical for certain linguistic schools: the first type seems to be common in Formal Semantics, e.g. Verkuyl (1993) and Naumann [1997], the second is quite common in Universal Grammar, e.g. Brinton (1988) and Smith (1991), and the third type appears in an approach from Generative Grammar, see Giorgi & Pianesi (1997). To avoid errors of that kind, and to make clear to what kind of "aspect" system the Tibetan languages are to be compared, I will define, in part I of the present study, what is or could be meant by the terms TYPE OF EVENT, ABSOLUTE and RELATIVE TENSE, PHASE and indefinite QUANTIFICATION (QUANT), ASPECT and FRAMING. After presenting the underlying principle of this study, the theory of markedness (section 1.1) and some general remarks on verbs and events (section 1.2), I will discuss the various linguistic concepts of TYPE OF EVENT, PHASE and QUANT, ABSOLUTE and RELATIVE TENSE, ASPECT and FRAMING, as well as ACTUALISATION (section 1.3). The concept of FRAMING is introduced because of its inverted pattern of markedness: Due to the combination of PHASE and QUANT, the 0-totality (imperfective) perspective appears as the functionally unmarked (though possibly morphologically and/or informationally marked) member of an opposition in terms of ASPECT. By contrast, the +internal (progressive) perspective is the morphologically, functionally, and apparently also informationally marked member of an opposition in terms of FRAMING or merely PHASE, and it is incompatible with QUANT, which is, therefore, subsumed under the holistic perspective, i.e. the neutral representation of an event as such. This inversion is taken as indication that the underlying conceptualisations must be quite different, despite the obvious similarities with ASPECT. This conceptual difference does not allow to take one of these oppositions as a mere derivation or special case of the other. Moreover, ASPECT is essentially related to the feature of telicity while FRAMING is not. Since the feature of telicity may be lacking in quite a few Non-Indo-European languages, only FRAMING, but not ASPECT could be a candidate for a universally valid concept. Based on these definitions three standard models of ASPECT will be presented in section 1.4: (a) Slavic (1.4.1), (b) Ancient Greek (1.4.2.1) and Romance languages (1.4.2.2), (c) the combination of the first two models as found in Bulgarian (1.4.3), and (d) Arabic, as the third model (1.4.4). They are postulated as standard models, because indefinitely quantified events, particularly habits, as well as conative situations (i.e., attempted inherently telic actions) are subsumed under the 0-totality perspective (i.e., imperfective verb

8

RELATIVE

TENSE and aspectual values in Tibetan languages

form). This is, however, not the case in the counter-model of FRAMING as represented by English ( 1 . 4 . 5 ) where habits are subsumed under the claimed "perfective" viewpoint (the holistic perspective) and only periphrastic expressions but not the +internal perspective (i.e., the marked continuative or progressive constructions) can represent conative situations. The section is concluded by a note on German as an aspectless language (1.4.6). In the last two sections, I will deal with the convergence of the pragmatic functions of temporal, aspectual, and modal, i.e. ΤΑΜ concepts, such as information and attention structuring (1.5) as well as with the delimitation of the overlapping and interrelated concepts (1.6). Particularly, I will discuss the interactions between ASPECT or FRAMING and TYPE OF EVENT ( 1 . 6 . 1 ) , the possible interrelations of ASPECT or FRAMING and ABSOLUTE TENSE ( 1 . 6 . 2 ) , as well as the independence in principle of ASPECT or FRAMING and RELATIVE TENSE and the reasons for a conceptual overlap found in some languages ( 1 . 6 . 3 ) . I will further discuss the differences between the concepts of ACTUALISATION and ASPECT as well as between ACTUALISATION and TENSE-R ( 1 . 6 . 4 ) and the interaction of Q U A N T with ASPECT, M O O D , and ABSOLUTE TENSE (1.6.5). In subsection 1 . 6 . 6 , 1 will show by a synopsis that for almost every aspect or framing language the complex concept of ASPECT or FRAMING is differently composed of more elementary ΤΑΜ concepts and that the aspectual domains vary significantly. I will present two tests for ASPECT proper and propose a ranking of the languages discussed according to the presence or absence of essential features of ASPECT ( 1 . 6 . 7 ) . To conclude, I will briefly discuss in subsection 1.6.8 the problem of multifiinctionality that is typical for the poorly inflecting Tibetan languages, but also not unknown in languages that are quite rich in inflectional or analytical forms. Apparently a strictly structuralist approach cannot deal with multifunctionality and leads to paradox, if not arbitrary, results when the basic ΤΑΜ opposition and the marked and unmarked members of the opposition are to be established. But the effective tool owed to the theory of markedness can be successfully applied with only few modifications. Part II presents the varieties of Old and Classical Tibetan (section II.3), Modern "Lhasa" Tibetan (section II.4), and Modern East Tibetan: Amdo, represented by Rebkong and Themchen, and Kham, represented by Nangchenpa (section II.5). The first section of Part II, deals with general features of the Tibetan languages. It begins with the classification of the Tibetan varieties and the data analysed here (II. 1.1). A serious problem for the presentation is that the transcriptions of the works cited are often phonetic and the systems differ considerably, secondly, that most Tibetologists are not familiar with a strictly phonemic transcription or with the IPA code. On the other hand, lexical and formal similarities might be blurred through the

Introduction

9

different phonemic shape. Thus, for the sake of comparison, all Modern Tibetan data is presented in a phonemic transcription that corresponds to the transliteration chosen for the written Tibetan and is supplied with a reconstruction of the written Tibetan (or Ladakhi) orthography. The system of the Tibetan script is briefly explained for those readers who are not familiar with it, followed by a concordance of the transliteration and transcription alternatives, phonemic charts and a description of the word-constituting features of the varieties studied (II. 1.2). The second section deals with general features of the Tibetan verb: The classification of the Tibetan verbs, namely the distinction of [±control] verbs, valency and case relations (II.2.1), and the set of the four stem forms in Old and Classical Tibetan with their functional oppositions (II.2.2). In doing so, the stem forms as provided in the dictionaries will be taken for granted and as not analysable. This is exactly how Tibetan writers used the stem forms: as entities not analysable and handed down in dictionaries or verb lists. Whether and how the variable elements of the verb stems can be etymologised at all is of secondary importance, and, since the matter is not solved, the discussion would be only confusing. Even the analytical attempts of the Tibetan grammarians, which are in a way based on the factual employment, do not really explain these uses and turn out to be idealised generalisations. The functions of the verb stems will be derived solely from their employment in discourse, but of course the Tibetan characterisation of the verb stems as referring to the present, past, future, and as word of command will be taken as a heuristic means of orientation, since it reflects the native speakers' conceptualisations. With respect to the question of aspectuality, the imperative stem does not pose any special problem and its imperative or optative function will not be further discussed. However certain employments and restrictions (the imperative stem is, with very few exceptions, not used in prohibitions) indicate that the original function of this stem form must have been the expression of capability or potentiality. But this question has to be postponed to the first section of part IV where a reconstruction of at least some features of archaic (undocumented) or Proto-Tibetan is suggested. In Old Tibetan, all three temporal stems can be found in prohibitions, and the prohibitive function is discussed with the respective stem forms (II.3.2 future stem, II.3.3.4 present stem, II.3.6.5 past stem). In this connection, a first excursus into the puzzle of the Tibetan verb morphology (II.3.3.4.1) is necessary to decide which stem form should be expected under the phonetic conditions of an additional Directive Marker of unknown origin: * {ci'g} or * {sig}. Although the future stem has predominantly modal functions, there is a certain overlap or competition with both the present and the past stem. But it

10

RELA TLVE TENSE

and aspectual values in Tibetan languages

is basically the opposition between the present and the past stem (and the corresponding compound constructions of the Modern Tibetan languages), which is to be discussed with respect to the applicability of the term ASPECT in the third section. Yet, before this can be attempted, the "non-finite" or nominal character of the verb stem has to be explained together with the conjunctive functions of case and other junction morphemes that might follow a stem, uncovering the underlying concept of RELATIVE TENSE (II.2.3). The section ends with remarks on negation (II.2.4) and the features of agreement and EviDENTIALITY, the marking of different means of knowledge (II.2.5). In the third section, dealing with Old and Classical Tibetan, the functional description of the "finite" periphrastic constructions and the stems in their "finite" and "non-finite" use, always presented in the relevant context, will show that even the concept of FRAMING cannot be applied with respect to the opposition of the Tibetan stem forms, not even for the oldest documented stages of Tibetan, because, contrary to intuition, the supposed "imperfective" present stem, together with the future and the imperative stem, would be, in fact, "perfective", while the supposed "perfective" past stem would be "non-perfective". This quite unexpected outcome is due to the fact that the mere present stem is never employed in continuative contexts, whereas the past stem or at least a "non-finite" form based on the past stem can be found in contexts of mere attempt (conative). Any oddity is avoided if the oppositions are set up in terms of RELATIVE TENSE (and MOOD). For the likewise non-continuative use of the present stem in past time contexts I will propose an explanation in terms of pragmatic functions. The periphrastic constructions are only briefly surveyed (II.3.1), followed by an outline of the temporal and modal functions of the future stem (II.3.2). The functions of the mere present stem as opposed to a subset of complex present tense forms, displaying an opposition in terms of FRAMING, similar to the simple and expanded forms in English, are described in non-past, i.e. present and future time, and prohibitive context (II.3.3) as well as in past time context (II.3.4.1-3). In connection with the presentation of a limited set of cases where this opposition appears to be neutralised (II.3.4.4), the traditional view of the Tibetan grammarians is discussed (II.3.4.5). Following Weinrich's (1964/1985) distinction of discussed and narrated world, a special emphasis is laid on narrative contexts and the conventions that can be found in narrations (II.3.4.6). The past stem has a triple function in past time context: aoristic (II.3.5.1), imperfectic (II.3.5.2) and perfectic/resultative (II.3.5.3), while in inactual, i.e. future time (II.3.6.1) and generic (II.3.6.2) contexts, only the latter function is found, arising in contrast to the neutral employment of the future or pre-

Introduction 11 sent stem. Similarly, the result clause of a conditional sequence (II.3.6.3), is a generic context where the resulting state is quite naturally under focus. The past stem is thus the informationally unmarked choice, while the present and the future stem go along with their connotations of volition or assertion and obligation. In Old Tibetan, the Negation Marker mi is still quite common, although no longer obligatory, with the past stem in inactual contexts (II.3.6.4), indicating that the distribution of the two Negation Markers mi and ma originally had to do with modal, rather than with aspectual distinctions. An excursus leads to the notorious problems of Tibetan verb morphology, and the morphological arguments are discussed that have been raised, if at all, in favour of a historical aspectual system in Tibetan (II.3.7). It will become clear that it is impossible to postulate aspectual functions of the stem forms on a mere formal approach. The section is concluded with a synopsis of the different functions of the stems as derived by the functional description, and the set of oppositions in terms of MOOD, RELATIVE and ABSOLUTE TENSE, as well as the secondary aspectual values (in terms of both ASPECT and FRAMING) are established (II.3.8).

"Lhasa" Tibetan, described in the fourth section, has developed a set of regularly used complex forms that are at first presented in an overview under temporal labels, followed by a brief discussion of the attempts to classify the various elements in terms of ASPECT (II.4.1). The temporal constructions are then described according to their basic functions in their corresponding temporal contexts (II.4.2), followed by a description of complex expressions of derived PHASE, specifying the internal or external structure of the event with the help of multifunctional complementary verbs (II.4.3). Only in contrast to these explicitly prospective, continuative, and completive constructions, the aspectual values of the present tense constructions in past time context (II.4.4) can be derived. Again a special emphasis is given to the specific conventions in the context of narration (II.4.4.3.1-4) and quotation (II.4.4.3.5). The description of the "non-finite" functions of the present stem with or without further elements (II.4.5) and of the mere past stem (II.4.6) will reveal the underlying concept of RELATIVE TENSE as means of ordering events along temporal lines. An excursus (II.4.7) will lead to the question whether the features of split ergativity, appearing in "Lhasa" Tibetan with some more regularity than in the other varieties, can be related to an underlying conceptualisation in terms of ASPECT/FRAMING or ABSOLUTE TENSE. I will show that the reasons for case shift are primarily based on pragmatics and on conceptualisations of time, and only secondarily related to formal oppositions. The section is concluded with a synopsis of the different functions of the complex forms as derived by the functional description, and the set of

12

RELA TIVE TENSE and aspectual values in Tibetan languages

oppositions in terms of MOOD, RELATIVE and ABSOLUTE TENSE, as well as the secondary aspectual values are established (II.4.8). Despite their relative distance and difference, the dialect groups of Amdo and Kham are presented together in the fifth section because the data on the Amdo group is still quite fragmentary. The description follows the outline given above for "Lhasa" Tibetan and it is likewise concluded with a synopsis of the different functions of the complex forms as derived by the functional description, and the set of oppositions in terms of MOOD, RELATIVE and ABSOLUTE TENSE, as well as the secondary aspectual values are established. Part III is entirely concerned with the West Tibetan varieties: Balti, Purik, and Ladakhi. This overweight is due to the fact that the present study was originally projected to describe in its entirety the syntax and semantics of the verbal constructions of Ladakhi. For this purpose I conducted a three months' fieldwork in Ladakh. However, it turned out that the elementary question whether the constructions should be described in terms of TENSE or ASPECT could not be solved without a synchronic view on the various Modern Tibetan languages, nor without a diachronic view on the development of the Tibetan languages beginning with the earliest textual evidence. The first section deals with general features of the West Tibetan varieties. It starts with an introduction of the data used. One part of the data is derived from written Ladakhi, dating from the first decade of the 20th century. The alleged hybrid character of the text (due to a supposed retranslation into Classical Tibetan through the use of the Tibetan script) is discussed and rejected on the basis of a previous comparison of the text with the actual spoken variety (Zeisler [1994b]) as well as on the basis of subsequent research on the Ladakhi writing traditions and on the authors of the text (III. 1.1.1). Another part of the data has been elaborated through the fieldwork, the conditions of which are described along with the introduction of the informants (III. 1.1.2). The original plan was revised after the fieldwork was completed. Thus, a few questions that arose in the course of the comparative research had to be left open, some of which could be addressed less systematically in subsequent fieldwork on case grammar. Finally, part of the data is derived from studies of other authors, which are briefly surveyed as far as they are not described in Bielmeier (1985a) (III. 1.1.3). The following subsection (III. 1.2) serves to define and describe the area and the location of the West Tibetan varieties, presenting a choice of phonetic (III. 1.2.1) and morphological isoglosses (III. 1.2.2), and touching on the problem of language shift (III. 1.2.3). The second section deals with general features of the West Tibetan verb. Compared to Old and Classical Tibetan the patterns of stem formation have been reduced and simplified (III.2.1). A peculiar innovation, obviously un-

Introduction 13 der the influence of the neighbouring Indo-Iranian (New Indo-Aryan and Dardic) languages, is the marking of transitive experiencer subjects with the Aesthetive (Dative/Locative) Marker instead of the Ergative/Instrumental Marker that is commonly found in other Tibetan languages (III.2.2). The feature of ergative split, varying with the dialects, as a regular pattern, as arbitrary variation, or as not prominent, is presented in subsection III.2.3. The next subsection (III.2.4) gives an overview over the tense forms of three dialect groups: (a) Balti, (b) Purik and Western Sham, and (c) Central Ladakhi. Subsequently the complex expressions of derived PHASE are discussed (III.2.5), followed by the markers of (Non)-EVIDENTIALITY (III.2.6), and some remarks on the peculiarities of negation (III.2.7). In the third section, the functions of the various simple and complex tense constructions are described (III.3.1-9). Two interesting innovations of West Tibetan are found with regard to the past tense constructions: One is the development of Remoteness Markers that derive imperfect from present tense constructions (III.3.6), the other is the development of passive or patient-oriented perfect constructions (III.3.8.3). The fourth section deals again with narrative conventions. Of special importance will be the differentiation between a Narrational Imperfect as the typical, unmarked means of expression (III.4.2) and a Narrative Present (III.4.3) as well as a Narrative (Present) Perfect (III.4.4), which are emphatically marked. Similar to "Lhasa" Tibetan, a quoting convention can be observed in direct speech, but only in the written Ladakhi text (III.4.1). The third part is again concluded with a synopsis of the different functions of the simple and complex forms as derived by the functional description and the set of temporal, aspectual, and modal oppositions is established (III.5). Due to the Remoteness Markers, which remind us to the development of Modern Arabic, TENSE-Α has become fully grammaticalised, while the aspectual values in terms of FRAMING have been more distinctively developed than in any other Tibetan variety in this study. But since the external perspective focusing on the preparatory phases is apparently integrated into the neutral holistic perspective, West Tibetan provides us with a quite particular model of FRAMING. * In part IV, the essential traits of the Tibetan languages discussed in part II and III are recapitulated and discussed from a more general and comparative perspective. In section IV. 1,1 will suggest a hypothetical reconstruction of some developments from Proto- or Archaic Tibetan to Old and Classical Tibetan. Rather than on formal, that is, morphological arguments this reconstruction is based on functional arguments, namely the shifts of meaning of particular forms as visible in the unexpected employment of the "imperative" stem in Old and East Tibetan and the seemingly "anomaly" of the

14

RELATIVE TENSE

and aspectual values in Tibetan languages

Tibetan past stem. Originally, the later imperative stem must have been marked for potentiality/ability (MOOD). The incompatibility of the so-called imperative stem with the /Prohibitive is so much against intuition that it has been overlooked by prominent authors, but it finds its explanation in the survival of the original potentialis function, particularly in negations (IV. 1.1). The later past stem of controlled action verbs must have been introduced to express the intentionality of an agent as directed towards a result (TYPE OF ACTOR), leading to a double focus on the initial as well as the final stages of the event (IV. 1.2). The developing distinction of accidental event and controlled action verbs and the relation of anteriority that is build into the contrast of intended result : obtained result may have led to a reinterpretation of the given derivative stem forms in terms of TENSE-R and MOOD and to the development of a double set of four [+control] plus two [-control] stems (IV. 1.3). The suggested reconstruction would, on the one hand, explain why the oppositions of the Tibetan verb stems cannot be described in terms of ASPECT or FRAMING, or why, if one insists on an aspectual opposition, it is contrary to intuition. On the other hand, the reconstruction fits well to the distinction of [±control] verbs that is typical for all Tibetan languages, and it does not make any claim that could not be corroborated by the functions of the stems in the attested Old and Classical Tibetan as well as in the Modern Tibetan languages spoken today. In the second section, I will further sketch the probable development of the different sets of complex forms in the Modern Tibetan languages (IV.2.1.2). From a synchronic perspective, the Modern Tibetan languages will be compared with respect to their formal, morphological inventory: stems (IV.2.1.1), auxiliaries (IV.2.1.3), Evidential Markers (IV.2.1.4), complex expressions of PHASE (IV.2.1.5). A last excursus in subsection IV.2.1.6, deals with the different types of Serialised Conjunctive Verb (SCV) constructions, such as "to come/go falling", "to stay/deposit hidden", and others, and compares them to the "Compound Verbs" or "Verbal Expressions" found in the New Indo-Aryan languages. The historical and the modern varieties will be also compared with respect to the functional oppositions of temporal (and aspectual) coding (section IV.3), summarising the relation between aspectual values or temporal reference and the choice of the auxiliaries and Negation Markers (IV.3.5), and with respect to the conventional or metaphorical uses of present tense forms in past time context (section IV.4). In the final conclusion (IV.5), the question of metaphors as a poor excuse for the wrong descriptive tools will lead to a brief discussion of the remaining descriptive alternative in terms of "distance" or "relevance". This alternative is rejected basically because it faces the same problems as a description in terms of ASPECT or FRAMING, and because the problem of the

Introduction 15 metaphor or the inbuilt violation of grammatical rules remains unsolved. There is thus no need to replace the temporal terminology by a modal one or to draw upon a super-concept of "tempo-modality". The presentation of the data follows two basic principles. First, the function(s), i.e. the semantic content of a given form (or the morphological surface), will be determined strictly in terms of oppositions and marking, using the effective tools of structuralist theory. But since it turns out that in Tibetan, as in many other exotic and less exotic languages, it is not (always) possible to establish the uniform, unambiguous, context-independent general meaning (Gesamtbedeutung) or the basic opposition of a given grammatical form out of its particular employments in discourse, the structuralist distinction between langue vs. parole will not play a crucial role. A less strict, but somewhat similar distinction is applied to the standard and the conventional or metaphoric use of grammatical constructions. In contrast to structuralist approaches, however, I will take language not as a static system, but as a dynamic network of rules that might be only temporary balanced and underlies constant pressures of change. The network of rules called grammar has history, and the traces of history are visible in any given stage and have a certain influence on the further development. This does not allow to postulate a function only by inference from an earlier or later stage, but it allows to corroborate the findings in, e.g., Classical Tibetan by the findings in, e.g., "Lhasa" Tibetan and the other way round. Secondly, I consider it as absolutely necessary, regardless what descriptive perspective one chooses, to take the verbal expressions of the Tibetan languages as semantic units that cannot be analysed, even though the formal elements seem to be transparent and might have temporal or aspectual values of their own when occurring in isolation. In particular, the temporal and aspectual values of the complex tense constructions do not depend on the underlying stem forms, rather they emerge from the complex expressions in their entirety. The semantic content of a verbal expression will, therefor^, not be derived formally from its elements but solely from its function in discourse. The tentative labelling of the different constructions is likewise derived from the basic function(s) even when it refers to formal attributes ("simple" : "expanded"). That the labelling shows a certain preference of temporal over aspectual notions has a didactic function of demarcation: The terminology of ABSOLUTE TENSE is used to avoid any temptation to identify aspectual oppositions with a strict terminology of RELATIVE TENSE or any possible abstract formulation. This choice of terminology also underlines the fact that the concept of RELATIVE TENSE is conceptually much more related to the concept of ABSOLUTE TENSE than that of ASPECT or FRAMING, especially because the absolute tense values are the default values of RELATIVE

16

RELATIVE TENSE

and aspectual values in Tibetan languages

TENSE (but not necessarily of ASPECT or FRAMING) if the context is not

otherwise specified. Since a strictly descriptive designation such as "simultaneity: continuative, non-habitual (exclusive), non-past (inclusive), nonfuture (exclusive)" for "Expanded Present" would appear not be very practical, the traditional temporal labels can and should be used like code names or abbreviations (the "long versions" are to be found in the respective sections "Conclusion: the set of oppositions", II.3.6, II.4.8, II.5.6, III.5). The traditional temporal labels might also be easier to grasp and to remember than neutral alphanumeric variables. Personally, I am convinced that meaning with all its vagueness cannot be represented in an abstract formula and especially not in terms of truth conditions, but, nevertheless, such representations might be a heuristic approach in those languages where meaning is settled and where the relation between form and function is approximately one to one. But Tibetan languages do not display a one to one relation between morphological elements and grammatical functions. Morphological elements are, more often than not, multifunctional and hence may functionally overlap, i.e. the same or similar function might be expressed by different morphological elements. Given this polysemy of form and polymorphy of function, we are still in the beginning of understanding the complex relations between form and function, and a translation into an abstract formula is not only not useful, but rather misleading. Where an abstract representation seems to be necessary, I will use graphics instead of formulas because the former allow more vagueness than the latter. Elaborating the meaning of a temporal construction from the context makes it necessary to quote rather long passages of the text. This presumes that the reader has at least some basic knowledge of Tibetan grammar. To facilitate the understanding of those who are not familiar with any of the Tibetan languages, all examples are provided with an interlinear version that indicates the grammatical functions and relations. Where it is not relevant for the discussion I will only indicate the function, even when it does not have a separate morphological basis. Where it is relevant, that is, especially in the case of the verb forms, the sign " / " will indicate that the specified function is only one of several possible functions of the given verb form. I have tried to keep the abbreviations as transparent as possible and have likewise tried to introduce them in the discussion before their first occurrence, but for obvious reasons this has not always been possible.

Parti The concepts of TENSE, ASPECT, and MOOD ( Τ Α Μ )

Traditionally, the description of the grammar or a grammatical subset of a given language starts with the formal inventory and then relates the different forms to their meanings. This approach goes from the morphological surface to the underlying functions or semantics, and is concerned with the details. If languages were to be compared one would likewise tend first to look for similarities in the morphology and subsequently for similarities in the relation of form and function or semantics. But the temptation to transfer the established relation between a certain formal structure and its semantics to another language with a similar formal structure leads into a fallacy. Cohen (1989), e.g., shows that the Slavic, Romance, and Semitic languages all have a similar pattern, i.e. (a) a binary opposition of basic verbs forms or verb stems that is (b) independent from temporal location, and from these two assertions he concludes that the opposition is functionally equivalent in all three cases. If one would transfer this approach to the Tibetan languages, one would quite easily arrive at the same result: there is a formal opposition between the present and the past stem or complex present and past tense forms. This formal opposition is obviously independent from temporal location, and thus it must be functionally equivalent to the opposition in the Slavic, Romance, and Semitic languages. And the more languages one could claim to display the same pattern the stronger the argument would be. However, the comparison of languages has shown that similar grammatical morphology or similar formal principles such as formal opposition may have different functions or semantics whereas similar functions might be encoded in most different ways. In the case of genetically related languages, formal similarity is due to the common origin, but the further development might have been quite different in any of the languages, and the similar formal structure might be a mere relic in one language. Thus formal analysis alone cannot serve as a proof. A general or universal linguistic approach has, therefore, to proceed in the opposite direction: it has to distil the possible semantic functions from linguistic descriptions of as many and as differing languages as possible and then relate them to the formal inventories of the languages to be compared. In doing this it is important 'not to judge one language according to the rules of another', and not to regard the relationships and categories of one language (e. g. Russian) as the 'norm', while talking of 'derivations from the norm',

18

Part I: The concepts of TENSE, ASPECT, and MOOD (ΤΑΜ)

'imprecision of the norm' etc. in another language. What we should always be trying to discover is what is specific in the aspectuality of each language in relation to its own norms (Maslov 1985: 41). Therefore, the pioneers of aspectual comparison starting with Russian and French, such as Pollak 1960 (cf. the discussion in Sacker 1983: 49f. and Schwall 1991: 105f.) and Klein (1974) are nowadays likely to be criticised for taking the grammatical oppositions of Russian as the one and only aspectual model (Sacker 1983 : 79; Schwall 1991: 119). But if we are not allowed to take Russian or any other language as the starting point for comparison, just because we do not know whether that language is a good model of aspect or not, then how can we arrive at a universal model, at all? And how can we come to know what ASPECT really is? One could try to compile all kinds of features that may or may not be related under the label of "aspect". But then one ends up with a very general "category" or concept2, which is under-determined, and accounts, perhaps, for all languages but not for anything special. This seems to be what has happened in the present discussion about TENSE and ASPECT where the latter concept more often than not is claimed to be basic and universally valid. See, e.g., Smith (1991: 22): The concepts of aspect play a role in all languages, so far as we know. And the aspectual systems of different languages are strikingly similar [...]. We define in Universal Grammar a maximally general aspectual system. It has the basic aspectual categories that generally occur in languages of the world, and on which particular variation depend.

2

I will use the term concept rather than grammatical category, because every human being, the natural user of natural language, has and operates with concepts or conceptualisations that are vague, interdependent, and cannot be exactly defined. Categories on the other hand, are basic and independent logical abstractions (or fictions) that appear to be welldefined. Logical reflection and the establishing of categories are necessarily based on language as a means of social interaction, whereas language is merely based on conceptualisations (thought) and feelings, which are beyond language. The use of language, including its structure or grammar, is thus pre-logical. Even on the meta-theoretical level one cannot establish well-defined and independent categories with respect to the temporal location, order, or structure of events (in contrast to, perhaps, person and number), if these meta-categories are expected to "describe real categories in real languages" (Bache 1995: 146). What will be presented below as "logical possibilities" and their realisation in certain languages are but linguistic conceptualisations that are, as their objects, characterised by vagueness, close affinity to each other, if not by overlapping. To set up idealised constructs in order "to tackle disorder in language" (Bache 1995: 146) and to abstract from the unpleasant and philosophically unsatisfactory properties of language is just to miss the point. Although idealisations might be quite usefiil as heuristic means, there is always a certain danger to take them at face value, by forgetting their fictional or constructed character. As a result, whatever does not fit into these "categories" is likely to be treated as "strictly irrelevant" (Bache 1995: 291 with respect to the Simple Present of performative verbs).

The concepts of TENSE, ASPECT, and MOOD

19

This approach does not take into account the obvious differences in the aspectual, temporal, and even modal coding of the languages of the world, and it does not draw a clear demarcation line between aspectual or temporal meanings that might be expressed optionally or additionally by lexical means, or that might be inferred from the context of an expression, and the grammaticalisation of such meanings. Languages, however, do not grammaticalise all the same meanings and not along the same principles. In German, e.g., ASPECT is not a grammaticalised concept, though aspectual as well as temporal meaning can be expressed by adverbs. Just as little are ASPECT or TENSE (in the traditional understanding of ABSOLUTE TENSE) grammaticalised concepts in Tibetan. If one looks for a general linguistic concept that would account also for German and Tibetan, and if it should also account for the non-temporal and non-aspectual functions of the grammatical forms of verbs, then it might be best called "ΤΑΜ" (for "TENSE-and/or-ASPECT-and/or-MOOD", cf. also Dahl 1985, using the abbreviation TMA, and Tournadre 1996a: 217 proposing the term "tamology" for the study of ΤΑΜ), the abstract sign reflecting the abstract (and perhaps empty) character of the designation. In Tibetan, as in most languages, ΤΑΜ is a function of that part of the sentence that is commonly called verb or verb phrase, and in the following, the discussion will be mainly about verbs or verb phrases and sentences containing verbs. Being the broadest possible generalisation, the linguistic concept of ΤΑΜ is of no use to explain any of the specific differences in languages. On the other hand, the similarities of aspectual coding between Slavic and Romance languages and even Arabic are quite obvious and are not merely accidental or "a few points of coincidence on the level of particular meanings", as Maslov (1985: 30) objects. And it is just because of comparable similarities that certain linguists think of English as an aspect language. But Maslov is certainly right when he continues that the observed similarities are due to the "individual components of the content of aspectual grammemes" (p. 30; emphasis added). It is thus necessary to break down the general concept of ΤΑΜ and to derive very specific and elementary concepts. It is then possible to describe, for each language separately, whether these specific concepts find expression, and to what extent the expression of these concepts plays a role in the whole system, as well as to compare the aspectual, temporal, and modal systems of different languages. In this study, the general notions of ΤΑΜ will be broken down into a set of eight concepts, namely TYPE OF EVENT, ABSOLUTE TENSE, RELATIVE TENSE, PHASE, QUANT, ASPECT, FRAMING, and ACTUALISATION leaving the concepts of M O O D somewhat aside. I will first present these concepts as independent abstract possibilities, which may or may not be realised in a

20

Part I: The concepts of TENSE, ASPECT, and MOOD

(ΤΑΜ)

given language. Some of the concepts appear to be elementary, some of them appear to be quite complex. All of them are in a way conceptually interrelated and practically they tend to interact in language. But just because of the interrelation and interaction of the concepts it is necessary to delimitate them precisely. The concepts are derived from the various shades of meaning or functions that are described for given grammatical forms in various languages. To avoid the above-mentioned fallacies, it is assumed that a one to one relation between form and function does not exist or is mere accident. This means that it is normally not possible to derive a clear-cut functional opposition from a formal or morphological opposition. On the other hand, this also means that it is very unlikely that any of the specific concepts should be reflected in language purely. As a consequence, none of the models presented below can be taken as the prototype against which all other languages can be measured and compared. What we do find in languages is a specific mixture of some or, rarely, all concepts, and it is the difference in content and "weight" of the ingredients that makes up the difference between the aspectual, temporal, and modal systems of languages. The concepts of TYPE OF EVENT, ABSOLUTE TENSE, RELATIVE TENSE, PHASE, QUANT, ASPECT, FRAMING and MOOD, are therefore not necessarily visible at the morpho-

logical surface of language, but are functional concepts, that is, they represent possibilities of meaning. They may or may not be relevant for the speakers in a given speech community, and thus they may or may not find expression or even formalisation in a given language. To show how these concepts are reflected in language and how they interact, I will present three models of aspect languages: (a) Slavic, (b) Ancient Greek/Romance, (c) Semitic, which have a common conceptual nucleus of QUANT and PHASE, i.e. the oppositions in terms of QUANT and PHASE are congruent. The main difference is which other concepts are fused and how the various concepts interact. There are some reasons to take the congruence of QUANT and PHASE as the standard model of ASPECT. English will thus be discussed as the counter-model of FRAMING in which the concepts of QUANT and PHASE do not form a conceptual nucleus, i.e. the oppositions in terms of QUANT and PHASE are not congruent. Nevertheless, I cannot go very deeply into details, and particularly, I cannot review and discuss the vast literature on ASPECT and "aspect". I will present a general outline instead, as far as it will be necessary for the analysis and comparison of the Tibetan languages.

1 Markedness and meaning

21

1 Markedness and meaning Before discussing the aspectual and temporal functions, it is necessary to present an outline of the theory of markedness, because it is essential for establishing the appropriate relation between form and function. The structuralist theory of markedness as developed by Saussure, Jakobson, Trubetzkoy, and others, presupposes closed systems of two or more members or terms that are in contrast or opposition. Generally one can think of three possibilities, (a) The contrast can be symmetric or equipollent if the terms divide up a domain, and each of the terms has a positive value and is thus positively marked3, e.g. the domain of ABSOLUTE TENSE might be divided into past tense, present tense, and future tense, (b) The opposition is asymmetric if only one of two terms has a positive value, i.e. indicates the presence of a property, while the second term explicitly indicates its absence, in this case the contrast is called privative or exclusive, (c) The contrast is called subordinative, hierarchic, or inclusive if only one of two terms has a positive value and the second term does not have any value and does not make any indication at all about the presence or absence of the property, i.e. is unmarked or zero-marked. Subordinative and privative contrast can be combined when the opposition has more than two terms. This is, roughly, the Universal Grammar approach to the theory of markedness (cf. Smith 1991: 15), the "pure" structuralist approach, however, would take any opposition as basically binary (or reducible to a binary opposition) and necessarily subordinative. Apparently, this assumption is too rigid. Let there be, in a given language, an opposition of past tense vs. non-past tense. The privative contrast as defined above implies that there is a term indicating the property "past" and another term indicating the property "not past", i.e. "present and future" and both would be complementary. One could think however, that if a language displays such a pattern, the speakers might have a unified concept of "present-future" or "presture" that has a positive value so that either both terms are equipollent or that "past" could be the term with the negative value "non-presture". This possibility should be kept in mind when dealing with languages that are based on other conceptualisations than the language of the linguist examining it. The subordinative contrast or "l'opposition de quelque chose avec rien" (Jakobson 1939: 144) implies that there is a general term or extensive member A ("non-past", "general tense") applicable to the category as a whole and a more specialised term or intensive member Β ("past") that positively indicates a specific property of the category, thus the form with the functional value "past" is used for past tense

In the sense of being characterised for a particular feature, merkmalhaft.

22

Part I: The concepts of

TENSE, ASPECT,

and

MOOD

(ΤΑΜ)

and only for past tense, whereas the form with the functional value "nonpast" can be used for all tenses including past tense. The theory of markedness was first developed for phonological contrasts, such as voiced: voiceless. It was soon applied to morphological markedness, e.g. the nominative or absolutive case may have no special morpheme or a "zero-morpheme" and are unmarked in contrast to other cases such as the genitive case or instrumental case etc. which are indicated through morphemes, and the theory was further extended to the semantic function of morphemes. But it soon turned out that the functional opposition could indeed mirror the morphological opposition, could be also just the opposite way, or could be subordinative while the morphological contrast would be equipollent (Jakobson 1939: 147). Due to language history and the continuous shifts in meaning, morphological marking does not necessarily correspond to functional marking (Comrie 1976: 111). A general "principle of iconicity" (Zwicky 1978: 137), therefore, does not exist. The idea of a binary contrast has several consequences. An important feature is the concept of neutralisation. On every level there are special contexts where only one member of a binary opposition can appear, e.g. on the level of phonology, word-final position may allow only voiceless obstruents, which are thus counted as the zero-marked "archiphonemes" (Trubetzkoy 1939). In analogy, Ruiperez (1982) counts the Ancient Greek present stem as "archimorpheme" with respect to the opposition aorist vs. present stem, because the opposition is neutralised in actual present time context where the aorist stem does not appear. Quite often the zero-marked member of an opposition can only be identified in a neutral context (note however that on the functional level, complex interactions between basic (lexical) semantics and the semantics of the morphemes and other operators may lead to inversions of the pattern of markedness, cf. also section 1.6.9 below). Due to such neutral contexts the zero-marked term might appear more frequently than the marked term. This leads to further assumptions, and the theory of markedness has been developed and has been extended to various domains (cf. Zwicky 1978). Of interest for the present study is the concept of informational markedness, which is a statistical approach. The choice of a grammatical form is unmarked if the form is usual or normal, i.e. if it appears more frequently than others, the choice is marked, when the form is unusual, i.e. less often or rarely employed, metaphorically used, or even violating the general rules. It jthus signals a special meaning and a special emphasis, not conveyed by the normal use (Smith 1991: 16). It has been argued that informational markedness corresponds to social or cultural marginality, whereas the less marked forms would be culturally more central or psychologically more salient

1 Markedness and meaning

23

(Zwicky 1978: 141). Another claim is that "representatives of more marked categories should tend to be eliminated in favour of forms representing less marked categories" (Zwicky 1978: 139). But even though such developments may be observed in phonology and in some semantic fields, on the informational level, the development goes quite often into the opposite direction. Marked forms are introduced for conceptually non-trivial functions, e.g. for a presentation of the event as still ongoing, but after a while, they are quite often generalised or normalised and may replace the former unmarked forms, while new marked forms appear. The former unmarked forms lose most of their functions and thus become less frequent and in a way they become marked again, especially in contrast to the newly appeared marked forms. But since they are negatively marked, they may finally disappear (cf. Cohen 1989: 150-55 for such developments in Semitic and Berber languages). There are thus different reasons for frequency and markedness. Counting the frequency of forms leads to additional problems. Whether the employment of a form is marked or not also depends on the context, not only on statistics. A present tense form in present time context is unmarked, and a present tense form in past time context is marked, even then, when statistically the speakers have much more to say about the past time. Likewise, the use of the expanded form in English is not marked in present time context, but marked in past time context, independent of which one should be more frequent in use. Similarly, the perfective verb in Russian, although formally and functionally marked, is used in past and future time contexts by far more often than the imperfective verb, and this in different discourse types (Comrie 1976: 117, with further reference). The question is also how to count the forms absolutely. Thus the theory of informational markedness is quite useful to analyse and compare different sorts of texts based on the frequency of certain grammatical forms, but in relation to the language as such it can only lead to rough guesses. The structuralist theory has laid much, perhaps too much, emphasis on the binary opposition and on the subordinated contrast. But not all negative terms are unmarked in the sense that they may replace the marked member (Comrie 1976: 111). E.g., the English non-expanded forms cannot be used with progressive meaning (Kucera 1981: 184-186), the French Passe Simple cannot be used in place of the Imparfait and the Imparfait cannot be used in place of the Passe Simple. Unfortunately, the common designation "non-X" or "-X" does not make transparent whether a privative or a subordinative contrast is meant. I will not make any distinction for the oppositions related to TYPE OF EVENT because it is not relevant for the discussion. But I will distinguish positive, negative and zero-marking for the oppositions related to

24

Part I: The concepts of TENSE, ASPECT, and MOOD (ΤΑΜ)

and RELATIVE TENSE. Stating that a form is "negatively marked for non-X", "non-X (exclusive)",4 or assigning the value " - " means that this form is never used for X. In such cases, I do not want to preclude that there might be also a positive value, which is simply not available in the language of description (such as "presture" for "nonpast"). Stating that a form is "not marked for X", "zero-marked for X", "nonX (inclusive)", or assigning the value "±" or "0" means that this form is used for something else than X as well as for X (this opposition cannot be inverted). Since Tibetan forms are multifunctional and overlapping, positive, negative, and zero-markedness are assigned for each domain of ΤΑΜ separately. I will use the sign "&" in the tables for the prevalent use of a form within a domain, when there is no positive marking for any of the terms. The polysemy of Tibetan forms makes it necessary to distinguish between the general meaning (Gesamtbedeutung), primary meanings (not really Hauptbedeutung, as defined by Jakobson 1936), and secondary meanings. General meaning is context-independent, whereas secondary meaning is restricted to a well-defined context (cf. Comrie 1985: 19)5 and appears as marked. General meaning has to be distinguished from implicature, i.e. the conventional use that might be cancelled through the context (cf. Comrie 1985: 23). Such an implicature would be that the Tibetan past stem or the complex past tense constructions derived from the past stem express terminated or complete events. This is, however, not always the case, as the introducing motto shows where the Common Past (claimed to be "perfective") is used for a merely attempted, incomplete event. In Old and Classical Tibetan, the verb stems are used with complementary functions as "finite" and "non-finite", even though there is no formal difference. It is thus necessary to derive complementary primary meanings. As I will show below, the ABSOLUTE TENSE value of the "finite" use of the verb stems is only a special case of the RELATIVE TENSE value of the "non-finite" use, thus it seems possible to take the latter as the "general meaning". But it should be kept in mind that the question whether a verb stem is used "finitely" or not, is entirely depending on the context. M O O D , PHASE, ASPECT, ABSOLUTE

One could perhaps also use the term "not-X" to indicate the privative contrast, but this subtle contrast in terminology probably leads into confusion. Comrie uses the term "basic meaning". The term "general meaning" is often used synonymously, but it might perhaps be useful to make a distinction between the "general meaning" of a grammatical form and the "basic meaning" of a verb or its Verbalcharakter o r TYPE OF EVENT).

2 Events and presentation of events in language 25 2 Events and presentation of events in language Verbs, verb phrases, or sentences containing verbs are about events "outside in the world" as they are perceived or imagined, or as they are presented by a speaker to a hearer to be imagined. Generally, there are various possibilities of imagining or conceptualising events. First of all, one might be concerned with the manner of the realisation of an event. One can locate events in time, be concerned with their ordering, or focus on the phases of realisation. On might be further concerned with the quantification of frequency, duration, or intensity of the occurrence, and one might take into account the current relevance of an event as well as its evidence, i.e. the means by which the event was perceived. And lastly, events might be qualified according to their desirability and according to their illocutionary force. It seems that for reasons of practicability it is not possible to represent all these features together in language and to give them equal weight. A certain choice seems to be inevitable and languages differ considerably in which of all the possible concepts are basic and which are negligible. In Dahl's sample "there is hardly any distinction in the TMA field which is marked in all languages" and "the loss of information entailed by not marking a potential distinction seems to have little or no negative effect on communication" (Dahl 1985:13). To a certain extent, the preferences in conceptualising events appear to be culturally determined. The cultural determination of perception has an impact on the presentation of events in language. But since language itself is part of the culture, the means of presentation may again influence the manner of perception. Given this circularity, it is evident that verbs, verb phrases, or sentences containing verbs do not represent events "objectively" as they occur, but events as perceived or imagined through a cultural and subjective filter. Given the choice or preference for a certain set of representative means or concepts, speakers of a particular language might feel the necessity to express a feature for which the lexicon and the syntactic rules do not supply him or her with an adequate means of presentation and might thus apply the given means in a metaphorical way. The individual metaphor may develop into a collective convention and may eventually lead to a reinterpretation and reordering of the previous set of rules. Conversely, as a result of reordering, previous regular and unmarked patterns may become marked as marginal, and eventually they may disappear. Previous rules, however, do not become obsolete at once but may be still effective for a longer or shorter period. Languages are thus dynamic and have a history that becomes visible particularly in the overlapping of, and in the gaps and contradictions between, the various concepts and patterns that make languages sometimes look quite

26

Part 1: The concepts of TENSE, ASPECT, and MOOD (ΤΑΜ)

illogical. On the other hand, language development may be taken as an indicator that the given expressions or grammaticalisations of ΤΑΜ concepts may not be sufficient for an approximately objective representation of events or that there may be competing or contradicting concepts. It is thus not very probable that it should be possible to find basic concepts that would be universally valid for every language, even though this would be desirable for a general linguistic theory. It is undisputed that not all languages have grammaticalised the concept of ABSOLUTE TENSE. It should be likewise accepted that not all languages have grammaticalised the concept of ASPECT or any other of the possible ΤΑΜ concepts. What a general linguistic theory could do, however, is to show the universally attested possibilities of perceiving and presenting events, which may or may not be used by the speakers of a given language. In the following, I will discuss a limited set of ΤΑΜ concepts that should not be taken as universally applicable but as mere possibilities. It might turn out that none of them is primitive and independent from the other concepts. Deliberately, I will use a more traditional instead of a more abstract terminology because the former is a common basis for both linguists and non-linguists, and moreover because the latter is quite often restricted to specific linguistic schools and needs to be retranslated, anyway, on the basis of the traditional terminology.

3 Some possible conceptualisations of events 3.1 TYPE OF ACTOR, TYPE OF EVENT, TYPE OF SITUATION

Events differ considerably in the way they are realised. The typical manner of realisation of an event is part of the basic meaning of the verb ( Verbalcharakter) and does not need any formal marking. Nevertheless, if there are several possibilities of realisation of an event X, e.g., "writing", this may be expressed either by different verbs, e.g., "to write", "to copy", or by derived verb forms, e.g., in Russian: pisat'(lpftv)/napisat '(Pftv) 'to write', perepisat'{Vfty)lperepisyvat (Ipftv) 'to write over, copy'. Likewise there may be several possibilities to focus on an event Y, e.g., "coming to death", which may be expressed either by different verbs, e.g., "to be killed", "die", or again by derived verb forms, e.g., Classical Tibetan hgum \ bkum | dgum | khum(s) 'to kill, be killed (by an agent)', hgum | gum (hgums) 'to die'. In this example the valence of the verb, i.e. the number of its arguments, is concerned together with the feature [icontrol], i.e. the question whether a possible argument of the verb exerts a certain amount of control over the event, or not. The differentiation of [±control] in relation to the argument structure of the verb may be termed TYPE OF ACTOR. It does not play a crucial role in the

3 Some possible conceptualisations of events

27

Indo-European languages, but it is essential for the Tibetan languages. Controlled action verbs [+control] (ctr) are verbs that refer to actions that are typically initialised by the will and realised under the control of a conscious or intentional agent (animals, human and superhuman beings, and, exceptionally, natural forces). Accidental event verbs [-control] (nc) refer to events that are typically realised without such agency or are realised beyond the control of an agent. The feature [±control] cannot be reduced to the features of [±agentivity] and [±volitionality]. In the Ladakhi example of nan3 'to hunt down', both agency and volition are presumed, but the control over the realisation is denied as additionally to the attempts of an agent a portion of good luck and perhaps also the consent of the animal is necessary (cf. section III.2.2 below). The formal expression of the opposition in terms of [±control] may be merely derivational as it is the case in Old and Classical Tibetan, but the differentiation may also affect the case assignment as in Ladakhi, or it may affect the choice of the verbal auxiliaries as in all Modern Tibetan languages. Certainly, all three features [±control], [±agency], [±volition] play a certain role in Tibetan, and the standard pattern may thus be varied by recombinations of derivation, case assignment, and auxiliaries to express the subtle nuances between the extremes of "+" and "-", cf. sections II.2.1, II.2.5, III.2.1-2.3 below. The basic notion of TYPE OF EVENT, also known as " Verbalcharakter", "lexical aspect", "type of situation", sometimes also as "Aktionsart", applies to the classification of events according to their internal structure or way of realisation, based on the Aristotelian distinction of kinesis, completed movement or actuality and energeia, incomplete movement or process (Verkuyl 1993: 43).6 Different linguists have proposed different classifications, but the most common, even though often criticised (see Brinton 1988, Verkuyl 1993:), is the fourfold classification suggested by Vendler (1957). Accordingly "being", "loving", and "knowing" can be classified as states, i.e. events "characterised by the inherent qualities of duration and homogeneity, as well as by the lack of change [and temporal] limits" (Brinton 1988: 24). In contrast to the philosophical tradition of opposing "states" or "situations" and possibly atelic processes to dynamic and possibly telic "events" (cf. Dik 1989 and Verkuyl 1993), I will use the term "event" as the most general term for what verbs are about. If not further specified the term "event" will comprise the subclasses [-control] and [+control]. The term "type of action" is inadequate because actions are only a subclass of events, and more particularly since the term "Aktionsarten" or "actiones verbf' has a quite different extension if used in studies on Slavic languages, corresponding roughly to my terms "PHASE" and "QUANT", but only in so far as these functions are expressed by derivational means. The term "type of situation" should be reserved for the more complex meaning on the sentence level that results from the interaction of the verb and its arguments, quantification of arguments, negation, ΤΑΜ markers, or adverbs. The term "state of affairs" or "Sachverhalt" likewise points to a more complex meaning and should be reserved for complex situations transgressing the sentence boundary.

28

Part I: The concepts of TENSE, ASPECT, and MOOD (ΤΑΜ)

States do not begin or end by themselves but are initiated and are brought to an end by other events (Sacker 1983: 214). States are thus opposed to all other kinds of events in so far as they do not involve change, they are [-dynamic]. Events such as "running", "working", and "reading" can be classified as activities, i.e. events that "last for a time" (Brinton 1988: 28) and are given or true at any point of their duration (Sacker 1983: 213). Activities are comparable to states, in so far that they both have no inherent temporal limit, no definite beginning and especially no definite endpoint or telos, they might go on forever, and any termination is arbitrary. Both can be divided into homogeneous sub-intervals. Both have the features [-telic], [+durative], but activities are generally treated as [+dynamic] because they involve some sort of reiterated change with respect to at least one of the verb arguments, and the beginning or ending of an activity is not necessarily depending upon another event. Activities can be transformed into situations that have an inherent final limit or telos, if the verbs are related to a definite object argument such as "reading a/the book", "constructing a/two house/s", "running a mile" etc. Events of this type are called accomplishments and may be characterised as "durative situations, which go on in time but have a necessary goal" (Brinton 1988: 28). They are heterogeneous as they are not given or true at any point before the final point of realisation (Sacker 1983: 213). They are [+dynamic], [+durative], and [+telic]. On the other hand, accomplishments (as well as achievements as I would propose to define them) may be transformed into activities if they are related to an indefinite number of object arguments such as "constructing houses", "killing beasts" etc. Events like "to reach the top", "to win the race", and "to die" are subsumed under the label achievement, which may be described as "punctual situations which take place at a specific point in time" (Brinton 1988: 28). As they are normally conceived of as being without any remarkable duration, they can neither begin nor end, they are given or true at a certain point of time (Sacker 1983: 214). They are [+dynamic] and [-durative]. In contrast to semelfactives (events comparable to states or activities, but happening in a single instant, although they are usually iterated, e.g., "to flash", "to knock"), achievements are oriented towards a certain result, which is their telos. They are thus also characterised by the feature [+telic]. It appears as if states and achievements would be inherently accidental events, and "cannot be qualified as actions at all", "they are not 'done' or 'performed' at all" (Vendler 1957: 149 and 149, note 10). While the number of states that may be controlled, e.g., "to sit", seems to be, in fact, quite limited and might thus, perhaps, be neglected, the number of verbs that do not fit into the above classification, as they express instantaneous telic con-

3 Some possible conceptualisations of events

29

trolled actions, is at least as high as the number of their accidental counterparts. Compare e.g. "to break (nc)" with "to break (ctr)" or "to die" with "to kill". There is no reason to claim that the controlled action has more duration than the corresponding accidental event only because it is associated with the feature of [+control] (on the contrary, the transformation described by the verb "to die" may take considerable time, so that the verb should be subsumed rather under the accomplishment verbs). It is quite striking that in the contemporary literature the event structure of verbs like to kill, to break (ctr), to hit, etc. is either not discussed at all (e.g., Vendler 1957, Brinton 1988) or the difference in duration between achievements and accomplishments is neglected as being merely semantic (Verkuyl 1993; Mumm 1996). Sasse (1991: 3-5) adds a fifth event class: "inchoativstative Sachverhalte" (onset of state plus following state) to the four Vendlerian classes: "total Stative Sachverhalte" (state), "Aktions-Sachverhalte" (activity), "gradual terminative Sachverhalte" (accomplishment), and "total terminative Sachverhalte" (achievement). But again, he does not distinguish between the features [-control] and [+control], and his example for achievement verbs is an accidental event verb, "to explode". Dik (1989: 98) includes the feature [±control] in his scheme, but he subsumes the achievement verbs under accomplishment verbs, restricting the feature [imomentaneous] to the feature [+telic] and thus reducing the four Vendlerian classes to three (α-γ): state of affairs: situation (a) position (b) state

[-dynamic] [-dynamic] [-dynamic]

[+control] [-control]

event (a) action - accomplishment - activity (b) process - change - dynamism

[+dynamic] [+dynamic] [+dynamic] [+dynamic] [+dynamic] [+dynamic] [+dynamic]

[+control] [+control] [+control] [-control] [-control] [-control]

[+telic] [-telic] [+telic] [-telic]

The labelling is always somewhat arbitrary and should not be taken too serious, but for merely pragmatic reasons, concerning the possibility of talking about "events" and "situations" in a more general way I would suggest slightly different labels. The preference of the assignment of [±durative] to that of [±momentaneous] or [±punctual], is due to the problematic notion of the latter. From an objective point of view, it seems to be logically impossible that any event should pass without taking some time, but on the other

30

Part I: The concepts of TENSE,

ASPECT,

and MOOD

(ΤΑΜ)

hand, from a more psychological point of view, it seems adequate to think of events as having no relevant duration in relation to those events that take a lot of time or in relation to a normal rhythm of events. Non-durative events are not normally conceived of as having sub-intervals in which other events could intersect, but it might be always possible to perceive and represent them in a sort of slow motion. Thus I would suggest the following classification: events (situations): (a) accidental events (a) state [-control] [-dynamic] [+durative] (β) process [-control] [+dynamic] [+durative] (γ) development [-control] [+dynamic] [+durative] (δ) transition [-control] [+dynamic] [-durative]

[—telic] to know, to sleep [-telic] to flow, to grow [+telic] to grow up [+telic] to break (nc)

(b) controlled actions (a) position [+control] [-dynamic] [+durative] [-telic] to sit, to keep (β) activity [+control] [+dynamic] [+durative] [-telic] to work, to read (γ) accomplishm. [+control] [+dynamic] [+durative] [+telic] to cure, (to read a book) (δ) achievement [+control] [+dynamic] [-durative] [+telic] to kill, to break (ctr) of EVENT are rather prototypes than precise classes (cf. Smith 1991: 20-22). The status of one or the other verb might, therefore, be disputable, some verbs might be ambiguous as to the distinction of one or the other TYPE OF EVENT (polysemy), e.g. the verb "to die" may be seen as the mere punctual transition as well as a slow and lengthy development. The classification of events itself might be culturally bound. It is thus not surprising if in a given language the difference between certain verb classes does not play a crucial role. In Tibetan, e.g., the difference between development and transition verbs seems not to be essential, rather the focus lies on the moment of transition, regardless whether the preparatory stage was a completely different one ("to break (nc)" or was slowly assimilating to the transition ("to grow up"). The same is true of inchoative verbs that express the beginning of a state such as "to blossom", which will be treated here as transition verbs. One could even guess whether from the Tibetan speakers' point of view, a process like flowing should not be seen as a state, if the changes in local position are negligible, or, when they are not, if they would not eventually lead to a final shift of position (water flows into the sea) corresponding to a transition. Accidental event verbs are often quite ambiguous in Tibetan (cf. also the remarks about the "adjective-verbs" in section II.3.7.2 below), oscillating between state and process or transition, including either the stage before the transition (development-transition) or the phase after the transition (transition-state). The above given verb classes, therefore, are mere TYPES

3 Some possible conceptualisations of events

31

logical possibilities, to which perhaps additional ones have to be joined for other languages, but which, for the same reasons, do not have to be realised in a given language. The following figure shows the temporal structure of the verb classes reduced to a set of four. In most cases, the feature [±control] does not have an impact on the temporal structure. One could argue that in the case of [-dynamic] verbs the feature [-control] is prototypical, whereas in the case of [+dynamic] verbs the feature of [+control] seems to be prototypical, and I will use the terms state, activity, accomplishment, and achievement accordingly as long as a further specification is not necessary. Likewise I will use the term event as a cover term, unless a further specification of the feature [±control] is necessary. TYPE OF EVENT

achievement (transition)

t*

^TL t*2 tx3

t*4 tx5 t*6 t*7 txg t*9 t* t* t*+ n

Π u

> * to break (ctr) to break (nc)

accomplishment (development)

J to cure to grow up

activity (process)

J

state (position)

to read to flow to know to sit

Figure 1. TYPE OF EVENT and temporal structure

A binary classification is presented by Mumm (1996) who distinguishes between transitory and non-transitory verbs, i.e. verbs that lead to a change of state and verbs that do not. Cf. the classification of Ruiperez (1982): "transformatif' : "non-transformatif', as well as that of Bull (1960), using the terms "cyclic" and "non-cyclic" for events with or without "automatic termination", which is nothing more than the difference between telic and atelic verbs. Mumm (1996), however, not only does not take into account the difference in duration in the case of telic events, but also even rejects the possibility of discriminating it on the very verb level. For him, duration, associated with continuous flow, would imply that the event is not delimited, and hence duration would be opposed to telicity (p. 66). According to him, non-transitory verbs are in a way like mass nouns, they can be subdivided into homogeneous sub-intervals, whereas transitory verbs are like individuals and cannot be subdivided, because every sub-interval would have a different quality, and it follows "daß zu keinem Teilmoment der VH [Verbalhandlung] ausschlüpfen die VH ausschlüpfen auf den VHT [Verbalhand-

32

Part I: The concepts of TENSE, ASPECT, and MOOD

(ΤΑΜ)

lungsträger] zutrifft" (p. 71). He further claims, that in the case of telic events, duration would be merely "eine graduelle Sache, die keine kategorielle Grenze rechtfertigt" (p. 77). This is true in principle, but as we will see in sections 1.3.4.2 and 1.6.1 below, prototypical duration of an event, whether seen in relation to other events or in relation to the minimal time units of perception, plays an important role in the interaction with ASPECT, at least in some languages. Arguing along similar lines, Verkuyl (1993: 46-50) distinguishes only three event classes: states with the feature [-ADD TO] corresponding to [-dynamic] and the feature [±SQA] or (un)specified quantity of argument, processes with the features [+ADD TO] and [-SQA], and events with the features [+ADD TO] and [+SQA]. He argues that the feature [±durative] or [±momentaneous] and thus the difference between achievements and accomplishments is merely lexical, whereas the features [+SQA] and [±dynamic] or [+ADD TO] depend on the definiteness of the arguments and on negation. He further claims that the lexical meaning of, e.g., "draw a circle" can change, if a new technique allows the reduction of the process of drawing to an instantaneous click with the mouse on a virtual button, and thus the distinction between achievements and accomplishments would be arbitrary. But his example also shows that the difference between accomplishments and achievements is at least partly based on the structure (complexity and quantity) of the arguments and satellites such as instruments, even though the complexity of an argument or satellite is an extra-linguistic fact and the notion of "complexity" is rather vague compared to unspecified quantification. However, achievements can be transformed into accomplishments through definite quantification, which is a linguistic fact, as they can be transformed into activities through unspecified quantification. On the other hand, there are atelic events that have no duration. E.g., "to flash" can be described as a state "to be luminous", pertaining only for an instant but with no change involved. In the case of "to knock" one could think of an activity without duration or repetition. Such non-repeated momentaneous events are traditionally classified as semetyactives. They play a certain role in Slavic languages. In other languages, however, they behave like achievement or transition verbs, and therefore, I have not included them in the above scheme. Of course, there is a change out of the state of being dark and a change back into the state of being dark before and after the event of "flashing", and there is a change out of the state of silence and a change back into the state of silence before and after the event of "knocking". But the same is true for any temporary state, e.g. the state of "to sleep", and for any temporary activity, e.g. "to sing". There is a state or situation before and after the event where "sleeping" or "singing" is not true. Again, the duration

3 Some possible conceptualisations of events

33

is relative and the notion "temporary" is only lexical. One might present a flash or a knock in slow motion as well as states by time- lapse pictures. Based on the speakers' conceptions of prototypical duration of events, the feature [±durative] can be defined as allowing or disallowing phasal verbs of beginning or termination, adverbs of ongoing duration such as "still", or adverbs of duration, such as "for" in the case of atelic and "ini" in the case of telic verbs. Only atelic and non-durative telic verbs can be combined with a definite temporal location, "at X". In the case of atelic verbs, "at X" means that there is a certain point of time at which the state or activity took place and it implies that the state or activity took also place some time before and after that point. In the case of non-durative telic verbs, "at X" means that the event happened exactly at that point of time. But since durative telic events have a longer or shorter phase of development until they reach their inherent telos, they cannot occur at or around a single moment, and this seems to hold also when the event is quantified or negated. Only the initial or final point of the event or an internal stage, marked as ongoing can be correlated to a definite time point: (1)

a. b. c. d. e. f. g. h.

The child (still) slept at four. The child (still) played at four. The cat (#still) caught a mouse at four. The murderer (#still) killed his victim at four. The child (#still) started/finished building the sand castle at four. The child was (still) building a sand castle at four. The child built #a sand castle / ??sand castles at four. The doctor #cured / ??did not cure the patient at four.

Speakers of natural languages generally make clear distinctions between durative and non-durative events. They would not use adverbs of duration with a single event interpretation of an achievement verb. For this reason, I would doubt that any native speaker of English would accept or produce a sentence like the following proposed by Verkuyl (1993: 42, 45), when "inj" is supposed to mean "taking as much time as x". Such sentences might be acceptable only if the verb together with its argument can have an alternative development reading as might be the case with "to reach ". With "in 2 " that is "at a point within x", sentence (2e) could be reformulated as (2f). With "in 3 " used in a technical sense: "the racing time was χ minutes and χ seconds" sentence (2b) could be reformulated as (2g), but that does not mean that the runner was winning all the time. (2)

a. ??He reached the top in{ half an hour, b. #She won the race ini half an hour.

34

Part I: The concepts

c. d. e. f. g.

of TENSE, ASPECT, and MOOD (ΤΑΜ)

#The bomb exploded ini half an hour. #John was released in ι two hours. #Mookie got hit in ι ten minutes. Mookie got hit once in2 ten minutes. She won the race in3 eight minutes and forty-one point five seconds.

In German as well as in Tibetan, sentences like (2b-e) would be absurd. Compare: (3)

a. b. c. d.

Sie las das Buch innerhalbi einer Stunde (zu ende). Sie las das Buch ini einer Stunde (zu ende). ??Die Bombe explodierte innerhalb2 einer Stunde. Die Terroristen piazierten eine Bombe unter dem Auto. Die Bombe explodierte innerhalb2 einer Stunde (=nachdem die Terroristen sie plaziert hatten). e. #Die Bombe explodierte ini zehn Minuten.

Index "1" on "in", "within", and "innerhalb" indicates that the span of time is correlated with the duration of the event, thus sentence (3a) can be paraphrased as: She read the book, and it took her some time, but somewhat less than an hour, and sentence (3b) can be paraphrased as: She read the book, and it took her (exactly) an hour. Both sentences may be further reformulated as (4) a. There is a non-empty time interval I (ta-tz) withini which the single event takes place,

e-B-e

b. so that the complete event time corresponds to a psychologically non-empty interval J (tb-ty) where aS" or "S S " or "E S ^ R " , respectively.

3 . 3 PHASE a n d QUANTIFICATION

As the realisation of an event goes through different phases or stages and may be disturbed in each of these, the presentation of an event may focus on each of these stages. The presentation may also account for the frequency of occurrence, as well as for the intensity of the event. PHASE, known also as "phasal aspect" (Dik 1989: 189-191) is the specification of a number of different phases or sub-intervals in the development of the event from the very beginning up to the very end. Expressions of PHASE focus on the temporal structure of the event. The event may thus represented by a vector oriented from the left to the right. In principle, there

64

Part I: The concepts of TENSE, ASPECT, and MOOD (ΤΑΜ)

is no limit to the number of sub-intervals, but the most common stages are the following: On the lefit-most side is the pre-initial stage of preparation or trial, expressed by prospective expressions such as "going to do" or "be about to do something", this stage may well reach over the true initial point of the event, but generally, such expressions imply that the final stages are not achieved. Inceptive or ingressive expressions focus on the mere beginning of the event, e.g. with the German prefix los-: loslachen 'to burst into laughter', losgehen 'to go o f f , or the Russian prefix za-\ zapet' 'to start singing', zabolet' 'to fall ill* etc. Continuative expressions focus on the middle stages of the event, which is thus represented as ongoing (one may also find the term "cursive"), and in its development. In this case, the question whether the final stages eventually will be achieved or not is simply left open, but there seems to be a strong preference for the positive answer unless the contradiction is made explicit. Progressive constructions, such as the English expanded forms, add the notion of dynamicity to the continuative meaning, this means that, unlike continuative expressions, they are not very common with state verbs or transform state events into situations of activity. Egressive expressions focus on the final stage and the cessation of an activity or state, while completive expressions emphasise that a telic event has not only come to an end but has reached its inherent telos. Particular expressions focus on the stage following the proper endpoint of an event in so far as the event has led to a new state, a result. Inchoative, perfect and, in binary systems, perfective expressions refer to the resulting stage only indirectly, as they explicitly name the - preceding - result-oriented action or the mere transition. Resultative expressions often refer to both the action or transition and the state, or may refer to the resulting state only indirectly as in the above cases. Result verbs explicitly express the resulting state, referring only indirectly to a preceding event (not all states may necessarily be results, however). Reference to the resulting state may be a matter of degree and often implies a variable or even a double focus, and for this reason the temporal plane might be ambiguous. Diachronically this may give rise to considerable shifts in meaning as well as to substitutions. See Nedjalkov & Jaxontov (1988) for a typology of resultative constructions. The various shades of resultative meaning may be exemplified by presentday English (cf. also Figure 13, p. 104 below): (23)

a. The man is dead (explicit state verb, Simple Present, may imply to be the result of a development or transition "to die" or of an achievement "to kill").

3 Some possible conceptualisations of events

65

b. The man is killed (explicit achievement verb, statal (passive) perfect: presentation as state resulting from previous action, focus by preference on the resulting state). c. The man died away (explicit inchoative/transition verb, Simple Past, implies the resulting state "to be dead", variable focus on transition and/or resulting state). d. The man has died (explicit development or transition verb, Present Perfect, implying the resulting state "to be dead", variable focus on development/transition and/or resulting state). e. The man has been killed (explicit achievement verb, Present Perfect Passive: implying a resulting state "to be dead" or "to be killed", variable focus on previous action and/or resulting state). f. John jhas the man killed (explicit achievement verb, former resultative construction: resulting state of object: "to be dead" or "to be killed", presented as possession (responsibility) of subject: focus on resulting state). g. John has killed the man (explicit achievement verb, Present Perfect Active: implying a resulting state of the object: "to be dead", "to be killed", but also a resulting state of the subject: "to be a killer", "to be guilty", "to be responsible", variable focus on previous action and/or resulting state). h. John shot the man dead (explicit achievement verb, Simple Past Active plus state verb: double focus on action and resulting state of object). i.

The man was killed (explicit achievement verb, Simple Past Passive: resulting state out of focus).

j.

John killed the man (explicit achievement verb, Simple Past Active: resulting state out of focus).

It is also possible that the resulting state implicitly referred to depends on the fact that the state or activity explicitly described by the verb has come to an end and the result is, therefore, that the previous state or activity does not pertain any more, as in Latin uixerunt 'They have lived', i.e. 'they are dead' (Cohen 1989: 118). In addition, deresultative expressions like the Chinese construction with -guo indicate that the resulting stage does not obtain any more (Smith 1991: 111, 348-353, cf. Nedjalkov & Jaxontov 1988: 40f.). They imply a second stage after the only temporary resulting state.

66

Part I: The concepts of TENSE, ASPECT, and MOOD (ΤΑΜ)

Obviously, two phases of the event are of special interest for communication, the internal ongoing phase and the external result phase, because both have to do with complex situations and with the relation between events. The expressions of both, therefore, necessarily have a relational component. On the one hand, the expression of the internal phase often serves as a temporal frame for another event, and thus for the relation of incidence. Given the different temporal structure [±durative] of events as classified under the label TYPE OF EVENT, it is quite natural that one event happens while another is still in course. On the other hand, events may have a certain result, and talking about a result requires a preceding event, and thus a relation of anteriority. Every language will have, therefore, some (not necessarily, but often grammaticalised) means for the expression of these two phases or relations. However, it appears to me (on the basis of the languages presented here) that the grammaticalisation of both relational expressions follows different and conflicting strategies (see also section 1.6.3 below). QUANTIFICATION (in the following QUANT), also known as "quantificational aspects" (Dik 1989:204) is the specification of an event as indefinitely quantified in contrast to its neutral representation as concrete, singular, or definitely quantified. Indefinite quantification transforms basically telic events into atelic situations: activities, in the case of mere iteration, or states, in the case of habitual events and generic facts. QUANT comprises the following main types: Distributive expressions emphasise the overlapping or successive repetition of like events by a number of actors. Iterative expressions focus on an unspecified but lastly limited repetition of the event within a rather short period. Expressions of intensity, speed, or degree appear to be related. Generally, these kinds of expressions do not have additional modal connotations. Habitual expressions focus on the in principle unlimited and more or less regular repetition over a long period, which is taken as a characteristic feature, and they may include modal connotations of inference or prediction. Somewhat problematic cases are generic expressions that focus on events that recur in regular intervals {the sun sets in the west) and/or are always true (two plus two is four). These events may be viewed either as indefinitely quantified or as definite (true at any particular time) and quasi singular, and in both cases they may have an additional modal or evidential connotation (inference, established or shared knowledge). There is a conceptual continuum between merely iterated events and generic facts. Expressions of QUANT may thus either group all these cases together or may draw a distinction at one of the ends of the continuum, i.e. mark off either limited iteration or generic truth by particular expressions. It is, however, quite unlikely that all types of quantification may receive a particular expression, since speakers do not make such clear-cut distinctions in everyday speech.

3 Some possible conceptualisations of events

67

Quite similarly, there is a conceptual overlap, in the case of state and activity verbs, between quantification, duration, and mere ongoing, which may lead to a certain inconsistency in the use of either phasal or quantificational expressions. Take, e.g., a king's reigning: Is it one complex action of considerable duration, and in this case, is it not rather a state, or, if it is an activity, is it one ongoing activity or rather the more or less regular repetition of more particular actions? Apparently, a king does not have the habit of reigning, but so has the sun not a habit of setting in the west. Is the king's reigning thus a generic fact? Such questions may be answered quite differently by individual speakers according to their personal preferences or according to subtle contextual or pragmatic constraints. Although habitual expressions refer to state-like situations, not all states can be viewed as habits. While in some languages, habitual expressions may be acceptable in combinations with state verbs as in Comrie's (1976: 28) example the temple of Diana used to stand at Ephesus with the interpretation "that the temple stood at Ephesus throughout a certain single period, without intermission", this may sound quite odd in others, e.g. in German, a habitual expression would imply that the temple must have, at least for one subinterval, realised a choice to stand at other places, too. And similar connotations may block a habitual expression in the case of a king's reign. As they are intended to refer to rather objective features of the event, the expressions of PHASE and QUANT may be lexically derived, as in the Slavic languages where the derivations are subsumed under the label "Aktionsarten" ("modes of action", see e.g. Isacenko 1962: 385-418: "Aktionsarten mit Phasenbedeutung", "Aktionsarten mit 'quantitativer' Bedeutung"), they may be fully grammaticalised, or the reference to PHASE and QUANT may be expressed by other syntactic means like adverbs and/or complementary verbs. Despite this objective character, the choice of a representation of PHASE or QUANT may, nevertheless, be subjective. This is especially true for indefinite quantification, which implies that the speaker judges the repetition as being characteristic (Comrie 1976: 28). Even in languages that have grammaticalised a set of perspectives on events (see next section), iterative and habitual and in some cases even progressive or continuous events may be both presented according to the corresponding 0-totality perspective or without any special emphasis according to the +totality or holistic perspective (Bache 1982: 62). The marking of PHASE and QUANT by either lexical or grammatical means can be subsumed under a more general hyper-concept of "aspectuality" including TYPE OF EVENT and ASPECT or FRAMING (cf. Schwall 1991: 101). However, although these concepts are, indeed, related, I would prefer a clear terminological distinction. The expression or highlighting of one or the other phase of an event or of its frequency is a free option in many lan-

68

Part I: The concepts of TENSE, ASPECT, and MOOD (ΤΑΜ)

guages. And even where the reference to PHASE and/or QUANT is grammaticalised, the different expressions of PHASE and QUANT do not form a closed system. Every expression of PHASE or QUANT appears to be marked in relation to the standard expression of the event-as-such. The latter may be zero-marked, because the mere stating of the event typically comprises the beginning, course, and end of the event. Or it may be negatively marked, in so far as it typically does not comprise external phases and/or quantification. Thus it may enter into a symmetric opposition to either the phasal or quantificational expression while being unmarked with respect to the other, cf. section IV.3 below for the present tense construction in various Tibetan languages. The expression of the event-as such can be positively described as either (a) complexiven in opposition to the confirmative expression, (b) as definite in opposition to the iterative/habitual

expression, or (c) as concrete

in opposition to the generic expression.

3.4 ASPECT a n d FRAMING

Quite to the contrary, ASPECT and FRAMING can be defined as the obligatory pre-selection of possible presentations of PHASE and QUANT, grouped together and subsumed under a set of two or three principal

perspectives.

These perspectives form a closed system of oppositions of higher order. The concept of ASPECT (vid) or "viewpoint" (Smith 1991) was first worked out for the Slavic languages. It cannot be applied easily to other languages. But on a very abstract level one could think of five possible prototypical perspectives on the realisation of events. The most natural and informationally least marked perspective focuses on the event-as-such or - contrastively - on the event in its totality without regard to the internal or external stages. The second perspective focuses on the internal stages of the event. Two perspectives focus on the external stages of an event: the preparatory and the resulting stages. The fifth perspective focuses on the indefinite quantification of the event. These perspectives might be combined differently in various languages.

For lack of a better term, "complexive" is used in the sense as defined by Cohen (1989:78) for the aorist of durative verbs: "un aoriste non ponctuel, mais qui nomme la totalite de Taction: aoriste complexif ou constatif (aussi concentratif, totalisant)".

3 Some possible conceptualisations of events

69

perspective external: preparatory stage

tx txl TX2 t*3 tx4 tx5 tx6 tx7 tx8 tx9 WlotjclltxutxtftxMtxlstx... 1 »- • _. 'J r ~ —

J

-

preparatory stage internal / 0-totality

i "

—

—

•

course

?

i

holistic / +totality

s

evt external: resulting stage

I1 L. _

QUANT: generic habitual/iterative/ distributive

i

11

evt''

\

resulting stage 1

•

ϊ —

ι i ι ι i η - O - D -evtl --evt„ I - - -CH» ι

Figure 10. Perspectives on the realisation of events

can be defined as an, in principle, binary symmetric or subordinative opposition of ways of presentation, viewpoints, or perspectives, namely the perfective viewpoint, i.e. the presentation in the marked +totality perspective, and the imperfective viewpoint, i.e. the presentation in the unmarked 0-totality perspective (possibly also in an equipollent -totality perspective, but since this opposition is not unequivocally attested in the data presented here - possible candidates are the Westafrican and Central-Sudanic languages, cf. the remarks on p. 136, section 1.4.4 below - 1 will not try to speculate about its implications, and in the following, I will restrict my arguments to the 0-totality perspective). FRAMING can be defined as a likewise binary, but only subordinative opposition of ways of presentations, namely in the marked +internal perspective and in the neutral holistic perspective. Apparently, most linguists would nowadays subscribe to a description of ASPECT in terms of ±totality. It appears to be the most general and least misleading description possible. Nevertheless, it should not be mistaken as the conceptualisation of a whole and its parts, and particularly not from a metaphysician's standpoint that allows the conceptualisation of "part" only as logically secondary to and even phylo- or ontogenetically later than the conceptualisation of "whole". If this claim (as presented by Thelin 1990b) would be substantial at all - one may, perhaps, ask how there could be a concept of "whole" without a conASPECT

70

Part I: The concepts of TENSE, ASPECT, and MOOD (ΤΑΜ)

cept of "part" then, on the morphological as well as on the informational level, the +internal perspective or any phasal expression, as focusing on parts of the event, could never be the marked member of a subordinative opposition in terms of a part-whole relation. The part could only be taken as the negation of the whole (as in the descriptions below: event "without" its limits, "incomplete" or "uncompleted" event), and to take it as a positive value leads to a logical oddity: an opposition of +(non-total): ±(non-total). II va sans dire qu'il est impossible de definir le terme positif comme la negation du terme negatif (Holt 1943: 57).

As a matter of fact, phasal expressions, including those of internal phase, as well as the +internal perspective are morphologically and/or informationally marked with respect to a neutral representation of the event-as-such (including the holistic perspective). The positive value may be seen in a sort of instruction (comparable to a stage direction) for the hearer to shift the focus of attention to the (internal or external) structure of the event that otherwise would be taken as granted and not particularly interesting. Emphasising the structure of the event may have several pragmatic reasons. The focus on internal phases may serve as a signal that something important is going to happen in the course of the realisation of the event. And indeed, this kind of signalling or even warning function is often found in narrations (note, however, that this function presupposes a relation to another event, and that there is a strong conceptual link to the incidence relation as a sub-function of simultaneity). From the particular emphasis on the internal or external structure follows, by contrast, that the presentation of an event-as-such is without any positive value, thus informationally unmarked. In the absence of a philosophically uncontaminated alternative, I will use the terms "holistic perspective" for the neutral presentation of the event-as-such as opposed to the "+internal perspective" for the marked presentation of the internal event structure - stipulating the absence of all connotations of a whole-part relation. The terms "+totality" and "0-totality perspectives" with the connotations of a whole-part relation will be reserved for an inverted opposition. The terms "perfective" and "imperfective viewpoint" or "perfectivity" and "imperfectivity", which, as I think, should not be applied for framing languages, will be avoided, except when referring to an idealised model of ASPECT and the domains of the idealised viewpoints as a means of comparison and when referring to definitions of other authors. Provided that the basic opposition of the +totality/holistic : 0-totality/ +internal perspective is grammaticalised, the external perspective on the resulting stage may additionally be coded to form a tripartite system. In an aspect language, the external perspective on the preparatory stage is typically

3 Some possible conceptualisations of events

71

subsumed under the O-totality perspective (imperfection de conatü), so that, given the vector of event structure, the latter may focus on any point before the final limit of the event {preterminal), while, in a tripartite system, the external perspective on the resulting stage may focus on any point after the final limit (transterminal), and the +totality perspective puts a somewhat weaker focus on the final limit of the event, if not on the event-as-such {terminal/delimited). In a binary aspect system, the +totality perspective may focus on any point at and after the final limit, if not on the event-as-such ((trans-)terminal/delimited). In a framing language, the external perspective focusing on the preparatory stage may be excluded from the system as in English or it may be integrated into the (aterminal) holistic perspective as in West Tibetan. The final limit is thus only negatively established by the use of the +intemal perspective (intraterminal), which typically selects a segment between the initial and the final boundary. The expanded form makes us think of the time-limits, within which something happens, while the simple form indicates no time-limit (Jespersen 1924:279).

For this reason, the +internal perspective is incompatible with conative (merely attempted) situations in Tibetan.14 The external perspective focusing on the resulting state may be associated to the holistic perspective (as in the case of the mere past stem or Simple Past of Old and Classical Tibetan as well as of West Tibetan; note, however, that in Old and Classical Tibetan the opposition of framing is restricted to the present tense constructions), but on the basis of the patterns of markedness, I would expect that framing systems would tend to be tripartite rather than binary. Whether the subsumption of the quantificational perspective under the O-totality perspective as in the standard aspect models (see sections 1.4.1-4.4 below) is a prerequisite for the definition of ASPECT will still have to be discussed (some arguments are given in section 1.3.4.4.1 below). In any case, the difference between the five perspectives described as logical possibilities and the higher order grammaticalisation of a set of two or three perspectives in a given language should be kept in mind.15 14

15

I am not sure whether this observation can be generalised for all framing languages. It seems to be valid for English as well, but in English other kinds of preterminal or preparatory situations are compatible with the +internal perspective. Note that my use of the expressions "external" and "internal" differs somewhat from that o f Bache (1995) for the definitions of perfectivity and imperfectivity. Bache refers to the speaker's position in relation to the situation, whereas I refer to the temporal segments of the event irrespective of the speaker's standpoint. With respect to the aspect languages the respective focus might thus alternatively be termed as (trans-)terminal (+totality perspective) and pre- or intraterminal (O-totality perspective). But with respect to the framing

72

Part I: The concepts of TENSE, ASPECT, and MOOD (ΤΑΜ)

In contrast to the rather objective concepts of TYPE OF EVENT and TENSE, the concepts of ASPECT and FRAMING consist of a rather subjective choice of viewing and presenting a situation as if it occurs in total, as if it is in course, as //it is in the preparatory stage, or as //it has a result. For a similar, but more elaborate distinction of the concepts of ASPECT and TYPE OF EVENT cf. Bache (1982). That the choice of perspectives may be a subjective choice of at least two possible ways of presenting an event and has, therefore, not much to do with objective reality or truth conditions has been likewise emphasised by Smith (1991). On the other hand, the characterisation of aspectual choices as "subjective" has often been criticised, especially by Russian linguists (e.g., Maslov 1985), particularly because there are contexts where a subjective choice is blocked as in the case of adverbs such as vdrug 'suddenly' where the perfective and dolgo 'for a long time' where the 0-totality perspective is obligatory (Bache 1982: 66, with further references). Nevertheless, the choice of particular adverbs is itself a choice of ways of presentation and may as well be enhanced by a pre-selection of perspectives. But since the notions "subjective" and "objective" are by no means welldefined, I do not want to insist on that matter. After all, any representation of an event through language has some "subjective" traits as compared to the "objective reality" of the world. E.g., temporal location might be quite a subjective matter, given the elasticity of the notions of "now" or "recent" and given the possibilities of tense shift (presentation of a past event as if it was happening "now"). It is only a matter of degree by which TYPE OF EVENT as prototypical conceptualisation of events is more "objective" than ASPECT or FRAMING or any other ΤΑΜ concept. This "objectivity" is, perhaps, nothing more than an empty conceptual frame that has to be filled or (re)-shaped through operators such as adverbs, number of participants, and ASPECT or FRAMING. The resulting TYPE OF SITUATION is then as "objective" or "subjective" as the operators chosen. I think it would be particularly misleading to make "subjective choice" of perspectives the basic criterion for ASPECT or FRAMING (cf. section 1.3.4.4.3 below).

3.4.1 + totality perspective ofASPECT and holistic perspective ofFRAMING

Definitions of perfectivity and imperfectivity that are to be taken seriously are necessarily formulated in the light of the Slavic languages. But as a consequence, perfectivity is always defined as the positive member of a

languages where event boundaries do not play but a negative role such designations may rather be misleading.

3 Some possible conceptualisations of events

73

subordinative opposition. With the reservation that imperfectivity may be marked as well, and that the respective criteria are rather descriptive than categorical, the following definitions, albeit each in themselves not fully satisfactory, if taken together, appear to be quite useful for the understanding of what the perspectives or viewpoints are for. Of course, the list of possible definitions is by far not complete. (a)

"A PFV [perfective] verb will typically denote a single event, seen as an unanalysed whole, with a well-defined result or end-state located in the past. More often than not, the event [...] will be seen as a single transition from one state to its opposite, the duration of which can be disregarded" (Dahl 1985: 78, emphasis added).

(b)

"Sentences with a perfective viewpoint present a situation as a single whole. The span of the perfective includes the initial and final endpoint of the situation: it is closed informationally." ... "Marked perfective viewpoints have a span beyond the situation in focus" (Smith 1991: 103, 111, emphasis added).

(c)

"The perfective looks at the situation from outside, without necessarily distinguishing any of the internal structures of the situation" (Comrie 1976: 4, emphasis added).

(d)

"A perfective representation conveys an external situational focus, i.e. the speaker looks at the situation from outside as a whole situation." ... "The situation is represented [...] without explicit interest in its progression. This means that there is focus on the boundaries of the situation" (Bache 1995: 270, 278; emphasis added).

(e)

"Der perfektive Aspekt hebt die in der Verbsemantik angelegten Grenzen hervor und stellt einen Sachverhalt als Situations Veränderung, unter Bezugnahme auf alle seine typischen Grenzen dar" (Sasse 1991: 11; emphasis added).

(f)

"The grammatical meaning of the perfective aspect is that (a) the realisation of the verbal action is always seen as a total event, i.e., as an entire complex or a closed whole, up to its final point or limitation, and that (b) the fact of the realisation of the action thus characterised is stressed or emphasised" (Nespital 1996a: 191; emphasis added).

(g)

"The two aspectual forms [...] assign different truth-values to the contents of the two ground-propositions [...] describing the activity content ρ and [...] the [resulting] state content q. The perfective verb assigns truth-values to the propositional contents of both groundpropositions. [...] The perfective verb treats the proposition denoted by q as a foreground proposition and the proposition of ρ as a

74

Part I: The concepts of TENSE,

ASPECT,

and MOOD (ΤΑΜ)

background proposition. The perfective verb [...] thus presents an action as an event by presupposing that the proposition ρ is true with respect to a certain activity situation and by asserting that the proposition q is true with respect to a certain state situation" (DurstAndersen 1992: 100; italics and bold italics by the author, emphasis by bold letters added). All these definitions have a common point: The +totality perspective (perfective viewpoint) focuses on the event-as-such in its entirety without regard to the internal structure. Some objections are, however, in order: Only (a) Dahl and (b) Smith indicate that Q U A N T is incompatible with the +totality perspective; however, their claim that the +totality perspective is a presentation of single events is too strong, as events may also be definitely quantified by a definite count word or other definite adverbs (cf. the discussion in section 1.4.2.1 below for Ancient Greek). Likewise too strong is (a) Dahl's claim that the event and its result are located in the past. His definition is based on statistic evidence. But his sample of languages seems to be biased towards languages that display the distinction of A S P E C T only in the past tense. A S P E C T distinctions are, in general, not limited to expressions of past time reference, they are quite common with expressions of future time reference, and may also appear with expressions of present time reference. (a) Dahl's and (g) Durst-Andersen's definitions may be valid only for binary aspect systems since they both subsume the external perspective on the resulting state under the +totality perspective. Talking about a foreground proposition (g), Durst-Andersen makes the focus on the resulting state even an essential part of the definition. It has been quite often overlooked that the focus on the external stage is excluded from a basically +totality perspective, (b) Smith, at least, distinguishes between a typical or "canonical" perfective viewpoint that excludes the focus on the resulting stage and a marked perfective viewpoint that focuses on the resulting stage. Nevertheless, a somewhat clearer distinction seems to be necessary for a general theory of A S P E C T that has also to account for the opposition between Perfect and Aorist in Ancient Greek (see section 1.4.2.1 below) and other tripartite sets of perspectives. Moreover, not all sub-functions of the external perspective on the resulting state are subsumed under the +totality perspective in a binary system, cf. examples (40) to (44), section 1.4.1 below. Durst-Andersen's statement could, perhaps, be reformulated so that his "proposition q" would describe the attainment of the inherent telos, and nothing more. Formulations in terms of truth conditions, however, should be avoided, as the propositions are

3 Some possible conceptualisations of events

75

not necessarily about objective facts but merely prescriptions directing the attention of the hearer (in this case: "don't bother about structure"). For quite different reasons, the definition of (f) Nespital is biased towards the Slavic languages. That the +totality perspective emphasises the realisation of the event in its totality in contrast to a mere stating of the fact is peculiar to the Slavic and possibly also the New Indo-Aryan languages, and is due to the language-specific fusion of the concepts of ASPECT with TYPE OF EVENT, cf. also Figure 35, p. 198 below. The statements of (c) Comrie, (d) Bache, and (e) Sasse appear to be the most general, and, as QUANT does not play a role, the definition would be open also for the counter model of FRAMING in English (but not for Tibetan). Only Sasse's definition in terms of typical boundaries (e) takes into account the possible interactions of ASPECT or FRAMING with TYPE OF EVENT (see section 1.6.1 below). Summarising, I would thus propose the following definitions for the (marked) +totality perspective of ASPECT and the (neutral) holistic perspective of FRAMING.

+totality perspective: (a) Sentences with a +totality perspective present an event in its entirety. The inclusion or achievement of the typical boundaries as given from the verb semantics is emphasised, (b) Interacting with TYPE OF EVENT, atelic events are typically presented as limited or punctual (ingressive, egressive) situations, (c) The event is not indefinitely quantified. holistic perspective: (a) Sentences with a holistic perspective present an event as such. The inclusion or achievement of the typical boundaries as given from the verb semantics is taken as granted or defocused. (b) The event structure is not necessarily affected, but the notion of an arbitrarily closed situation is a common implicature for atelic events, (c) The event may be indefinitely quantified. The defocusing with respect to the final boundary may allow to present a telic event neutrally as merely attempted, i.e. the common implicature of the neutral representation that the telos has been achieved may be cancelled explicitly or implicitly. This definition of the holistic perspective in favour of the Tibetan languages comes very close to Durst-Andersen's (1992) following definition (g) of the 0-totality perspective of an aspect language. That an event is presented in the +totality perspective as a complete or realised one does not necessarily mean that the event has to be completed or

76

Part I: The concepts of TENSE, ASPECT, and MOOD (ΤΑΜ)

realised at the time of speaking or at any other reference point. The choice of the +totality perspective does not refer to an objective fact, rather it expresses the subjective conception of an action (that might never be performed) as complete in the sense of uninterrupted or "vu dans toutes ses phases ä la foi" (Isaöenko 1960: 77).

3.4.2 0-totality perspective of ASPECT and + internal perspective ofFRAMING

The definitions of imperfectivity are complementary to those of perfectivity, thus the objections are more or less the same. Dahl (1985) dispenses with an explicit definition of imperfectivity. (b)

"Imperfective viewpoints present part of a situation, with no information about its endpoints. Thus imperfectives are open informationally. The unmarked imperfective spans an interval that is internal to the situation. [...] Marked imperfectives focus on the preliminary stages of an event or the resultant intervals of telic events" (Smith 1991: 111; emphasis added).

(c)

"The imperfective looks at the situation from inside, and as such is crucially concerned with the internal structure of the situation, since it can both look backwards towards the start of the situation, and look forwards to the end of the situation, and indeed is equally appropriate if the situation is one that lasts through all time, without any beginning and without any end" (Comrie 1976: 4; emphasis added).

(d)

"An imperfective representation conveys an internal situational focus, i.e. the locutionary agent looks at the situation from inside as something in progression." - "This means that there is focus on the medial phases of the situation [...] rather than on its boundaries." "The locutionary agent not only passes on the information that the situation took place, but dwells on it and thus, creates an acute impression that it relates to something else either as a comment to something communicated immediately before the utterance or as an introduction to further information" (Bache 1995: 270, 278, 272; emphasis added).

(e)

"Der imperfektive Aspekt stellt einen Sachverhalt als Situation, unter Ausschluß aller seiner Grenzen dar" (Sasse 1991: 11; emphasis added).

(f)

"The non-perfective aspect and its grammatical forms, on the other hand, do not (a) render the realisation of the verbal action as an in-

3 Some possible conceptualisations of events

77

temally closed whole or complex, nor do they (b) emphasise the fact of the realisation of the verbal action as such. - The non-perfective verb forms merely express the performance of the verbal action" (Nespital 1996a: 191). (g)

"The imperfective verb assigns only a truth-value [...] to the propositional content denoted by p, but assigns no truth-value to the propositional content denoted by q [...], but leaves the proposition q as [...] a standard implicature: the hearer himself has to make use of all available sources in order to find out whether the proposition q is true or false" (Durst-Andersen 1992: 100; bold italics of the author).

The last part of Smith's definition (b) is obviously written in favour of English, allowing the Expanded Present he is sitting as a description of the resulting state after a transformation "to sit down", where languages like Ancient Greek would have a perfect construction (see p. 102, section 1.3.5 below). By contrast, Nespital's definition (f) is applicable only to the Slavic and the New Indo-Aryan languages. That the mere denotation or stating of the occurrence of an event is subsumed under the 0-totality perspective is due to the special combination of ASPECT with TYPE OF EVENT in the Slavic and New Indo-Aryan languages. The foregrounding of the attainment of the inherent telos gives the perfective verb a surplus of information, which seems to be in contradiction with the rather neutral stating function. It is only through this contrast of informational markedness that the imperfective verb gets this neutral value. Otherwise one has to ask how this description is compatible with the claimed 0-totality value: The description given of this use makes it look very much like a prototypical case of viewing an event as a single whole without paying 'essential attention to the internal structure of the situation' (Dahl 1985: 76).

In all other models, the stating function is connected with the +totality perspective, which seems to be, on the informational level, the most natural and thus unmarked choice (Comrie 1976: 21), corresponding thus, on the informational level, to the holistic perspective. By contrast, the 0-totality perspective could, and the +internal perspective does, appear as the marked member of the opposition on the informational level. Nevertheless, Nespital, Smith, and Sasse treat the aspectual opposition as a subordinative one with the +totality perspective always being the marked member, while Comrie allows also an equipollent or symmetric opposition. The latter view presupposes that both perspectives convey complementary information: one is about endpoints, the other about internal stages (cf. Smith 1991: 16). This

78

Part I: The concepts of TENSE, ASPECT, and MOOD (ΤΑΜ)

may, perhaps, be due to the difficulties to name positive values that are not at the same time negatively defined as in the case of the part-whole relation. With respect to the functional opposition in terms of ASPECT (±totality perspective), I would agree that the imperfective viewpoint is either the unmarked member of a subordinative opposition (0-totality perspective) or a marked member in an equipollent or symmetric opposition (-totality perspective). As shown in section 1.3.4 above, independent positive values can be formulated (and have to be formulated) with respect to pragmatic functions. Sasse hints at another possible positive value when he describes the interaction of the perspectives with verb semantics: Dabei werden durch den imperfektiven Aspekt die in der Verbsemantik angelegten Grenzen unterdrückt, während sie durch den perfektiven Aspekt hervorgehoben werden (Sasse 1991: 11; italics of the author, emphasis added) Similarly Bache (1995: 278) states: With a perfective expression the medial phases are subdued and the boundaries highlighted; with an imperfective expression the boundaries are subdued and the medial phases highlighted (emphasis added). Although these formulations favour a symmetrical relation, the "suppression" of the typical boundaries may be seen as the more active part. This becomes apparent in the description of the interaction of +internal perspective with non-durative situations: When exposed to an imperfective focus, a punctual situation is burst wide open and gets conceptually redefined (Bache 1995: 299; emphasis added). Note, however, that if the +internal perspective is employed for an incidence relation, the achievement of the telos of non-durative telic events is typically implied, example (24). A closed interval reading can also be found with the 0-totality perspective when indefinite quantification is precluded and a conative interpretation is either not possible (with accidental event verbs), not intended, or would not make sense, example (25). 16 (24)

Mary was jumping(EPa) into a taxi when John called(SPa) (Smith 1991:228).

There might be also semantic restrictions with particular verbs. E.g., the concepts underlying the controlled action verbs "to enter" and "to go out" seem to be rather fundamental in Tibetan in that they do not allow for preparatory stages (either one enters/goes out or one doesn't), and thus the Ladakhi informants almost unanimously rejected a conative interpretation (cf. p. 755, section III.3.7.2 below).

3 Some possible conceptualisations of events 79 (25)

Lorsque je sortais(Impf) de la chambre, i'ai rencontre un ami (Klein 1974:31).

The achievement is then presented rather as an accomplishment situation (slow motion). It might be conceived of as an open interval, but only in relation to the reference time (incidence), which is then necessarily conceived of as punctual. In "reality", both events happen at the same time, and the +internal or 0-totality perspectives are rather metaphorically used to background one event with respect to the other (Smith 1991: 228; cf. also section 1.5.1-3 below). Other kinds of "conceptional redefinition" are the prospective or conative interpretation of the -^internal and 0-totality perspectives respectively, and the limited iteration reading in the case of the +internal perspective. An active part lies also in the signalling function mentioned only in Bache's definition (d), which might thus contribute to the markedness of the perspective. This function, however, seems to be a secondary outcome of the interaction of ΤΑΜ marking with the pragmatic theme rheme structure of presenting chained events, rather than a function typical for the +intemal perspective (see sections 1.5.1-3 below). Summarising, I would propose the following definitions for the unmarked 0-totality perspective of ASPECT and the marked +intemal perspective of FRAMING. 0-totality perspective: (a) Sentences with a 0-totality perspective shift the attention on the internal structure of an event or present merely a part of the event. The typical boundaries as given from the verb semantics are left out of consideration, (b) Interacting with TYPE OF EVENT, durative telic events are presented as open and unlimited situations, non-durative events as durative situations, achievements might be presented either as accomplishments or activities, (c) As a consequence, the focus of inherently telic controlled actions may be shifted to the external preparatory stages (de-conatu function), (d) Events of all event classes may be indefinitely quantified. +internal perspective: (a) Sentences with a +internal perspective shift the attention on the internal structure of an event signalling some sort of interference. The typical boundaries as given from the verb semantics are suppressed or negatively established and the prototypical event time is extended, (b) Interacting with TYPE OF EVENT, non-durative events are presented

80

Part I: The concepts of TENSE, ASPECT, and MOOD (ΤΑΜ)

as durative situations, atelic durative events might be secondarily delimited. Durative telic events are typically presented as open intervals (unlimited activities), but non-durative telic events are rather presented as accomplishments (slow-motion achievements). All open interval interpretations imply a particular, mostly punctual, reference time in relation to which the situation is conceived to be open, (c) In the case of telic events, the focus might be shifted on the extended external preparatory stages (prospective function). Nondurative telic or semelfactive events may be presented as complex situations of limited iteration, (d) The event is not indefinitely quantified. When the event is presented without its endpoints, especially without the final boundary, this does not necessarily mean that the action has not been completed. With past tense reference it is even more likely than not that the event eventually came to an end or reached the telos sometime before the speech act, if no contradicting information is given in the context (Smith 1991: 125; Durst-Andersen 1992: 100). One would expect that the 0-totality perspective is not possible with non-durative telic verbs. However, such a restriction is not observed, but the 0-totality perspective has a certain impact on the TYPE OF EVENT on the sentence level. The non-durative telic verb is either presented as an activity, due to the frequent repetition of the event (habitual or iterative) or it is presented in a sort of slow motion as an accomplishment with duration. It is also possible that in absence of an internal structure on which the 0-totality perspective may focus, the preparatory stage of controlled actions comes under the focus. This effect of the 0-totality perspective on non-durative telic verbs is traditionally known as imperfectum de conatu, it is found in Ancient Greek (see Ruiperez 1982: 100), Latin (Sasse 1991: 19), or French, as well as in the Slavic languages. It seems to be, however, a less common and thus informationally marked use and the more common interpretation of the 0-totality perspective with a nondurative telic verb would be that of repetition. The conative interpretation depends on additional information from the context, e.g. the explicit or implicit negation of the intended result: (26)

Moi, je me noyais(Impf) un beau jour dans la Tamise, tu m'as tir6(PC) de l'eau (Victor Hugo, Weinrich 1964/1985: 104).

(27)

Dokazyval{Ipftv Pa), no ne dokazal(Pftv Pa). "He tried to prove but didn't" (Thelin 1990: 53).

3 Some possible conceptualisations of events 81 3.4.3 The external perspectives: preparatory and resulting stage An external perspective may focus either on the preparatory stage before the event takes place or on the resulting stage after the event has taken place. The preparatory stage may comprise the mere intention to act and may reach to the initial phase(s) of the event. The focus on the preparatory stage corresponds to what Comrie (1981b: 66) describes as "prospective aspect" for expressions such as English going to do or being about to do: A state is related to some subsequent situation, such that the seeds of this subsequent situation are already present in the earlier state, by giving expression to the subsequent situation. The "prospective aspect" or the focus on the preparatory stage would be thus the symmetrical counterpart of a perfect construction as expression of the resulting stage. In both cases the focus lies on a stage that is not explicitly mentioned, whereas the explicitly mentioned event lies outside the focus. It may be rather unusual but not contradictory that the expression of the external perspective might focus on both the preparatory and the resulting stage excluding the event as such. Focusing on the preparatory stage of an event could be conceptually associated with the necessity of stating explicitly whether the preparations have led to a result or not. Due to that conceptual link, the explicit assertion may become superfluous in due course and the result may be implied. But as I will show in section IV. 1.2, the double external focus of the Tibetan Simple Past seems to be the result of the introduction of the [±control] distinction and may thus be quite a singular development. In many or perhaps most languages, the focus on the preparatory stage is not grammaticalised. It is usually expressed by adverbials such as "almost", complementary verbs such as "to try", or a combination of both like "to be about". Even though the preparatory stage may reach beyond the initial point of the event, it is not commonly represented by imperfect(ive) constructions in the case of durative verbs. The imperfectum de conatu is thus, in fact, better described as a case of the 0-totality perspective that reaches an external stage only in default of duration and thus in default of an internal structure. The focus "on a span beyond the situation" (Smith 1991: 111) has also been called "transcendent aspect" by Hirtle (1975). Even though Hirtle contrasts his "transcendent aspect" only in a binary opposition to the "imminent aspect", which comprises the progressive as well as the non-progressive forms in English, I have found this label suggestive and my system of external, internal, and holistic or +totality perspectives and the alternative

82

Part I: The concepts of TENSE, ASPECT, and MOOD (ΤΑΜ)

designations in the figures as "transterminal" (focus on resulting stage), "preterminal" (focus on preparatory stages), "intraterminal", and "terminal" is based on his concept17. The focus on a resulting stage may be indicated by various explicit and implicit semantic and grammaticalised means, see examples (23a-h), section 1.3.3 above. The grammaticalised external perspective on the resulting stage will be treated under the heading ACTUALISATION in section 1.3.5 below as a concept of its own right. Nevertheless, it may be part of a tripartite aspect or framing system.

3.4.4 Away from a universal theory of "aspect": conceptual differences of ASPECT and

FRAMING

Aspect and framing systems apparently have some striking similarities. Otherwise one could not explain why so many authors attempt to describe English as an aspect language, despite all criticism and protests on the part of linguists concerned with Slavic languages. If one takes the incidence scheme of Pollak (1960) as the sole touchstone, then obviously, the Slavic imperfective verbs and the English expanded forms have the same function: they present an event as an open interval, which serves as a frame for another incident event. This is already all that can be said about similarities between these languages. But then, of course there are similarities to the tripartite aspect system of Romance languages, namely the formal distinction of the +totality or holistic perspective and the external perspective focusing on the resulting stage (for the very reason, hardliners of the Slavic camp would not classify the Romance languages as aspect languages). There are, however, several important points where English and other framing languages differ from the Slavic as well as from the Romance languages: (a) indefinite quantification, particularly the expression of habits, is compatible with the claimed "perfective" simple, but not with the claimed 17

A quite similar set of perspectives is also presented in Johnson (1981: 152). According to her, the "verb aspect involves reference to one of the temporally distinct phases in the evolution of an event through time." Her "event phase" corresponds to my +totality or holistic perspective, her "result phase" to Hirtle's "transcendent aspect" and to my external perspective focusing on the result. Her "developmental phase", that is any phase of the event prior to the final endpoint includes the internal as well as the preparatory stage. It is, however, not the case that languages with a claimed perfective : imperfective opposition necessarily present the preparatory stage of the event with the 0-totality or +internal perspective, at least not in all tenses and/or not in all verb classes. The imperfectum de conatu is found in aspect languages only with achievement verbs. In framing languages, conversely, a shift to the preparatory stage is observed only with transition verbs (the general acceptance of sentences like "He was reaching the top/winning the race, when...", may, however, be disputed, cf. Comrie 1976: 47).

3 Some possible conceptualisations of events

83

"imperfective" expanded forms and (b) the expanded forms cannot express conative situations (situations of mere attempt). And, if we accept West Tibetan as a somewhat odd example for a (secondary) framing system, then it turns out that (c) either the opposition of +intemal: holistic perspectives is not related to the features of telicity and boundedness or, alternatively, that the neutral presentation of an event by the holistic perspective, quite in contrast to the +totality perspective of aspect languages, allows that the inherent telos is not achieved and that the respective implicature is cancelled, (d) A temporal anchoring point for the +intemal perspective, particularly the temporal relation between the framing and the incident event, thus a partial fusion with the concept of TENSE-R seems to be essential for a framing system, but not for an aspect system where such temporal connotations may play a role, but not necessarily so (cf. also section 1.6.3 below). Conative situations, e.g., do not serve as a temporal frame. Finally (e), aspect systems show a certain affinity with (and may be restricted to) past time reference whereas framing systems show a certain affinity with (and may develop from) present time reference.

3.4.4.1

QUANT

and the definition of ASPECT

The standard reaction of adherents of a theory of "aspect" that is universally applicable or valid at least for English is the claim that indefinite quantification has nothing to do with aspectuality. In his study on ASPECT, Comrie (1976: 25) defines indefinite quantification in accordance with the standard models of ASPECT as an elementary feature of imperfectivity. According to him, imperfectivity splits up into the features habitual and continuous (or non-habitual), while the latter feature can be further specified as progressive (adding the notion of dynamicity) and non-progressive. Note that this classification does not account for the conative employment of the 0-totality perspective in aspect languages.

. 1 perfective

1

1 imperfective 1

1 habitual 1 non-progressive

1 continuous ι

I progressive

Figure 11. Classification of aspectual oppositions (Comrie 1976:25)

84

Part I: The concepts of TENSE, ASPECT, and MOOD (ΤΑΜ)

But in his study on TENSE (Comrie 1985: 40) the suggestion rather is that habituality has not much to do with ASPECT: More generally, habitual meaning lies on the boundary of the three systems of tense, aspect and mood. In principle, one could expect habituality to be expressed by means of a tense, since it involves location of a situation across a large slice of time [...] Habituality can also be aspectual, in that it refers to the internal temporal contour of a situation, in particular that the situation must occupy a large slice of time. Habituality can also be modal, since it involves induction from limited observations about the actual world to a generalisation about possible worlds. Brinton (1988: 53) argues that the habitual is probably a separate aspect category with a meaning different from that of the imperfective, because habitual events occur on different occasions while iterative events are repeated on one occasion. Iterative meaning would be either an inherent TYPE OF EVENT, e.g. "to hammer", or would be derived through the interaction of non-durative TYPE OF EVENT with progressive or continuative aspect, whereas habitual meaning would be a basic aspect meaning. The traditional classification of habitual with imperfective represents a conflation of 'imperfective' and 'durative'; habits are durative but probably not imperfective (Brinton 1988: 54). Mumm (1996: 102) objects against the above scheme of Comrie (1976: 25) that habituality cannot be viewed as mere sub-case of imperfectivity, mainly because of the ambiguity of habituality with respect to the feature of complete-d-ness and the possible subsumption of habituality under the +totality perspective, as in the case of the Gnomic Aorist. According to Bache (1995: 200), indefinite quantification such as habituality or genericity would be non-actional or state-like and thus incompatible with any kind of marked aspectuality. His general hypothesis is: that habituality is expressed by aspectually unmarked language-specific forms, presupposing thus a pattern of markedness that is, in most cases, established only through the integration of indefinite quantification into one or the other perspective. 18 18

If the Tibetan languages are accepted as having a framing system, at least in the subset of "present tense" constructions, i.e. expressions of simultaneity, then even a modified ver-

3 Some possible conceptualisations of events

85

Does this mean that the integration of habituality into a set of perspectives may lead to arbitrary results, and that it is nothing more than mere coincidence that in the three standard models of ASPECT presented below, habituality is integrated into the 0-totality perspective, and that by consequence, in all three models the essential notion of this perspective is more than just continuation (PHASE) in contrast to Brinton's apparent claim? Is there not a conceptual affinity or even a conceptual "node" between the notion of indefinite continuation and the notion of indefinite repetition? It appears to be quite natural that habits are associated with continuation. According to Johnson (1981: 155) this may lie in the fact that the end of iterated events and habits is not defined so that they could continue indefinitely into the future. Since the 0-totality perspective typically presents events as open situations, it "is the natural choice" for the presentation of iterated events or habits. Quite similarly Bache (1995: 284) holds that complex situations are conceived of as having a specific internal structure, consisting of a series of consecutively realised identical or related subsituations. It is therefore only natural to represent complex situations with an internal focus. His argument, however, biased in favour of English, is only meant to account for the use of the expanded form for limited iteration within one situation such as "the telephone was ringing". Since a habit is something one has, not something one does (Bache 1995: 239),

sion of Bache's claim would not be universally valid, because expressions for the +internal perspective, e.g. the Compound Present/Future of Old and Classical Tibetan, although [+definite] and frequently used for situations ongoing at the reference time, may be used for single events presented in their totality, e.g. for future time reference, in performative contexts, or for generic facts (which have to be treated as [+definite] but [-concrete] in Tibetan). The constructions used for the incidence relation are thus the neutral member of an opposition in terms of FRAMING ([O-continuative] or [0-complexive]). By contrast, the expressions of the holistic perspective, e.g. the Simple Present/ Future of Old and Classical Tibetan, which are compatible with indefinite quantification and genericity appear as the marked member of the opposition ([+complexive] and [0-definite]/[0-concrete]) as they can never be used with continuative function, cf. also Figure 74, p. 933 below. But since I am not interested in establishing the Tibetan languages as framing languages at any price, I would perfectly agree with the objection that this somewhat counter-intuitive pattern of markedness might be an indication that these languages had better not be described in terms of FRAMING or even ASPECT. And thus the universal validity of the rule that whatever expression is used for habits and generic facts it cannot be the marked member of an opposition in terms of ASPECT or FRAMING would not be challenged.

86

Part I: The concepts of TENSE, ASPECT, and MOOD (ΤΑΜ)

it is not counted as "complex situation" but rather as state. While such differentiation between iterated events and habits might be necessary in English to account for the different compatibility with the +internal perspective, other languages do treat iterated events, habits, and generic facts all alike or might differentiate between iterated events and habits, on the one hand, and generic facts, on the other (cf. section 1.3.3 above). To treat habits as states and to deprive them of any kind of actionality might be, after all, one of the Sapir/Whorfian misconceptions based on the improper use of metaphors. I do not know whether Tibetan speakers perceive habits as states without any dynamicity or control or rather as repeated actions, but at least they cannot say that they "have" habits (as possession or as attribute). In the case of the Slavic languages, it is quite evident that the association of continuation with the feature of habituality becomes necessary because of the feature of boundedness, telicity, or definiteness associated with the +totality perspective. But since the secondary derivation of imperfective verbs is based on a previous iterative suffix (IsaSenko 1962: 406), a suffix that is still productive in Czech (Kuöera 1981: 177f.), the Slavic languages also show that it may be the feature of iteration or indefinite quantification rather than the feature of continuation that leads to the development of a coherent aspect system. The conceptual connection is also apparent in the case of the Indo-European iterative derivation by suffix -ske/o- developing a continuative or inchoative meaning (Kurylowicz 1964: 106f.). Although Dahl (1985) does not specify the functions of imperfectivity, it may be inferred from his description of prototypical perfectivity: "A PFV (perfective) verb will typically denote a single event" (p. 78), that indefinite quantification would be a function of the 0-totality perspective. On p. 79, however, he points to the fact that the concepts of [±definite] (single event: repeated event) and [±total] may be contradictory. As already mentioned above, definiteness does not exclude repetition as far as the number of repetitions is limited or definite. A problem arises, however, when one wants to stress the fact that in a possibly indefinite series of events the event occurs in its totality on each single occasion, cf. example (51), section 1.4.2.1 below, for Ancient Greek, example (82), section 1.4.4 below, for Classical Arabic, as well as the discussion of the "non-congruent" forms in Bulgarian, section 1.4.3 below. The same problem arises for generic facts, which are true all time, for which quite often the -»-totality perspective is used as with the Gnomic Aorist in Ancient Greek, cf. example (52), section 1.4.2.1 below. Obviously, such cases of absolute regularity may (alternatively) be subsumed under definiteness, cf. section 1.3.3 above. In habitual contexts, the choice of the particular perspective may also be pragmatically motivated. In Hindi, the Imperfective Present (i.e., the present

3 Some possible conceptualisations of events

87

tense of the simple verb) is typically used for repeated events, when the series is seen as unlimited, and in this case the Imperfective Present merely has stating function. As actions of this type may be rendered by both aspectual forms, the selection of the +totality perspective (in this case the present tense of the compound verb) is then connected with the[] oppositional characteristic [] of pointing out each single action [...] and as an event whose realisation carries a special communicative or informational weight.... Whereas the sentence with ätä hai refers, so to speak, to a normal course of events, the following sentence with the perfective V[erbal] Expression] ä jätä hai stresses the realisation of each single action of the series as an extraordinary event (Nespital 1996a: 197; emphasis added). Thus on the basis that habitual events facts are more naturally presented with the Imperfective Present, which is thus informationally unmarked, the Perfective Present is used for habitual events, if the occurrence of the event, the manner of its realisation, or some other concomitant fact is foregrounded: (28)

Teduä märnä cäho, to mal uskä thaur dikhä dü. Rät ko yahä roz pänl pine ätä hai (Ipftv Prs). KabhT-kabhl dopahar me bhl ä jätä hai (Pftv Prs). "If you want to kill a leopard, I will show you his whereabouts. Every day he comes here at night to drink water. (But) sometimes he comes here even at noon" (Nespital 1996a: 197, nr. 16).

In Hindi, at least, the marked use of the perfective "Compound Verb" or "Verbal Expression" in iterative or habitual contexts shows that the association of habituality with the 0-totality perspective is the more natural and less marked one. In this particular case, the +totality perspective could be motivated by the contrast and the restriction ("sometimes") of the still indefinite iteration. The presentation of generic facts with the +totality perspective may likewise be pragmatically motivated. Generic facts may be seen to hold for an indefinite time without any limit. But the emphasis may also lie on the fact that the assertion is, indeed, true in each and every instance where the conditions described are met with. Generic facts are not merely special cases of habitual events, as has been suggested by Brinton (1988: 54). As they are law-like (cf. the "natural laws"), they seem to be beyond any temporal and aspectual conceptualisation, and it might be a quite natural solution to treat them as if they were compact and single or at least definite events. As it may be important to differentiate between iterativity and habituality, it may be likewise necessary to distinguish generic facts

88

Part I: The concepts of TENSE, ASPECT, and MOOD (ΤΑΜ)

from habits, which are, after all, only contingent events. But the difference between iteration, habits, and generic facts is one of ontological or epistemological status and thus one of MOOD, rather than of ASPECT or TENSE. On the other hand, it is quite striking that the most prominent function of a Perfective Present in the Slavic languages is, indeed, the expression of habituality, example (29) for Czech (cf. also Isaöenko 1960: 86, 1962: 282 for Russian) - and one might, therefore doubt the general assumption that the Perfective Present refers to a single event only. To claim that the Perfective Present in habitual contexts denotes a single event, which is exemplary for a whole series of similar events (Isaöenko 1962: 283f.), might sound like a rather poor excuse. (29)

Kdy chlapec dostane(Pftv Prs) penize, koupi(Pftv Prs) vzdy darek pro divku. When the boy got/gets the money, he (always) bought/buys a present for the girl (TMAQ 102; Dahl 1985: 79).

I would rather suggest that the use of a perfective present tense construction for habitual events may be explained by the vague notion of "present" or "now". If a distinction is made between a very narrowly conceived moment of "now" or an "acute" or "actual present" of ongoing events and any other kind of present time reference by the use of a progressive or continuative construction, than the remaining part naturally includes reference to situations that have held in the past, will hold in the future, and thus do hold also in the present. Complexive (i.e., non-continuative (exclusive)) present tense constructions are, therefore, likewise a quite natural means for the expression of generic facts and habits, and may thus be used in competition with forms that are (or originally have been) marked for indefinite quantification or are simply not marked for limitation. Obviously there are two possible conceptual links between the feature of [±complexive] or [±continuative], on the one hand, and the feature of [±definite] or [±habitual],19 on the other, which may lead to different sets of perspectives. As opposed to the feature [+limited] or [+bounded], the feature [+continuative] may be linked with the feature [+habitual] (i.e., [-definite]) since both features go along with the feature [-/0-limited] or [-/0-bounded]. In this case, however, both features are no longer positively marked: the 19

Here and below, if nothing else is stated, the feature [+habitual] includes the features [+iterative] and [+generic], and it is used as the positive equivalent of [-definite] (i.e., indefinitely quantified) and vice versa. Likewise [+complexive] is the positive equivalent of [-continuative] and vice versa. It will be, from time to time, necessary to switch between these ascriptions, e.g. to avoid negative values for marked functions.

3 Some possible conceptualisations

of events

89

imperfect(ive) construction has either a continuative or a habitual function, but hardly ever expresses the habitual continuation of an event. The imperfect(ive) construction is thus neither marked for continuation nor for indefinite quantification, and particularly not for a combination of both functions, it is neutral with respect to both features: [0-continuative]/[0-habitual]. On the contrary, when the feature [+continuative] is primarily associated with the incidence relation, which is typically a relation between two single events, then it is quite evident that it is necessarily linked with the feature [+definite], and that the feature [-/O-definite] is then linked with the feature [-/O-continuative]. On the assumption that the marked +intemal perspective as an expression of the incidence relation is incompatible with indefinite quantification (cf. also Bache 1995:199), whereas the feature [+complexive] may go along with the feature [+habitual],20 the following combinations are possible:

mutually exclusive

FRAMING

ASPECT

continuative + +

habitual +

0

0 +

+

—

0 0

markedness

function

marked

internal

unmarked

neutral

neg. marked

habitual holistic

marked unmarked

perfective imperfective

—

-

0 +

-

0

—

—

0

0

Figure 12. Possible combinations of the features [±continuative] and [±habitual]

and FRAMING thus differ considerably with respect to the patterns of markedness. But one could still argue that they belong to the same type of conceptualisation, just as the inverted patterns of case marking of nominative/accusative and ergative/absolutive languages do not affect the participation in the grammaticalised concept of CASE or just like the binary temporal oppositions of past : non-past and future : non-future would still be instantiations of TENSE-Α. However, as has been mentioned earlier (p. 51, section 1.3.2.2 above), an opposition in terms of future : non-future is quite probably better described as an opposition in modal terms such as "realis : ASPECT

20

This assumption is derived from the patterns of markedness in Tibetan (cf. Figure 74, p. 931 below) and from the observation that habits and generic facts may be presented by the holistic and even by the +totality perspective in combination with present tense.

90

Part I: The concepts of TENSE, ASPECT, and MOOD (ΤΑΜ)

irrealis" or perhaps better: "potential : non-potential", "obligatory : nonobligatory", or the like. Inversion in the patterns of markedness may thus be a sign that the underlying conceptualisations differ considerably. Another quite important difference is that the opposition in terms of ASPECT is quite often restricted to the temporal domain of past time reference, whereas the development of the opposition in terms of FRAMING apparently starts in the domain of present time reference, see, e.g., the development in French and Portuguese, section 1.4.2.2, and may then spread to other temporal domains as in English. It is certainly no mere accident that the Perfective Present in the Slavic languages corresponds to an opposition in terms of FRAMING and that a similar opposition (although with somewhat odd patterns of markedness) can be found with the "present tense" constructions in the Tibetan languages. It seems that temporal and/or modal conceptualisations such as influence/control or relevance in combination, perhaps, with pragmatic features play an additional role in the development of the two systems. As the example of Czech shows, aspect languages of the Slavic type may have two distinct morphemes for the imperfective viewpoint, distinguishing habituality and continuity (Kuöera 1981). One could even think of an equipollent opposition between a +totality and a -totality perspective that would allow a subdivision for each of the members. The +totality perspective ("X") could then be subdivided into ±external/resulting ("χ"), the -totality perspective ("Y") could be subdivided into ±habitual or ±continuative respectively ("υ"), thus Χ(+χ : -χ/0) : Υ(+υ : -υ/0). But in this case, the definition given in the beginning of section 1.3.4 above as a grouping together of possible presentations and thus a grammaticalisation of a higher order would be violated and one may ask whether such a system would not be better accounted for in terms of the elementary oppositions. Similarly, the West Tibetan example shows, that a framing system may develop into a system of four perspectives, namely external-resulting, holistic, quantificational, and internal, encoding the quantificational perspective separately. It is then, however, no longer obvious which of the several oppositions is the dominant one, and such a system is better described according to the elementary oppositions in terms of PHASE, QUANT, and ACTUALISATION. One may even ask whether English is not better described by the more elementary terms of PHASE and ACTUALISATION, as indefinite quantification is not unambiguously grammaticalised. While (limited) iteration may go along with the +internal perspective, habits and generic facts may be subsumed under the holistic perspective. But the habitual interpretation seems to depend on adverbs such as "every day", "always", etc., and the more typical expression

3 Some possible conceptualisations of events 91 for habits is a periphrasis with "used to" (in past time contexts) or "has/had the habit of'. Kurytowicz (1964: 96f.) mentions Lithuanian as combining, the "punctual" (complexive) with the "durative" (continuative) function in one (neutral) form in opposition to a (marked) habitual expression, on the one hand, and a perfect construction, on the other. This quantificational system is the apparent counterpart to a framing system of the English type, but it would obviously violate the above-mentioned definitions of the universal theory of "aspect". Since first, it is claimed that indefinite quantification has nothing to do with aspectuality. Secondly, and more important, the basic opposition of +totality/holistic : 0-totality/+intemal perspectives exemplified by the incidence scheme cannot be established. The conceptual differences between the English and the Lithuanian model are quite apparent. But for the very reason, the differences between the standard model of ASPECT as a combination of the elementary concepts of PHASE and QUANT and the model of FRAMING based only on the elementary concept of PHASE should be accepted. What the various models of ASPECT, FRAMING, and the Lithuanian model have in common can only be described on the elementary level of PHASE or QUANT, and there is no particular need for a higher order cover term.

3.4.4.2 Unsuccessful attempt and felicity The second of the above-mentioned features rarely appears in the actual discussion about ASPECT (as an exception, cf. Klein [1969]: 127-136, reported by Li Chor-Shing 1991: 9f.), quite probably because something like the imperfectum de conatu is unknown to English, and also because its role in the aspect languages is less prominent than the features of continuation and indefinite quantification. Adherents of a universal theory of "aspect" might argue that this feature is marginal and, therefore, does not belong to the essential functions of "imperfectivity". As the Arabic model shows, the conative function may be missing with the standard expression of the 0-totality perspective, but may be found with a more explicit progressive (?) construction, see example (131), section 1.6.7 below. The conative function is, perhaps, not absolutely necessary for the definition of the 0-totality perspective in a particular language, but then this might, in fact, be a deviation from the standard pattern. Moreover, the Tibetan languages, and particularly West Tibetan, show that in a framing system, conative situations are not only incompatible with the internal perspective, but, quite to the contrary, they can be compatible with the holistic perspective. Not only is the holistic perspective unmarked

92

Part I: The concepts of TENSE, ASPECT, and MOOD (ΤΑΜ)

with respect to the +internal perspective, but the opposition in terms of FRAMING itself is related basically to the incidence relation and the pragmatic consequences of the instruction "look at the internal structure: something is going to happen". The question whether the event has a natural final boundary and whether such final boundary is eventually achieved, which is so important for aspect languages, simply does not matter. Smith (1991: 119) suggests a default neutral viewpoint for languages where ASPECT is not grammaticalised or not grammaticalised in all temporal or modal subsets. It turns out, that in most cases, such a neutral viewpoint is not compatible with conative situations. For this reason even in an aspectless language like German the following sentences with accomplishment and achievement verbs are quite odd if not unacceptable. In the case of a derived accomplishment situation, example (30), the acceptance seems to depend on the dialect and/or sociolect of the speaker as well as on the context of the utterance, example (31) with an achievement verb is an obvious contradiction, except, perhaps, in a very emotional or highly artificial context. (30)

??Wir bauten(Pa) , aber es wurde nicht fertig.

(31)

#Er tötete(Pa) den König, aber der König starb nicht.

Given this evidence, one could perhaps argue that the compatibility of conative situations with the informationally neutral holistic perspective in Tibetan languages results from the simple fact that these languages do not have telic verbs. In this case, there would be no typical final boundary to be achieved, and hence, since all situations were merely conative, the neutral perspective, necessarily, must be compatible with conative situations. But this would be only a particularity of Tibetan and thus without any consequence for a general theory of "aspect". Certainly, one can argue about the existence of telic verbs in Tibetan or any other "eastern" language as one may argue about the existence of a concept of agency. But according to my attempt of reconstruction, telicity must have been introduced into Proto-Tibetan at the latest with the distinction of controlled action and accidental event verbs, when a particular derivative verb stem was marked for the agent's responsibility for a certain result (see also the discussion in section IV. 1.2 below). The Tibetans, thus, have integrated conceptualisations about agency and the agent's intentions or aims into their language. It is only that they are, compared to speakers of some "western" Indo-European languages, somewhat more sceptical about how much control one has over the realisation of the telos. Romantic notions about "eastern languages" are not really helpful. One could as well ask whether the speakers of the Slavic languages

3 Some possible conceptualisations

of events

93

do have telic verbs and a concept of agency, as in most cases, the basic verb form, the imperfective verb, apparently denotes unbounded "processes". Nevertheless, a general theory of ASPECT and FRAMING has to take into account the possibility of languages without telic verbs. However the verbs of such languages have to be conceptualised, the events denoted by them do not have an inherent final boundary. Without an inherent final boundary the +totality perspective becomes a logical impossibility. There are no such entities as complete(d) events or closed situations. There are merely unlimited states and processes or (preparatory) activities that may or may not lead to a transformation. The neutral presentation of such events, therefore, corresponds exactly to the 0-totality perspective in the Slavic languages as defined by Durst-Andersen (1992: 100; cf. section 1.3.4.2 above, definition (g)). But it is, of course, possible to focus on the middle segment(s) of such atelic events. Languages without telic verbs could thus display an opposition in terms of FRAMING, but not one in terms of ASPECT. Completive or resultative expressions may then be introduced to paraphrase telicity, and by this means an aspectual system may develop together with telic verb phrases. By contrast, languages that have telic verbs may grammaticalise either ASPECT or FRAMING.

It is even possible that forms that are marked in terms of one or the other opposition may be found side by side in one language, as in Portuguese (section 1.4.2.2), in the Tibetan languages (cf. Figure 74, p. 933), and perhaps even in the Slavic languages (Perfective Present: Perfective Past). This may be taken as a further evidence of the difference in conceptualisation behind ASPECT and FRAMING. But it seems to be extremely unlikely that a language should have grammaticalised and systematised both oppositions over all temporal and modal domains. There is no need for such an over-complex system. As one of the main differences is the treatment of indefinitely quantified events, individual phasal and quantificational expressions could do the job much better and with fewer inconsistencies. The occurrence of marked forms of both types in the same temporal or modal domain of a given language may thus be a further indication that neither ASPECT nor FRAMING is the dominant concept in that language.

3.4.4.3 Minimal contexts, elementary functions, and conceptualisations of higher order At this point, the objection is legitimate, that the definitions for ASPECT and FRAMING given in the beginning of section 1.3.4. above might be sort of ad hoc definitions, and even more, heavily biased towards the Slavic languages.

94

Part I: The concepts of TENSE, ASPECT, and MOOD (ΤΑΜ)

The consequence of giving up the above definitions would be that any language that shows the grammaticalisation of one of the features described as PHASE or QUANT could be counted as "aspect" languages and that concept of "aspect" would really be universal. But at the same time it would be superfluous, since the more elementary concepts of PHASE and QUANT would do the same job, and even more precisely. If we compare the embarrassing and seemingly unnecessary multiplication and overlapping of the West Tibetan present tense constructions with their quite subtle differences in terms of PHASE and QUANT with the "neat" and "orderly" systematic behaviour of ASPECT in the Slavic languages or of FRAMING in English, these languages seem to be worlds apart. The latter languages show a significant reduction of alternatives of expressions, at least on the syntactic level. One could, therefore, think of ASPECT and perhaps also of FRAMING as grammaticalisations of higher order, and with respect to this higher ordering the term ASPECT, at least, is all but superfluous. Nevertheless, the question remains whether we need an additional linguistic concept of FRAMING at all. Since it is likewise defined as a grammaticalised concept of a higher order, it seems to be of the same type as ASPECT and thus redundant. Ultimately, the answer to that question depends on what one counts as relevant. I, for my part, decided to introduce an additional linguistic concept, because I came to the conclusion that the above-mentioned differences with respect to indefinite quantification and telicity are relevant enough to distinguish two different systems (obviously based on different conceptualisations) by quite different names and not merely by a somewhat reserved designation such as "?aspect" or an indefinite enumeration of aspect types. Proponents of a universal theory of "aspect" would probably argue that the above-mentioned features are not relevant at all, but merely particularities of individual languages. The question is certainly debatable. But the above-mentioned features are not the only ones that are eliminated from the discussion as being irrelevant. Bache (1995: 289), e.g., restricts the "universal model of verbal categories" explicitly to "the referring propositional mode of language". That means all other "modes of language" or illocutionary acts are excluded from the "metalinguistic specifications" (p. 291). With respect to the definition of ASPECT, this concerns primarily the mode of demonstrating or the use of performative verbs. These contexts are quite typical for the choice of a +totality or holistic perspective for a narrowly defined present moment, at least in some languages, including English. Even sports reports, another typical context, are disclaimed as being rather "peripheral uses of the referring mode", because the use of the Simple Present would be (a) an institutionalised way of expression, (b) purely stimulus-

3 Some possible conceptualisations of events

95

bound, and/or (c) merely serving "as a medium supporting or replacing a visual experience" (p. 290). With all such exclusions, to which one may add all sorts of fiction (as no longer referring or as being unrelated to the deictic centre of the speech act, cf. Bache 1995: 260), one can safely arrive at the then universally valid conclusion that actual present time reference and the +totality or holistic perspective would be incompatible. But such claim is in striking contrast with the insight in the elasticity of temporal notions of "present" (Bache 1995: 263) and the subjective character of the choice of perspectives (Bache 1982). The latter assumption, however, if it is taken as the sole criterion, leads to another fallacy. In the search of a minimal context where the choice of perspectives would be, in fact, "subjective", i.e. not conditioned by or interacting with contextual features such as adverbs, T E N S E - Α , or TYPE OF SITUATION (Bache's "Aktionsart" ( 1 9 8 2 ) or "ACTIONALITY" ( 1 9 9 5 ) ) Bache comes to the conclusion that only in the case of durative atelic verbs the speaker or writer is left with a subjective choice in the sense that he may choose to describe the situation either as a unit, or 'total event' [...] or as something unfolding, with specific attention to the internal structure of the situation [...]. Provided of course that both values are appropriate in context, the choice of aspect is here optional since the situation described (and thus the Aktionsart) remains the same no matter which of the aspect is chosen (Bache 1982: 65). (32)

a. II regna(PC) pendant trente ans. b. II regnait(Impf) pendant trente ans. "He reigned [but not: #was reigning] for thirty years" (Bache 1982: 63).

(33)

a. My otmetili(Pftv Pa) prazdnik na dace, b. My otme£ali(Ipftv Pa) prazdnik na dace. "We celebrated [but not: #were celebrating] the holiday at our house in the country" (Bache 1982: 67).

(34)

a. We celebrated(SPa) Stephanie's birthday at my uncle's place. b. We were celebrating(EPa) Stephanie's birthday at my uncle's place (Bache 1995: 123).

The minimal pairs are designed as a means that leads us out of the vicious circle that we cannot a priori define "aspect" according or in contrast to the model of the Slavic languages, since we do not know whether indefinite quantification and the feature of telicity/boundedness (including the imper-

96

Part I: The concepts of TENSE, ASPECT, and MOOD (ΤΑΜ)

fectum de conatu) are essential features of "aspect" as long as we do not know what "aspect" should be (cf. Bache 1995: 31, 47). But the problem of such minimal contexts as in examples (32) to (34) as well as in example (36), section 1.4.4.1 below, is that it becomes extremely difficult to say what the "universal semantic properties" of looking at the situation from within and from outside, which is nothing less than depending "on an innate genetic predisposition" (Bache 1995: 13), exactly are - when the boundaries between inside and outside cannot be defined as with activities. Even more so, if the single sentence as the "minimal textual unit" is taken to be the "primary unit of analysis" (Bache 1995: 125), not even the incidence scheme is a valuable argument, since it necessarily transgresses the sentence boundary, not to speak of other discourse features such as the background vs. foreground distinction. From the claim that the TYPE OF SITUATION should not be changed one would have to draw the conclusion that the Slavic and Romance languages do not have a "category" of ASPECT, since no minimal pair could be found without the limitation of an activity and the establishing of a boundary by the +totality perspective, presenting the activity (and in some languages perhaps also the state) as if it were an accomplishment or even an achievement, or without the suppression or defocusing of the boundaries of a telic event through the 0-totality perspective as if it were an activity, or without indefinite quantification, which would, according to Bache (1995), likewise amount to a change of situation from accomplishment or achievement to state. In this context, it is quite interesting that Bache (1982) renders both variants of (32) and (33) with the Simple Past, giving thus the impression that the Expanded Past in English might not be functionally equivalent to the 0-totality perspective in French and Russian, whereas Bache (1995) presents an example for the subjective choice of Simple and Expanded Past in English, (34), that is apparently formed on the Slavic model of (33), giving thus the opposite impression. Part b of the Russian example could, of course, also be interpreted as a case of indefinite quantification: "We used to celebrate ...", while part b of the English example could not get this interpretation. The claim that the TYPE OF EVENT/SITUATION should not be changed is entirely biased towards a framing system, with the +internal perspective as the marked member. Some situations would be changed through the suppression of the boundaries. But its unmarked counterpart, the 0-totality perspective leaves or can leave the boundaries out of focus, and thus none of the situations is changed. By contrast, the +totality perspective as the marked member of an aspectual opposition as well as its unmarked counterpart would necessarily lead to a change of some situations by the focusing on, and

3 Some possible conceptualisations of events

97

the suppression of, the boundaries. For this reason, Slavic linguists would argue contrariwise that only telic verbs could display the opposition of ASPECT (Maslov 1985: 13, cf. also Schwall 1991: 33-38 and Durst-Andersen 1992: 59-64). Even if we accept that the functional difference between each minimal pair is "purely" that of a focus on the internal structure of the event, mainly to express the incidence relation, then we arrive at best at an elementary distinction in terms of PHASE: one of several possible phases is selected or foregrounded whereas all other phases and the event in its totality are backgrounded. It is not even defined that this selection goes along with a reduction of other expressions of PHASE, as I would presuppose for a framing system. What Bache (1982 or 1985) calls "aspect" would rather be a sub- case of PHASE. If the incidence relation is really all that "aspect" is about, we do not need a term of higher ordering. Of course, one might now object that what I call PHASE (or FRAMING) is exactly what Bache describes as the metalinguistic category of "aspect". This would be fine as long as one would not suggest that this kind of universal "aspect" or my PHASE (or FRAMING) would be the same as what I have described as ASPECT. We just would have to think about another name for the latter concept. Names do not matter. What does matter are the functional differences. And it seems that the functional opposition of the +totality and the O-totality perspective in the Slavic, Romance, and Arabic languages cannot be captured by the minimal contexts given above and by a description in terms of "aspect" (or my PHASE) alone. Even if these languages should turn out to be rather idiosyncratic cases (Dahl 1985: 69) among the majority of languages of the world, we would still be in need for a different name for this particular conceptualisation. Given the fact that the term "aspect" was first introduced for the Slavic languages we should keep it, if only as a matter of politeness, for the possibly idiosyncratic behaviour displayed by these languages, and look for another name for the desired universal metalinguistic category. The terms "phase" and "quant" for the elementary concepts also known as phasal and quantificational aspect (Dik 1989) and "framing" for the more particular and possibly higher order concept are but suggestions. I have chosen the latter term because it has a positive value, not involving connotations of the whole-part relation, because it cannot be confounded with current descriptions of PHASE or ASPECT, and because it seems to describe best the two essential or most frequent motivations of choosing the +intemal perspective (when there is a choice): (a) the event, presented as being in the process of unfolding, serves as a temporal frame for a second, incident event (Jespersen 1924: 279; Hirtle 1967: 60; Smith 1991: 128) and (b) the event,

98

Part I: The concepts of TENSE, ASPECT, and MOOD (ΤΑΜ)

presented rather as a kind of state, providing background information, serves as the narrative framework for the foreground plot in narrations (cf. also Rijksbaron's 1984:2 description of the Ancient Greek Imperfect as "creating a framework within which other actions may occur").

3.5 ACTUALISATION: the current relevance of the resulting state

If a past (or an earlier) event and/or its result turn out to be of relevance for the present situation (or for a later situation at a given reference time), the event and its result may be actualised and presented as (fit was belonging to the present (or later) situation. ACTUALISATION as a higher order concept combines features of TENSE-R (anteriority) and PHASE (resulting stage) and, in absolute tense languages, possibly also of TENSE-A (temporal location of event or resulting state). Current relevance at the time of the speech act is typically expressed by a present perfect construction; the reference time at which something is thought to be relevant may also lie in the past (past perfect construction) or in the future (future perfect construction). A perfect construction expresses "a relation between two time points" (Comrie 1976: 52), a relation of anteriority between an explicitly expressed event and an implicit resulting state (either of the agent or of the patient), and it establishes thus two reference time intervals: (a) the event time and (b) a sub-interval of the resulting state, i.e. the time of the situation in relation to which the result is taken to be relevant. Due to this function, perfect constructions appear to be of a chameleon-like character with respect to absolute temporal reference. The latter may depend on whether the main focus lies: on the event or on the resulting state. This is not a great problem when the resulting situation is located in the past by a past perfect construction. Then, of course, the preceding event is automatically located in the past as well through the anteriority relation. The situation is less clear when the relevant resulting state is located in the present by a present perfect construction and the preceding event thus belongs to the past. It has been often stated that, e.g. in English, the Present Perfect conveys information about the present situation, however, the verb itself expresses an event that is located in a preceding interval of time and nothing is said explicitly about the present situation. It seems thus that perfect constructions have a double or variable focus which may lie either on the preceding event (actional perfect) or on the resulting state (statal perfect) (cf. Sacker 1983: 214, Maslov 1985: 15, Schwall 1991: 372), and sometimes, perhaps, on the abstract fact of a relation of anteriority.

3 Some possible conceptualisations of events

99

The relation between the event and the time of speaking is, at least theoretically, not defined when the resulting situation is located in the future by a future perfect construction. The event may be located posterior as well as simultaneous or anterior to the speech act (Comrie 1981a). However, this problem is perhaps relevant only in languages where the absolute temporal relation between resulting state and speech act is grammatically encoded, as in English. In Old and Classical Tibetan, where only TENSE-R is grammatically encoded, the constellation that the speech act lies in between the event and the result or is simultaneous with the event is apparently impossible, since the use of the mere past stem as a /Future Perfect depends entirely on a clear context such as propositions of prophecy, wishes, promises, etc., as well as the result clause (