PL EN


2017 | 8 | 1 | 111-123
Article title

Biaspectuals Revisited

Authors
Content
Title variants
Languages of publication
EN
Abstracts
The article deals with (or rather begins with) Czech biaspectual verbs. Although biaspectuals (sometimes referred to as aspectual homonyms) distinguish between perfective vs. imperfective meaning, there is nothing in their morphological makeup to signal this meaning distinction. To determine the aspect of a biaspectual, i.e. to disambiguate its aspectual homonymy, biaspectuals are sometimes synonymously substituted by verbs whose morphological makeup does signal their aspect; the biaspectuals are then considered perfective or imperfective (used perfectively vs. imperfectively) depending on the aspect of their substituents. The article demonstrates that this method is deficient: it is not necessarily conclusive. To demonstrate this, the following observations were made and conclusions drawn on Czech aspect and aspect in general. i. Despite the fact that aspect is thought of as an obligatory verbal category in Czech, it is not a matter of the verb alone, but rather of a larger linguistic expression. The mutual morphological makeup of the verb is only one of the many factors/exponents which (“in cooperation”) determine the aspectual interpretation of the respective linguistic expression. Some of these factors are identifiable as aspectual exponents in the expression itself (for example tense, verb complements, adverbial verb complements among them), others are beyond its scope, i.e. they are part of the (situational) context in which the expression is used. ii. Linguistic expression can be interpreted as perfective, imperfective, aspectually unspecific or the aspectual distinction can be irrelevant for it — despite that, aspect is considered to be an obligatory category. iii. Furthermore, the morphological imperfective can be used to co-express perfectivity, and the morphological perfective can be used to refer to an imperfectively conceived process/event. Therefore, due to this and points i. and ii. above, the verb IS NOT inherently perfective or imperfective, it is USED perfectively, imperfectively, or in an aspectually unspecific way.
Contributors
  • Akcent College
References
Document Type
Publication order reference
Identifiers
YADDA identifier
bwmeta1.element.desklight-085747cc-9ee9-4c85-9fc3-ab26a2de20eb
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.