Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 4

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  imperfective
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
1
Content available remote

On Typology of Polish and French Imperfective

100%
Lingua Posnaniensis
|
2010
|
vol. 52
|
issue 2
67-77
EN
The aim of this paper is to present a typology of Polish imperfective past tense forms in the factual use for the purpose of creating a set of guidelines for their translation into French language. Although descriptions of factual imperfective aspect is not new to linguistics, both Polish and international, equivalence of its forms in other languages pose problems to foreigners and native speakers alike. This is especially true in French, where Polish past imperfective forms could be expressed by a number of past tenses. In order to proceed with our task we are going to adopt a classification of Polish imperfective verbal forms based on the following criteria: general factual meaning or specific (concrete) factual meaning as a primary measure and imperfective or perfective intention of the imperfective form as a secondary measure. Such systematization of the phenomenon in Polish will allow us to formulate guidelines of equivalence with French past tenses.
2
76%
EN
In recent times, German as a language with a well-functioning tense system is developing a special progressive form, marking actions and processes which are continual and not yet terminated. There is a variety of forms like beim Arbeiten or gerade im Begriff sein zu arbeiten, but most usual and by far most grammaticalised is the am-progressive (er ist am Arbeiten, “he is working”). In this paper the restrictions which still exist are discussed. They are limited, but although they are not entirely accepted in standard German, the range of these constructions is extensive. In spite of this fact, the German language does not tend to develop general aspectual markers. A comparison with English shows this clearly. However, in its early periods the German language had overt aspectual characteristics. Especially constructions with the present participle and the auxiliary verbs sein and warden could function as aspect partners. These constructions gradually disappeared at the end of Middle High German. Thus, modern German has only very few aspectual markers, which are restricted to progressive constructions verbalizing actions and processes in actual situations.
3
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Biaspectuals Revisited

63%
XX
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.
EN
This paper describes the complex tense and aspect morphology in Nama, a previously undocumented Papuan language of southern New Guinea. Tense/aspect suffixes followed by agent/actor referencing suffixes occur in combination with one of two sets of patient referencing prefixes. Most of the tense/aspect suffixes mark two possible tenses, and the choice of a prefix from a particular set determines the appropriate interpretation. The distinction between imperfective and perfective aspect is central to the Nama tense/aspect system, and the forms of the perfectivity markers depend on the number category of the grammatical arguments: dual versus non-dual, which encompasses both singular and plural (i.e. more than two). At the same time, the agent/actor suffixes and patient referencing prefixes generally index two different number categories: singular versus non-singular. Each of the two basic aspects has three different tenses, with some other aspectual distinctions occurring only with singular arguments. A combination of imperfective and perfective marking is also used.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.