The past continuous (progressive) tense
The primary meaning of the Past Continuous is that of a past action shown in its progress at a given past moment, e. g.:
The door wasslowly opening,and Anthony found himself gazing into a pair of pale-gray hooded eyes. (Gordon) She followed his gaze through the falling rain and saw a man and a girl coming from the large block of flats opposite her home. Now they weregetting into a little motor car. (Gordon)
Verbal processes in narration may also be denoted by the Past Continuous, e. g.:
The fog wasrapidly disappearing,already the moon shone quite clear on the high ground on either side. It seemed to him very far off a great throng was forming. It was menacing, shouting.It stirred, it moved, it was advancing.
Progression in time as denoted by the Past Continuous is most fluctuating and variable: from several short stretches of time to long duration, repeated actions or simultaneity or, say, increasing duration. Examples are:
Suddenly Soames said: "I can't go on like this. I tell you I can't go on like this. His eyes were shiftingfrom side to side, like an animal's when it looks for way of escape". (Galsworthy) Jolyon gazed into his hat, his embarrassment was increasingfast; so was his admiration, his wonder, and his pity. (Galsworthy) ...But Mammy was showing her age and rheumatism was slowingher lumbering tread. (Mitchell) Here the implied context is all that exists or can be considered relevant.
Two other youths, oblique-eyed, dark-haired, rather sly-faced, like the two little boys, were talkingtogether and lolling against the wall; and a short, elderly, clean-shaven man in corduroys, seated in the window, was conninga battered journal. (Galsworthy) Compare also:
a) She was playingthe piano from eleven to twelve this morning. b) She playedthe piano from eleven to twelve this morning.
What matters in the choice of the verb-form, as always in language, is the speaker's view of matters.
To sum up, continuous forms may either indicate that an activity is incomplete or not as yet completed, or else may be noncommittal regarding the completion of the specified activity.
A special interest attaches to its stylistic transposition where it comes to represent:
a) future action when that future moment is viewed from the past. This is often the case in patterns with the free reported speech. The primary meaning of the verb-form comes to be neutralised by the situational context, e. g.: At last, my dear, I thought you were never coming.
b) with adverbs of frequency and repetition the Past Continuous will generally denote habitual actions, abilities, properties and other characteristic traits, e. g.: Annette was always running up to town for one thing or another, so that he had Fleur to himself almost as much as he could wish. (Galsworthy) '
Instances are not few when patterning with such adverbs becomes an effective stylistic device to express various emotions: annoyance, irritation, displeasure, anger, amusement, praise, etc. The expressive element is often intensified by some other indicators of the given context, e. g.:
His car bumped something slightly, and came to a stand. That fellow Riggs was always bumping something. (Galsworthy)
The emotive factors determine and modify patterns of grammatical structure in unnumerable ways. Attention has been repeatedly drawn to the fact that they may affect not only the choice of vocabulary but the character of such metaphors as occur in the use of grammatical forms. The Continuous Tenses of the present-day English are most dynamic in this respect. More and more they are used with special functions of different modal force. The stylistic range of their application in expressive language has become surprisingly wide.
c) we also know such transpositions when the Past Continuous is endowed with special emotive functions and comes to express rather the
intention of doing something than the action itself. In such patterns of "implied negation" the connection between the subject and predicate is not to be taken in a direct or positive sense. The meaning is thus negative, that of an unrealised intention to do something (suppositional modality), e. g.: "I suppose you were too busy to come to the station".
He coloured crimson. "I was coming, of course", he said, "but something stopped me" 1.
'I was coming' means: "I intended to come" (but I did not) 2.
Like in other cases, the opposition "real — unreal" comes to be neutralised here by contextual indication.
Here he was not surprised to meet Stener just coming out, looking very pale and distraught. At the sight of Cowperwood he actually blanched.
"Why, hello, Frank", he exclaimed, sheepishly, "where do you come from?".
"What's up, George?" asked Cowperwood. "I thought you were coming into Broad Street".
"So I was", returned Stener, foolishly, "but I thought I would get off at West Philadelphia and change my clothes. I've a tot of things to tend to yet this afternoon. I was coming in to see you". After Cowperwood's urgent telegram this was silly but the young banker let it pass. (Dreiser).
Cf. Russian: открывал, да не открыл, выбирал, да не выбрал. Ukrainian: розкривав, та не розкрив; вибирав, та не вибрав.
Closely related to this is the analogous modal use of the Present Perfect Continuous, e. g.: Mr. S. lands at Southampton tonight. He has always been coming. This time he has come.
THE PERFECT TENSES
The category of time relevance in English is based on the binary opposition "non-perfective :: perfective"; the former is known to be unmarked, the latter possesses a special grammatical meaning. This is to suggest that the action denoted by the unmarked form is not correlated with some other moment of time or some other action whereas the perfect form is characterised by a special current relevance.
Grammarians differ greatly in defining the linguistic nature of the Perfect Tenses in English. That the category of Perfect is a tense category is sometimes denied. Reference is often made to the specific aspective essence of these verbal forms defined as resultative, retrospective, successive, etc.
A. I. Smirnitsky's3 viewpoint presents a special point of interest. His basic assumption is that the Perfect Tenses express the category of "time relation" presented by the regular opposition of all
1 Quoted from H. В. Калачевская. Грамматическая категория вида в английском языке. «Філологічний збірник», КДУ, 1957, № 10.
2 See: Latin "imperfectum de conatu" used with analogous meaning, e. g.: Veniebatis igitur in Africam... prohibiti estis in provincia vestra pedem ponere.
3 А. И. Смирницкий. Перфект и категория временной относительности. «Иностранные языки в школе», 1955, No. 1; Морфология английского языка. М., 1959, р. 311.
Perfect forms to all non-Perfect forms, such as works:: has worked; worked :: had worked; will work :: will have worked, etc. The corresponding relative terms adopted by A. Smirnitsky for these grammatical contrasts are "non-perfect" and "perfect".
The unmarked non-Perfect forms do not refer to a special current relevance whereas the marked Perfect forms express priority.
A. I. Smirnitsky presents a logical system of the correlation between the Indefinite, the Continuous, the Perfect and the Perfect Continuous forms graphically as a parallelepiped on whose three dimensions he placed: 1) the category of tense (the Present, the Past and the Future), 2) the category of aspect (the Common and the Continuous) and 3) category of time relation (the non-Perfect and the Perfect forms).
Somewhat similar views on the categories of the English verb are held by the American scholar M. Joos 1.
In treating the Indefinite, the Continuous, the Perfect and the Perfect Continuous forms M. Joos, like Prof. Smirnitsky, marks out three different verb categories which he calls "tense", "aspect" and "phrase".
Other grammarians advocate the view according to which the category of Perfect is a peculiar tense category, i. e. a category included in the verb paradigm along with the categories "present" and "past" 2. According to G. Vorontsova 3 the category of Perfect is a peculiar aspect category and as such must be included in the regular grammatical contrasts of "common" and "continuous" aspects.
The divergency of the linguistic approaches to the identification of the Perfect Tenses in English is indeed striking.
The question much debated nowadays is how define the invariable meaning of these grammatical forms.
What should not escape our notice is that the shift from tense to aspect which is so specific in the functional relationships of English verb-forms cannot be studied in isolation from the distributional meaning of the Perfect Tenses.
One more question primary in importance is that the grammatical content of the Perfect Tenses cannot be studied without a considerable reference to the lexical character of the verb and variations of denotative and connotative meaning resulting from the use of Perfect forms in different syntactical environment, large patterns, in particular.
The occurrence of the Perfect Tenses in different syntactic environments will show variations of their basic grammatical content. Instances are not few when the context comes to be explicit enough to neutralise the opposition between the Perfect Tenses and the preterit verb-forms.
The current relevance as marked by the Perfect Tenses must reasonably be referred to as their basic meaning.
1 See: M. Joos. The English Verb. The University of Wisconsin Press Madison and Milwaukee, 1964.
2 See: O. Jespersen. The Philosophy of Grammar. London, 1968, p. 254.
3 See: Г. H. Воронцова. Очерки по грамматике английского языка. M., 1960, p. 191.
Observations on the difference of distribution, in the kind of context, linguistic or situational, where each perfect form occurs, give every reason to say that the resultative meaning and the meaning of completeness do not exhaust the aspective content of the Perfect Tenses with all their multiple polysemantic essence in present-day English.
What needs further investigations as grammar learning advances is the study of the dependence of the meaning of Perfect forms on the tense category (present, past and future) and its distributional meaning in cases when the application of the verb-form seems to go far beyond the strict limits of the system. The fact is, that we occasionally find such varied uses of the Perfect Tenses that they may bring to considerable linguistic changes of the meaning of the form itself. It is also interesting to note that considerable variations in their patterning sometimes appear a matter of stylistic preference. There are important treatments of their distributional value presented by А. Коrsаkоv in one of his work-papers «Перфектно-поширені форми та вираження часових відношень в англійській мові».
It will not be superfluous to point out that there is a good deal of difference between the use of the Past and Perfect Tenses in English and some other languages. The Perfect Tense is often used in other languages where the Past Tense is required in English. This is the case when attention is drawn to the time at which an action or event took place in the past; hence especially in questions beginning with when? (Sometimes with where?), and in sentences with adverbial adjuncts answering such questions, e. g.:
When (where) did you see him last? (Cf. Where have you been all the time?). Two aeroplanes were shot down yesterday. I received his letter a week ago. His father was born in Ireland. Did you come by tram or by bus?
The Present Perfect Tense usually denotes an action that falls within the time-sphere of the present. Its uses are mainly three: (a) the Continuative Perfect; (b) the Resultative Perfect; (c) the Perfect of Experience.
The Continuative Perfect often corresponds to a Present Tense in other languages; English shares with some other languages the use of the Resultative Perfect, which denotes a past action connected, through its result, with the present moment, e. g.:
We have bought a new car. ... (Cf. We bought a new car last week). Look what you've done. Ten years have passed since we first met.
We have a use intermediate between the Continuative and the Resultative Perfect when the reference is to a period of time that is not yet over, e. g.: I've been to the pictures twice this week.
(But: I went to the pictures twice last week).
To indicate completed activities in the immediate past the Perfect Tense with the adverb just may be used, e. g.: George has just gone out. It has just struck twelve.
In spoken English I've got is often equivalent to I have: Guess what I've got in my pocket.
In a sentence like He's got (= obtained) what he wants, however, we have to do with a Resultative Perfect.
The Perfect of Experience expresses what has happened, once or more than once, within the speaker's or writer's experience. It is not unknown in other languages, at least in head-clauses, though an adjunct expressing repetition is usually added. Similar adjuncts may be added in English, e. g.: (1) I have sat for hours on the river bank on a. fine summer's day, waiting for a fish to bite. (2) When I have asked him the way, I have invariably received a polite answer.
Like the Present Tense, the Present Perfect may neutralise its primary meaning in subordinate clauses dependent on the main clause expressing or implying future time, e. g.: Wait till I've finished my work. As soon as I have copied the text, I shall give it to you. The Past Perfect (Pluperfect) answers partly to the Past Tense, partly to the Perfect. It seems to represent a shifting back of these tenses into the (more distant) past1.
One more important point must not be left unmentioned here. We mean the use of the verbal forms which in present-day English go parallel with the Present Perfect and Past Perfect as to their structure but differ essentially in their grammatical content and stylistic value. These are patterns with the participle II separated from the auxiliary have as in: I have all my work done. We have it all thought out, don't worry. Patterns of this kind are often referred to as intensified forms of the Perfect Tenses (Present or Past), the so-called "Conclusive Perfect". According to O. J e s p e r s e n, for instance, they hardly differ from the perfect forms and serve only to emphasise the present state much stronger than the Perfect does.
There is, indeed, a suggestion of effort implied in such forms which makes them forcible and highly expressive. But separation from the auxiliary verb imparts such a clear cut adjectival character to the participle that such patterns denote not so much an action as a. state. A verbal form comes to function as an intensive statal passive.
Colloquial English abounds in patterns like the following: You had it memorised all through in the morning, but I feel you're forgetting it again. When you came, I had my plans already made. Attention will be drawn here to the grammatical ambiguity which may result from the use of such forms in different contexts. This ambiguity is generally resolved by the immediate lexical context.
The descriptive character of the participle isolated from the auxiliary have has made possible the following uses of the verb-phrase:
a) patterns grammatically synonymous with the Perfect Tenses (Present or Past), e. g.:
1 See: R. W. Zandvoort. A Handbook of English Grammar, London, 1965, p. 62. 152
I have it memorised to perfection. Cf.: I have memorised it... I had it memorised to perfection. Cf.: I had memorised it...
b) patterns grammatically synonymous with statal passive. These may be referred to as "statal passive of intensity", e. g.:
They have all their opponents beaten.
c) patterns with the full force of the present or past tense, causative in their meaning, e. g.:
I have my suits made to order. I had my suits made to order.
Instances are not few when the Present Perfect is used with reference to simultaneous actions. Here we find patterns like the following: Haven't you had the window open since I have been out?
It is interesting to note that in contexts with reference to habitual use there is a potential ambiguity. Take the following sentence for illustration: Every time I have seen her she has been reading. This may have two possible meanings: either that on each occasion she was actually reading or that on each occasion she had previously been reading. The ambiguity arises from the fact that the Perfect may imply either the overall period of time that we are speaking about or, in addition, each repeated period. The overall period of time is clearly shown by Every time I have seen her to be one that began in the past and continues up to the present moment. But the successive periods of time that are to be related to these points of time may either be periods that simply overlap these points of time or they may be periods that began before and continue up to the given points of time.
In most cases a sentence-pattern with whenever or every time followed by Perfect tense-forms in both clauses is obviously interpreted in the first of the two senses, the Perfect being taken with reference only to the overall period of time, activity on each occasion overlapping the points of time. The other sense will generally be indicated by some special situational context.
Next we come to the use of the Past Perfect Tense. It will as well be seen here that the syntax of the verb bears an intimate relation to its morphology because the grammatical content of this verb-form is also greatly conditioned by the syntactical arrangements in which it occurs.
Observed in different patterns of syntactic environment the Past Perfect will show a considerable variation in its grammatical meaning.
It is important to emphasise the following:
a) in a great many cases the Past Perfect Tense serves to connect grammatically two past actions, one of which is prior in time. Examples are not far to seek:
Dinny spun round to the window. Dark had fallen and if it hadn't she couldn't have seen. (Galsworthy)
Sometimes it is possible to use the simple Past Tense for both actions in analogous arrangements; the difference will be one of emphasis. The Past Perfect emphasises the priority of time. In its stylistic value it is slightly more formal.
Thus, for instance, the following two sentences appear to be interchangeable: I had studied French before I started English. I studied French before I started Greek. Textbooks often say that 'had studied' implies that
Compare the Ukrainian: Як гукнеш, так і відгукнеться. Що посієш, те й пожнеш.
Similarly in Russian: Как аукнется, так и откликнется. Что посеешь, то и пожнешь.
Closely related to this is the use of the Future Tense applied to lifeless things to denote power or capacity, e. g.: (1) The hall will seat two hundred. (2) That will do.(3) That won't do.
b) the activity essentially characteristic of the subject, very often with some approval, disapproval or reproach. The necessary meaning is usually signalled by the context, e. g.:
"Very true, child; but what's to be done? People will talk,there's no preventing it." (Sheridan)
"Doctors!" said James, coming down sharp on his words; "I've had all the doctors in London for one or another of us. There's no satisfaction to be got out of them; they'll tellyou anything. There's Swithin, now. What good have they done him? There he is, he's bigger than ever; he's enormous; they can't get his weight down. Look at him!" (Galsworthy)
Further examples are: Don't listen to him! He will tellyou incredible things. They will sithere for hours playing chess.
This kind of functional contrast in the use of the tense-forms may be illustrated by numerous examples in Ukrainian.
Cf. Сидить і оком не моргне. Мовчить і слова не скаже.
Similarly in Russian: Сидит и глазом не моргнет. Молчит и слова не скажет.
Compare also: Чуден Днепр при тихой погоде, когда вольно и плавно мчит сквозь леса и горы полные воды свои. Ни зашелохнет, ни прогремит.
Here is a good example to illustrate the use of the Future Tense where it does not convey the pure idea of tense but is associated with modal conceptions of a very strong presumption (Hypothetical Future):
"...Father! I have said I do not... I have said I cannot..."
"By the most merciful what? What? The name for it! Words for it!"
"Do not frown on me father. I wish him happiness. I cannot marry him. I do not love him."
"You will rememberthat you informed me aforetime that you did love him."
"I was ignorant. I did not know myself. I wish him to be happy." (Dreiser)
We find here various shades of hypothetical meaning ranging from a mere supposition and conjecture to a strong presumption. The necessary meaning is generally sensed from the grammatical or situational context and intonation in actual speech. Other examples are:
(1)Hewillalready be asleep,don't disturb him. (2) That will beyour luggage, I think. (3) Mother will be wonderingwhere we are.
A parallel development may be traced in other languages.
Cf. French: Il dormira déjà (He must already be asleep).
German: Er wird schon schlafen. Das wird schon wahr sein. DerBrief wird wohl fertig sein.
The Future Perfect Tense may take over analogous functions. We mean such contextual situations when it does not imply futurity at all but
is used to indicate a mere supposition with reference to a completed action, e.g.: They will have heardthe news maybe synonymous with I suppose they have heard the news or They may have heard the news. Further examples are: a) They won't have seen you come. (Syn. They can't have seen you come) b) It will have beenalready gatheredfrom the conversation of these worthies that they were embarked in an enterprise of some magnitude... (Dickens)
In present-day English shall and will are not the only ways of referring to future time. Futurity may also be expressed by transpositions of other verb-forms, well known in many, if not all, languages. Implying futurity, we can say, for instance: I'll read my essay on Tuesdays → I read my essay on Tuesday → I'm reading my essay on Tuesday. The difference will lie here in the implied attitude to, ground of expectation of the future action, or determination to do so.
"...About leaving your husband, Lady Corven; any reason you'd care to give me?" Clare shook her head.
"I'm not going into my life with him, either here or anywhere. And I'm not going back to him". (Galsworthy)
The Future Tense may be used with imperative force. This is the case, for instance, when we desire to speak courteously and at the same time indicate that we are confidently expecting that our wish will be fulfilled.
As you are going to the post office, you will perhaps mail these letters for me.
When spoken in earnest tone the future becomes almost a command. She (grandmother to grandchild) said, "You will donothing of the kind!"
"None of that! none of that!" he said, glowering under his strange, sad, gray brows. "I can't stand it! Don't tempt me! We're not out of this place yet. He's not! You'll come home with me now". (Dreiser)
You'll go or I'll sell you down the river. You'll never see your mother again or anybody you know... Hurry! (Mitchell)
The imperative force is most expressive in similar uses of the Future Continuous:
"I know who you're here with", he continued, shaking his head sadly. "The dog! I'll get him yet. I've had men watchin' you all the time. Oh, the shame of this day! The shame of this day! You'll be comin' home with me now". (Dreiser)
Transposition of the Future Tense into the Imperative is common in other languages.
French: Vous ferez signer ce texte et vous me le rapporterez demain.
Similarly in German: (1) Mach die Notizen. Du wirst bei mir bleiben. (Bredel) (2) Du wirst den Apfel schießen von dem Kopf des Knaben. (Schiller)
Cf. Ви зробите все, що я просив, і не треба більше розмовляти. Ви напишете мені про свої враження. Я буду Вам дуже вдячний.
The growing use of the "going to-future" is one more point of interest. We must naturally distinguish:
a) be going to — used as a statement of intention, synonymous with intend to, e. g.: They are going to leave to-morrow.
b) be going to — a periphrastic verb-form denoting a future action — a relative stylistic synonym of the ordinary future tense.
This grammatical idiom has spread considerably during the last 50— 60 years in Modern English, particularly in its American variant, and this process continues. Various dimensions along which such messages may differ are most directly relevant to the subjective modality of predication. The expressive "going to-future" often assumes emotional value implying various subtle shades of meaning, such as, for instance, caution or warning, prophecy or encouragement, prohibition or categorical command. Contextual nuances of such use are very elusive.
In objective referential use the "going to-future" may express futurity without any implication of intention in the strict sense, e. g.:
Soon she is going tobe 16= Soon she will be 16.
Synsemantic in its character, it is widely used in present-day English as an alternative of the ordinary future tense.
The relative distribution of the "going to-future" presents a major point of interest in studying the stylistic aspect of verb-forms, their subjective use with different shades of emotional colouring.
Compare the subtle shades of modal force and expressivity of the context-sensitive "going to-future" in the following examples:
My mother ran away when I was three, and I have no sisters. It's going tobe hard for you, with a nomadic, unsatisfactory brute like me. (Galsworthy) — warning, predication.
Intensity and emphasis are particularly strong in negative constructions, which are often used as stylistic alternatives of the Imperative Mood, e. g.:
You're not goingto deceive me always! (Dreiser)
It is to be noted that the semantic element of predetermination of or certainty about an action can somewhat weaken the meaning of future time relevance.
"He ought to understand! He piles up his money for me", she thought; "but what's the use, if I'm not goingto be happy? Money, and all it brought did not bring happiness". (Galsworthy)
"Oh, what is going tohappen now?" she cried. (Mansfield) — supposition, apprehension;
"This is going tobe my masterpiece" (Wilde) — prediction, certainty.
"There's no use crying my dear. Crying isn't going tohelp things" (Gordon) — predetermination, conviction;
"You — you mustn't think any more of what happened just now, little man", he said huskily. "See? That's all over now. That's forgotten. That's never going tohappen again. See?" (Mansfield) — certainty, promise.
The analysis of the distributional meaning of the tense-forms in present-day English, brief as it is, will remind us of the constitutional value of syntactic morphology whose subject matter is "grammar in context". Variations in the use of the verb-forms, their potential polysemy and transpositions conditioned by the mode of the speaker's representation of the verbal idea are a source of constant linguistic interest. Different verb-forms may be used with one and the same time-reference. Observations in this field make it apparent that the various functions of the tenses
are not yet finally and absolutely fixed. Making for greater subtleties and finer shades in expressing the speaker's subjective attitude to the utterance functional shifts are still taking place. This can be best illustrated, for instance, by the extension of the subjective use of the continuous forms in expressive language where they are endowed with special emotive functions. Not less characteristic are the linguistic changes observed in the use of modal verbs. An interesting development of recent years is, for instance, the use of may + infinitive II as equivalent to could + infinitive II with the implication that the envisaged outcome did not occur. The relationship between them is certainly not, as OED implies, anything to do with tense in present-day English.
Revision Material
1. Be ready to discuss the distinction between paradigmatic and syntagmatic meanings of verb-forms.
2. Comment on expressive transpositions of the English tense-forms, neutralisation of grammatical meaning and situational synonymy in grammar. Compare analogous developments in other languages.
3. Give examples to illustrate the use of verb-forms in transposition with future time reference.
4. Comment on the use of "going to"-future in Modern English.
5. Be ready to discuss the stylistic range of Continuous forms in Modern English.
6. Comment on the denotative and connotative value of the Present Continuous (Progressive) Tense.
7. Describe the linguistic essence of the Perfect Tenses in Modern English.
8. Give examples to illustrate modal re-interpretation of verb-forms as connected with the problem of Mood. Compare similar developments in other languages.
9. Discuss the statement that in Modern English the Continuous tense-forms are more and more assuming the function to intensify the verbal idea and in many cases have emotional value.
10. Comment on the linguistic changes in the use of English verb- forms in their present development.
11. Discuss the opposition "finitude — non-finitude" in Modern English.
Chapter VII THE PRONOUN
PERSONAL PRONOUNS
In the category of person English makes distinction between three classes of personal pronouns denoting respectively the person (s) speaking (first person); the person (s) spoken to (second person) another person(s) or thing(s) — third person.
Person distinctions are naturally closely related to the category of number.
There is no formal distinction of persons in plural, e. g.: we speak, you speak, they speak. There is no distinction of number in the 1st and 2nd persons either.
In point of fact, the binary opposition speak :: speaks in all English verbs, except the modal auxiliaries expresses the relation: 3rd person singular or any other person of both numbers. The exception to the patterns of conjugational variants is also the verb to be, whose paradigm is unique and includes five distinct finite forms: am, is, are, was, were.
Archaic verb-forms in -t or -st are generally associated with the old pronoun thou. These are unproductive in Modern English and used only in religious texts and occasionally for stylistic purposes in elevated speech or poetry. Thou and ye wereformerly often shifted to express the speaker's mood and tone. The "thou of contempt" was so very familiar that a verbal form was coined to name this expressive use. Shakespeare gives it, for instance, to Sir Toby Belch (Twelfth Night) in the lines urging Andrew Aguecheek to send a challenge to the disguised Viola: "Taunt him with the license of ink, if thou thous't him some thrice, it shal not be amiss 1" Proteus and Valentine in Two Gentlemen of Verona initially exchange thou, but when they touch on the subject of love, on which they disagree, their address changes to the "you of estrangement".
Like in other provinces of grammar, attention must be drawn to the use of pronominal forms in transposition. The affective value of such "metaphors" may be traced in many, if not all, modern languages. The first to be mentioned in English is the use of the pronouns we, you and they in patterns where they are synonymous with the formal generic one.
The so-called "editorial" we (Lat. pluralis modestial) is well known, for instance, as used in many modern languages by authors of scientific papers, monographs or articles in a newspaper, etc. Examples are hardly needed.
1 Quoted in: Style in Language ed. by T h. A. S e b e о k. New York-London, 1860.
The pronoun we is common in proverbial sayings:
We shall see what we shall see. We soon believe what we desire. We never know the value of water till the well is dry.
Cf. Это случится при одном единственном условии,— если мы все — от мала до велика — удвоим и утроим темпы нашей оборонной работы, если каждый из нас — от мала до велика — поймет, что каждый час, тобой потерянный для оборонного труда, будет стоить жизни твоего брата на фронте. (А. Толстой)
Expressive effects of great subtlety will be found in the use of the pronoun we in such examples as:
"I say", said Hurstwood, as they came up the theatre lobby, "we are exceedingly charming this evening".
Carrie fluttered under his approving glance. (Dreiser)
Cf. Ukrainian: Ну, як ми себе почуваємо сьогодні? Russian: Ну, как мы себя чувствуем сегодня? French: Se porte-on mieux aujourd'hui?
The pronoun we is often used when speaking, for instance, to ones-pet child or to a sick person with playfully optimistic emotional colour-ing. The shift of the pronominal form expresses a shift in the speaker attitude and tone. Here again we must say that this recurrent feature 's not specifically English and may easily be traced in other modern languages, e. g.: How are we feeling now? (we — you).
Discussing some tendencies of the present times, E. Partridge1 gives examples of adding to one's reply a declaration in the third person, e. g., in response to,, Do you like that?"we hear the person addressed say "No, said he frowning!"
Further examples are:
"Mr. Grundy's going to oblige the company with a song", said the Chairman.
"No he ain't", said Mr. Grundy.
"Why not?", said the chairman.
"Because he can't", said Mr. Grundy.
"You had better say you won't", replied the chairman.
"Well, then, he won't", retorted Mr. Grundy. (Dickens)
Nursery talk is known to have its traditional characteristics; mothers and fathers, aunts and grannies are liable to address children using the third person instead of the second, as will he (or she) do it. Examples of this kind may be found in numbers.
The generic use of the pronoun you will be found in any sphere of application. It is common in colloquial English, in literary prose, in proverbial sayings:
You never can tell. You can't eat your cake and have it.
You cannot judge a tree by its bark, etc.
1 See: E. Partridge. Slang Today and Yesterday. London, 1960, p. 123.
Emotional colouring is particularly strong in you with its more or less apparent appeal to the person spoken to, as in:
"Now and then? Mr. Croom, didn't you always show your feelings?" If you mean did I always show that I was in love with her — of course I did, you can't hide a thing like that". (Galsworthy)
"I'm ancient, but I don't feel it. That's one thing about painting, it keeps you young". (Galsworthy)
And here is a good example from J. London to illustrate that the generic you and one are not interchangeable when used in this function:
"By the way, Mr. Eden", she called back, as she was leaving the room, "what is booze? You used it several times, you know".
"Oh, booze", he laughed. "It's slang. It means whiskey and beer — anything that will make you drunk".
"And another thing", she laughed back. "Don't use 'you' when you are impersonal. You' is very personal, and your use of it just now was not precisely what you meant".
"I don't just see that".
" Why, you said just now to me, 'whiskey and beer — anything that will make you drunk' — make me drunk, don't you see?"
"Well, it would, wouldn't it?"
"Yes, of course", she smiled. "But it would be nicer not to bring me into it. Substitute 'one' for 'you', and see how much better it sounds". (London)
With reference either to an unspecified person or to people in general we may also use the pronoun they. It is important to observe that in spoken English you implies reference to the speaker or those with whom he identifies himself, they — reference to people with whom the speaker does not identify himself, e. g.: No tree, no shrub, not a blade of grass, not a bird or beast, not even a fish that was not owned. And once on a time all this was jungle and marsh and water, and weird creatures roamed and sported without human cognisance to give them names... Well! They had got it under, kennelled it all up, labelled it, and stowed it in lawyers' offices. (Galsworthy)
They used as a generic pronoun usually refers to some persons unknown and is often highly emotional denoting that the speaker dissociates himself and the person addressed from the situation, e. g.:
My poor little girl, what have they been doing to you?
Analogous is the use of the French pronoun ils, e. g.:
Mais Pied-d'Alouette parla et dit:
— Ils m'ont pris mon couteau.
Qui cela?1
The generic they may alternate with the word people patterning similarly with generic force, e. g.:
Mrs. Candour. Very true child: but what's to be done? People will talk — there is no preventing it. (Sheridan)
Compare the use of the German pronoun sie in analogous transposition:
1 See: P. Г. Пиотровский. Очерки по грамматической стилистике французского языка. М., 1956, р. 136.
Ihm haben sie das Auto gestohlen. = Ihm hat man das Auto gestohlen 1.
The pronoun they with reference to indefinite persons is sometimes used with demonstrative force, e. g.:
They must hunger in winter that will not work in summer. (proverb)
The shift of the pronominal form expresses a shift in the speaker's attitude and tone. Here again we must say that this recurrent feature is not specifically English. Other languages present similar phenomena.
In Russian and Ukrainian the generic use of verb-forms in the 2nd person singular and plural without a pronominal indicator is a well known stylistic device, e. g.:
«Комуністом стати можна тільки тоді, коли збагатиш свою пам'ять знанням всіх тих багатств, які виробило людство». (В. І. Ленін)
«Песню дружбы запевает молодежь,
молодежь, молодежь.
«Эту песню не задушишь, не убьешь,
не убьешь, не убьешь».
(«Гимн демократической молодежи мира»)
Cf. Сонце! Сонце! Це тебе, довічний світе, стріваючи, вітає земля... Прокинулась світова мати, показала нам личенько красне... Ви почуваєте, що ви частина того світу, невеличка цяточка його живого тіла, непримітний куточок його безмірної душі. (П. Мирний)
1 E. Agricola, H. Görner, R. Кülfner. Wörter und Wendungen. Wörterbuch zum deutschen Sprachgebrauch. Leipzig, 1963, p. 546.
Chapter VIII THE ADVERB
Adverbs make up a rather complicated group of words varying widely in form and distribution.
Considered in their morphemic structure, adverbs may be classified in eight groups.
1—2. The two largest groups are those formed from derived and base adjectives by adding the suffix -ly, e. g.: hopefully, physically, strangely, falsely, etc.
3. The third group consists of those that are formed by means of the derivational prefix -a (phonemically [э]) to nouns, adjectives or verbs. Of about sixty of them in more or less common use nearly half are formed from nouns: aboard, aside, away, etc.
The rest are about equally divided among those formed from verbs, e. g.: amiss, astir; from adjectives — anew, abroad.
In traditional grammars such words are generally classed as both adjectives and adverbs and they are so listed in most dictionaries, which seems hardly justified since from the structural point of view none of them can fit the basic adjective position between determiner and noun. (We cannot say the aloud voice or the adrift boat) 1.
4. The fourth group of adverbs originally very small, but in present-day English exhibiting signs of rapid growth includes those formed by adding the derivational suffix -wise to nouns.
A few adverbs of this type are well-established words like clockwise, otherwise, likewise; others are recent coinages or nonce-words like crabwise and actor-wise. In American English the suffix -wise is most active and can be more freely attached to many nouns to create adverbs like personnel-wise. Such forms are recognised in writing by the use of the hyphen.
5. Then comes a smaller group of adverbs formed by the addition of the derivational suffix -ward(s) to a limited group of nouns; home- ward(s), forward(s), backward(s). Most adverbs of this group have two forms, one with the final s and one without, variously distributed. The forms without s are homonymous with adjectives: the backward child, he looked backward.
6. Next we come to a group of adverbs formed by combining the pronouns some, any, every and no with a limited number of nouns or pronominal adverbs, such as: someplace, anyway, everywhere, nowhere, etc. There are fewer than twenty of these in common use.
1 See: W. N. Francis. The Structure of American English. New York, 1958, p. 284.
7. Another relatively small group of adverbs includes those that are formally identical with prepositions: about, around, before, down, in, inside, over, on, etc.
8. The last group of adverbs is the miscellaneous class of those that have no formal signals at all to distinguish them in isolation; we know them as adverbs because of their positions in utterances, in which the other parts of speech are clearly identifiable. Many adverbs in this group are fairly frequent in occurrence: always, now, then, here, there, often, seldom, still, even. Others in this group are words which may also appear as other parts of speech, such as: downstairs, home, late, little, fast, stow, early, far, near.
A word should be said about adverb-qualifiers.
Among adverbs there are some which have degrees of comparison and others which have not.
Adverbs in the comparative degree, whether formed by adding the suffix -er or analytically by adding more and most may take the same qualifiers that comparative adjectives do, e. g.: still more difficult, a little louder.
The adverbial meaning can be intensified by adding right, far, by far, e. g. : far ahead, right ahead, far better, better by far, far down, far below, etc.
Intensity of adverbial meaning may also be produced by the use of full and well as intensifiers. The latter are survivals of Old English and less frequent in present-day use, e. g.: He was well out of sight; well ahead, etc.
A special point of linguistic interest is presented by the development of "merged" or "separable" adverbs. The term "merged" is meant here to bring out the fact that such separable compounds are lexically and grammatically indivisible and form a single idea.
Considered in their structure, such "separable" compounds may be classified as follows:
a) preposition + noun:at hand, at home, by heart, on horseback, on foot (= by foot — arch.), in turn, to date;
b) noun + preposition + noun:arm in arm, day by day, day after day, day to day, face to face, word for word, year by year;
c) preposition + substantivised adjective:at last, at first, at large, in large, in full, in quiet, in short, in vain, of late, of old;
d) preposition + verbal nounmade through conversion: at a guess, at a run, in a rush, on the move, on the run;
e) preposition + numeral:at first, at once, at one, by twos;
f) coordinate adverbs:by and by, on and off (= off and on), on and on;
g) pronoun + adjective (or participle):all right, all told, O. K. (all correct);
h) preposition + pronoun:after all, in all, at all.
In point of fact most adverbs of that kind may be reasonably referred to as grammatical idioms. This can be seen, for instance, in the unusual absence of the article before their noun components and specialised use
of the noun in its singular form only: on foot (but not on the foot, or on feet which may occur in free prepositional word-groups), in fact (but not in the fact), at first (but not at the first), etc.
Denoting subtle shades of adverbial meaning, adverbs of this type are quite plentiful not only in Modern English but in other European languages.
Cf. Russian: на бегу, на лету, в сердцах.
Ukrainian: на льоту, в гості, в гостях.
French: en bas, en vain, par cœur.
German: nach Hause, zu Hause, von Hand, etc.
Discussing the nature of such adverbs in Russian V. V. Vinogradоv points out:
«У ряда слов смешанное употребление формы, совмещающей значения имени существительного и наречия, ведет к тонким и изменчивым смысловым нюансам. Происходит своеобразное колебание формы между функциями имени существительного и наречия. Например, на ходу: «На скором ходу мы сбросили телегу и не слыхали толчка» (Л. Толстой); «Он на ходу шатался от изнеможения» (Тургенев), но «Бросил несколько слов на ходу» (т. е. мельком, торопливо) и т. п.; на бегу: «И свист саней на всем бегу» (А. Толстой); «Алешка, щелкая на бегу подсолнухи, скрылся за воротами» (Чехов) Ср. «Успел набегу перекусить и ушел на вечернюю работу», «перекинуться словами набегу» и т. п. Ср. на лету и налету» 1.
The frequency value of merged adverbs is on a marked increase in present-day English contributing very much to the development of structural synonyms, such as, for instance:
chiefly — in chief finally — in fine fully — in full partly — in part quietly — in quiet suddenly — of a sudden vainly — in vain kindly — in kind
He spoke so warmly that I had to answer in kind. (Snow) These are not always interchangeable and may differ not only in shades of adverbial meaning but in their stylistic value. Thus, for instance, such compounds as in fine, in vain, in chief are decidedly more bookish, more formal than the simple adverbs of similar meaning. Some of them are interchangeable with simple adverbs only in some contexts of their use.
CATEGORY OF STATE
Open to thought and discussion is the linguistic nature of such words in the English vocabulary as are generally registered in dictionaries either as predicative adjectives or adverbs, e. g.: ablase в огні, abloom
1 See: В. В. Виноградов. Грамматическое учение о слове. M., 1947, 166
в цвіту, aboil в кипінні, adrift на плаву, aghast охоплений жахом, afire в огні, aflame в огні, afloat на воді, на плаву, afraid зляканий, agog в сподіванні, в збудженні, ajar трохи відкритий, ahead спереду, попереду, akin споріднений, alight засвічений, в огні, alike подібний, alive живий, alone один, aloof в стороні, amiss недоречний, не до діла, не до ладу, asleep сплячий, astir в русі, athirst спраглі вий, жадаючий, awake несплячий, пильний, насторожений, aware обізнаний, etc.
From a historical point of view it is interesting to note that most predicative adjectives of this kind have originated from prepositional phrases, e. g. : abloom < in bloom, aboil < on the boil, afire < on fire, aflame < in flame, ajar < on the jar, asleep < in sleep, etc. Some others go back to participial forms, e. g. : aghast (agast, agasted < past participle of agasten — "to terrify"), afraid < old past participle of affray, etc.
The functioning units of the given type make up a special class of words which L. V. Sčerba aptly called "category of state". And there seems no small justification to introduce this term 1.
A bit of study will lead us to the conclusion that according to the positions they can fill and the function they can perform in various structures they do not need to be classed as adjectives or adverbs.
When we come to examine the patterns in which words of this morphological class are involved, we find that their operation in the structure of speech exhibits special formal qualities distinguishing them from adjectives and adverbs with which they contrast. The first to be mentioned here is that they are marked by grammatical indication of time and mood in which the copula-verb or its "meaningful absence" is always a necessary component.
Words of the category of state may denote: a) physical state of persons and things, e. g. : alive, asleep, athirst, awake; afire, aflame, alight, aglow, ablaze, etc.; b) psychological state: afraid, agape, agog, aghast, ashamed, ashudder, atremble, aware, etc.; c) state in motion, e. g.: afoot, astir, afloat, etc. Some words of this class denote position in space, e. g.: aloof, astray, astride, askew, etc.
The formal arrangements in which these words occur may be briefly characterised as follows:
a) following a copula-verb, they generally function as subjective or objective predicatives. In this function they easily combine with copulative verbs cf various kind, e. g.: Her little resolute face under its copper crown was suspiciously eager and aglow. (Galsworthy). The lamps were still alightall pale, but not a soul stirred — no living thing in sight. (Galsworthy) Thebutler came to lay the table for dinner, and seeing his master apparently asleep, exercised extreme caution in his movement. (Galsworthy) Then he became awareof something else. A true artist never stands alooffrom the people.
b) words of the category of state are also used as ordinary attributes in post-position or emphatic attributes. In the latter case they may take
1 Л. В. Щерба. О частях речи в русском языке. В сб.: «Русская речь», вып. 1928.
is also based on a certain grammatical pattern but it is intended for nomination (naming an action directed at the object and the object itself).
It is to be noted, however, that in certain contexts and speech situation the latter may also function as a unit carrying information.
Consider the following: I (1) The student is writing; (2) There is a book on the table; (3) It is
cold. II. I'll not go anywhere; (4) Only with you; When are you going to leave?
(5) Tomorrow morning. Which way are you going? (6) — To the left.
How is he? (7) — Up to the mark. (8) To know what was on her mind!
The above given syntactic structures marked by (1), (2), (3), (4), (5), (6), (7), (8) carry the necessary information and all have a communicative value. It should be clear, however, that the two types of syntactic structures differ essentially in their purely grammatical status.
The structural patterns underlying sentences (1), (2) and (3) exist in the language as system and are always intended for communication; those in (4), (5), (6), (7) and (8) are not specially intended for information and may function as such only in certain contexts, linguistic or situational (4, 5), in a dependent part of a dialogue (5, 6, 7) or say, in a composite sentence (8), etc.
Word-combinations are constructed according to the rules of a given language and function very much in the same way as the ultimate unit — the word.
The concept of the word combination was first suggested by V. V. Vіnogradov1 who defined it as "a free equivalent of a phraseological unit", the latter, in its turn was viewed as "a free equivalent of a word". The word-combination and the word are thus assumed to be functionally identical. This can be shown by comparing, for instance, the verb to decide and the word-combination to take a decision; to glance and to cast a glance, etc.
Major Syntax studies linguistic units of communicative value. In Major Syntax we are concerned with the rules according to which words and word-combinations are actualised in speech, i. e. used as parts of predicative units — units of communication integrated into a given situation and expressing the purposeful intention of the speaker in the form of sentences. This division makes distinction combining words to form non-predicative (nominative) complex units, on the one hand, and combining words to express predication, on the other.
In terms of meaning, the sentence is traditionally defined as the expression of a complete thought. But this seems to be open to thought and discussion because completeness is, in fact, very relative and depends largely on the purpose of the speaker or writer as well as on the context, linguistic or situational.
Logical definitions of the sentence predominated in the preceding periods of the development of the syntactic theory. The concepts of structural grammar are based on grammatical and phonetic criteria. Its authors develop the principles suggested by L. Bloomfield —
1 See: В. В. Виноградов. Грамматическое учение о слове. M., 1947. 170
the concept of endocentric and exocentric phrases as sentence elements and the immediate constituents analysis.
The principle of transformational grammar is that the whole grammar of a language constitutes a definition of the sentence.
The traditional definition is that a sentence is a group of words expressing a complete thought is to-day often criticised on the ground that a sentence is sometimes one word and that the thought is not always complete but largely depends on the meaning of preceding sentences.
Some recent writers have attempted to make "utterance" do the work of the classical term "sentence". But this does not seem fully justified because the two terms belong to different planes, one historical and the other linguistic.
The dissatisfaction with the term seems to result from the fact that accurate studies of syntax distinguishing what is grammatically self-contained in writing, and what are the corresponding structures in actual speech, have not yet been made. This deserves special systematic description.
Sentence-patterning in English has been described proceeding from different angles of view. Thus, for instance, the concept of the relational framework of language has led to the study of the inner syntactic relationships in the sentence which seems most promising in the investigation of the depth of syntactic perspective.
Structural (descriptive) linguistics endeavours to present the syntactic aspect of language in terms of a tabulated survey of sentence patterns and the rules of developing and extending these patterns. The notion of the structural pattern is worked out with relevance to a simple monopredicative sentence.
Most grammarians hold the view that language is a system of interdependent units in which the value of each unit results solely from the simultaneous presence of the others. Distinction is reasonably made between syntagmatic and paradigmatic or associative relations.
In actual speech syntagmatic relations will be observed between linguistic units of different levels, e. g. phonemes and morphemes within a word, between words in phrase structure and sentence, between phrases in sentences, or, say, between the parts of composite sentences, etc.
The question naturally arises about the relation of predicativity to the grammatical organisation of the sentence. Grammarians are not agreed at this point. The sentence is sometimes viewed only as a speech event with no relevance to its grammatical organisation and distribution at all. On the communicative level any part of the utterance may function as predicate. This view is most emphatically stated by E. Benveniste 1.
A sentence may consist of one or more words.
Examples of one-word sentences are such exclamations as Thanks! Good!, Fire!, Rain!, Look!, Quick!, Steady!, Mother!.
Other, not necessarily exclamatory examples are: Yes.— No. Perhaps. — Certainly.— Incredible.— Tired?, Rain?, What? (= What did you say?)
1 See: E. Benveniste. Problèmes de linguistique générale. Les niveaux de l'analyse linguistique. Paris, 1966, pp. 128-129.
One-word sentences are, as a rule, synsemantic. The necessary idea is made clear by a particular situation, a statement made or a question asked in mother sentence.
Cf. Why don't you dance? — Dance? I never do.
A simple sentence has its own system of formal means to express objective modal meanings and time relations concerning the reality or irreality of what is expressed in predication. The reflection of objective reality in a sentence is always clear of purpose.
Modality and syntactic time relevance cannot be thought of in isolation. The two categories are inseparable and present, in fact, a regular structural feature of any sentence.
Distinction must naturally be made between the morphological categories of time and "syntactic time relevance". The former are expressed by means of grammatical morphemes, the latter as a category of the sentence-level has its own formal means: special structural sentence-patterns and verb-forms made to serve syntactic purposes.
In different contexts of their use verb-forms can be functionally re-evaluated, e. g. present tense-forms can be used with past or future time relevance, as in: I'm not coming back to England. Bless you always Jon. (Galsworthy) She is playing Chopin tomorrow.
The category of "syntactic" mood can be expressed by: a) the structural sentence-pattern itself; b) the notional verb in a given structure of predication; c) verbless sentence-patterns; d) functional re-evaluation of the verb-forms of the Indicative and Imperative Mood; e) functional re-evaluation of some types of sub-clauses.
The theory of the functional sentence perspective worked out by the Prague School of linguistics has led in recent times to the concept of three stages of syntactic abstraction where the sentence is viewed as: 1) a single speech event; 2) a syntactic structure made up of the syntactic elements with no relevance to situational contexts and belonging only to grammar; 3) an utterance in its functional sentence perspective.
On the third level of analysis we exa