Volume 10, Issue 2
  • ISSN 1876-1933
  • E-ISSN: 1876-1941
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes



This paper offers a fresh perspective on (restrictions on) aspectual coercion, thereby focusing on the essentially epistemic import of aspectual constructions. The case study that I will discuss is the unexpected use of the simple tenses for ongoing event reports in sentences involving full-verb inversion. I will argue that this attestation of the simple present/past in inverted sentences can be analyzed as a kind of aspectual mismatch between the higher-order construction and the embedded tenses. Yet at a more basic, epistemic level of analysis, there is no mismatch: the full-verb inversion construction and the embedded tenses are similar in the sense that both report events that are conceived of as fully and instantly identifiable.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Altshuler, D.
    (2016) Events, states and times: An essay on narrative discourse in English. De Gruyter Open. 10.1515/9783110485912
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110485912 [Google Scholar]
  2. Bary, C.
    (2009) Aspect in Ancient Greek: A semantic analysis of the aorist and the imperfective. Phd Dissertation, Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen.
  3. Birner, B. J.
    (1994) Information status and word order: An analysis of English inversion. Language, 70, 233–59. 10.2307/415828
    https://doi.org/10.2307/415828 [Google Scholar]
  4. (1995) Pragmatic constraints on the verb in English inversion. Lingua, 97, 233–256. 10.1016/0024‑3841(95)00026‑7
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0024-3841(95)00026-7 [Google Scholar]
  5. Birner, B. J., & Ward, G.
    (1992) On the interpretation of VP inversion in American English. Journal of Linguistics, 28, 1–12. 10.1017/S0022226700014973
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226700014973 [Google Scholar]
  6. (1998) Information status and noncanonical word order in English. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/slcs.40
    https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.40 [Google Scholar]
  7. Bolinger, D.
    (1977) Meaning and form. New York: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Brisard, F.
    (2002) The English present. InF. Brisard (Ed.), Grounding: The epistemic footing of deixis and reference (pp.251–297). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110899801.251
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110899801.251 [Google Scholar]
  9. Calver, E.
    (1946) The uses of the present tense forms in English. Language, 22(4), 317–325. 10.2307/409921
    https://doi.org/10.2307/409921 [Google Scholar]
  10. Celle, A., & Smith, N.
    (2010) Beyond aspect: Will be -ing and shall be -ing. English Language and Linguistics, 14, 239–269. 10.1017/S1360674310000079
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S1360674310000079 [Google Scholar]
  11. Chen, R.
    (2003) English inversion. A ground-before-figure construction. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110895100
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110895100 [Google Scholar]
  12. Cooper, R.
    (1986) Tense and discourse location in Situation Semantics. Linguistics and Philosophy, 9, 17–36.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Croft, W.
    (2007) Construction grammar. InGeeraerts, D. & Cuyckens, H. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of cognitive linguistics (pp.463–508). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Croft, W., & Cruse, A. D.
    (2004) Cognitive linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511803864
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511803864 [Google Scholar]
  15. De Smet, H., & Heyvaert, L.
    (2011) The meaning of the English present participle. English Language and Linguistics, 15, 473–498. 10.1017/S136067431100013X
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S136067431100013X [Google Scholar]
  16. de Swart, H.
    (1998) Aspect shift and coercion. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 16, 347–385. 10.1023/A:1005916004600
    https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005916004600 [Google Scholar]
  17. De Wit, A.
    (2016) The relation between aspect and inversion in English. English Language and Linguistics, 20(1), 107–128. 10.1017/S1360674315000301
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S1360674315000301 [Google Scholar]
  18. (2017) The present perfective paradox across languages. Oxford studies of time in language and thought. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. De Wit, A., & Brisard, F.
    (2014) A Cognitive Grammar account of the semantics of the English present progressive. Journal of Linguistics, 50, 49–90. 10.1017/S0022226713000169
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226713000169 [Google Scholar]
  20. De Wit, A., Brisard, F., & Meeuwis, M.
    (2018) The epistemic import of aspectual constructions: The case of performatives. Language and Cognition. 10(2), 234–265. 10.1017/langcog.2017.26
    https://doi.org/10.1017/langcog.2017.26 [Google Scholar]
  21. De Wit, A., Petré, P. & Brisard, F.
    (ms.). Standing out with the progressive.
  22. Dorgeloh, H.
    (1997) Inversion in Modern English: Form and function. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/sidag.6
    https://doi.org/10.1075/sidag.6 [Google Scholar]
  23. Drubig, H.-B.
    (1988) On the discourse function of subject-verb inversion. InJ. Klegraf & D. Nehls (Eds.), Essays on the English language and applied linguistics on the occasion of Gerhard Nickel’s 60th birthday (pp.83–95). Heidelberg: Julius Groos Verlag.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Goldberg, A.
    (1995) Constructions: A Construction Grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Goldsmith, J., & Woisetschlaeger, E. F.
    (1982) The logic of the English progressive. Linguistic Inquiry, 13, 79–89.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Güldemann, T.
    (2003) Present progressive vis-à-vis predication focus in Bantu: A verbal category between semantics and pragmatics. Studies in Language, 27, 323–360. 10.1075/sl.27.2.05gul
    https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.27.2.05gul [Google Scholar]
  27. Kay, P., & Michaelis, L. A.
    (ms.), Partial inversion in English.
  28. Kreyer, R.
    (2006) Inversion in modern written English: Syntactic complexity, information status and the creative writer. Tübingen: Gunter Narr Verlag.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Lakoff, G.
    (1987) Women, fire, and dangerous things. What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. 10.7208/chicago/9780226471013.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226471013.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  30. Langacker, R. W.
    (1987) Foundations of Cognitive Grammar, vol. 1: Theoretical prerequisites. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. (1991) Foundations of Cognitive Grammar, vol. 2: Descriptive application. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. (1993) Nouns and verbs. Language, 63, 53–94. 10.2307/415384
    https://doi.org/10.2307/415384 [Google Scholar]
  33. (2001) The English present tense. English language and linguistics, 5, 251–273. 10.1017/S1360674301000235
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S1360674301000235 [Google Scholar]
  34. (2011) The English present. InA. Patard & F. Brisard (Eds.), Cognitive approaches to tense, aspect and epistemic modality (pp.45–86). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/hcp.29.06lan
    https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.29.06lan [Google Scholar]
  35. Lauwers, P., & Willems, D.
    (2011) Coercion: Definition and challenges, current approaches, and new trends. Linguistics, 49, 1219–1235. 10.1515/ling.2011.034
    https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.2011.034 [Google Scholar]
  36. Ljung, M.
    (1980) Reflections on the English progressive. Göteborg: Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Los, B., & Starren, M.
    (2012) A typological switch in early Modern English – and the beginning of one in Dutch?Leuvense Bijdragen, 98, 98–126.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Michaelis, L. A.
    (2004) Type shifting in Construction Grammar: An integrated approach to aspectual coercion. Cognitive linguistics, 15, 1–67. 10.1515/cogl.2004.001
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cogl.2004.001 [Google Scholar]
  39. (2011) Stative by construction. Linguistics, 49, 1359–1399. 10.1515/ling.2011.038
    https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.2011.038 [Google Scholar]
  40. Partee, B., & Borschev, V.
    (2007) Existential sentences, BE and the genitive of negation in Russian. InK. von Heusinger & I. Comorovski (Eds.), Existence: Semantics and syntax (pp.147–190). Berlin: Springer Verlag.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Petré, P.
    (2017) The extravagant progressive. An experimental corpus study on the grammaticalization history of [BE Ving]. English Language and Linguistics, 21, 227–250. 10.1017/S1360674317000107
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S1360674317000107 [Google Scholar]
  42. Prado-Alonso, C.
    (2011) Full-verb inversion in written and spoken English. Bern: Peter Lang. 10.3726/978‑3‑0351‑0252‑9
    https://doi.org/10.3726/978-3-0351-0252-9 [Google Scholar]
  43. (2016) A constructional analysis of obligatory XVS syntactic structures. Studia Anglica Posnaniensia, 51, 51–82. 10.1515/stap‑2016‑0002
    https://doi.org/10.1515/stap-2016-0002 [Google Scholar]
  44. Pustejovsky, J., & Bouillon, P.
    (1995) Aspectual coercion and logical polysemy. Journal of Semantics, 12, 133–162. 10.1093/jos/12.2.133
    https://doi.org/10.1093/jos/12.2.133 [Google Scholar]
  45. Rappaport Hovav, M., & Levin, B.
    (1998) Building verb meanings. InM. Butt & W. Geuder (Eds.), The projection of arguments: Lexical and compositional factors (pp.97–134). Stanford: CSLI Publications.
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Ziegeler, D.
    (2007) A word of caution on coercion. Journal of Pragmatics, 39, 990–1028. 10.1016/j.pragma.2006.07.014
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2006.07.014 [Google Scholar]
  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): coercion; epistemic schemas; full-verb inversion; progressive aspect; simple tenses
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error