1887
Volume 11, Issue 1
  • ISSN 0378-4169
  • E-ISSN: 1569-9927
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

In this paper, it is claimed that PC is a unitary, but complex category. It is shown that in analyzing PC, four temporal elements must be used: the deictic zero point, the time of the auxiliary, the time of the participle, and the time of focus. Given these, there are two different formulations for PC, one based on its affinity with the simple tense-aspects (PC-1), the other based on its relation to the compound tense-aspects (PC-2). The relevance of both of these is shown through the history of PC and the existence of the passé surcomposé. Evidence is also brought from iconicity (compositionality). All of this demonstrates that PC-1 and PC-2 are two endpoints of a continuum with many transitional uses in between. Various examples of these transitional types are given. Thus, it is concluded that PC evidences a dynamic counterbalance between polysemy on the one hand and general meaning on the other hand.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/li.11.1.02wau
1987-01-01
2019-08-26
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/li.11.1.02wau
Loading
  • Article Type: Research Article
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