- •The Subject Matter of Grammar
- •The Evolution of English Grammars
- •The XX th Century Linguistic Schools
- •Prague Linguistic School (Functional Linguistics)
- •American Descriptive Linguistics
- •Transformational and Transformational Generative Grammar
- •Semantic Syntax
- •Methods of Linguistic Analysis
- •Parsing (Traditional Syntactic Analysis)
- •The Oppositional Method
- •The Distributional method
- •The ic Method (method of immediate constituents)
- •The Transformational Method
- •The Method of Deep and Surface Structures
- •The Functional Sentence Perspective Method (fsp)
- •The Componential Method
- •The Contextual Method
- •The Levels of Language
- •The Morphological Structure of me
- •The Classifications of Morphemes
- •Paradigmatics and Syntagmatics
- •The Asymmetry of a Linguistic Sign
- •Parts of Speech Classifications of Parts of Speech.
- •Notionals and Functionals
- •Heterogeneity
- •Field and Periphery
- •Subcategorization
- •Onomaseological approach
- •The Noun The General Properties of a Noun
- •The Category of Gender.
- •The Category of Number
- •The Category of Case
- •Debated Problems within the Category of Case
- •Genitive Constructions (n’s n)
- •The Article Debated Problems
- •The Functions of Articles in a Sentence
- •The Verb The General Properties of a Verb
- •The Category of Tense
- •Classifications of Tenses
- •The Future Tense
- •The Present Tense
- •The Past Tense
- •The Future-in-the-Past Tense
- •The Category of Aspect
- •The Category of Time Relation (or Correlation)
- •The Category of Voice
- •The Category of Mood
- •The Indicative Mood
- •The Imperative Mood
- •The Subjunctive Mood
- •Points of Similarities with the Finites
- •Points of Differences with the Finites
- •Debated Problems within The Verbals
- •The Functions of Non-Finites
- •Types of Syntax
- •The theory of the phrase
- •Devices of Connecting Words in a Phrase
- •Debated Problems within the Theory of the Phrase
- •Classifications of Phrases
- •The theory of the simple sentence
- •The Definition of a Sentence
- •Syntactic Modelling of the Sentence
- •Semantic Modelling of the Sentence
- •The Notion of a Syntactic Paradigm
- •Structural Classification of Simple Sentences
- •Predicative Constructions Within a simple sentence we distinguish primary and secondary (independent/ dependent) elements, the structural nucleus and its adjuncts.
- •Syntactic Processes
- •The Principal Parts of a Simple Sentence
- •The Secondary Parts of a Simple Sentence
- •An Object
- •An Adverbial Modifier
- •An Attribute
- •Debated Problems within a Simple Sentence
- •A composite sentence
- •A Compound Sentence
- •I. The General Notion of a Complex Sentence.
- •2. The Status of the Subordinate Clause.
- •3.1. Classifications of Subordinate Clauses.
- •3.2. Types of Subordinate Clauses.
- •4. Connections between the Principal and the Subordinate Clause.
- •5. Neutralization between Subordination and Coordination.
- •6. The Character of the Subordinating Conjunction
- •7. Levels of Subordination
- •Syntactic Processes in the Complex Sentence.
- •9. Communicative Dynamism within a Composite Sentence( Compound and Complex) and a Supra-phrasal Unit.
The Future Tense
As a colourless, neutral synthetic future which is to be found in Russian and French it is non-existent in English. O. Jespersen, Palmer, L. Barkhudarov hold that shall and will are modal verbs meaning obligation and volition. English does very well without regular auxiliaries to express futurity (The train leaves tomorrow. The train is leaving tomorrow. The train is to leave tomorrow. The train is about to leave tomorrow. The train is on the point of leaving). We do not find the Future in clauses of time and condition ( If he comes, tell me about it. When he comes, tell me about it).
According to N.A.Kobrina, B.A.Ilyish, E.A.Korneeva, the English Tense system is represented by the opposition The Past : the Present : the Future. These scholars find that shall and will indicate merely futurity , they have become fully grammaticalized, losing their modality. N.A. Kobrina and E.A.Korneeva add that there exist two constructions shall/will + infinitive, in one shall and will are modals and in the other they are future auxiliaries. When they are auxiliaries, they can be contracted into ‘ll. This marker of futurity can be attached to any class of words (What he says’ll have authority).
M.Y.Blokh distinguishes newer categories within the Future. On the basis of the oppositions come :: shall come, come :: will come he distinguishes the category of prospect, on the basis of the opposition shall come:: will come he distinguishes the category of futurity option. The distinction between the members of this opposition is neutralized in the element ‘ll. Shall and will are not substitutable. Will can be used in all persons, shall is relevant only for the first person singular and plural. So we can conclude that The Future is an unfinished system in English.
The Present Tense
As to its syntagmatic semantics, the Present is the richest tense form. Its paradigmatic meaning is that of immediate present coinciding with the moment of speech. It’s syntagmatic meanings are: habitual recurrent actions characterising a person (He hates authority); universal truths (usually in maxims)(The old believe everything, the middle-aged suspect everything, the young know everything. O.Wilde); the biblical timeless present ( One generation passeth away and another generation cometh, but the Earth abideth forever…); futurity ( He returns from London tomorrow); a long stretch of time from the past into the future( I know him all my life); a past occurrence ( the so called Historic, Dramatic Present) (Yesterday she comes in, sits down, gasps and dies. A. Christie. Then he turned the corner and what do you think happens next?).
The Past Tense
It seems to be semantically simpler as it merely refers to something that happened in the past. According to Otto Jespersen’s theory of the imaginative use of tenses, the Past or the before Past conveys, under certain conditions, hypothetical actions, unreality, impossibility (I wish you did it. I wish You had done it yesterday. He looks as if he had never been here). O.Jespersen did not distinguish the Subjunctive Mood (neither Subjuncive I nor Subjunctive II).