IV. Present, Past, and Future Tenses of the Continuous Aspect, Perfect Correlation

Present. Past, and Future Tenses of the Continuous Aspect and of the Perfect Correlation express an action of some duration (a continuous action) begun before and continuing into a given moment present, past or future or in other words an action of some duration immediately preceding a 2iven moment present, past or future.

A. Present Perfect Continuous expresses an action begun in the past and continued into the present; it connects the past with the present through the uninterrupted progress of an action begun before the present moment and still continuing at that moment (inclusive present perfect continuous).

Present Perfect

Continuous

Inclusive

I have been writing this letter all the afternoon. She's been travelling since this morning. I've been writing since I came here.

Present Perfect Continuous may also indicate an action begun in the past, continued up to the present but no longer going on at the present moment (exclusive present perfect continuous).

Present Perfect

Continuous

Exclusive

Prm. —O—

What have you been doing in my absence? I have lost the book which I have been reading (читал). Cf. I have lost the book which I have read (прочел). I've been waiting for you for half an hour.

B. The Past Perfect Continuous expresses an action begun before a given moment in the past and continued into that past moment (inclusive past perfect continuous) or coming up very close to the past moment but no longer going on at that past moment (exclusive past perfect continuous).

Past Perfect

Continuous

Inclusive

Past Perfect Continuous Exclusive

He came to the spring, the point towards which he had been travelling since early in the afternoon. By that time he had been studying English for three years. He had been strolling about the beach before I was up.

Benford's eyes were red, she had evidently been crying.

C. The Future Perfect Continuous denotes an action begun before a given moment in the future and continued into that future moment (inclusive future perfect continuous).

Future Perfect Continuous

I shall have been writing for two hours by the time you come back.

D. The Future-Perfect-Continuous-in-the-Past expresses an action begun before a given future moment and continued into that future moment when the future moment is viewed from the past (inclusive future-perfect-contmuous-in-the-past), e.g.

They write to me that by the end of July they would have been staying at the seaside for a month.

4. The Category of Aspect

The problem of the category of aspect is connected with such forms as to write - to be writing or writes - is writing, etc.

The category of aspect in English Grammar presents a very complicated question. There exists a great variety of opinions in connection with this problem. Some linguists mostly foreign such as Kennedy, Curme and some others consider that aspect is rather a semantic category. Some other linguists such as H. Sweet, O. Jespersen, N.F. Irtenyeva do not recognize the existence

39

of this category in Modern English. They treat such forms as is writing, was writing, etc. as type frames to some other actions or situation.

Still other grammarians (Ivanova) though recognizing the existence of the category of aspect do not separate it from the category of tense. Thus they classify all the forms of the verb into two groups: Pure temporal forms such as Past Indefinite. Present Indefinite. Future Indefinite, and temperern aspective forms: Present Continuous. Past Continuous, and Future Continuous. But if we come to analyze such forms as wrote - was writing we see that these forms express one and the same time of an action, i.e. past. And it is the character of an action that is different in these pairs of forms. The forms was writing, was reading serve to express an action which is taken in its progress while the forms wrote and read indicate the mere statement of the fact of the action. Therefore, we may say that these forms differ in the expression of the character of an action. That is why such grammarians as Ilyish. Barhudarov. Yartseva. and some others recognize the existence of a special category which grammatically expresses the character of an action. They call this category that of aspect. The grammatical category of aspect serves to express the way in which the action is shown to proceed. The category of aspect is the system of two opposimes. that is the forms of the type writes - wrote and the forms of the type is writing -was writing. The forms of the type is writing serve to express an action in its progress and are called the Continuous Aspect whereas the forms of the type writes express that the action is simply stated or that its nature is not specified and these forms are called the Common Aspect. Thus the continuous aspect is a marked member of the opposition both in its meaning and in its form as it is built up by means of the auxiliary verb to be -Participle I. The common aspect is an unmarked member of the opposition. Note should be made that the continuous aspect is not used with all the verbs of the English language. There are five groups of verbs that are usually not used in the continuous aspect:

1. Verbs expressing some relations as actions: to contain, to consist, to possess:

*.. oorne iinA-vcr^s suCn as: to ucconic, to appear, to prove;

3. Verbs of physical perception: to see, to hear, to smell, to feel;

4. Verbs of mental perception: to dislike, to hate, to trust:

5. Verbs denoting actions of a very short duration: to jump, to break, to

drop.

All these verbs are terminative by their nature. Ilyish calls this phenomenon as the neutralization of aspect relations.

Sometimes, however, even these verbs may be used in the continuous

aspect to show the progress of an action at a given moment and stressing its temporary nature, e.g.

I was hating her more and more while she spoke.

There is no strict correspondence between the continuous and the common aspects in English and the perfective and imperfective aspects in Russian.

5. The Category of Correlation or Relativity (the Perfect Forms)

The existence of the perfect forms in the system of the English verb presents a very complicated problem and has been a subject of a lengthy discussion which has not so far brought about a definite result.

All the views on the essence of the Perfect form in English may be divided into three groups:

1. The first point of view is that the perfect forms present a peculiar tense category which should be classed alongside with such tenses as present, past, and future. This point of view is held by 0. Jespersen. H. Sweet. Ganshma and Vasilevskaya.

2. The second point of view is held by G.N. Vorontsova and I.P. Ivanova who consider the category of perfect! veness as a peculiar aspect category together with continuous and common aspects.

3. The third point of view was expressed by Professor A. Smirnitsky who was the first to speak of the perfect forms as the forms serving to indicate a peculiar category different from the category of tense and aspect. He called this category the category of time relation.

The existence of such a variety of opinions may be explained by the fact that scientists are trying to define the basic character of the perfect forms without paying attention to the system of forms already established in English. Thus if we admit that the perfect forms present the category of tense then they would be a union of two different tenses:

a) Present Perfect - the present and the perfect;

b) Past Perfect - the past and the perfect;

c) Future Perfect - the future and the perfect.

This is clearly impossible because two different terises in one and the same form will destroy each other. Hence it follows that the category of perfect cannot be a tense category.

The same may be said in reference to the category of aspect. The common and the continuous aspects are firmly established in English grammar. Thus it is impossible to admit that in the form Present Perfect Continuous (has

40

41

been writing) we have a continuous aspect and the perfect aspect at one and the same time. Hence the conclusion is that the perfect form is not aspect. The essence of the grammatical category expressed by the perfect form differs both from tense and aspect. Therefore, Professor A. Smirnitsky has proved that the perfect forms present an independent specific grammatical category which is a system of two member opposimes. This category was called in English the category of correlation or relativity.

This category is represented by the system of forms of the type: writes - has written, wrote - had written,

will write - will have written.

The forms of the type has written serve to express that the action is prior to some moment in time and were called the Perfect Correlation.

The forms of the type writes - wrote do not imply the idea of priority and were called the Non-Perfect Correlation. The forms of the Perfect Correlation present a marked member of the given opposition both in meaning and in form as it is built up by means of the auxiliary verb have + Participle IT. The non-perfect correlation is not marked either in its meaning or in its form.

So accepting the existence of the category of correlation we may say that the system of the verb's category is based on the forms of the categories of tense, aspect, and correlation. Therefore in the form had been plaving we deal with the past tense, the continuous aspect and the perfect correlation. And in the form played we deal with the past tense as well but with the common aspect and the non-perfect correlation.

There is one more point to be settled, namely the so-czlledpresent (past) perfect exclusive andpresent (past) perfect inclusive. The so-called exclusive perfect denotes an action already completed before present or past moment.

E.g. I have torn the paper in two.

The so-called inclusive perfect denotes an action begun before and continued into the moment (present or past).

E.g. I have been here for half an hour.

This would practically mean: I have been here for half an hour and 1 still am here and may stay here for some time to come.

But this terminology perfect exclusive and perfect inclusive cannot be recommended because it suggests the idea that there are two different meanings of the present (past) perfect which is obviously wrong. The difference does not lie in the meanings of the perfect form, but depends on the situation in which the sentence is used.

42

6. The Category of Voice

Voice is the grammatical category of the verb which expresses an action from the subject or to it. e.g.

1. The teacher asked the pupil.

2. The teacher was asked by the pupil.

All the words in the second sentence are the same, the difference is only in the voice of the verb. In the first sentence the action is directed from the subject to the object, i.e. the subject is the doer of the action, while in the second sentence the action is directed to the subject, the subject itself is aeted upon. Therefore, the category of voice shows the direction of an action from the subject or to the subject.

In Modern English there are two grammatical voices: the active voice and the passive voice. The active voice shows that the action is directed from the subject to the object and the subject itself is the doer of an action. The passive voice is used to show that the action is directed to the subject and not from it. The subject itself is not the doer of an action but is acted upon. The passive voice is not simply a parallel construction of the active voice. Very often we do not find the doer of an action in the passive constructions. This is because sometimes we do not know the doer of an action or we are not interested in it or sometimes we do not want to mention it for some reason or other.

E.g. This folk song was composed many years ago.

This machine is operated by hand, (we are not interested by whom the action is done, we are interested in the fact that the machine is operated by hand).

The category of voice is a grammatical category, i.e. it is expressed by means of grammatical forms and not by lexical means.

Some grammarians hold that the number of voices is more than two. Some of them count even five voices in Modern English, namely: the Active voice, the Passive voice, the Reflexive voice, the Middle voice, and the Reciprocal voice.

If we take the sentence: He shaved himself and left the house earlv. can we say that the verb shaved and the reflexive pronoun himself comprise the Reflexive voice? Evidently not. because in such sentences we deal with the lexical word combination in which reflexive pronouns are used in the function of a direct object to some transitive verbs imparting to them reflexive meaning.

The same case is observed in the so-called Reciprocal voice which is perceived by some grammarians in such sentences as: They saw each other

onlv for a moment. The action here is reciprocal because of the meaning of a direct object, expressed by a reciprocal pronoun whereas the grammatical form of the verb does not show it. In fact, we deal here with an Active voice but not with the reciprocal one.

In the sentences like The paper burned, the door opened, etc. some grammarians find the so-called Middle voice. But hardly have we any ground to consider it as a special Middle voice, i.e. a grammatical category different from the active voice. The special meaning of the verb is expressed by lexical means and not by a special form of the verb.

44

Lecture IV The Category of Mood

1. Definition of the category of mood. Mood and modality.

2. Different conceptions of the mood system in English and the role of meaning and form in the classification of moods.

3. The Indicative Mood.

4. The Imperative. Its morphological peculiarities.

5. Non-recognition of the imperative mood as a separate mood form.

6. The problem of the let us go type.

7. Oblique moods: the Subjunctive, the Conditional, the Suppositional.

The Category of Mood

Mood is a verbal grammatical category which serves to express the modality of an action. By modality we mean the relation of what is said to reality. That means whether we speak about real actions or actions which are possible, necessary, probable, desirable, or unreal. Modality may be expressed in different ways:

a) by means of mood-forms of the verb, e.g He was here yesterday. I wish he were here;

b) by modal verbs which may express modality both lexically and grammatically at the same time. e.g.

I couldn't speak to him tomorrow even if I wished.

The form couldn ? expresses modality twice: on the one hand by its lexical meaning of possibility, and on the other by its mood-form.

c) by parenthetic words, i.e. lexically: certainly, perhaps, to be sure, I believe, etc.

d) by phonetical ways. i.e. by means of intonation, e.g.

He is a | good man.

All the four ways of expression of modality may be found in one and the same sentence, e.g.

Certainly you could come to see me tomorrow.

The number of grammatical moods vary depending on the viewpoint of a scientist and his way of approaching the problem. Moods are usually divided into direct or indirect or oblique.

The indicative and the imperative moods are considered to be direct because they directly denote the fact of an action or that another person is directly addressed and ureed to fulfill a certain action.

45

So the indicative mood expresses real actions from the speakers point of view.

The imperative mood is the form of a verb used to express commands or requests. If the indicative mood has the greatest number of forms, the imperative mood has the fewest. Since it expresses requests or commands it has no tense forms, because there is no sense, for example, in requests or commands directed to the past. Commands or requests may be only in two forms: in the affirmative and in the negative.

Almost all grammarians recognize the existence of the imperative mood but its existence is open to discussion. At any rate this mood has such peculiarities which set it apart from all the other moods. Its main peculiarities are:

1. It has no tense forms while all the other moods have;

2. The imperative mood does not express the category of person;

3. It is not correlative with the interrogative sentence while the forms of all the other moods may be used both in declarative and interrogative sentences.

These peculiarities make it very doubtful whether it is necessary to recognize the imperative constructions as a mood. Perhaps it is more correct to point out that the imperative construction is a special communicative type of a sentence but not a mood. Besides it expresses modality of a whole sentence but not modality of the verb predicate. This means that the modality of such imperative constructions is expressed by intonation and sentence structure and it is not expressed by the form of mood.

Some grammarians find the analytical imperative mood inLet+Infmitive. e.g. Let us go, etc. in which let is an auxiliary word.

It is hardly possible to share this point of view, because the verb to let here is not deprived of its lexical meaning hence it is not an auxiliary verb and we have no ground to speak of an analytical form of the Imperative mood. In the sentences Let me have that book or Let him go there, etc. we shall find different shades of meaning in the verb to let, so it cannot be the auxiliary verb to form the analytical imperative mood.

However Professor Vorontsova in support of her point of view adduces an example: Let's let him go. She proves easily that in this case the first verb let is devoid of any lexical meaning and therefore the whole combination may be taken as an analytical form. But very often let preserves its meaning and in the sentence Let him go, let may be substituted for the verb allow. Allow him to go. Hence here there is no analytical form.

Let + Infinitive presents something intermediate between the analytical form of the imperative mood and a phrase and is perhaps on its way to

46

become an auxiliary word especially with the first person plural.

The English use very often along with let the auxiliary verb to do especially in the negative form for example in conversation, e.g. Don't let's talk of that day.

Very often the speaker does not however express an action as a matter of fact, neither does he urge another person to perform an action. The speaker expresses an action as possible, desirable, obligatory, necessary, supposed or simply contrary to fact. In this case the verb serving to denote this action is used in the Oblique mood. The forms of the verb used in the Oblique mood are quite various in Modern English and the problem connected with it seems extremely complicated. Some linguists speak of only one oblique mood, some of more than one. Foreign grammarians consider that the number of oblique moods in English may be established in accordance with the practical use of this or that verb expressing either a problematic action or an unreal one. Thus, 0. Jespersen takes into consideration only the usage of synthetical forms. Curme refers the oblique mood to different cases of usage of the Indicative mood. H. Sweet speaks both of the usages of the synthetical forms and of the analytical forms. Max Deutschbein finds sixteen moods in Modern English.

Our grammarians also solve this problem differently. Khlebnikova thinks that in Modern English there exists the Conjunctive mood which is subdivided into the Subjunctive and the Conditional Moods. A. Smirnitsky and some other grammarians suggested an interesting classification of Oblique Moods. They divided all the forms of the verb into four moods:

1. Subjunctive I which serves to express a problematic action and the form of which coincides with the form of the Infinitive without the particle to in all cases. It has no tense distinction.

E.g. I suggest that he arrive at once.

One form is used for all the persons Singular and Plural. Subjunctive I is a very old mood and is rapidly falling into disuse. It is found in poetry, in elevated prose and in documents of official language.

2. Subjunctive II expresses unreal actions and formally coincides with the forms of the Past Indefinite tense when the action refers to Present and Future and with the Past tense of the Perfect Correlation when the action refers to the Past, e.g.

I wish you were present (now. tomorrow).

I wish you had been present (yesterday).

Here some grammarians. Professor Grusinskaya, for example, perceive the so-called Shifting of Tenses, e.i. the form of the Past Indefinite is used for the Present and Future (and what was past is unreal for present and

47

future) and the form of the Past Perfect for the Past (and what is Pluperfect is unreal for the Past).

So in English to express unreality two separate forms are employed. In Russian one and the same form is used to express unreality in the present, past, and future, e.g. Лбы пошел туда, in which бы comes from the future оыти and пошел is past tense.

So in Russian unreality is expressed by the forms future + past and it is unreal for the past because there is future and unreal for the future because there is past and unreal for the present because there is no present at all. So this form is much stronger than in English.

Subjunctive I and partly Subjunctive II (Present Subjunctive II) are synthetic forms. Two other forms the Suppositional Mood and the Conditional Mood are analytical forms.

3. The Suppositional Mood which is a grammatical synonym to Subjunctive I. expresses a problematic action and is built up by means of the auxiliary verb should + Infinitive Indefinite or Perfect, e.g.

I suggest that he should take part in the conference. It is impossible that he should have said it.

4. The Conditional Mood expresses the greatest degree of unreality. The unreality of an action here depends on some unreal condition or circumstances.

E.g. If I knew him I should speak to him.

If he had been here he would have called on me.

The Conditional Mood in the principal clause expresses the second unreality dependent on the unreality expressed in the subordinate clause by the Present or Past Subjunctive II.

All the Oblique Moods with the exception of Subjunctive I have Indefinite and Perfect forms. Subjunctive I and the Suppositional Mood are synonyms in meaning but they differ in forms, uses, and style. Subjunctive I is a synthetical mood while the Suppositional Mood is analytical. The Suppositional Mood has Indefinite and Perfect forms, e.g.

It is impossible that you should do it (referring to present and future).

It is impossible that he should have done it (referring to past).

As to the syntactical usage in subordinate clauses both Subjunctive I and the Suppositional Mood may be used in the same cases.

E.g. All the progressive people demand that peace through out the world (should) be established.

The only difference in their syntactical usage refers to simple sentences. In simple sentences expressing wish or concession we find only Subjunctive I.

E.g. Long live the forces of peace! So be it!

48

Subjunctive II and the Suppositional are mostly used in subordinate clauses while Subjunctive I may be used both in subordinate clauses and in simple sentences. The Conditional Mood is used in simple sentences (with implied condition) or in principle clauses.

This classification should be discussed from the point of view of the scientific principle which it is based on. If we suppose that the given classification of four Oblique Moods is based on the structural principal then the question arises why we should distinguish between such forms as Subjunctive I and Present Subjunctive II. From the structural point of view these two forms do not differ because they both are synthetical forms. Again why we should distinguish between the Conditional and the Suppositional Moods and Past Subjunctive II - they are analytical.