These utterence has an adverbial of time «last night» establishing the time of the event in the past, while the actions are described in the present tense. The actual time is remote from the time of utterence, but the actions described are presented as if they coincide with the time of the utterence.

e.g.: My parents worked in the field all day. And I work in the fields all day like them…

The so-called «historical present» is characteristic of popular narrative style (or fictional present or fictional narrative). In Older English, the simple present was used more widely with reference to a present event which would now be described by use of the present progressive (durative):

e.g.: I go = I'm going.

The «historical present» describes the past as if it is happening now; it conveys something of the dramatic immediacy of an eye-witness account.

e.g.: I couldn't believe it! Just as we arrived, up comes Ben and slaps me on the back as if we're life-long friends. «Come on, old pal», he says. Let me buy you a drink! I'm telling you, I nearly fainted on the spot».

A very different use of the present tense in reference to the past is that found with verbs of communication:

e.g.: The ten o'clock news says that there's to be storm. Such verbs include also verbs like understand, hear, learn which refer to the receptive end of the communication process.

e.g.: I hear that poor Mr. Simpson has gone into hospital.

These sentences would also be acceptable with the simple past or present perfective, but the implication of the present tense seems to be that although the communication event took place in the past, its result - the information communicated - is still operate.

e.g.: The Book of Genesis speaks of the terrible fate of Sodom and Gomorrah.

Thus, although the Book of Genesis wsa written thousands years ago, it still «sreaks» to us at the present. The notion that the past can remain in the present also explains the optional use of the present tense in sentences reffering to writers, composers, artists, etc., and their extant works.

e.g. In The Brothers Karamazov, Dostoevsky draws/drew his characters from sources deep in the Russian soul.

It is something more than a figure of speech to suggest that author is still able to speak to us through his works.

The present tense can even be used, without respect to any patticular work, for general artistic characterization of the author, but biographical details of the artist's life must be normally reported through the past tense. Hence there is an interesting contrast between:

e.g.: Murasaki write/wrote of life in 11th century Japan.

cf: Murasaki wrote in 11th century Japan.

The simple present is usually used in Newspaper Headlines.

e.g.: «NO SELL-OUT» SAYS P.M.

TRADE UNIONS BACK MERGER

There is a close connection between the «historical present» of above, and the simple present as used in the «Fictional narrative». The only difference is that whereas the events narrated by means of the «historical present» are REAL, those narrated by the «fictional historical present» are IMAGINARY.

This is stylistically marked in contrast to the normal convention of the past tense for store-telling.

e.g.: The crowd swarms around the gateway, and seethes with delighted anticipation; excitement grows, as suddenly their hero makes his entrance…

A special exception in the use of the present tense in stage direction.

e.g.: Millinson enters. The girls immediately pretend to be working hard. William assures a businesslike air, picks up two folders, and makes for door.

Here the present tense is used by convention, as if to represent the idea that events of the play are being performed before our eyes as we read the script.

In his monography M.Y. Blokh debates a point how to use shall or will future and marks «The view that shall and will retain their modal meanings in all their uses was defended by such a recognized authority on English grammar of the older generation of the twentieth century linguists as O. Jespersen. In our times, quite a few scholars, among them the successors of Descriptive Linguistics, consider these verbs as part of the general set of modal verbs, «modal auxiliaries», expressing the meanings of capability, probability, permission, obligation, and the like».

The modal nature of the «shall/will + Infinitive» combinations can be shown by means of equivalent substitutions.

e.g.: He who does not work neither shall he eat.

cf.: He who does not work must not eat.

As regards the second question-the aspect of the verb in modern English - M.Y. Blokh picks up two main variants: the continuous and the perfective.

l. The continuous forms are aspective because reflecting the inherent character of the process named by verb, they do not, and cannot, denote the timing of the process. The opposition constituting the corresponding category is effected between the continuous and non-continuous forms.

2. The true nature of the perfect is temporal aspect reflected in its own opposition, which cannot be reduced to any other oppositions. The categorial member opposed to the perfect will be named «imperfect or non-perfect».

The author underlines that the aspective meanings can be inbuilt in the semantic structure of the verb and, on the other hand, the aspective meanings can also be represented in variable grammatical forms and categories. At this point of our consideration, we should differ the categorial terminology and the definitions of categories.

A category, in normal use, cannot be represented twice in one and the same word-form. The integral verb-form cannot display at once more then one expression of each of recognized verbal categories, though it does give a representive expression to all the verbal categories taken together through the corresponding obligatory featuring. So in the verbal system of English there are two temporal categories:

- the past tense as a direct retrospective evaluation of the time of the process;

- the future tense - the timing of % he process in a prospective evaluation.

There are two aspective categories:

- the continuous aspect;

- the perfect aspect.

N.Y. Blokh describes the aspective categories backed on the works of H. Sweet and O. Jespersen. On the ground that aspective category is constituted by the opposition of the continuous forms of the verb to the non-continuous forms, they present some sentences with while-clauses:

1. While I was typing, Mary and Tom were chatting in the adjoining room.

2. While I typed, Mary and Tom were chatting in the adjoining room.

3. While I was typing, Wary and Tom chatted in the adjoining room.

4. While I typed, they chatted in the adjoining room.

We have to feel the difference in semantic connotations. The meaningful difference consists exactly in the categorial semantics of the indefinite and comtinuous: while the latter shows the action in the very process of its realization, the former points it out as a mere fact…The stylistic potential of the continuous aspect is in its possibility to create a number of actions going on simultaneously in descriptions of scenes implied by the narration.

e.g.: Standing on the chair, I could see in through the barred window into the hall of the Ayuntamiento and in there it was as it had been before. The priest was standing, and those who were left were kneeling in a half circle around him and they were all praying. Pablo was sitting on the big table in front of the Mayor's chair with his shotgun slung over his back.»

(E. Hemingway., p. 154)

In his A Course in Theoretical English Grammar M.Y. Blakh describes and explains the category of retrospective coordination (the perfect aspect) that has been interpreted in linguistic literature in four different ways. In Table 15 «The Perfect Aspect» (The History of the Problem) we present a piece of information about the authors, foreign and native), who presented the perfect aspect as a problem. We present 5 subdivisions according to the ways of the grammatical interpretations:

1. «The tense view».

2. «The aspect view».

3. «The tense-aspect blend view».

4. «The time correlation view».

5. «The strict categorial view» by M.Y. Blokh.

This table is very convenient for students who wants to get post-graduated education and continue their philological observations in the frames of Theoretical English Grammar.

Grammatical material from the textbook written by M.Y. Blokh is very visual and inportant for students. There is no doubt that its numerous particular propeties, as well as its fundamental qualities as a whole, will be further exposed, clarified in the course of continued linguistic research.

I.B. Khlebnikova in her book «Essentials of English Morphlogy» underlines that the items selected for study in this book represent the most debatable parts of English Morphology. It concerns, first of all, the grammatical categories of the verb. The author marks that «the verb is a two-face Janus»: when it is viewed as the carrier of some generalized, abstract grammatical meaning, it belongs to morphology; when it is viewed from the point of view of the position it occupies in relation to different word-classes, it belongs to syntax. Taking into account all these we can find a lot of reasons to present «the third face of our Janus-verb» - stylistic features that are included in our research. The author in chapter IV «The General Organization of Morphlogical Forms» presents «Structural1 Principles of Organization» - The Macrosystem of the English Verb», organized in the table (Table 16). Being guided by Ukrainian, Russian, American and European linguistic schools - A. Hill, B. Strangle, O. Jespersen, L. Barkhudarov, G. CURME, G.N. Vorontsova and others - I.B. Khlebnikova expoands the characteristic features of an analitical forms of English verb. They are nine. Between them we can find the descriptions of:

an auxiliary as a verb which has no lexical meaning of its plus infinitive, participle I, II;

a collocations as indivisible in grammatical sense, though its components are separate words; it is idiomatic in grammar sense;

auxiliary verbs realized the «present-past» dichotomy:

have done - had done;

is speaking - was speaking;

shall do - should do;

verb as the whole macrosystem and in the central - microsystem of tense-aspect;

the abbreviation of the auxiliary component in colloquial speech:

I've done it, and etc.

The author presents the Microsystem and defines that the distinctive features of tense comes first since it is tense, and not aspect, that presents the frame of the system, though opinions may differ on this score (cf.: traditional Russian term «aspect-tense system of Russian verb»).

In her debates with O. Jespersen who denied the existence of future tense as a grammatical tense in English and it was repeated in more modern publications (By Barkhudarov, 1975) the author writes «the most exact approximation of the real, notional time will be the division into past, present and future, if the linguistic material admits such a differentiation».

The paradigm of tense-aspect in English, from the point of the author's view, is based upon temporal divisions (both proper and relative), forming a frame into which aspect differentiation is included within the range of different temporal points. Special attention was given to perfectnees.

Perfectness is the most enduring and essential category, acting in all microsystems (Table 17).

Describing stylistical features of the present, past and future tenses she marks that the present tense is widely used in narrations taking place within the sphere of the moment of speech, especially in plays and dialogues; «historical present»; permanent qualities, etc. The main sphere of the use of the past tense is the narration in the past, the representation of a chain of events which happened before the present' time. The complete parallelism of the future I and the future 11 and their purely grammatical meaning is exhibited an any contexts. The following sentences can be represented by both future tenses.

e.g.: Then I will drive this pilum through you.

(He said he would drive that pikum through him).

I shall not bother about them.

(He said he would not bother about them).

We would give the descriptions of some terms according to I.B. Khlebnikova:

transposition - the transference of some past actions into the range of the another axis of orientation - the present tense which is the initual point of temporal opposition.

neutralization - the future action is expressed by the present Indefinite or Continuous.

oppositions - represent an event on the plane of content of morphological forms which is reflected on the plane of expression.

e.g.: Mr. X arrives at London airport tomorrow.

I am taking the girl to London next week.

(neutralization)

The author gives definitions of abstract grammatical categories which find expression in the tense-aspect microsystem (active). There are three in number: tense, temporal relativity (perfect-ness) and aspect (durative).

Страницы: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10