The grammar of the english verb phrase part 69 pps

The head clause typitypi-cally refers to a homogeneous background situation and shifts the domain by using the absolute past tense, the present perfect or the present tense: Everything I

the situation time of the subclause and the situation time of the head clause:

the situation time of the subclause is directly related to t0 This is in keeping

with the principle that only past time-sphere tenses can be used to express

T-relations in a domain established by an indefinite present perfect

9.9.9 When the head clause containsjust, the situation referred to is

automat-ically recent Because of this, temporal subordination is less likely in the

sub-clause However, the influence of recency may conflict with factors promoting

temporal subordination For example, in represented speech the speaker may

prefer to apply temporal subordination because he does not want to assume

responsibility for what he reports, i e because he wants the subclause to be

interpreted ‘opaquely’, i e from the point of view of the reporting speaker,

rather than ‘transparently’, i e from his own point of view (see 8.24.3):

“The army has just said they would release Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, [but we do

not know when,” he said, adding that he had no specific information about the

release.] (www)

Pyongyang, however, has just said itwould not be going back to multilateral

negotia-tions on its nuclear program, stating that it wants to boost its nuclear potential in

response to a US “hostile” attitude (www)

In the following example would not do could not be replaced by will not do

because the ‘it’ in question has already been done at t0

[“Therefore, this Board will not make a finding about the adequacy of nearby

inter-sections or other elements related to the adequacy of public facilities.” (Emphasis

added.) Nevertheless,] it immediately did that which it has just said itwould not do,

[by bootstrapping specific traffic safety matters under the general provisions of the

Code.] (www)

In the following example,would lend cannot be replaced with will lend because

the context suggests that there may not be any lending in the post-present:

[Not only do I feel like an unemployed wastrel (which I’m not really, my first shift

at Sports Soccer is on Wednesday), but I also feel like a money-driven little bitch.]

My dad (Jim) has just said hewould lend me some money for rent [because he has

offered a million times, but then after saying it was fine he said “but then at

Christ-mas I sent you the money for a train ticket to come and see us and you didn’t.”]

(www)

However, there are also examples in which the conditional tense form could

easily be replaced by the future tense:

President Mubarek of Egypt has just said hewould allow opposition candidates to

run in their upcoming election (www)

GM has just said itwould add a 7.5-liter V12 to its powertrain lineup (www)

[In a less then clever vein, I left the hose connected to the faucet Yes, yes, I know

There’s a little warning on the flange that says “Remove hose during freezing

weather or pipe may burst ” I’ve learned my lesson and] the insurance company guy has just said theywould cover everything, including a stay in a nice hotel [Sadly,

you will be paying for my stupidity, by ever so slightly increased rates.] (www) [The heat just got turned up a notch.] Marissa from The Hotrod Store has just said shewould be there on Saturday to race so grudge matches (www)

Kodak has just said theywould be issuing a new version in the fall (www)

The use of the conditional tense withjust is no doubt related to the fact that

many (especially Am E.) speakers consider just as possibly referring to a past

time, witness the fact that they use ‘X justsaid that …’ next to (or instead of)

‘X has just said that …’.

9.9.10 In 9.11 we will see that a pre-present domain established by a present perfect clause receiving a continuative interpretation cannot normally be ex-panded:

Ever since I was a soldier I have known that I {am / *was} reluctant to follow

orders that I {do / *did} not find sensible.

A similar restriction applies when the pre-present domain is established by an indefinite perfect which is interpreted inchoatively, so that the focus is on the continuative state resulting from it (see 5.26.2):

I have been suspended from work while investigations into alleged misconductare taking place [What should I do?] (www) (are taking cannot be replaced with were taking)

But in France, four men sent back from Cuba have been remanded in custody while they are investigated for possible links to terrorist organisations (www) (*were in-vestigated)

9.9.11 Up to now we have only considered examples in which the head clause establishes a pre-present domain and in which the subclause either expands this domain (as if it were a past domain) or shifts the domain In this subsection

we will discuss examples in which it is the other way round: the pre-present domain is established by the subclause In these examples the subclause typi-cally refers to a repetitive hypersituation The head clause typitypi-cally refers to a homogeneous background situation and shifts the domain by using the absolute past tense, the present perfect or the present tense:

Everything I’ve ever done was wrong.

Every time I’ve met him, he’s been so polite and a really nice person to talk to.

(www) Every time we’ve tried [this restaurant] it’s either closed or the wait is too long.

(www)

Let us have a closer look at these three possibilities of tense choice.

(a) The past tense in examples likeEverything I’ve ever done was wrong is an

absolute past tense creating a W-simultaneous domain (This is in keeping

with the fact that this past tense can be ‘backshifted’ in past represented

speech:He said that everything he’d ever done had been wrong ⫺ see 8.25

for this ‘indirect speech test’) The following further illustrate this

possibil-ity:

Whenever I’ve been there, I felt like I was wandering through a friend’s house

looking at their art collection (www)(This resembles I’ve been there several times

and each time I felt like I was wandering through a friend’s house looking at their

art collection, which itself resembles The president has had talks with the

protest-ers She told them that their cause was a just one in that the present perfect is used

to introduce a situation and the past tense is used to give more information about

it ⫺ see 8.25.3.)

Every time I’ve met him hewas quite the gentleman (www)

Since then, whenever I’ve seen him, hewas always the same loving, friendly person

always giving that grin and a hug (www)

[I’ve never had a serious problem though, but] whenever I’ve been there, I was

cool to them and theywere cool to me (www)

Every time I’ve seen him hewas alone.

In such examples the subclause establishing the pre-present domain is typically

a clause referring to a repetitive hypersituation and functioning as (or like) a

temporal clause This clause always precedes the head clause It is only because

the pre-present domain is established first that the domain established by the

past tense in the head clause can be interpreted as W-simultaneous with the

pre-present domain

(b) When the head clause (supporting the subclause which is in the present

perfect and refers to a repetitive hypersituation) uses the present tense, it

also receives a repetitive interpretation and therefore establishes a number

of W-simultaneous present domains:

But whenever I’ve looked at the job board the jobasks for experience (www) (Has

asked is also possible.)

This sentence seems to be a blending ofWhenever I’ve looked at the job board

the job has asked for experience and Whenever I look at the job board the job

asks for experience (Not surprisingly) the speaker wants to talk at the same

time about what he believes is habitually the case and what has habitually been

the case and is thus evidence for his assertion about the habitual present In

other words, the head clause locates its situation in the present and the

sub-clause locates its situation in the pre-present, and the listener is expected to

make sense of these temporally unconnected T-locations, using the repetitive adverbial as a guide to make the double interpretation

The following are similar:

And every time I’ve met him he impresses me more ⫺ [he is so unassuming and

modest for one who has accomplished so much] (www) Whenever I’ve been really upset and crying, most of my catslook startled and at a

loss, [because they’re not really used to it] (www) [The food here is always fabulous,] everything I’ve ever tried is always superbly

spiced and flavoured and sooo fresh! (www) (c) When the head clause (supporting the subclause which is in the present perfect and refers to a repetitive hypersituation) uses the present perfect,

it establishes a pre-present domain of its own and also receives a repetitive interpretation In that case there are in principle two possible readings The first is that the two pre-present domains are W-simultaneous with each other, in the sense that each subsituation constituting the repetitive hypersituation of the head clause is W-simultaneous with a subsituation constituting the repetitive hypersituation of the subclause):

Whenever I’ve been in trouble, Tim has helped me out.

Every time I’ve asked for a salary increase my boss has threatened to fire me.

Every time I’ve met him, he’s been so polite and a really nice person to talk to.

(www) The second possible reading is that the head clause domain is interpreted as W-anterior to the subclause domain Consider:

Every time I’ve met him he’s been drunk.

Whenever I’ve seen John he’s been ill.

How many timeshas John been ill when you have seen him?

In these examples the two clauses establish pre-present domains which may be interpreted as W-simultaneous with each other However, there is also another possible interpretation, in which each of the situation times of the subsituations making up the repetitive hypersituation referred to in the temporal subclause

is treated as if it were t0and in which the situation times implied by the head clause lie in the ‘pseudo-pre-present’ periods leading up to these ‘pseudo-t0’s’.3 For example, Whenever I’ve seen John he has been ill can be interpreted as

meaning ‘Every time I have seen John he had been ill in the period leading up

to my seeing him’ This interpretation can be brought out by the addition of

just to the head clause: Whenever I’ve seen John he has just been ill.

3 This is a case of shift of temporal perspective which we have not yet referred to.

In sum, it is possible for the repetitive time clause to use a present perfect

implying a number of ‘pseudo-pre-present’ periods and for the repetitive head

clause to represent the times of the subsituations referred to as holding within

or throughout these pseudo-pre-present periods This possibility is in principle

available irrespective of the W-reading (i e indefinite, continuative or

up-to-now) which the head clause in the present perfect receives Thus, the example

Has John been ill when you have seen him? can be altered in various ways

which each bring out one of the three interpretations:

Has John ever been ill for some time when you have seen him?(On the most obvious

interpretation of the head clause, the sentence is interpreted as: ‘You have seen John

a number of times Has it ever happened that he had been ill for some time (and

still was) then?’ This means that each illness was continuing into an orientation

time in the pre-present period.)

Has John ever just been ill when you have seen him? (indefinite interpretation of

has John been ill: ‘You have seen John a number of times Has it ever happened that

he had been ill just before you saw him (but no longer was when you saw him)?’)

On each occasion when you have seen John, how many times has he been ill since

your previous visit?(quantificational constitution interpretation of has John been ill:

‘You have seen John a number of times On each of those occasions, how many

times had he been ill in the period following your previous visit and leading up your

seeing him?’)

As a further example, consider the following:

Every time I’ve seen Gilda in the last few weeks she has been playing football

This sentence presupposes that I have seen Gilda several times in the past two

weeks and says that on each of these occasions it would have been true (at the

time) to say ‘Gilda has been playing football’ or to say ‘Gilda is playing

foot-ball’ In other words, the sentence is ambiguous between (a) ‘At the time of

my seeing Gilda it has each time been true to say that she has (‘just’ or

other-wise) been playing football’, and (b) ‘At the time of my seeing Gilda it has

each time been true to say that she was playing football’.4The form has been

playing in the former of these paraphrases receives the same interpretation as

it does in isolation, except for the fact that the relevant pre-present period is

not a time span leading up to t0 but a time span reaching up to the times

referred to byevery time I’ve seen Gilda (which are interpreted as being

indefi-nite times in a period up to t0) Similarly, the form is playing in the second

4 Not surprisingly, the two readings above can also be expressed by sentences in which

there is no shift of domain but the pre-present domain established by the

Adv-time-clause is expanded (as if it were a past domain ⫺ see 9.9) by the tense forms in the

head clause:

Every time I have seen Gilda shehad just been playing football (T-anteriority)

Every time I have met Gilda shewas playing football (T-simultaneity)

paraphrase locates its situation time at the various pseudo-present times in the period up to now rather than at the real t0

Sentences like this differ from nonrepetitive indefinite perfect sentences in that they involve an intermediate type of ‘basic orientation time’ (see 10.4.1)5 ⫺ that is, an intermediate orientation time functioning as if it were

t0⫺ in their temporal structure Whereas I have seen Gilda locates its situation

time in a period leading up to t0, every time I have seen Gilda implies that

there are a number of situation times in a period leading up to an (each time different) ‘basic orientation time’ and that the various basic orientation times are themselves indefinite intervals in an implicit period up to t0.6

Needless to say, the present perfect cannot realize the above kind of tempo-ral schema in a nonrepetitive sentence.When I have seen John, he has been ill

is only grammatical if when means ‘whenever’ or ‘every time that’ If when is

to be read as ‘on the particular occasion when’, the sentence that must be used instead is When I saw John, he was ill or When I saw John, he had been ill (for some time).

9.10 T-relations on an up-to-now reading of the head clause

If the pre-present domain is established by an up-to-now perfect (in which case the situation time fills the entire pre-present but does not include t0), there are in principle two possibilities in the subclause: temporal subordination (involving a shift of temporal perspective to the past zone) or a shift of domain The former possibility can only occur when the speaker can discern enough ‘bygone-ness’ in the up-to-now situation expressed in the head clause to expand the pre-present domain as if it were a past domain The latter possibility occurs when the up-to-now situation is given a recency interpretation

5 In 10.4.1, ‘basic orientation time’ is defined as follows: “The basic orientation time (represented as ‘orientation time 1 ’) is that orientation time in the structure of the tense from which the temporal relations expressed by the tense begin to be computed In most cases orientation time 1 is t 0 , but there are cases in which it is a post-present binding orientation time (i e a pseudo-t 0 ).”

6 The use of an intermediate orientation time functioning as if it were t 0 is also exemplified

by present perfect sentences of a different kind:

Hehas been going to invite me for months (but he has not done so yet).

Here again the implication is that there have been several occasions in the pre-present when a proposition was applicable whose default interpretation is that it is applicable

at t 0 , viz the tensed proposition ‘He is going to invite me’ That is, the sentence is interpreted as ‘For months he has been intending to invite me.’

9.10.1 On an up-to-now reading the terminal point of the full situation lies

close to t0 This means that an up-to-now reading can easily be treated as a

recency reading, in which case the pre-present domain established by the head

clause is not expanded (as if it were a past domain) but the subclause shifts

the domain (i e establishes a new domain) On the other hand, expanding an

up-to-now pre-present domain is also possible provided one can discern enough

‘pastness’ (‘bygone-ness’) in the up-to-now situation to treat the pre-present

domain as if it were a past one This means that in many cases both a shift of

domain and temporal subordination are possible in the subclause (However,

restrictions may be imposed by the type of subclause or by pragmatic factors.)

9.10.2 In complement clauses there is generally a slight preference for shifting

the domain if the head clause situation is not a repetitive hypersituation

How-ever, temporal subordination is also grammatical:

[You want to know what I’ve just been doing?] I’ve been teaching your son how he

{can / could} open a lock with a hairpin.”

[“At last you’re back What have you been doing?”]⫺ “I’ve been explaining to your

children why you {have / had} forbidden them to play in the park.”

[“Ah, there you are What have you been doing?”]⫺ “I’ve been telling your children

that they {will / would} have to clean the kitchen tomorrow.”

9.10.3 When the pre-present situation is repetitive (and receives an up-to-now

reading) both temporal subordination (i e expanding the domain as if it were

a past one) and the use of an absolute tense (shifting the domain) are in

prin-ciple equally possible in a complement clause This is because some of the

subsituations of the repetitive hypersituation are divorced from t0 while the

last one is not: the former can be treated as if they were past situations, whereas

the last subsituation is treated as recent

If the first option is chosen (i e the subclause is temporally subordinated),

the speaker is primarily concerned with the non-recent subsituations In most

of the examples that we have found, temporal subordination is actually

obliga-tory because (as is clear from the context) it would be false to represent the

subclause situation as actualizing at t0:

I’ve been telling myself that Iwasn’t ready yet, [but honestly I’ve been afraid to fail

if I even started trying!] (www) (Am not will not be used because the implication

would be that Iamactually ready.)

[Homecoming isn’t just for queens anymore Eight young men are vying for the

noble title of homecoming king, an honor that has never before been bestowed in

Dade County.] “For the last three years the girls and the boys on student council

have been saying that it wasn’t fair, [that there should be boys too,” said Donna

Street, a coordinator of the homecoming committee “When Mr Hall came it was

one of the things they asked.” New principal Fred Hall granted the students’ wish

and a homecoming committee was formed.] (www)(Isn’t fair cannot be used because

the unfair situation no longer holds at t 0 )