The past perfect had left represents John’s leaving as T-anterior to some orientation time in that domain.Arrived can only be a relative preterite, since a shift of domain within the sam
Trang 1Johnleft at five.
[John will no longer be there at six because] hewill have left at five.
Johnhas already left.
By then Johnwill already have left.
In the same way asleft in John left at five establishes a past domain, will have left in the second example creates a pseudo-past subdomain in a post-present
domain And in the same way ashas left in John has already left establishes a
pre-present domain, will have left in the last example creates a
pseudo-pre-present subdomain in a post-pseudo-pre-present domain
Pseudo-past and pseudo-pre-present subdomains are expanded in exactly the same ways as true past and pre-present domains ⫺ see 9.18 and 19.19 This is clear from a comparison of the sentences in the following pairs: (a) Tim gave a fiver to whoever {had paid / paid / would be paying} a visit to his
mother in hospital today.(The head clause establishes a past domain.)
(b) [By tonight John will be broke.] He will have given a fiver to whoever {had paid / paid / would be paying} a visit to his mother in hospital today (The head clause establishes a pseudo-past subdomain.)
(a) Has the mayor ever been able to claim that he {had helped / was helping / would help} us? (The head clause establishes an indefinite pre-present domain which is expanded as if it were a past domain.)
(b) I doubt that by the end of his office the mayor will ever have been able to claim that he {had helped / was helping / would help} us (The head clause establishes
an indefinite pseudo-pre-present subdomain which is expanded as if it were a past domain.)
(a) Tom’s father has known for some time that Jane and Tom are married (The head clause establishes a continuative pre-present domain; the that-clause estab-lishes a present domain of its own.)
(b) [Once Jane and Tom are married and have gone off to Angola, we’ll let Tom’s father know that they are married.] By the time they come back, he’ll have known for several months that they are married, [and with luck he’ll have got used to the idea].(The head clause establishes a continuative pseudo-pre-present subdomain; the that-clause establishes another, W-simultaneous, subdomain.)
F The explanatory force of this analysis of tenses in
post-present domains
Our analysis of the English tense system in post-present temporal domains offers a natural explanation for some tense phenomena which might seem puzzling at first sight
Trang 29.26 Observation 1
9.26.1 The model of the English tense system that we have presented, and
which hinges on the notion of temporal domain, neatly accounts for an
inter-esting difference that we may observe between (1) and (2):
(1a) Johnhad left at 5 p.m.
(1b) Johnhad left when Bill arrived.
(2a) Johnwill have left at 5 p.m.
(2b) Johnwill have left when Bill arrives.
(2c) [According to the plan, John will no longer be there at midnight He will have
left much earlier.] More specifically, hewill have left when Bill arrived.
Sentence (1a) is ambiguous between two readings, which we can paraphrase as
‘It was the case that John had left⫺ he left at 5 o’clock’ and ‘At 5 p.m it was
the case that John had already left’ (The latter interpretation is strongly invited
if we giveat 5 p.m initial position in (1a), or when we insert already into had
left.) Sentence (1b) is ambiguous in exactly the same way (Compare John was
no longer there at five, because he had left when Bill arrived at four with John
had already left when Bill arrived.) Sentence (2a) is ambiguous too: at 5 p.m.
again indicates (i e ‘contains’⫺ see 2.23.1)12either the situation time of John’s
leaving or the orientation time to which that situation time is T-anterior
How-ever, when we replace at 5 p.m by a when-clause, as in (2b⫺c), we see that
we cannot use the same tense form for both readings If thewhen-clause is to
indicate the time to which the situation time of John’s leaving is anterior, it
must use the present tense (arrives) If it is to indicate the situation time of
John’s leaving, it must use the past tense (arrived).
The theory that has been presented accounts for this difference between (1b)
and (2b⫺c) In (1b) both situation times are located within the same past
domain The past perfect had left represents John’s leaving as T-anterior to
some orientation time in that domain.Arrived can only be a relative preterite,
since a shift of domain within the same absolute time-zone does not occur in
adverbial when-clauses (except in two well-defined cases ⫺ see 13.15⫺16).
Since the relative past tense can be used to express T-simultaneity with any
orientation time in the past domain, it is not clear from the relative past form
arrived whether Bill’s arrival is to be interpreted as T-simultaneous with the
situation time of the head clause (i e the time of John’s leaving) or as
T-simultaneous with the orientation time to which John’s leaving is anterior
12 Since the Adv-time indicated byat 5 p.m is punctual, ‘contains’ must be read as
‘coin-cides with’ ⫺ see 2.23.
Trang 3Hence the ambiguity of (1b) In (2b⫺c) there is no such ambiguity because the reference is now to a pseudo-past subdomain within a post-present domain In
a post-present domain different verb forms are used to express T-simultaneity
To express T-simultaneity with the central orientation time (or with another pseudo-t0) the present tense is used This is the case in (2b) (⫽ ‘When Bill arrives, John will already have left’), which uses arrives ⫺ see Figure 9.14.13
To express T-simultaneity with the central orientation time of a pseudo-past subdomain we use the relative past tense This is the case in (2c), which uses
arrived ⫺ see Figure 9.15 So, both the ambiguity of (1b) and the nonambiguity
of (2b⫺c) are predictable from the theory
Figure 9.14 The temporal structure of John will have left when Bill arrives.
Figure 9.15 The temporal structure of John will have left when Bill arrived.
9.26.2 The above explanation also accounts for the different tense forms in the following:
I will thank you to wipe your feet when youenter the house (A to-infinitive follow-ing thank refers to a posterior situation The situation time of ‘to wipe your feet’ is
13 Figures 9.14 and 9.15 are simplified in that the complex temporal structure ofwhen
(explained in chapter 13) is disregarded.
Trang 4therefore interpreted as a pseudo-t 0 , so that the when-clause uses the present tense
to express coincidence.)
I will now thank you for wiping your feet when you entered the house (Because
thank is followed by for, the situation time of wiping your feet is interpreted as
anterior to the time of the thanking, which is the central orientation time of a
post-present domain and is therefore a pseudo-t 0 The time of the wiping is therefore
treated as a pseudo-past orientation time Entered expresses T-simultaneity in the
pseudo-past subdomain that is established in this way.)
[If you don’t stand by him now,] he will never forget your abandoning him when he
needed you.
9.27 Observation 2
9.27.1 In 9.18⫺19 it was shown how the past perfect can be used to represent
its situation time as T-anterior to a pseudo-past or pseudo-pre-present
orienta-tion time which is T-anterior to the central orientaorienta-tion time (⫽ pseudo-t0) of
a post-present domain For example:
(3a) [If you use the cover-story that you’ve come to check the lift as your way of
getting into the building, how will you later explain the fact that you were still
there six hours later?] The police will want to know why you didn’t leave when
youhad done your work (The situation time referred to by didn’t leave is a
pseudo-past orientation time; had done expresses T-anteriority to it.)
(3b) [If you keep beating her she might go to the police, and then] the police will
ask the neighbours if they have ever noticed that shehad been beaten up (The
situation time referred to by have noticed is a pseudo-pre-present orientation
time; had done expresses T-anteriority to it.)
However, examples can be found in which the past perfect is used (seemingly
similarly) without there being any mention of a pseudo-past binding
orienta-tion time:
(4a) [If you join our club,] you will know a lot about people that you had never
dreamed of meeting before.
(4b) [If a local pressure group can achieve results, the interest may gather
momen-tum.] Individuals whohad never considered taking part in public debate will
be attracted to the success of certain ventures (SEU)
What is intriguing is not only that the past perfect is used in these sentences,
but also that it cannot be used in other, seemingly similar, sentences:
(5a) If you peep through this hole in the curtain, you will see the audience that
{have / *had} come to watch the play.
(5b) [Don’t tell that joke to everyone you talk with this afternoon or you will not
be able to use it during your public appearance tonight.] I will not have you
telling a joke which you {have / *had} already told several times.
Trang 5If our analysis of the past perfect in (3a⫺b) is correct, we must assume that in (4a⫺b) the time of the situation described in the past perfect is each time located T-anterior to a pseudo-past orientation time which remains ‘unspeci-fied’, i e it is neither a situation time nor an orientation time specified by a time-specifying adverbial nor an orientation time that is implicit in the seman-tics of a temporal conjunction⫺ see 2.14 Moreover, we will have to explain why there is apparently no such unspecified pseudo-past orientation time in the tense structure of (5a⫺b)
9.27.2 The analysis we propose involves the following claims:
(a) The past perfect forms in (3a⫺b) are instances of ‘the past version of a present perfect’ This means that these past perfect forms imply the exis-tence of a period leading up to (but not including) a pseudo-past orienta-tion time (See the definiorienta-tion of ‘pre-present’ in 2.35.) The pseudo-past orientation time in question remains unspecified
(b) The past perfect forms in (4a⫺b) are instances of the past version of an
indefinite present perfect No examples can be found in which the past
perfect receives a ‘continuative’ reading or an ‘up-to-now’ reading (This
is in keeping with the use ofbefore and never in (4a⫺b), which trigger an
indefinite perfect reading.) (c) When a durative situation has never actualized in a period up to t0but is actualizing at t0, the speaker can choose between the present perfect and the past perfect to refer to it:
Ihave never dreamed of meeting these people before (before ⫽ ‘before t 0 ’)
Ihad never dreamed of meeting these people before (before ⫽ ‘before I started meeting these people a short time ago’)
Sentence (4b) is fine because a durative full situation whose situation time is located at t0 (and hence represented as punctual ⫺ see 3.1.1) must actually have started before t0 This means that the initial point of the full situation is anterior to t0and can therefore be treated as a past orientation time to which another situation time can be represented as T-anterior by the use of the past perfect
(d) In the same way, when a durative situation has never actualized in a period leading up to a post-present pseudo-t0but is actualizing at that post-pres-ent time, the speaker can choose between the prespost-pres-ent perfect and the past perfect to refer to it:
[If you join our club,] you will know a lot about people that you have never dreamed of meeting before (before ⫽ ‘before the pseudo-t 0 , i e before the time
of your knowing about these people’)
Trang 6[If you join our club,] you will know a lot about people that you had never
dreamed of meeting before (before ⫽ ‘before the time when you will know a lot
about these people as a result of meeting them’)
The second example is grammatical because a durative situation (viz knowing
a lot about people) whose situation time is located at a pseudo-t0 (and hence
represented as punctual ⫺ see 3.1.1) must actually have started before that
pseudo-t0 This means that the initial point of the full situation is anterior to
the pseudo-t0 and can therefore be treated as a pseudo-past orientation time
to which a situation time can be represented as T-anterior by the use of the
past perfect
(e) Because the past perfect requires that the initial point of the post-present
situation function as a pseudo-past orientation time, i e as an orientation
time that is past with respect to (and hence treated as disconnected from)
the pseudo-t0, the past perfect is only possible if there is no link (other
than the temporal one) between the situation referred to by the past perfect
and the pseudo-past binding orientation time This means that it is the
present perfect that has to be used if the speaker is to express a resultative
link between the anterior situation and what is the case at the pseudo-past
binding orientation time
The analysis outlined in (a)⫺(e) appears to account for the examples in (4) In
(4a) [If you join our club, you will know a lot about people that you had never
dreamed of meeting before], the situation of never dreaming of meeting certain
people is represented as anterior to the beginning of the situation of knowing
a lot about them, but there is no causative or resultative link between these
two situations In (4b) [Individuals who had never considered taking part in
public debate will be attracted to the success of certain ventures], the situation
of never considering taking part in public debate is represented as anterior to
the beginning of the new situation (viz the situation of people feeling attracted
to the success of certain ventures) but does not have any bearing on the latter
Instead there is a sense of contrast between the two situations (As a matter of
fact, in each of (4a⫺b) there is a contrast between the situation referred by in
the future tense and the situation referred to in the past perfect Thus, in (4a)
the post-present situation of knowing a lot about certain people is contrasted
with the anterior situation of never having met those people before.)
However, things are different in (5) In (5a) [If you peep through this hole
in the curtain, you will see the audience that {have / *had} come to watch the
play], there is a resultative link between the anterior situation and the
pseudo-t0at which the seeing is located: we interpret (5a) as ‘If you peep through this
hole in the curtain, you will see the audience that are here to watch the play
as a result of having come to watch the play.’ This resultative link means that
the coming must be represented as anterior to the seeing and not as anterior
Trang 7to a time which is treated as past with respect to the seeing In other words, the condition for the use of the past perfect referred to in (e) is not satisfied The past perfect would effectively represent the coming to see the play as anterior to the beginning of the seeing and represent the latter as past with respect to the rest of the situation of seeing This divorcing of the coming and the seeing is not possible if there is to be a resultative link between the two This is in keeping with the fact that the future situation of ‘seeing the audience that are here to watch the play’ does not contrast with the earlier situation of people having come to watch the play
It should be noted, however, that the past perfect must be used if (5a) is modified in such a way that the idea of present result (viz ‘the audience are hear to watch the play’) is cancelled:
If you peep through this hole in the curtain, you will see the audience that {*have / had} come to see the play talking among themselves and paying no attention to
the actors
In this context, the resultative idea ‘they are here to see the play’ is no longer valid at the time ofwill see It is clear that the audience are not watching the
play and have forgotten about their initial intention of doing so The use of
had come to see the play is therefore normal: both the coming to see the play
and the resultant state of being in the theatre to see the play are anterior to (in the sense of ‘completely over at’) the post-present time of seeing the audience talking among themselves and paying no attention to the actors It is therefore impossible to use the present perfecthave come to see the play with its
concom-itant implication of ‘they are here to see the play’ This accords with the fact that there is a clear contrast between this anterior state and what is actually happening at the time referred to bywill see.
Sentence (5b) (repeated here) can be accounted for in a similar way: (5b) [Don’t tell that joke to everyone you talk with this afternoon or you will not
be able to use it during your public appearance tonight.] I will not have you telling a joke which you {have / *had} already told several times.
Again we have to use the present perfect (has told) because the relative clause
implies a resultative link between the anterior repeated telling of the joke and what is the case at the time of the pseudo-t0at which tonight’s telling is located: the intended interpretation is ‘I will not have you telling a joke which people will already be familiar with as a result of your having told it several times before.’ The past perfect cannot express this meaning, for it would represent the past telling as anterior to the beginning of the post-present telling, while treating that beginning as past with respect to the post-present telling itself This intervening past orientation time excludes the possibility of a resultative interpretation