Skip to main content
Log in

Present perfects compete

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Linguistics and Philosophy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper proposes a new look at the so-called ‘present-perfect puzzle’. I suggest that it is in fact part of a bigger problem, which also involves simple past tenses. I argue that present perfects compete with simple past tenses, and that the distribution of these tenses shows signs of the impact of this competition. The outcome of the competition is argued to be heavily dependent on which of the two tense-forms is the default. A pragmatic theory is proposed which accounts for the reduced distribution of the present perfect in languages like English and (American) Spanish, and the reduced distribution of the simple past tense in languages like French and German.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alexiadou, A., Rathert, M., von Stechow, A. (eds) (2003) Perfect explorations. Mouton de Gruyter. G. Schaden, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Arnauld, A., & Lancelot, C. (1754). Grammaire générale et raisonnée. Paris: Prault fils l’aîné, Available at http://gallica.bnf.fr.

  • Benveniste, E. (1966/1974). Problèmes de linguistique générale I + II. Paris: Gallimard.

  • Burgos, D. (2004). Anteriority marking in British English, standard German and Argentinean Spanish. An empirical examination with special emphasis on temporal adverbials. Lincom.

  • Bybee J., Dahl O. (1989) The creation of tense and aspect systems in the languages of the world. Studies in Language 13(1): 51–103

    Google Scholar 

  • Bybee J., Perkins R., Pagliuca W. (1994) The evolution of grammar. Tense, aspect and modality in the languages of the world. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  • Dahl O. (1985) Tense and aspect systems. Blackwell, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • de Swart H. (1998) Aspect shift and coercion. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 16(2): 347–385

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giorgi A., Pianesi F. (1997) Tense and aspect. From semantics to morphosyntax. Oxford University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Grice H.P. (1975) Logic and conversation. In: Cole P., Morgan J.L. (eds) Syntax and semantics. Speech acts Vol. 3. Academic Press, New York, pp 41–58

    Google Scholar 

  • Inoue K. (1979) An analysis of the English present perfect. Linguistics 17: 561–589

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kamp H., Reyle U. (1993) From discourse to logic. Introduction to modeltheoretic semantics of natural language, formal logic and discourse representation theory. Kluwer, Dordrecht

    Google Scholar 

  • Klein W. (1992) The present perfect puzzle. Language 68: 525–552

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klein W. (2000) An analysis of the German Perfekt. Language 76(2): 358–382

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kratzer, A. (1998). More structural analogies betweens pronouns and tenses. In D. Strolovitch & A. Lawson (Eds.), Proceedings of Salt 8. Ithaca: CLC Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levinson S.C. (2000) Presumptive meanings. The theory of generalized conversational implicature. MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindgren K.B. (1957). Über den Oberdeutschen Präteritumschwund (Annales Academi Scientiarum Fennicæ 112). Helsinki: Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maurice W. (1935) Discrimination between past and present. Neuphilologische Monatsschrift 6: 312–330

    Google Scholar 

  • McCoard R.W. (1978) The English perfect: Tense-choice and pragmatic inferences. North Holland, Amsterdam

    Google Scholar 

  • Meillet, A. (1912/1982). L’évolution des formes grammaticales. In Linguistique historique et linguistique générale (pp. 130–148). GenÉve/Paris: Slatkine/Champion.

  • Müller S. (2005) Zur Analyse der scheinbar mehrfachen Vorfeldbesetzung. Linguistische Berichte 203: 297–330

    Google Scholar 

  • Musan R. (2002) The German perfect. Its semantic composition and its interaction with temporal adverbials. Kluwer, Dordrecht

    Google Scholar 

  • Nishiyama, A., & Koenig, J.-P. (2004). What is a perfect state? In B. Schmeiser, V. Chand, A. Kelleher, & A. Rodriguez (Eds.), WCCFL 23 Proceedings (pp. 101–113). Somerville: Cascadilla Press.

  • Pancheva, R., & von Stechow, A. (2004). On the present perfect puzzle. Ms, University of Southern California and Universität Tübingen.

  • Portner P. (2003) The (Temporal) semantics and (Modal) pragmatics of the perfect. Linguistics and Philosophy 26: 459–510

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rathert, M. (2001). Anteriority versus extended now: theories of the German perfect. In Audiatur Vox Sapientiae. A Festschrift for Arnim von Stechow (pp. 410–426). Berlin: Akademie Verlag.

  • Reichenbach, H. (1947/1966). Elements of symbolic logic. Toronto: Collier-MacMillan.

  • Rothstein, B. (2006). The perfect time span. On the present perfect in German, Swedish and English. Ph.D. thesis, Universität Stuttgart.

  • Weinrich H. (1986) Grammaire textuelle du français. Alliance Française, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  • Weinrich H. (1993) Textgrammatik der deutschen Sprache. Mannheim, Duden

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gerhard Schaden.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Schaden, G. Present perfects compete. Linguist and Philos 32, 115–141 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10988-009-9056-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10988-009-9056-3

Keywords

Navigation