Natural Language Semantics

, Volume 8, Issue 4, pp 297–347 | Cite as

Spanish Imperfecto and Pretérito: Truth Conditions and Aktionsart Effects in a Situation Semantics

  • Alicia Cipria
  • Craige Roberts
Article

Abstract

Spanish verbs display two past-tense forms, the pret´rito and the imperfecto. We offer an account of the semantics of these forms within a situation semantics, addressing a number of theoretically interesting questions about how to realize a semantics for tense and events in that type of framework. We argue that each of these forms is unambiguous, and that the apparent variety of readings attested for them derives from interaction with other factors in the course of interpretation. The meaning of the imperfecto is constrained to always reflect atelic aktionsart. In addition, it contains a modal element, and a contextually-given accessibility relation over situations constrains the interpretation of the modal in ways that give rise to all the attested readings. The pret´rito is indeterminate with respect to aktionsart, neither telic nor atelic. One or the other aktionsart may be forced by other factors in the clause in which the pret´rito occurs, as well as by pragmatic contrast with the possibility of using the imperfecto.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

REFERENCES

  1. Abusch, Dorit: 1985, On Verbs and Time, PhD dissertation, University of Massachusetts at Amherst.Google Scholar
  2. Bach, Emmon: 1986, “The Algebra of Events”, Linguistics and Philosophy 9, 5–16.Google Scholar
  3. Barwise, Jon: 1986, “The Situation in Logic. II: Conditionals and Conditional Information”, in E. C. Traugott, C. A. Ferguson, and J. S. Reilly (eds.), On Conditionals, pp. 387–403. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  4. Barwise, Jon and John Perry: 1981, “Semantic Innocence and Uncompromising Situations”, in P. A. French, T. E. Uehling, Jr., and H. K. Wettstein (eds.) Midwest Studies in Philosophy VI: Foundations of Analytic Philosophy, pp. 387–404. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis.Google Scholar
  5. Berman, Steve: 1987, “Situation-based Semantics for Adverbs of Quantification”, in J. Blevins and A. Vainikka (eds.), University of Massachusetts Occasional Papers 12, pp. 45–68. GLSA, Amherst.Google Scholar
  6. Binnick, Robert: 1991, Time and the Verb: A Guide to Tense and Aspect. Oxford University Press, New York.Google Scholar
  7. Carlson, Greg: 1977, Reference to Kinds in English, PhD dissertation, University of Massachusetts at Amherst.Google Scholar
  8. Comrie, Bernard: 1976, Aspect: An Introduction to the Study of Verbal Aspect and Related Problems. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  9. Cooper, Robin: 1986, “Tense and Discourse Location in Situation Semantics”, Linguistics and Philosophy 9, 17–36.Google Scholar
  10. de Swart, Henriette: 1992, Adverbs of Quantification: A Generalized Quantifier Approach, PhD dissertation, University of Groningen.Google Scholar
  11. Dowty, David: 1979, Word Meaning and Montague Grammar. Reidel, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  12. Dowty, David: 1986, “The Effects of Aspectual Class on the Temporal Structure of Discourse: Semantics or Pragmatics?”, Linguistics and Philosophy 9, 37–61.Google Scholar
  13. Dowty, David: 1987, “Aspect and Aktionsart”, ms., The Ohio State University.Google Scholar
  14. Garey, Howard: 1957, “Verbal Aspect in French”, Language 33, 91–110.Google Scholar
  15. Heim, Irene: 1982, The Semantics of Definite and Indefinite Noun Phrases, PhD dissertation, University of Massachusetts at Amherst.Google Scholar
  16. Heim, Irene: 1990, “E-type pronouns and Donkey Anaphora”, Linguistics and Philosophy 13, 137–177.Google Scholar
  17. Hinrichs, Erhard W: 1981, Temporale Anaphora im Englischen, unpublished Zulassungarbeit, University of Tübingen.Google Scholar
  18. Hinrichs, Erhard W: 1985, A Compositional Semantics for Aktionsarten and NP Reference in English, PhD dissertation, The Ohio State University.Google Scholar
  19. Hinrichs, Erhard W: 1986, “Temporal Anaphora in Discourses of English”, Linguistics and Philosophy 9, 63–82.Google Scholar
  20. Horn, Laurence R: 1984a, “Ambiguity, Negation, and the London School of Parsimony”, Proceeding of NELS 14, pp. 108–131. GLSA, University of Massachusetts at Amherst.Google Scholar
  21. Horn, Laurence R: 1984b, “Toward a New Taxonomy for Pragmatic Inference: Q-based and R-based Implicature”, in D. Schiffrin (ed.), “84), pp. 11–42. Georgetown University Press, Washington.Google Scholar
  22. Kamp, Hans: 1979b, “Some Remarks on the Logic of Change. Part I”, in C. Rohrer (ed.), Time, Tense and Quantifiers, pp. 135–174. Niemeyer, Tübingen.Google Scholar
  23. Kamp, Hans: 1981a, “Évènements, représentations discursives et référence temporelle”, Langages 6, 439–464.Google Scholar
  24. Kamp, Hans: 1981b, “A Theory of Truth and Semantic Representation”, in J. Groenendijk, T. M. V. Janssen, and M. Stokhof (eds.), Formal Methods in the Study of Language, pp. 277–322. Mathematische Centrum, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  25. Kamp, Hans and Christian Rohrer: 1983, “Tense in Texts”, in R. Bäuerle, C. Schwarze, and A. von Stechow (eds.), Meaning, Use and Interpretation of Language, pp. 250–269. De Gruyter, Berlin.Google Scholar
  26. Kenny, Anthony: 1963, Action, Emotion, and Will. Routledge and Kegan Paul, London.Google Scholar
  27. Kratzer, Angelika: 1981, “The Notional Category of Modality”, in H. J. Eikmeyer and H. Reiser (eds.), Words, Worlds, and Contexts: New Approaches in Word Semantics, pp. 38–74. De Gruyter, Berlin.Google Scholar
  28. Kratzer, Angelika: 1989, “An Investigation of the Lumps of Thought”, Linguistics and Philosophy 12, 607–653.Google Scholar
  29. Kratzer, Angelika: 1995, “Stage-level and Individual-level Predicates”, in G. N. Carlson and F. J. Pelletier (eds.), The Generic Book, pp. 125–175. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
  30. Kratzer, Angelika: 1998, “Scope or Pseudoscope? Are There Wide-Scope Indefinites?”, in S. Rothstein (ed.), Events and Grammar, pp. 163–196. Kluwer, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  31. Krifka, Manfred: 1986, Nominalreferenz und Zeitkonstitution. Zur Semantik von Massentermen, Pluraltermen und Aspektklassen, PhD Dissertation, University of Munich. Published by Wilhelm Fink, Munich.Google Scholar
  32. Krifka, Manfred: 1987, “Nominal Reference and Temporal Constitution: Towards a Semantics of Quantity”, FNS-Bericht 17, Forschungsstelle für natürlich-sprachliche Systeme, Tübingen. Also in R. Bartsch, J. van Benthem, and P. van Emde Boas (eds.), 1989, Semantics and Contextual Expression, Foris (GRASS 11), pp. 75–115. Foris, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  33. Landman, Fred: 1992, “The Progressive”, Natural Language Semantics 1, 1–32.Google Scholar
  34. Lewis, David: 1970, “General Semantics”, Synthese 22, 18-67. Reprinted in D. Davidson and G. Harman (eds.), 1972, Semantics for Natural Language, pp. 169–218. Reidel, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  35. Link, Godehard: 1983, “The Logical Analysis of Plurals and Mass Terms: A Lattice-Theoretical Approach”, in R. Bäuerle, C. Schwarze, and A. von Stechow (eds.), Meaning, Use, and Interpretation of Language, pp. 303–323. De Gruyter, Berlin.Google Scholar
  36. Link, Godehard: 1987, “Algebraic Semantics for Event Structures”, in J. Groenendijk et al. (eds.), Proceedings of the 6th Amsterdam Colloquium, pp. 153–173. ITALI, University of Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  37. Moens, Marc and Mark Steedman: 1988, “Temporal Ontology and Temporal Reference”, Computational Linguistics 14, 15–28.Google Scholar
  38. Montague, Richard: 1973, “The Proper Treatment of Quantification in Ordinary English”, in J. Hintikka, J. Moravcsik, and P. Suppes (eds.), Approaches to Natural Language: Proceedings of the 1970 Stanford Workshop on Grammar and Semantics, pp. 221–242. Reidel, Dordrecht, Reprinted in R. Thomason (ed.), 1974, Formal Philosophy: Selected Papers of Richard Montague, pp. 247–270. University Press, New Haven, Yale.Google Scholar
  39. Parsons, Terrance: 1989, “The Progressive in English: Events, States, and Processes”, Linguistics and Philosophy 12, 213–241.Google Scholar
  40. Parsons, Terrance: 1990, Events in the Semantics of English: A Study in Subatomic Semantics, MIT Press, Cambridge Mass.Google Scholar
  41. Partee, Barbara: 1984, “Nominal and Temporal Anaphora”, Linguistics and Philosophy 7, 243–286.Google Scholar
  42. Portner, Paul: 1992, Situation Theory and the Semantics of Propositional Expressions, PhD dissertation, University of Massachusetts at Amherst.Google Scholar
  43. Portner, Paul: 1994, “A Uniform Semantics for Aspectual -ing”, The Proceedings of NELS 24, GLSA, University of Massachusetts of Amherst.Google Scholar
  44. Portner, Paul: 1998, “The Progressive in Modal Semantics”, Language 74(4), 760–787.Google Scholar
  45. Roberts, Craige: 1994, Temporal Adverbial Clauses in an Event-Based Semantics, ms., The Ohio State University.Google Scholar
  46. Stump, Gregory T.: 1985, The Semantic Variability of Absolute Constructions. Reidel, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  47. ter Meulen, Alice G. B.: 1984, “Events, Quantities and Individuals”, in F. Landman and F. Veltman (eds.), Varieties of Formal Semantics, pp. 259–280. Foris, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  48. ter Meulen, Alice G. B.: 1995, Representing Time in Natural Language: The Dynamic Interpretation of Tense and Aspect. MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
  49. Verkuyl, H. J.: 1972, On the Compositional Nature of the Aspects, Foundations of Language, Supplementary Series, Vol. 15. Reidel, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  50. Yoo, Eun-Jung: 1996, “Interpretation of Korean Temporal Markers -ESS and -NUN”, in A. Kathol and J. H. Yoon (eds.), Papers in Tense and Modality. OSU Working Papers in Linguistics 47, pp. 137–158. Department of Linguistics, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio.Google Scholar
  51. Yoon, Jae-Hak: 1996, “Interpretation of Relative Tenses in Korean Time Adverbials”, in A. Kathol and J. H. Yoon (eds.), Papers in Tense and Modality. OSU Working Papers in Linguistics 47, pp. 159–177. Department of Linguistics, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alicia Cipria
  • Craige Roberts

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations