Re: Portuguese tense/aspect system
- From: "Neeraj Mathur" <neemathur@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2005 20:30:03 +0100
"António Marques" <m.ap@xxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:4245573b$0$7735$a729d347@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Neeraj Mathur wrote:
> >
> > Doesn't Portuguese have a tense/aspect system that differs widely from
> > Spanish, Classical French, and most Italian?
>
> Since neither Ruud nor Miguel seem to say much about it, I'll have to
> barge in. Yes, portuguese (and galician) works much more like enghlish
> than like the three of them. Compare:
[snip examples; a few transplanted to below]
Thanks.
I just dug out the notes from this lecture series I attended a long while
back; maybe they'll be repeated some time in the future, because I'm quite
certain that I would gain much more from them now than I did then!
Anyway, the point that Smith was trying to talk about was a slightly
different one from what I wrote above. He was using an analysis of tense
based on Hornstein, where the speech-act (S) and the event (E) have no
direct relationship with each other, but both have a relationship with the
reference point (R). (So instead of saying that the difference between a
present perfect and a preterite is that the first is E-SR while the second
is ER-S, he says that the first is (E-R)(S,R) and the second is (E,R)(R-S),
if you see what I mean.)
He was then talking about the morphological structure of the various tenses,
using a Coseriu-type analysis. It seems that for Classical French and
Standard Italian, you get a consistent pattern where, if E and R are
coincident, the tense has a simple structure and if they are not, the tense
is compound or formed with periphrasis; in Spanish the pattern also seems to
apply, with one possible exception, but in Portuguese the pattern doesn't
work as well.
The exception in Spanish is the 'simple pluperfect' (hiciera), which tense
is described as being (E-R)(R-S) and should therefore have a compound
structure. This does seem to appear, as in 'había hecho'; he has given
'hiciera' in brackets but I can't seem to work out why (the only note I've
got jotted there says 'backgrounding past'). In his analysis there is no
distinction between hiciera and había hecho in either tense or aspect.
In Portuguese there appear to be two exceptions. The first is equivalent to
the Spanish one, the simple pluperfect 'fizera' occupying the same position
as 'tinha feito'. The second exception I don't fully understand at this
point - the handout doesn't say very much and my notes don't indicate that
he talked much about it - but it seems to involve 'fiz' and 'tenho feito'.
He has 'fiz' in the same box as 'hai feito' which he has crossed out, and
'tenho feito' which he has put in brackets. As I read his handout, he seems
to be suggesting that 'fiz' is used exclusively for the tense (E,R)(R-S) in
the perfective aspect, but that it can also be used for (E-R)(R,S) as well;
for this latter, 'tenho feito' also an option (but less common?) standing
for an older form 'hai feito' (but that even in this older stage, 'fiz' was
possible for this tense as well).
To put it another way, Portuguese has developed the Latin perfectum in a
very different way. He provides the following schema for the (VERY long
term!) diachronic changes in Romance:
1) perfect aorist
\ /
2) perfectum
/ \
3) pres. perf. preterite
\ /
4) compound past
Here, stage 1 would be the Indo-European stage; stage 2 would be Latin,
stage 3 would be Spanish, Classical French, and Standard Italian, and stage
4 would be the stage of Modern French, Romanian, and various northern
Italian dialects.
Essentially, he is claiming on this handout that Portuguese, together with
Calabrian and Sicilian, is still at Stage 2 with Latin, or is just about to
break out into stage 3.
Now, you gave the following examples of Portugese tense usage:
>I did: fiz
>
>I have done: fiz [...time adverb]
>
>I have done (frequentative, contrived): tenho feito
>
>I used to do: fazia [...time adverb]
According to this, it seems that you are generally happy to agree that 'fiz'
and 'fazia' are used to differentiate aspect in the tense (E,R)(R-S); I'm a
bit less clear on what you're saying about the distinction between 'fiz' and
'tenho feito'. Is it used consistently for (E-R)(R,S), contrasting with
'fiz' in the same way that eg. 'he hecho' and 'hice' do in Spanish? Or are
you saying that its disctinction is aspectual? If so, how does it differ
from 'fazia'? I have the feeling the lecturer (John Charles Smith) may have
suggested that 'tenho feito' and 'hai feito' were essentially invented as
artificial literary constructs in an attempt to mimic Spanish (or maybe it
was something completely different that he said - I don't have much written
here) - is that true?
The problem is quite intriguing; he didn't talk about it that much because
the focus was on the method by which the periphrastic tenses came into being
in those languages that use them. I wish I'd paid more attention (and not
stopped going halfway through term); it was the first term in my first year
and I only went to them because I was interested in linguistics. I've done a
lot more study now of linguistics in general (historical in particular) and
would be able to get much more out of it if he were to repeat them!
Neeraj Mathur
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Portuguese tense/aspect system
- From: António Marques
- Re: Portuguese tense/aspect system
- From: Ruud Harmsen
- Re: Portuguese tense/aspect system
- From: Xavier
- Re: Portuguese tense/aspect system
- From: António Marques
- Re: Portuguese tense/aspect system
- From: Ruud Harmsen
- Re: Portuguese tense/aspect system
- Prev by Date: Re: Related languages (Re: A China-Sumer connection)
- Next by Date: Re: [request]
- Previous by thread: Yet another test
- Next by thread: Re: Portuguese tense/aspect system
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|