Logo of Humboldt-Universität zu BerlinLogo of Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin
edoc-Server
Open-Access-Publikationsserver der Humboldt-Universität
de|en
Header image: facade of Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin
View Item 
  • edoc-Server Home
  • Artikel und Monographien
  • Zweitveröffentlichungen
  • View Item
  • edoc-Server Home
  • Artikel und Monographien
  • Zweitveröffentlichungen
  • View Item
JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.
All of edoc-ServerCommunity & CollectionTitleAuthorSubjectThis CollectionTitleAuthorSubject
PublishLoginRegisterHelp
StatisticsView Usage Statistics
All of edoc-ServerCommunity & CollectionTitleAuthorSubjectThis CollectionTitleAuthorSubject
PublishLoginRegisterHelp
StatisticsView Usage Statistics
View Item 
  • edoc-Server Home
  • Artikel und Monographien
  • Zweitveröffentlichungen
  • View Item
  • edoc-Server Home
  • Artikel und Monographien
  • Zweitveröffentlichungen
  • View Item
2022-06-13Zeitschriftenartikel DOI: 10.3390/languages7020148
Nobody’s Perfect
Bertrand, Anne
Aonuki, Yurika
Chen, Sihwei cc
Davis, Henry
Gambarage, Joash cc
Griffin, Laura
Huijsmans, Marianne
Matthewson, Lisa cc
Reisinger, Daniel
Rullmann, Hotze
Salles, Raiane
Schwan, Michael David cc
Todorović, Neda
Trotter, Bailey
Vander Klok, Jozina cc
Sprach- und literaturwissenschaftliche Fakultät
This paper challenges the cross-linguistic validity of the tense–aspect category ‘perfect’ by investigating 15 languages from eight different families (Atayal, Brazilian Portuguese, Dutch, English, German, Gitksan, Japanese, Javanese, Korean, Mandarin, Niuean, Québec French, St’át’imcets, Swahili, and Tibetan). The methodology involves using the storyboard ‘Miss Smith’s Bad Day’ to test for the availability of experiential, resultative, recent-past, and continuous readings, as well as lifetime effects, result-state cancellability, narrative progression, and compatibility with definite time adverbials. Results show that the target forms in these languages can be classified into four groups: (a) past perfectives; (b) experientials; (c) resultatives; and (d) hybrids (which allow both experiential and resultative readings). It is argued that the main division is between past perfectives, which contain a ‘pronominal’ tense, on the one hand, and the other three groups on the other, which involve existential quantification, either over times (experiential) or over events (resultative). The methodological and typological implications of the findings are discussed. The main conclusion of the study is that there is no universal category of ‘the perfect’, and that instead, researchers should focus on identifying shared semantic components of tense–aspect categories across languages.
Files in this item
Thumbnail
languages-07-00148.pdf — Adobe PDF — 2.434 Mb
MD5: f1b7e2d8489526e6ad49891cce49c2ef
Cite
BibTeX
EndNote
RIS
(CC BY 4.0) Attribution 4.0 International(CC BY 4.0) Attribution 4.0 International
Details
DINI-Zertifikat 2019OpenAIRE validatedORCID Consortium
Imprint Policy Contact Data Privacy Statement
A service of University Library and Computer and Media Service
© Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin
 
DOI
10.3390/languages7020148
Permanent URL
https://doi.org/10.3390/languages7020148
HTML
<a href="https://doi.org/10.3390/languages7020148">https://doi.org/10.3390/languages7020148</a>