Boneh, N. Aspect (Modern Hebrew) 1-14.Indd
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Aspect (Modern Hebrew) Like tense, aspect is a category related to the (2a) States: le-ha±amin be-ru≤ot להאמין ברוחות-רפאים -expression of temporality. Aspect encodes “dif ferent ways of viewing the internal temporal refa±im ‘to believe in ghosts’ ’le-±ehov ±opera ‘to love opera לאהוב אופרה .(constituency of a situation” (Comrie 1976:3 la-da≠at ≠ivrit ‘to know לדעת עברית Tense and aspect encode topological relations between two time intervals. In main, unembed- Hebrew’ ded contexts, tense relates speech time (S) to (2b) Activities: ’liß≤oq ‘to laugh לצחוק reference time (R), the time which the statement lixtov mixtavim ‘to write לכתוב מכתבים is about (Reichenbach 1947); tense is thus a deictic category. Aspect relates event time (E), letters’ ’laruß ‘to run לרוץ the time of the described event/state, to R; this relation has to do, for instance, with whether (2c) Accomplishments: ’leßayer tmuna ‘to draw a picture לצייר תמונה the boundaries of the event are included in the ’lixtov mixtav ‘to write a letter לכתוב מכתב -reference time or not. Referring to the bounda laruß šloša km ‘to run לרוץ שלושה ק"מ ries of the event time is only one facet of what is commonly covered by aspect. This tem- three km.’ poral relation has been dubbed ‘grammatical (2d) Achievements: ’lamut ‘to die למות aspect’ or ‘viewpoint aspect’ (Smith 1991; Klein lehav≤in be-≤ašud ‘to spot להבחין בחשוד -Demirdache and Uribe-Extebar ;119–1994:99 ria 2000). Other properties having to do with the suspect’ lenaßea≤ ba-ta≤arut ‘to win לנצח בתחרות the internal temporal structure of events are (1) whether or not an event involves change in the race’ time, i.e., stative vs. dynamic; (2) whether an event holds at a moment or at an interval, i.e., A linguistic description denoting a state can be punctual vs. durative; (3) whether an event has evaluated for its truth conditions at the small- built into it a terminal point, or can be pro- est fraction of time possible. It is not dynamic, tracted indefinitely, i.e., telic vs. atelic. since it does not describe any change in time. It These three properties are used to classify is not telic, since it does not encode an inherent event descriptions into aspectual classes. An endpoint to the described event, which can be attempt at such a classification dates back to protracted indefinitely. Aristotle’s distinction between kinêsis and ener- A linguistic description denoting an activity geia. The aspectual classes commonly featuring is evaluated at an interval, not a moment: in in the literature are states, activities, accom- describing an action of running, not every frac- plishments, and achievements (Ryle 1949:149– tion of time can be described by this predicate, 153; Vendler 1957; Kenny 1963; Dowty 1979: since, for instance, lifting one’s foot, which is chapter 2). These are referred to as ‘lexical required for running, does not itself qualify as aspectual classes’. Here is an illustration of the running. It is dynamic, since it describes change properties making up the classes. in time. It is not telic, since it does not encode an inherent endpoint to the described event, which (1) can be potentially protracted indefinitely. Linguistic descriptions denoting accom- Dynamic Durative Telic plishments (run three km), like activities, are State – – – evaluated at an interval, not a moment. Like activities, these are dynamic, since they involve Activity + + – change in time. However, contrary to states and Accomplishment + + + activities, these descriptions encode an inherent endpoint: in the examples of (2c), the event Achievement + – + ends when the three kilometers are run, or BBoneh,oneh, NN._Aspect._Aspect ((ModernModern Hebrew)_1-14.inddHebrew)_1-14.indd 1 11/9/2012/9/2012 22:18:46:18:46 PPMM 2 aspect (modern hebrew) when the painting is finished. Events described vs. durative and telic vs. atelic—are manifested by accomplishment predicates cannot be pro- in Modern Hebrew (for the stative/dynamic tracted indefinitely. distinction → Stative). Finally, linguistic descriptions denoting The punctual/durative distinction is discussed achievements, like die, express by their nature by Yitzhaki (2004). Predicates which are true at ’be-≠od ‘while בעוד a change; therefore, they are dynamic. Like a moment cannot appear in states, they are true only at a given moment: clauses (3), nor in inflected infinitive clauses (4), the event they denote does not have temporal contrary to predicates which are true at intervals בעוד volume’. Achievements are by their nature (see also Greenberg 2008). The particle‘ telic, the ‘end’ point is inherent to the event be-≠od ‘while’ is inflected for person, number, described thereby; in other words, the events and gender and is obligatorily followed by the described by achievement predicates cannot be participial form of the verb. Inflected infinitives, -be ב- indefinitely protracted. as in (4), are preceded by the preposition The right way of grouping descriptions of ‘in’, and can inflect for person, number, and events into aspectual classes according to dis- gender. Predicates denoting activities (3a) and tinguishing properties is an issue subject to accomplishments (3b) are felicitous in a be-≠od- considerable debate (for instance: Dowty 1979; clause, whereas those denoting achievements Bach 1986; Rothstein 2004; an overview can be (3c) and states (3d) induce ungrammaticality. found in Filip forthcoming). Likewise, in (4), activity and accomplishment The term Aktionsart(en), coined by Agrell predicates (4a–b) are felicitous in the inflected (1908), which overlaps to some extent with the infinitive clause, but achievement and state classification outlined in table (1), is used to predicates are not (4c–d). describe different ‘manners of action’, not all In Modern Hebrew telic and atelic predi- of which are transparently related to the inner, cates can be distinguished by several means. temporal structure of events. For instance, Most crucially, predicates give rise to differ- alongside such qualifications as terminantive, ent entailment patterns according to whether resultative, delimitative, iterative, one also finds or not they denote telic events (5–6) (Bennett attenuative and augmentative (→ Aktionsart). and Partee 1978; Dowty 1979:56–57; Yitzhaky The general cross-linguistic conception is 2004 for Hebrew). Second, telic and atelic that viewpoint aspect (grammatical aspect) predicates pattern differently with respect to kim≠a† ‘almost’ (7) (Dowty כמעט tends to be encoded by inflectional means, the adverb whereas aspectual classes (and Aktionsarten) 1979:58). Third, predicates pattern differently are encoded lexically or derivationally. This with respect to whether they can complement -siyem ‘fin סיים gamar or גמר holds in Modern Hebrew as well, despite the verbs of finishing fact that its verb system has no overt inflec- ish’ (8) (Dowty 1979:57). tional or derivational markings that can qualify Starting with entailment patterns, activities be-≠od-clauses בעוד as aspectual (Rosén 1977:179–184). and accomplishments in do not give rise to the same entailments. While 1. Lexical aspectual classes example (5a) entails that I ran (5b), in example (6) no such inference is possible. (6a) does not This section reviews how two distinctive prop- entail that Ruti completed writing the speech erties outlined in the introduction—punctual (6b). בעודו רץ, הרגיש דני את שריריו מתכווצים (3a) Be-≠odo raß, while-3MS. run.PTCP.MS., hirgiš Dani ±et šrirav mitkavßim felt.PAST.3MS. Dani ACC muscles-3Ms. cramp.PTCP-MPL. ‘While he was running, Dani felt his muscles cramping’. BBoneh,oneh, NN._Aspect._Aspect ((ModernModern Hebrew)_1-14.inddHebrew)_1-14.indd 2 11/9/2012/9/2012 22:18:46:18:46 PPMM aspect (modern hebrew) 3 בעודה כותבת את הנאום, קיבלה רותי שיחה גורלית (3b) Be-≠odah kotevet ±et ha-ne±um, while-3FS. write.PTCP-FS. ACC the-speech, qibla Ruti si≤a goralit receive.PAST-3FS. Ruti phone-call.FS. crucial-FS. ‘While she was writing the speech, Ruti received a crucial phone-call’. *בעודה מנצחת בתחרות, נשמעה תרועה גדולה (3c) *be≠odah menaßa≤at ba-ta≤arut, while-3FS. win PTCP-FS. in.the-race nišme≠a tru≠a gdola heard.PASSIVE.PAST-3FS. clamor.FS. big-Fs. *?‘While she was winning the race, a great clamor was heard’. *בעודו אוהב שוקולד, חלה דני בסוכרת (3d) *be-≠odo ±ohev šoqolad, while-3MS. love.PTCP.3MS. chocolate ≤ala Dani be-sukeret got.sick.PAST.3MS. Dani in-diabetes *‘While he was loving chocolate, Dani got diabetes’. ברוצו, הרגיש דני את שריריו מתכווצים (4a) be-rußo in-run.INF-3MS., hirgiš Dani ±et šrirav mitkavßim felt.PAST.3MS. Dani ACC muscles-3MS. cramp.PTCP-MPL. ‘While he was running, Dani felt his muscles cramping’. בכותבה את הנאום, קיבלה רותי שיחה גורלית (4b) be-kotvah ±et ha-ne±um, in-write.INF-3FS. ACC the-speech, qibla Ruti si≤a goralit receive.PAST-3FS. Ruti phone-call.F crucial-FS. ‘While she was writing the speech, Ruti received a crucial phone-call’. *בנצחה בתחרות, נשמעה תרועה גדולה (4c) *be-naß≤ah ba-ta≤arut, in-win INF-3FS. in.the-race nišme≠a tru≠a gdola heard.PASSIVE.PAST-3FS. clamor.FS big-Fs. *?‘While she was winning the race, a great clamor was heard’. *באוהבו שוקולד, חלה דני בסוכרת (4d) *be-±ohavo šoqolad, in-love.INF-3MS. chocolate ≤ala Dani be-sukeret got.sick.PAST. 3MS. Dani in-diabetes *‘While he was loving chocolate, Dani got diabetes’. בעודי רץ, הרגשתי את שריריי מתכווצים (5a) be-≠odi raß, while-1CS. run.PTCP.MS., hirgašti ±et šriray mitkavßim felt.PAST-1CS. ACC muscles-1CS. cramp.PTCP-MPL. ‘While I was running, I felt my muscles cramping’. רצתי (5b) raßti. run.PAST-1CS. ‘I ran’. BBoneh,oneh, NN._Aspect._Aspect ((ModernModern Hebrew)_1-14.inddHebrew)_1-14.indd 3 11/9/2012/9/2012 22:18:46:18:46 PPMM 4 aspect (modern hebrew) בעודה כותבת את הנאום, קיבלה רותי שיחה גורלית (6a) be-≠odah kotevet ±et ha-ne±um, while-3FS.