CHAPTER THREE
THE SYNTAX OF FUTURTTY IN ENGLISH 53
3.1 Introduction
Since ancient times ordinar>' people and philosophers alike have engaged in speculation about the future, finding in this concept a source of continual fascination. It is a matter of aspiring for knowledge of what can be realized neither through perception (like the present) nor through memory', (like the past), and takes shape only in the fonn of expressions or anticipation. This internal anticipation of what is yet to be is the very definition of existence whose proper domain is the future.
Much has been written and a great deal of attempts have been made to explore the namre of fumre as a mental construct and as a category of umversal grammar and as a portion of cognitive substance to be mapped onto grammar.
The question here is are there predictable patterns m the diachronic development of futures which may be applied to aU languages in which ‘future’ is an established category' of the grammar
It has been traditional since antiquity’ to conceptualize time as tripartite system consisting of past, present, and future, a system in which the future is like the past except that it follows rather than precedes the present in the infinite continuum of time. Similarly, it is often implied that the past/present/fumre distinction is somehow essential to the notion of tense.
Many languages operate with but a single temporal opposition involving anteriority-posteriority (i.e. ‘earlier than’ and 'later than') or. alternatively, ‘now’
- 'not now’. In the latter case sequence of events is indicated by adverbial or 54
nominal elements. For all languages that may probably be called ‘tense’ languages, sequence is marked by the verb. For ‘prospective’ systems, including all Indo-
European languages, future is a less primaiy category than past or present; it has been described by Camara (1956 : 37), as mentioned in Fleischman (1982 : 30), as a second-order category' which, when superimposed onto the basic past-nonpast opposition, yields respectively the dimensions ‘post preterit’ and ‘post actual’ or
‘post present'. Although there is linguistic evidence of various sorts pointing to the secondary status of future, and most obvious is the fact that a significant number of languages operate without an explicit future paradigm, a relatively small percentage of the world’s languages exhibit anything that might reasonably be described as a future tense.
In this respect, Romance provides ideal linguistic soil on which to carry out this t\^pe of historical excavation, (cf, Fleischman 1982) where the ontogenesis of the future stands out as one of the ‘cat’s cradles’ of dichronic Romance linguistics.
As regards English, it seems that no sight of fumre, as a linguistic term is existent onto the map of its grammar. Jespersen (1909, rep. 1961 : 199), for instance, thinks that “it may be conceded that English has no real future tense,”
Murcia (1983 : 121) states that the expression ‘future tense’ w'as viewed as a misnomer, since in English finite verb stems are not inflected to express future time in the way they are in other languages such as French. English was shown to have several nontense means of signaling future time (e.g. modal auxiliaries, periphrastic modals and adverbs of time). 55
Cobuild (1990 : 255) states that “it is impossible to talk with as much certainly about the future as it is about the present or the past”. He finds that “any reference we make to future events is therefore usually an expression
of what we think might happen or what we intend to happen.’’(ibid). Roberts
(1986 : 116) says that, “Future Tune is expressible in a variety of ways, but there is no future tense as such,” According to him it is important to recognize that
“there is no simple correlation between the grammatical category Tense and the notion of Time. For example, in the right circumstances, both present tense and past tense are compatible with the expression of future time.’’(ibid) To explain what Roberts states, let us consider the examples given below :
(3-1) The plane leaves at ten this morning, (present tense - future
time)
(3-2) If it ramed tomorrow, the match would be cancelled.(past tense
- future time)
Palmer (1971 : 193) thinks that “morphologically English has two tenses
only, as examplified by (He likes/He liked) which are plausibly referred to as
'present’ and 'past’. He further states that “we shall not be referring to future tense at all m spite of having past and present tenses.” (1965 ; 2) There is, then,
a real sense m which English has 1^ future tense, instead there are various ways
of refemng to future time. But this, as Palmer himself (ibid) states, is no more
a justification for a future tense than the fact that we have w'ays of referring to
future time. Thus, most in-ammarians deal with ‘future’ as ‘tense’. 56
Pence and Emer>' (1990 : 265). for instance, state that ‘future tense’ is made by the use of shall or will plus the infinite of the verb (now regarded as the notional verb) without the sign to. To them, the form shall/will go in
(He shall/will izo) is simply the future tense of the verb go. But a careful exammation of modem American discourse, both oral and written, shows that most of the traditional rules for the use of shall and will have broken down.
“Nearly ever>- statement that can be made about the current use of these two auxiharies must be extensively qualified, and the matter is further complicated by the noticeable variance between American and British practice.” (Pence and Emery
1990 : 281)
Chafe (1973 : 261-5) uses the term ‘future’ for the tenses :
(3-3) Next Friday, I am going to another concert.
(3-4) They are plaving something by Stravinsky
We would call them ‘after present’ tenses occurring in the present time axis, according to the Bull framework.
Strang (1969 : 143), on the other hand, thinks that tense differentiation
can be thought of as a system signalled by patterns of co-occurrence between verbs and adverbials. He claims that this applies to futurity more than to past or present, as shown in this sentence.
(3-5) They are leaving (now, tomoiTow').
Martinet (1962 : 121) states that the future tense is not only unmarked
inflectionally but the intenelationship between the verb foiTns and their time 57
reference in English is a complex matter as well. The past fonn may have a future time, or a present form may have a past time reference.
VvTiatever the case, it is difficult to define future tense markers in English.
Close (1981) for example finds that a new explicit time marker is introduced into the discourse which terminates the old tense and replaces it with another.
But Kruisinga (1925 : 47) states that “the future tenses are formed with the two auxiliaries shall and will.”
3.2 History of Future in English
As known and accepted by all grammarians of English, Future was regarded as one of the three traditional tenses together with Past and Present.
That is due to the traditional view of considering tense and time as two identical concepts. .And as stated by Eckersley and Eckersley (1960 ; 157). tense means tlie form or fonns used to express certain time relations generalizing that the present form indicates present time and the past form indicates past time, and the form shall+Vs indicates future time. It is worth noting that there is no reference to either ‘before present’ or ‘after present’. Thus, in their analysis, traditional grammai'ians regard markers from other categories as forming new tenses. “This confusion leads to different ideas concerning the number of tenses m English.” (Mchayet, 1983 : 14). WTiat Cunne (1913 ; 516) mentions about how the present form was used to express both presentness and futurity is to support this. Mchayet (1983 : 21) states that “the desire for a distinctive foiTn 58
for the future had led to the employment of certain forms for the expression of future tmie. So. shall and were used for this function.” Wlien both shall and will gradually lost their lexical meanings and came to be used as markers for the future tense. Curme (1913 ; 522) says that “at early stages there was a tendency to use shall to denote future time, while was still mainly used as a full verb to express volition.”
Fries (1940 : 153) finds how shall and will were similarly used in the
Middle English with all persons before shall began to lose some grounds in the course of time giving way to will to be used with the second and third person to express simple futurit>'. He also states that “in contemporary usage will dominates the situation giving the following percentages with the first person 70%, with the second person 78%, and with the third person 90%.”"
(P. 159). It seems that no radical change has occurred since then, except the belief of Curme (1913 : 530) that English grammarians are quite wTong to think that shall, not will, when used with the first person, expresses simple futurit\'. According to him. shall does not approach the idea of futurity as will does. Will, when used, breaks the connection with the present and directs the attention to the future; while shall denotes the present time planning for future action.
Poutsma (1928 : 225 ff) lists shall and w'ill amongst the verbs denoting
certaint^^ and uncertainty' and treats them in one place as modals and in another
as markers of future. As markers of future he analyses them within tlie framework 59
of the categories : reported speech and non-reported speech, declarative sentences and questions. Future will is placed traditionally in the second and third person in non-reported declarative and questions. Shall accordingly occurs regularly in the first person in non-reported declarative and also in questions.
Reviewing the controversy, Jespersen (1961) finds no reason to use the traditional paradigms and discusses the reasons for the controversy as arising from the inherent uncertainty of future time.
Palmer (1965) provides the most obvious example of an attempt to put order into the traditional presentation. Other more radical attempts have been made to cope with systematising, e.g. Ota (1963), Diver (1964), Joos (1964) and
Ehrman (1966). Twaddell (1960) provides a short concise account of form and meaning. Boyd and Thome (1969) provide an inteipretation within the general area of transformational grammar using the concept of elocutionary force, and there has been some discussion of will (will-deletion) by TG grammarians such as Lakoff (1970), Binnick (1972) and Jenkins (1972) and Leech (1971) whose description of shall and will is in some respects a development of Palmer’s account. Both Palmer and Leech treat shall and will together with the other verbal forms of future reference (time).
3.3 Syntactic Devices of Futurity in English
It has already been mentioned in 3.1 that English has no future tense in the real sense of the term. Instead, there are wa\'s of refemng to future time. 60
Now, the question is, whether a tense or not, what syntactic constructions does
English have to refer to future
As a matter of fact. English has a surprising variety of devices other than the two markers shall and will to signal future time. Aarts (1969 : 565) supports this fact giving an mexhaustible list of thirteen verbal constructions that refer to future time. These are represented by the following :
shall leave
shall be leaving
shall be going to leave
shall have left
leave
am leaving
am going to leave
(3-6) I am to leave [tomorrow,
was to leave
was leaving
was going to leave
was to have left
_ had been leaving
Charleston and Fries mention a number of verbal constructions that refer to future tmie most of which are included within Aart's presentation except the 61
construction ; [be on the point of +v -ing] mentioned by Charleston (1955 ; 268) and [be about + to + v] mentioned by Fries (1956 ; 125). Fries (ibid : 126) adds that there are many other verbal constructions (because of their meaning) look to the future fulfilment. He gives the following examples :
desire to
want to
need to
expect to
ought to
(3-7) I have got to go-
have to
must
may
might
can
_ should
It would be convenient to deal with the devices that refer to future as constructions as given below :
a) Verbal constructions that refer to future.
b) Adverbial constructions that specify future time.
c) Adjectival constructions that indicate futurit>'.
d) Contextual (Discourse) reference. 62
3.3.1 Verbal Constructions for Future
Grammarians of English differ with each other when giving different
numbers of various verbal constructions by which future time is expressed.
Leech and Svaitvdk (1975 : 76) state that there are five chief ways
expressing future time in the English verb phrase; and the most important future
constructions are those which use 'will’ or ‘shall’, and ‘be going to’.
Swan (1980 ; 250) mentions that there are several different verb-forms
which can be used to talk about future. Three common structures are (i) the
shall/will future, (ii) the be going to stiiicture and (iii) the present progressive.
He states that these three structures do not have the same usages and it is not
always easy to choose the correct form.
Quirk et al (1972 : 47-50) present the most important six verbal
constructions used to express fumrity with or without temporal adverbial. These
can be put m the following order ;
- shall/will + Vs
- be goint to + Vs
- present progressive
- shall/will + be + present participle
- be to + Vs
- be about to + Vs
Charleston (1955), Fries (1956), Aaits (1969) and others suggest a number
of verbal constructions some of which have been included in Quirk’s presentation 63
while the others are not (as mentioned in 3.1 previously).
This chapter sheds light on almost all the verbal constructions used in
Enghsh to refer to the future time.
3.3.1.1. ShallAVill + Vs
3.3.1.1.1 Introduction
The problem of shall and matters a lot in the syntax of English and it is still a matter of controversy, though some English grammarians have tried to clarify the confusion about shall and will. Curme (1913 : 517) shows us how the above mentioned two forms were used in Old English as full verbs with independent meanings : shall (Sculan); to perform an act according to the will of another person, w j]\ (willan) ; to perform an act according to the will of the subject.
Syntactically speaking, these two forms are now regarded as modal auxihaiies as they behave syntactically like the other forms in that group of modals, though not ever\'one lists them as modals all the time (Fries 1940) and
(Boyd and Thome, 1969). Wekker (1976 : 25), fully agreeing with Curme, states that the development of will mto a real auxiliary took place in the Middle English penod; and '‘since then shall and will were claimed to be markers for the future tense’ (Mchayet, 1983 ; 29). One fundamenal controversy that has existed for many years is the distribution of shall and will in the traditional paradigm :
I shall, you will, etc. The main dispute concentrates on first person usage in particular (Smith, 1978 . 60) 64
Another contribution to the simplification of the shall/will problem was made by Boyd and Thome (1969) m their performative analysis of modal verbs.
Katietek in his discussion of the matter (1970a : 57) adopts their analysis for two important reasons.
“...first It is by far simpler than that professed by traditional granmarians;
second, it has the viitue of being capable of offering an exhaustive and uniform
account of the two forms in all their possible contexts.”
A careful examination of modem English discourse, both oral and written,
shows that the most of the traditional ‘mles’ for the use of shall and have broken down. Pence and Emer>' (1990: 281) state that “nearly eveiy
statement that can be made about the correct use of these two auxiliaries must be extensively qualified, and the matter is further complicated by the noticeable variance between American and British practice”. It is safe to say that they habitually use for the future foims, paying attention neither to the person of the subject nor to any such modal implications as vohtion, willingness, promise,
or the like.
Although it seems impossible to make concise and satisfying statements
about shall and will, it does seem important to note the rules concerning their uses. Equally important is the fact that present day speakers and writers of various backgrounds and regions, do attempt to add precision and formality' to their
language when using shall and will. 65
3.3.1.1.2 Form and Syntactic Use
To the nature of futurity'. Leech (1971: 52) tliinks that shall and have two intermingle functions. The first is when they function as modal auxiliaries, and the second is when they mark the future time. But it seems very difficult or rather impossible to draw a dividing line to separae these two functions. Close
(1981: 68) considers as the true marker of fumre. Ridont and Mason (1972:
140) state that the future tense in English is formed with the two verbs shall and will. Thus, we find that Swan (1980: 250) considers the construction shall/will +
VS as one of tliree common structures used to talk about the future giving it an independent ‘shall/will future.’ On page 254, Sw'an (ibid) provides us with some information about the function of shall and and the how of their usage in
English to refer to future stating that to talk about the future, will can be used in all persons. In affirmative sentences, the conti'acted form (TI) is common
(particularly after person subjects); the negative contraction is won’t.
(3-8) He will probably never be rich.
(3-9) WTiere will you be this time tomorrow ?
(3-10) This won’t take long.
Shall is also possible in the first person (usually with the same meaning as will). The contraction is (i]), and the negative contiaction is shan’t.
(3-11) I shall probably never be rich.
(3-12) We shan’t have much time to see your father. 66
Swan (ibid: 547) states that in modem English, shall is used mostly as the first-person future auxiliar>' in addition to the other ‘dictionary meanings’ it has as one member of modal auxiliaries ;
(3-13) 1 shall ring you as soon as 1 amve.
(3-14) shall hear the results of the election within hours.
Quirk and S. Greenbaum (1973: 47), differentiating the future and modal functions of them, state that shall and, particularly, will are the closest approximations to a colourless, neutral future. Will, for future, can be used in all persons throughout the Enghsh speaking world, whereas shall is largely restricted in the usage to southern Br.E.
To a great number of grammarians of English, the construction of shall/ will + Vs is referred to as ‘future simple’ and it is concerned with :
pure future and prediction or with volition, compare :
(3-15) I will be a teacher next year (prediction)
(3-16) WTiat will you ^ if something happens ? (= decide now)
They find that w ll is the best w'ay to express determination (intention) :
(3-17) I w'ill help you (= I definitely intend to help you)
Pence and Emeiy (1990 : 281) define four points of the usage of shall and will as given below :
a) to express simple futurity or expectation, shall is used with the first person and with the second and third persons.
(3-18) 1 don't think 1 shall have a good chance. 67
(3-19) ^ou will be rewarded I am sure
b) to express detennination. command, willingness, or promise, will is used with the first person and shall with the second and third persons
(3-20) ^ will leave in spite of everything.
(3-21) You shall leave whether you wish or not.
(3-22) He shall have any help of any body.
c) in asking questions shall (or should) is the common auxiliary with the first person; the auxiliary expected in the reply often determines the auxiliary' used in a second -or third -person question.
(3-23) Shall 1 call you when 1 am ready ?
(3-24) Shall ^ go to the theatre tonight ?
(3-25) Shall he be made to obey ?
d) the form used in an indirect quotation is the form that would be used if the quatation was direct.
(3-26) We insist that y m shall stay.
(3-27) We demand that he shall be punished.
Shall is still found in < formal > English, but is no longer common in conversation. Sometimes, it is used w'hen they need a ‘heavier w'ord' (a word not normally used much) as in :
(3-28) W'e shall fight and we shall win.
Murphy (1994' 42) states that shall is used mostly in the questions (shall l...'^/shall we..'^) : 68
(3-29) Shall we go out for lunch ?
Cobuild, however, states that if the subject is ‘I’ or ‘we’, the modal shall is sometimes used instead of will to talk about future events (1990: 255) :
(3-30) You will stay at home and I shall go to do your work.
Swan (1984), giving the forms below, states that in modem English,
1 shall, and I w^ill. we shall and we will are used to talk about the future thinking that since the speaker or writer can choose between will and shall simply to avoid repeating will in a sentence like :
(3-31) The telephone will never ring and 1 shall never have to answer it.
Affirmative :
I shall / will
You will
(He, She, It) will
We shall / will
They will
Questions :
Shall/will (1, you, etc.)
Negative :
1 shall/will not; You will not. etc
Contraction :
n i ; You’ll; He’ll, etc
1 won’t/shan’t, etc.
Table 2
Swan’s Fonns of Shall/Will 69
But sentences such as :
(3-32) rVou and 1 'J ' / will be here tomorrow. Both of usj
and not :
(3-33) C^You and 1 | shall be here tomonow. Both of us
show that shall does not normally occur in modem English when the subject is a phrase like (You and I) or (Both of us) in the above sentences.
Allen (1958: 69) expresses how shall and will are regionally different in use. He states that the form with ^ for all persons is more usual in American and Scottish English than British English. In British English it is rare with many of the stative verbs. Shall is normal in questions. Some Scottish speakers seldom use shall even for questions m the first person. Shall does not accur very often in Ehrman’s .American corpus (Ehrman 1966 : 56). It has the basic meaning of will and is a “stylistic literary version of will”.
Supporting nearly the same generahzation, Eckersley and Eckersley (1960:
162) state that in England tlie n o i T n a l usage to express merely futurity uncoloured by anyone's inclmations or intentions is shall for the first person singular and plural and m il for all other persons :
I he, she, it shall you will They we 1 Table 3 Table 4 Normal Usase of Shall/Wilj 70
Palmer (1971: 193) states that will is used for functions other than future time reference. The same can be said about shall. Both will and shall are, above all, modal auxjharies functioning exactly as ‘can’ and ‘may’. He gives these sentences showing the other functions of as a modal auxiliary ;
(3-34) 1 ‘II come if you ask me. (willingness)
(3-35) She’ II sit for hours. (habit)
(3-36) That ‘II be John. (probability)
(3-37) Oil will float on water. (general truth)
3.3.1,2 Be + Going to
3.3.1.2.1 Introduction
Fries(1940 ; 159) points out that the history of this verbal construction goes back to Early Modern English. Scheffer (1975: 271) follows the historical development of using going to as a future time expression when saying that this constmction w'as rare at first, then it began to be used more frequently in the sixteenth century. It lost its lexical meaning in the course of the seventeenth century and acquired its new usage as a future reference.
Hopper and Traugott (1993: 1) ask about what permits the pair in (3-38) but not the (b) sentence in (3-39)
(3-38) a) Bill is going to go to college after all.
b) Bill is gonna go to college after all. 71
(3-39) a) Bill is uoiriR to college after all.
b) *Bill is ^orma to college after all. stating that this question and others are characteristics of the study of grammaticalization. He also mentions that the answer is that the auxiliary' which expresses ‘immediate futurity’ derives historically from the motion verb go m highly specific context, and that the t\\'0 coexistent forms are polysemous.
Hopper and Traugott (1993 : 82) hypothesize that the future meaning of be going to was derived by the semanticization of the dual inference of later time indexed by (go) and puiposive (to), not from (go) alone. Such a hypothesis depends on that the inference from purposive (to) must have played a significant role m the grammaticalization of be going to given that the major syntactic charge involved in the development of the auxiliary is the rebracketing of (... be going) (to S) as (... be going to V)
3.3.1.2.2 Form and Syntactic Use
Poutsma (1928 ;244) calls be going to one of the further expedients to express futurity. Palmer (1965: 63) notes that the form is very common in ordmaiy conversation, perhaps more common tlian shall or will. This is probably why Close devotes so much space to it in contrast with earlier texbooks which still had a "shall/will fixation’' (Smith, 1978: 77). Close (1970 a: 19-22) considers be going to as ‘a plain future’ which can frequently replace shall and will. This may give an impression that be going to is considered the next most common 72
means of expressing future time after shall/will + Vs. Wekker (1976: 124), however, thmks that be tiomg to is used m mformal spoken English more frequently than in written English. Joos (1964 ; 23) states that this verbal construction is used to express “a completely colourless future tense” or “tlie ‘purest’ future” as
Palmer (1964: 163) calls it. Yet it seems that goinu to is not only used to express ‘pure futurity’ but ‘coloured futurity’ as well:
(3-40) This car is veiy cheap. I am going to buy it.
(3-41) She is going to participate in the coming elections.
It is asumed that going to refers to the near or immediate future, as in:
(3-42) My father is going to retire this very week.
“However, it seems that this construction may refer to an indefinite or
even far future.’’(Mchayet, 1983: 49)
(3-43) My supervisor is going to be a full professor in two years.
Swan (1984: 250) fmds that tliis verbal construction can also be used to refer to ‘present-future’ as in:
(3-44) 1 think it’s going to rain this evening.
(3-45) Look it’s going to rain ! We’re going to be wet.
(3-46) She is going to have a baby.
Smith (1978: 94) refers to it as ‘the general present-future’ expressed by the construction be going to giving some examples.
(3-47) There is going to be a population crisis in 1990.
(3-48) 1 am going to be sick. 73
Palmer (1965; 257) states that be tzoirm to can replace will with a human subject; and it is sometimes preferred to will:
(3-49) 1 will play tennis this afternoon.
(3-50) 1 am going to play tennis this afternoon. be gomg to can also be used with an inanimate subject ;
(3-51) Look at those clouds. There is going to be a storm.
Leech (1971 : 56) thinks that in certain cases will and be going to “seem neai'ly equivalent and can often be substituted for one another with little charge in effect.”
(3-52) He is going to lend me some money.
(3-53) He will lend me some money.
Joos (1964 : 32), however, states that the future event expressed by be going to “is taken for granted as a proper part of future reality”; whereas the future expressed by shall/will considered as a ‘contingent future’, Binnik (1971:
42) supports what Joos states giving these two examples.
(3-54) Most congi'essmen are dubious about what happen to money
in local hands.
(3-55) Most congressmen are dubious about what is going to happen to
money in local hands.
Some grammarians find that the phrase be going to plus infinitive is interpreted as assigning a iater time’ to its associated verb phrase. That is be going to is another important temporal element which clearly gives us an extia wa\' of assigning a time later than utterance time: 74
(3-56) John is going to leave to Europe tomorrow.
(3-57) The weather is going to improve tomorrow.
It seems a matter of fact that the structure be going to is used when we talk about the present and future together, i.e. , we connect the present and future
(Mchayet, 1983; 54), as shown m:
(3-58) It's going to rain.
3.3.1.3 ShallAV^ill + Progressive Aspect
3.3.1.3.1 Introduction :
It seems that this verbal construction has been used since Old English as Wekker (1976 : 28) remarks when stating that “it was established in Old
English.”. Along Middle and Modem English no available source provides any information about whether this construction has been developed or not.
Leech (1971 : 61). however, speculates that the growth m the use of this verbal construction is due to the need for a way that refers to the future without volition, intention or the like.
Allen (1958:77) finds how, in this century, there has been increasing use of the future progressive to replace the now dead plain future question shall
YOU ? in Classical English. So, the classical :
(3-59) Shall we visit them tomorrow ?
I S heard now' as :
(3-60) Will we be visiting them tomonow ? 75
3.3.1.3.2 Form and Syntactic Use
Leech (1971 : 64) states that this verbal construction “generally refers to
the near, but not to ‘immediate future'.
(3-61) Some guest will be visiting us soon.
So, he concludes that this verbal construction refers to what is likely to
be considered as ‘pure future.’
But the same grammarian contradicts himself when stating that we shall
not expect it to refer “to events too far in the future nor to events too near at
hand” (ibid) :
(3-62) The lecturer will be coming in a minute.
(3-63) They will be playing another concert soon.
Confirming what Quirk and S. Greenbaum (1973: 49) think. Leech and
Svartvik (1994: 78) state that we can use the will + progressive construction in
a special way to refer to a ‘future -as -a -matter -of -course.’
So, he concludes that this verbal construction refers to what is likely to
be considered ‘pure future’.
Muiphy (1994; 48) thinks that will+be-ing m sentences such as ;
(3-64) What time will your friends be aiTiving tomorrow ?
is similar to the present continuous for the future.
Allen (1958 : 72) states that “the use of the future continuous is now the
usual form of plain future question in the 2nd -person whenever it is felt necessary
to avoid any confusion with a requesf’. 76
(3-65) Will you be coming to visit me towmorrow ?
Close (1975 : 257) states that will be-ing is most likely to be used in this way either with a human subject or with reference to an action that is subject to hwnan control, as in :
We shall } (3-66) { be sailing at midnight. The ship will
Kalogjera (1968: 124) finds the presence of temporal adverbial obligatory whenever we use this verbal construction to indicate a future duration.
(3-67) We shall be working all day tomorrow.
ConfIrming what Kalogjera states, Cobuild (1990 : 259) requITes us to note that "an adjunct of time or an adjunct of frequency is normally required with the future continuous tense."
(3-68) She '~ be appearing tomorrow and Sunday at the Royal Festival Hall.
3.3.1.4 Future + Perfect Aspectl
3.3.1.4.1 ShallIWiII+ Have + V - en
This verbal construction is grammatically referred to as 'future perfect simple, as one form of 'past in the future' 1 Murphy (] 994 : 48) gives the structure " will have s!oen' to say that something will already be completed". This can be shown on the time-line :
Now Future I v > Diagram 12
Future Perfect Simple
Scanned by CamScanner 77
Swan (1984: 134) considers this verbal consti-uction as another way of talking about future. But, as being marked for aspect,’ Swan (1980: 256), and
Pence and Emery (1990: 266) limit the use of this structure to express the completion of an action at some defmite time in the future. Ekersley and Ekersley
(1960: 178) state that this tense is formed by the ‘future tense of have +a past participle’ i.e. (shall/will + have + p.p) and it is often associated with the preposition and the constiiiction ‘by’ the time (that) :
(3-69) The taxi will have arrived by the time (that) you finish dressing.
Swan (1980 : 256) states that occasionally the future perfect tense
“represents an action as completed before the present”.
(3-70) He will have made his decision before now.
Hornby (1975: 99) thinks that the future perfect emphasizes the completion of an act or activity and looks to what follows the completion of the activit)'. consider.
(3-71) I shall have completed my homework by five o’clock (and I shall
go out to play.)
Cobuild (1990: 255) states that future perfect is used to refer to something that has not happened yet but will happen before a particular time in the future, as in :
(3-72) May be the time we get to the dock he’ II already have started.
(3-73) By the time he is t\\'enty a countiy man will have killed a
considerable number of animals. 78
Some other grammarians think that ‘the future perfect simple’ is used to predict an action which at a given future time will be in the past :
(3-74) He will have reached home by four today.
In this repect, Close (1983; 65) states that a future state or action that will be completed — to a specific future time or some other future time or event (near or distant) can be expressed by this constiiiction, as in :
(3-75) 1 will have finished all this typing by 5 p. m .
(3-76) He will have walked to school before you finish your breakfast.
He (ibid) thinks that the same can be expressed using (Copula Be plus adjective or participles), without using a perfect future ;
ready (3-77) It will be < > by 5 p. m.
^ fimshed ^
available 'J > soon.
{completed
Allen (1958; 81) states that, “just as the present perfect’ does not tell us when the action took place, so the future perfect does not tell us when the action will take place. We use simple tenses (past or future) for these dates.”, as in ;
(3-79) I’ve read three of Shaw’s plays (1 know about them now)
(3-80) I shall have read six of Shaw's plays by the end the year. (I shall
know about them then.)
It is noticed that ‘W ’ often introduces the future perfect. 79
He (ibid) tlunks that where this tense might be expected m a time clause, we find the 'present perfect tense' instead (P.82) :
(3-81) You will have finished your work by six o’clock.
(3-82) I will stay until vou have finished youi' work.
3.3.1.4.2 ShallAViU+ Have+ Been+ V-ing
This verbal construction is ‘refeiTed to as “future perfect progressive.”
It is the second form of ‘past in the future.’ : This construction is used to say that something will be going on for a duration of time at a specific time in future ;
(3-83) By next month, 1 will have been teaching at this school for
ten years.
(3-84) By May 2001, he will have been working for this factory for
twelve years.
Close (1983: 66) states that “durative or habitual action that is taking place m the present and that w'lll continue into the future until or through a specific future time” can be expressed by the future perfect continuous constiaiction, as in :
(3-85) He will have been riding his bike to school for two years by tlie
time he graduates in June,
In other words, this verbal constmction mainly indicates incompletion of activit>^ at a given time in the future, i.e., the action at a certain point in the 80
future will be in progress, as shown on the time-line below
Now f 7T\
V
Diagram 13
Present Perfect Progressive
Allen (1958; 81), however, believes that this structure is rather rare and
it IS not often used.
3.3.1.5 Simple Present
3.3.1.5.1 Introduction
As mentioned in 3.1, the ‘Simple Present’ was not only used to
denote present time but future time as well. As Wekker (1976: 24) states, the
use of ‘simple present’ in Old English was rather common and the use of shall
and will w'as infrequent. The development and rapid increase of using shall and
will to function as ‘future tense auxiliaries’ was in the Middle English. Yet,
Mchayet (1983 : 64) states that “the ‘simple present’ still retained its function
to denote future time,” It seems that for retaining ‘simple present’ to function as
a future reference, there are some reasons the main two of which are :
a) the simple present is capable of expressing emphatically that a certain
thing is sure to happen away from the interference of the speaker’s intention or
volition, and 81
b) the use of shall/wil] with certain verbs such as come, go, become. -
- etc., Wliich imply the notion of futurity, is feh to be redundant.
Nevertheless, in the course of Modem English the ‘simple present' loses grounds gradually, giving way to other future time expressions, but it is still used in present -day English though infrequently and in restiicted contexts (ibid).
3.3.1.5.2 Form and Syntactic Use
Any syntactic functions and grammatical rules of using ‘simple present’ other than as a future time reference will be beyond the limits of this study. In this respect, Palmer (1974 : 58) thinks that “future time reference is only a non- basic function of ‘simple present’”. Aarts (1969 : 566) calls the ‘simple present’ which denotes futurit>' the “non -progressive future present”.
Palmer and Blandford (1969:146) generalize that the ‘simple present’ is used occasionally to express a future action considered as part of a program already fixed :
(3-86) My guide leaves to Nasik next week.
(3-87) The matches begin on Saturdays.
It’s worth mentioning that Jespersen (1931) is the first who notices this condition on the use of the simple present to refer to future time when considenng the sentence ;
(3-88) *lt rains tomoiTow. as impossible since it expresses a future event which cannot be pre-planned or arranged. 82
Pence and Emery (1990: 262) state that one usage of the present tense is to express the future time thinking that it is often used, generally with an adverbial expression, to suggest future action :
(3-89) My contract expires tomon'ow.
Arts (1969; 572), according to Poutsma (1926: 215) notices that the simple present refers to future time practically only when futurity appears from some adverbial, adjunct or clause denoting or implying a future point of time.
Similarly, Hornby (1975: 208) and Joos (1964: 135) remark that the simple present rarely denotes future time without an adverbial in the same sentence or in a removed context :
(3-91) I start writing tomorrow.
(3-92) Pune gets a new art gallery next Saturday.
Admission is free.
In this respect, Sw'an (1980: 255) and (1984: 137) Leech and Svartvik
(1975 : 77) add that the simple present tense is used for the future in certain types of subordinate adverbial time clauses :
(3-93) a - I will be happy as soon as 1 ^ back home.
b - I ^11 get him to phone you when he comes in.
c - We will not forgive you unless you apologize.
In these examples. futurit\' is sufficiently indicated in the main clause, hence the use of the simple present to refer to future time in the subordinate clause is appropriate. 83
In this respect. Swan (1980: 312) shows us how a present tense is nomially used with a future indication in clauses that begin with in case, as in:
(3-94) I Ve got much money m case we find some precious things to buy.
Besides, the use of the simple present in the subordinate clause instead of repeating shall/will constniction is preferred for stylistic variation (Mchayet,
1983: 67)
It is also found that a verb in the present tense referring to the future can also be contained in ‘That- clauses following such verbs as : hope, assume. suppose, etc.
(3-95) 1 hope the train is not late.
(3-96) They assume that they are good players,
Some grammarians such as Zandvoort (1975 ; 58) come to say that the verbs in the simple present forms used to refer to futurity are of a limited class.
“The future present is especially common with these (verbs) which denote a coming or leaving.”
However, other verbs of activities otlier than ‘coming and leaving’ are used to indicate future. Consider these answers :
(3-97) He ^ets maiTied next month,
(3-98) They dine outside the house tomon'ow.
Smith (1978: 96) states that it is. however, necessaiy to distinguish two broad subdivisions of the programmed Present- Future : informal and fornial : 84
and that the present simple is one component of the foimal way :
(3-99) The guest aiTives at midday.
3.3.1,6 The Present Progressive
3.3.1.6.1 Introduction
Viewed by some grammarians, this verbal construction is given different names.‘Progressive’ is the modest, most accepted and widely used nowadays.
Jespersen (1931: 164) for instance, calls it ‘expanded tense,’ Sweet (1968: 103) chooses to give it the name ‘defmite tense’ as compared with the ‘indefinite’ tense expressed by the simple present, as in ;
(3-100) He is drawing portriates. (defmite : at this time)
(3-101) He draws portriates. (idefmite : timeless)
Sometimes, it is called ‘continuous tense’ as it describes an action or a state as going on at some point of time in the present. Some other grammarians, however, name it ‘progressive’ since it expresses an action in progress.
Concerning use of this verbal construction for refering to future time,
Wekker (1976: 27) states that it was first used in Old English as one of the present tense forms of the verb been (beo. bist, bip, beop) used to express future actions that took place out of the will of the speaker. The use of it so as to express a future action that is already detennined and ananged developed in
Middle English. 85
3.3.1.6.2 Form and Syntactic Use
To Poutsma (1928). the present progressive is a marker of the immediate future or of the future aheady in preparation or contemplated as being so. He does not allow ;
(3-102) 1 am writing to you tomonow.
with “the bulk of verbs” which do not admit the progressive form. In fact, this example is a good way of demonstrating the formal difference :
(3-103) I am writing to you tomonow (informal)
('3-104)- 1 write to you tomorrow, (very formal and uncommon in this
context)
Note also : (Smith, 1978: 82)
(3-105) I am looking forward to your letter (as between friends... informal)
(3-106) 1 look forward to your letter (as in business ... formal)
Jespersen (1961: 297) makes roughly the same remarks as Poutsma. saying that is in the following sentence is an example of future reference.
- It is here that 1 shall die.
Palmer (1965), stating that the durational aspect associated with the progressive “extended” foiTn is discernible, thinks that what decides the use of the progressive form is simply informalit>'.
Smith (1978 : 96). supporting such a point of view, comes to conclude that “the formal/informal distinction is associated w'ith the asbsence or presence of the progressive - ing form, respectively”. 86
(3-107) 1 write to infonn you that... (formal)
(3-108) 1 am writing to infonn you that... (informal)
But, he (ibid) thinks that the English language, in one particular case, can make available to the speaker/writer a view which combines the ‘future- future' view with the ‘informal programmed- future’ (cf4.2) as shown in this sentence :
(3-109) There will be a time in the future (tomorrow') where I will be able
to say to you ; “1 am driving to Kazimierz today.” (P.97)
Tliis combmed view has been termed die ‘future- as- a- matter- of- course.’
Palmer (1965: 260) states that Be- ing can be used with (out) an adverbial of fumre time to suggest action in the immediate future, as in :
(3-110) Hurry up. The ti'ain is leaving (in a minute).
Thus, such a verbal consti'uction is sometimes referred to as ‘the progressive future present’ or ‘the near future’ as Leech (1971; 58) calls it ;
(3-111) The tiain is leaving in a minute.
Leech and Svartvik (1975 ; 77) confirm that this construction, like be going to. suggests tlie near future especially when there is no time adverbial.
Joos (1964; 134 - 135), however, believes that the present progressive does not require an adverbial to have future reference. For example ;
(3-112) The guests are leaving.
IS likely to refer to future time since “English grammar”, as Joos (ibid) states,
“ has no de\ace whatever for cutting future time aw'ay from the time of speaking.” 87
But. some grammarians such as Crs'stal (1966: 25). think that the presence of a future temporal adverbial is obligatoiy when the present progressive is used to
express futurity ;
(3-113) Fm staving m India from now on.
Providmg some piece of discourse and their accompanying tense analysis
the two sentences of which are :
(3-114) Next Friday, I am going to another concert and
(3-115) They are plaving somethmg by Stiavinsk>',
Chafe (1973 ; 261 ff) uses the term 'future’ or ‘after present’ tenses
occurring, according to Bull-framework, in the present time axis. Note that using
will, the true marker of the future, would sound less appropriate than ‘after
present’ forms in the above two sentences
Allen (1958; 74) states that ‘present progressive’ is mostly commonly
found with verbs of movement and cannot be used with verbs that are not found
m continuous tense forms :
(3-116) U^iere are going for your next holiday ?
He (ibid) adds that this verbal consti'uction nearly always has a personal
subject :
(3-117) Ameer is coming here next year.
Allen's ideas of fmding the ‘present progressive’ with verbs of move
ment are confirmed by many other grammarians like ; Palmer (1965) and
Swan (1980). 88
Joos (1964: 118), in his comprehesive treatment of ‘status’ and 'process’ verbs, states tliat status verbs cannot be used to express futunty without an explicit time marker such as will/shall or going to. and thus, cannot be used in the progressive present form to refer to future.
Mchayet (1983: 61), however, fmds it a matter of argument to say that the progressive present is used with dynamic verbs since such a tense occasionally occurs with static verbs.
3.3.1.7 Be to + Vs
3.3.1.7.1 Introduction
This verbal construction appeared first in \4iddle English as stated by
Fries (1940: 167). If compared with the be going to verbal construction, Be to
+ Vs is older iin use.
Fries (1956: 132) remarks that conveying ‘purpose’ was the mam aim for using this constiTJCtion in the Middle English. Then, it developed in the direction of losing Its original meaning acquirmg new giounds as a future time expression with the colourings o f ‘necessity’, ‘obligation’, ‘duty’, etc. (Mchayet, 1983: 79)
3.3.1.7.2 Form and Syntactic Use
Smith (1978 : 96) considers the be to + Vs verbal construction as one exponent of the formal way. Poutsma (1982 : 247). however, treats be to + Vs as an occasional variant of shall and will, as in : 89
(3-118) The building is to be seven storeys high.
Giving the above sentence. Poutsma quitely ignores the claim that the be to + Vs verbal construction denotes formal programmed present future only.
Poutsma also says that be to serves to mark futurity where shall and will are not available, for example, gi\ong English a "future infmitive’ as in ‘effects to be wrought.’ (Smith 1978: 79). The same remarks are made by Kruisinga (1925:
53), Jespersen (1961: 354- 5), Palmer (1965: 142-3) and Fries (1940: 167) who confirm that this verbal construction is considered as a means of expressing future time that deserves a place with shall/will + Vs.
Close (1975: 259) states that be to is sometimes used to replace be ^oing to and, as such, be going to could be deleted, as in :
(3-119) a) I am going to defend my thesis next week,
b) 1 am to defend my thesis next week.
But in some other cases, (3-120 b) is not acceptable :
(3-120) a) 1 am going to faint,
b) *1 am to faint.
Palmer (1974: 155) holds that this verbal construction, as a future time reference, does not occur with other medals and is not marked for aspect or phase. It differs from the modal only m one respect, i.e., it has the finite forms: am. is, are. was and were.
Quuk and S. Greenbaum (1973) tlunk that futuntv' expressed by this verbal construction is heavily shaded with modality, as in : 90
(3-121) It is certain that we will win the match.
(3-122) We are certain to win the match.
Mchayet (1983: 82) states that this verbal constiiiction clearly signifies futurity; consequently it doesnt not need a future adverbial for this purpose, as in :
(3-123) You are to stay here.
Leech and SvarTvik (1975 : 78), however, state that be to is one of some less common ways of expressing futurity.
3.3.1,8 Be About to
3.3.1.8.1 Introduction
Fries (1940 ; 167) remarks that “tins verbal construction appeared first, as expression of future time, in Early Modem English” suggesting that it follows the same march of development which is followed by shall and will.
This construction “gradually lost its original meaning of 'proximity’ and came to be used as a functional construction that expresses imminent future’".
3.3.1.8.2 Form and Syntactic Use
Fries (1940: 167) remarks that be about to construction is as impor tant as the verbal construction shall/will + Vs in its use as a future time expression.
Leech and Svartxak (1975 : 78). however, consider this verbal constiiiction as a less common w'ay of expressing future. 91
(3-124) 1 am about to write the director a nast>' letter.
They (ibid) state that be about to and its equivalent on the point of emphasize the nearness of future.^
(3-125) a) The bomb is about to explode.
b) The bomb is on the point of explosion.
Ridont and Mason (1972 : 46) think that “there is in fact no real future of the infinitive or gerund in English, and these forms therefore have to be replaced by 'composite patterns’. The generally accepted paraphrase for the missing future infmitive is to be about to (do something).” And that is why it is regarded as a construction expressing near future :
(3-126) A thunder storm is about to blow up.
(3-127) The play is about to finish.
(3-128) The taxi is here and we are about to leave.
(Quirk, 1973: 50)
In this respect. Close (1975: 261) regards this construction a near equivalent to the verbal constructions be going to and the ‘present progressive’, which refer to immediate future ;
(3-129) The tram is about to move.
(3-130) The train is going to move.
(3-131) The train is moving soon.
He (ibid) also states that this verbal construction can be used with animate and inanimate subjects to refer to inmiinent future : 92
(3-132) The match is about to start, (inanimate subject)
(3-133) The referee is about to whistle, (animate subject)
Close (1975: 261), however, thmks that be on the pomt of -ing could replace be about to with an animate subject only, as in :
(3-134) I can’t see you now; Tm just on the point of leaving.
As seen in all the examples about the verbal construction be about to.
It seems that it clearly indicates futurity without any future time adverbials.
Close (ibid) confirms that such a verbal construction requires no adverbial of
future time ;
(3-135) The president is about to make an important announcement.
3.3.1.9 Future Time in the ‘Past’
Although it is known that the future tense clearly cannot have a real past.
Leech and Svarrvic (1975 : 78- 79) find that we can put the future construc
tions already mentioned (except the ‘simple present’) into the past tense;
we then arrive at a ‘future in the past’ (i.e., future seen from a view point in the
past)
As regards to ‘simple present’, the researcher fmds it occasianally possible
to be replaced by ‘simple past’ since some sentences such as the ones below are
acceptable :
(3-136) Her birthday w'as the following day.
(3-137) The delegates an'ived the next day. 93
(3-138) He asked the tax)- driver to hurry because his plane 1 ^ at six
o ’clock.
Swan (1980 : 256) thinks that, “to express this idea, we use similar structures to the ones that we normally use to talk about the future but we change the verb - forms”. So, instead of shall/will, we use should/would, as in ;
(3-139) In 1997, I arrived in Puna where I should stay for three years.
(3-140) He published his first book at the age of twenty. Three years later
he would be a famous poet,
instead of am/are/is Roing. we use was/were going :
(3-141) Last time 1 met you, you were going to start a new job.
instead of the present progressive, we use the past progressive :
(3-142) I was meeting him in Bombay the next day.
instead of am/are/is to. we use was/were to :
(3-143) a - I looked at the stage where the play was to start.
b - When we said goodbye, 1 thought it was for ever.
But we were to meet again.
Quirk and S. Greenbaum (1973 ; 50), however, hold that some of the
future constructions can be used m the past tense to express time which is in the
future. In this repect they list five states in which past foiTns are used to refer
to future :
1) The rare auxiUary verb construction with would, 2) be going to. 3) Past
progressive. 4) be to + infinitive, and 5) be about to (on the point of) 94
(3-144) He was about to lose the last chance.
Moreover, Swan (1980 : 47) states that “a past tense does not always have a past meaning. Expressions like '1 had' or you went' can be used, in most kinds of sentences to talk about the present or future.”
This can be represented by these several different cases :
1. after if and other words with similar conditional meaning, as in :
(3-145) If you went at about five o’clock tomorrow, you could see him
before he 1 ^ the office.
(3-146) If only we had enough money.
(3-147) You look as if you were just about to run away.
2. after ‘it’s time’, 'would rather’, and 'wish’ :
(3-148) Nine o’clock - It’s time you went to bed.
(3-149) I am ratlier busy today - 1 would rather you visited me tomorrow.
(3-150) 1 wish I h ^ a better memory.
3. in a subordinate clause depending on a conditional ;
(3-151) If only we would do what we said, things would be better.
4. in such expressions as :
(3-152) I wondered if you were free this evening.
(3-153) I thought you might like fishing.
(3-154) 1 was hoping we could have dinner together.
(3-155) Did you wish to visit me now 95
5. the past modal forms, could, might, would and should, generally have a present or future reference :
(3-156) Could you telephone me tomorrow evening ?
(3-157) 1 think it might rain soon.
(3-158) N'ly children should be here soon.
(3-159) Would you leave soon ?
WTnen talking about modals, the researcher supports the view of considering the past forms of such modals as will, shall, can, and may as future time references. Consider these examples :
(3-160) Could we meet again tomorrow evening ?
(3-161) In India he first met the girl whom he would one day marry.
(3-162) Pune was the place where I should study for the next two years.
Moreover, in a subordinate clause the use of ‘should’, ‘would’, ‘could’ or
‘might’ is obligatory when the verb m the principal clause is in the past time :
should \
would (3-163) He thought he carry out such duties. could
might
/ should \
would (3-164) He said that he give up smoking. could
might 96
Some grammar books denote the special use of the past perfect with
(before) and (until) for a later (future) not an earlier (past) event, and indeed for an event that probably would not happen, as in :
(3-165) He died before he had completed his novel.
(3-166) We refused to come until they had apologized.
3.3.1.10 Modals Other Than ShallAVill
3.3.1.10.1 Introduction
Bhavani (1985) surveys a number of verbs which share the position of the subordmate element of the lexical verbs but differ from them by having fromal syntactic particularities which are connected with their semantic sub-ordmation in verbal groups. These verbs also show some syntactic deviations. The most important of these is that they can take the negative adverb ‘NOT’, both
Its strong stressed form (not) and weak-stressed form (n’t), without the verb
Hence, these verbs are treated separately : they are traditionally called
‘auxiharies.’ These verbs, as the name implies, are ‘helping verbs’, i.e., they have no independent existence as verb phrases but they are there only to make up verb phrases.
-Among them, the ‘modal auxiliaiies’ contribute modality, expressing such concepts as ‘volition’, ‘probabilit>'’ and ‘insistence.’
As regards the number of modals in English, theories of the English grammar have some different concepts. “Traditionally, modals are resti'icted to 97
seven ; may, can, shall will, must, need and dare. Might, could, should, and would were interepted as the past forais of may, can, shall, and will, respectively.”
(Hakutani. 1978: 59). He (ibid) fmds that ever since the need for re-analysis of English modals w^as proposed by Bach (1967), various studies on this topic have appeared (Boyd and Thome, 1969, Hakutani, 1972. Hakutani and Hargis,
1972; Chapin, 1973; Huddleston, 1974; Edmondson and Plank, 1967). The general trend in their investigations seems to be that the TG concept of limiting the
Enghsh modals to may, can, shall, will and must is impractical and thus untenable for purposes of grammar.
The terms mood (or, in the European tradition, mode), modal and modality (Which is to be discussed in chapter 4) have widely differing senses according to various authors at various times. Mood, however, refers to a particular morphological (formal) categoiy of the verb which has a modal function. It generally involves a distinct set of verbal paradigms, e.g. indicative, subjunctive, imperative, optative, conditional, which vary from one language to another in respect to number as well as to the semantic distinctions they encode.
Modals constitute an alternative strategy for encoding modal notions.
Modals to Fleischman (1982 ; 15) “include such fonns as can/could, will/would, shall/should, may/might, ought, must, dare, need.” The same writer states that
“relevant to the present inquiry' is the debate over whether will/shall are fundamentally modal or (future) tense auxiliaries.” (ibib). The debate over the 98
category status of these verbs need not detain us. For the puiposes of this mquiw it is sufficient to recognize that a particular subgroup of verbs which Function modally’ will also predictably function as futures.
Moreover, Modals have some additional morphological and syntactic characteristics as distinct from the primary auxiliaries DO. HAVE, and M .
First, they can only occur as the first, i.e., the finite element of the verb phrase but not in non- finite forms; and so they cannot be used as infinitive or participle
Consider ;
Modals Primary Aux Lexical Verbs
* to may to have to eat
* is maying is being is eating
* is mayed has been has eaten
Table 5
Modals as Finite Forms
Second, they are not inflected in the third person singular present tense where lexical verbs have the - s form.
3.3.1.10.2 Modals and Future Time
By now it is universally acknow'ledged that future is rarely, if ever, a purely temporal concept; it necessarily involves an element of prediction or some related modalization. Fries (1927 : 94) regards such modal colourations 99
as “inevitable consequences of the future idea”. The future tense of all languages that operate with this category is always partly temporal and partly modal.
McCray (1979) according to Bhavaru (1985) remarks that the relationship between tense and mood/modalit\' in futures goes back to ancient times. It is seen as a result of morphological and semantic extensions to the category of aspect. In many languages reference to future world states is in fact grammaticalized in the category of mood rather than tense. (Fleischman, 1982; 24). The same writer
(ibid) states that Camava (1956: 33, 1957; 223) attempts to resolve the question by postulating three grades of future ; 'modal’, modal- temporal’ and 'temporal’, each corresponding to a different level of grammar ; a) future as pure mood, b) future as tense with a modal colouration, and c) future as pure tense. From a diachronic perspective, a given form should display these functions in the order listed, although it turns out that future tends to surface initially as the split type, i.e., future as tense with a modal colouration that allows it to substitute for non past forms.
Quirk and S. Greenbaum (1973; 47) think “the future and modal functions can be separated, but shall and, particularly, are the closest approximation to a colourless, neuti'al future.”
As regards shall and will which, Wekker (1976 ; 7), like most others before him, argues on the basis of syntactic and semantic evidence-behave more like tense auxulianes than like modals. “will is essentially a marker of future time.’' This statement echoes Fries’s earlier judgement. Wekker’s position is also 100
in line with Chomsky’s claim (1971: 210) that the volitional overtone, among
others, “is characterstic of the future tense in many languages” Which simply
reconfirms Fries’s statement on the independence of the 'source’ and target'
modaUties of futures. Yet this position would appear to conflict with the standard
(Aspect) TG analysis of the Aux node :
Aux -» Tense (N4) (Aspect) Ih- Tense -> {Present, Past}
Modal {can, may, must, shall, will}
Which first of all makes shall/will the exponents of future, and
secondly treats future as a modalit}'. Fleischman (1982 : 31) points out that the
interpretation of future as mood is argued for in Orf (1972), like wise from a
generative prespective. An opposite metaphor for viewing the relationship, or
balance, between temporality and modality in futures is the mathematical notion
of a whole, where the parts may vary in inverse relation to each other, but the
sum of the parts must remain constant. Once a language has established future as
co-present in its forms. However, the more temporalized a given form becomes,
the weaker its modal force, and vice versa.
Apart from tlie two modals : shall/will, some other modals are used in
some grammatical consti-uctions to refer to future. Fries (1956: 126) adds that
there are other modals which “because of their meaning, look to the future
fulfilment.” 101
He (ibid) gives the following examples :
(3-167) a) 1 ought to go.
b) 1 CM go.
c) 1 may go.
d) I might go.
e) 1 should go.
I must go.
g) I have to go.
Quii'k and S. Greenbaum (1973 : 48) state that apart from shall, and will
“other modal auxiliaries can have future reference also."
(3-168) He may leave tomorrow.
Thomson and Martinet (1980: 115 -127) give some grammatical structures in which modals such as :
may/might, can, have to. and need are used to express future ;
(3-169) He may/might tell his wife.
(3-170) He may/might emigrate.
(3-171) He may/might be waiting at the station w^hen we arrive.
(3-172) He may/might not believe your stoiy.
(3-173) Can/Could 1 park here ?
(3-174) Can't/Couldn’t 1 leave my suitcase here
(3-175) Shall 1 have to obey the teachers when 1 go to school ^
(3-176) Will you have to take a camera when you travel ? 102
(3-177) 1 don’t suppose 1 need wear a coat.
(3-178) 1 needn't wear a coat.
(3-179) Candidates must be in their places by 9 a. m.
(3-180) You must jom a club and make friends.
3.4 Adverbial Constructions that Specify Future Time
3.4.1 Temporal Adverbials
3.4.1.1 Introduction
As seen in 3.3.1, the verb form alone may not indicate the time referred to clearly. Thus ambiguity emerges if no time reference co-occures. Scholars as
David Cr^'stal (1966: 1) have of course noted the existence of regular formal co-occurrences between temporal adverbials and tense- forms- But, as he (ibid) thinks, this has been only for the most abvious cases, and there has been no general empirical study of all the mutual restrictions and formally definable correlations m English. Jespersen (1933) introduces adverbials m his description of English tenses. Ward (1954; 44) notes the frequency of adverbials with ‘past ordinary’ tenses; while adverbials w'lth other tense- forms are hardly mentioned.
Zandvoort (1957: 58- 63) mentions adverbials only incidentally in his description of present, past and perfect tenses. However. Ota (1963) studies in more detail conelations between verb foims and certam adverbs in English; and Osman (1964) gives adverb- tense relationship a great deal of prominence m his exposition of
Endish tenses. 103
To solve the ambiguity arising in time reference, temporal adverbials play a major role m specifymg the time reference of the verb in English. In this respect, Strang (1969 : 143) observes that “tense differentiation should be thought as a system signalled by patterns of co-occurrence between verbs and adverbials.”.
Cobuild (1990: 258) holds that, in many statements, it is the adjunct rather than the tense of the verb which carries the time reference. For this reason many adjuncts can be used with more than one set of tenses because they refer to time and not to tense. He (ibid) thinks that “if you want to refer to a period of time in relation to another period of time, or in relation to an event, you use an adjunct.” Adverbials and their co-occurrence with verb tenses do not escape
Jespersen's attention (1931) to be aw’are of what important role such temporal adverbials play in the distinction of the time reference of verb forms. Leech
(1969 : 134) noticing what close relationship between temporal adverbials and verb fonns, points out that “the verbal group partially duplicate the semantic function of adverbials of time.” Similarly, David Crystal (1966 : 5) gives the adverbial as equal importance in the specification of tenses as the verb itself since “it is not a question of tense fonn alone giving relevant distinguishing indication of time, as has been tiaditionally assumed but of tense fonn with or w'ithout adverbial specification which gives unambiguous indication.” In the three sentences below, which have one and the same verbal construction. Palmer
(1965; 60) show's how temporal adverbials, in addition to their use. in solving ambiguity', are used to specify time more accurately : 104
(3-181) I am working at the moment, (basic)
(3-182) I am working tomonow. (future)
(3-183) I am alwa\'s working, (habitual)
Mchayet (1983: 21) states tliat temporal adverbials may occur m a preceding sentence and govern the time reference of the following sentence or sentences until a new temporal adverbial is intioduced, as in :
(3-184) She appears on the stage tomorrow to the first time.
She wears her red hat and plays the role of a modem girl.
To Huddleston (1969 : 220). ‘temporal adverbials (specifiers) are one
Item, besides iflections or auxilianes, and conjunctions, with which ‘deep tense’ vs ‘surface tense’ is associated, as seen in :
(3-185) He may be here now/tomon'ow.
3.4.1.2 Future Temporal Adverbials (Collocation with Future Time Reference)
Ciystal (1966 ; 16) states that “the adverbial is taken as the base form, and the tense the compared item (rather than vice versa) as there is greater determination exisiting in this direction than in the other : an adverbial requires an accompanying tense- form, whereas a tense- fonn does not in theoiy require an adverbial. Later this procedure is reversed, and the tense-form taken as base, to ascertain the total range of meanings each tense- form contributes towards.”
Cobuild (1990: 258) states that ‘time reference’ is common with 'past' and ‘future’ tenses. For example, a common use is to put adjuncts which 105
normally refer to future time with the present tense when it is used to refer to future actions :
(3-186) India celebrates its fifty second birthday tomorrow.
(3-187) After all, you are leaving next week.
They can also be used with references to the future actions that are made m the past :
(3-188) 1 planned to finish this thesis in two months time.
So, Cr>^stal (1966 : 5-6) thinks, after analysing actual texts, that there is a very high occurrence of future adverbials and that in fact in 70 % of cases the adverbial is required for a correct interpretation. He (ibid) believes that
“lables such as 'future’ or 'habitual’, then, should not be given to the verb form alone, but to the combination of the two foims, verb and adverbial.”
In this respect Crv'stal (1966: 12-15) provides us with category lables including adverbial elements of future :
1. When ? Future time reference explicit (In Future) : any moment. ... now, a w'eek/fortnight ... tomorrow, a week ... next Monday, in days ... to come. later this week .... next time (any/some day ...) next week, one of these days .... some days, the day after tomorrow, the week ... after next, tomorrow' (morning/ w'eek/fortnight). etc.
2. Time refened to follows explicit time reference
a) Removed (non-specific) : a short ... while after (wards)/later. bv and b\'.
(with)in a short ... while, (with) in a short ... (space of) time, later (on) (in the week ...). 106
b) Specific ; a dav ... later/afterfwaids). after a few days .... (with) in a day
... (or two), (wath)in matter of days.... (in) the follwing month.... (in) the week... after (wards/ following, (on) the next/followln^ day .... the next time.
In Ivic’s terms (1962: 199-204) who calls the obligator^' co-occurrence of temporal adverbials ‘non-omissible determiners’, there must be a non-omissible determiner present, which in this case is a temporal adverbial with future reference, as in :
(3-189) I live in Pune from next year.
Wekker (1976 : 1), however, states that by future time reference is meant
“the expression of temporal relationship of posteriority ... relative to the moment of utterance or some other reference point.”
Cobuild (1990: 256) states that :
a) general or vague reference to future is made by an adjunct which refers to indefinite time such as: in future, by sometimes, some days, one of these days, sooner or later, in the future, as in :
(3-190) I’ll drop by sometime.
(3-191) Sooner or later, he will ask you to join him.
(3-192) In future, she will have to habitualize herself
b) adjuncts wliich include the word tomonow aie mainly used with future tenses :
(3-193) We will tr>' some where else tomorrow.
(3-194) They will come tomonow night. 107
(3-195) This time tomoiTow, I w ill be in Nasik.
c) Some adjuncts mvolve time expressions with next used for specific times such as days (Sunday...etc) months (October, etc.) seasons (summer, etc) week, year and so on :
(3-196) Next summer, our crops will be much better.
(3-197) He will be talking about Iraq next week.
(3-198) They wall get married next Sunday.
However, it seems that presence of future temporal adverbials is a matter of controversy among grammarians. That is due to the obligatory and/or optional collocation of verbal constructions that refer to future time with future time adverbials. This can be better explamed through the following :
1) As regards shall/will + Vs. Palmer (1965: 113) suggests that it is likely to be collocated with future time adverbials when they are used to refer simply to future time.
(3-199) The train will be here in a few minutes.
(3-200) We will be together tomorrow.
Since the underlying time reference of this verbal construction is alw'ays future. It can be used with or without a time adverbial. In this case, the role of the adverbial, as stated by Kalogjera (1968; 124), is to specify the future time explicitly, or to add the notion of frequency and duration, as in ;
(3-201) We shall make a pait>' this evenin^. (specification)
(3-202) We shall make a part}' every weekend, (frequency) 108
(3-203) We shall make parties for two weeks, (duration)
2) But. to Leech (1971 : 53). “a sentence with shall/will + Vs is likely to be incomplete without a temporal adverbial.” So. the sentence ;
(3-204) It will rain as Leech views, is incomplete because of its factual emptiness: and an adverb is needed to make the future time, refeiTed to, definite.
Palmer (1974 ; 104) states that the “reference to future time is clearly shown by collocation with future time adverbials”,
(3-205) a - The train will arrive soon.
b - The match will begm in a few minutes.
Mchayet (1983: 42) concludes that, when will + Vs refers to pure futurit}', collocation with future time adverbials is needed. But, presence of future temporal adverbials is essential for sentences used to express the future perfect.
3) Some verbal consti'uctions indicate futurity by themselves and as a result they do not collocate with future adverbials. Be to + Vs, for example, clearly signifies futurit\’; consequently it does not need a future temporal adverbial for this purpose. Be about to + Vs construction bears the indication of future time: and so it is not obhgatorily collocated with future adverbials. As far as Be
+ going to and progressive future (shall/will + progressive) are concerned, grammarians believe that such verbal consti'uctions do not require any adverbial to have a future reference. 109
4) the same is said about presence of future adverbials with the progressive present. This is still a matter of controversy. Aaits (1969: 272) states that Poutsma
(1926: 335) believes that “some adverbial adjunct denoting future is often required.” Cr>^stal (1966: 25) confinns this point of view thinking that presence of a future temproal adverbial is obligatory when the present progressive is used to express future activity’ or 'future duration’ :
(3-206) a - 1 am leaving tomorrow.
b - They are living in India from now on.
Kjuisinga (1931: 134) and Joos (1964: 134- 135), on the other hand, ignore the presence of future temporal adverbials with the present progressive.
Like them, Jespersen is silent about the co-occuiTence of future temporal adverbials with this veiy tense.
5) As regards the simple present, which is used not only to indicate present time but future as well, its use may then be ambiguous between the two. The sentence given below :
(3-207) My lecture begins at eight o’clock may refer to either present or future time. For this reason. Cobuild (1990 : 258) like many other grammarians holds that “a common use is to put adjuncts which normally refer to future time with the present tense when it is used to refer to future actions”.
Pence and Emery (1990: 262) find that the simple present is generally used with an adverbial expression to suggest future actions :
(3-208) My lease expires tomoiTow. 110
Thus, it seems that it is not the present tense alone that indicates future time, but commonly, the present tense collocated with a future time adverbial.
Mchayet (1983; 69) provides us with some grammarians’ points of view regarding the necessity’ of collocation between present tense and future time adverbials. Poutsma. for example (1926: 215) notices that the simple present refers to future time “practically only when futurity appears from som adverbial adjunct or clause denoting or implying a future point of time.” as in .
(3-209) Pune gets a new theater next Sundav: Admission is free
(3-210) W^en I defend mv thesis next month. I have the honour to invite
all my teachers, relatives and friends.
Yet, Zandvoort (1975 : 58) does not go as far as Poutsma does, and points out that the sentences which express future present “usually contain an adverb or adjunct expressing future time”. Similarly, Hornby (1975: 208) and Joos (1969: 135) remark that the simple present rarely denotes future time without an adverbial in the same sentence or in a removed context. Using some downtoners such as practically onlv, usually, etc., shows that certain regularities in the co-occurrence of adverbials and tenses in English are highly considered by grammanans, Ciystal’s article (1966) “Specification and
English Tenses” thoroughly considers these regularities. In that article. Crystal points out (P. 6) that “specification is obligatoiy when the present tense has future time reference,” Ill
(3-211) I set out teaching two weeks later.
(3-212) He leaves for Cairo tomonow.
3.4.2 Temporal Clauses
It is generally claimed that the use of future tense in temporal clauses results m ungrammaticalit\'.
(3-213) a- 1 will write to you when 1 will have time.
Reference to a future-time is established by means of a ‘present tense’ or a ‘present perfect’, as in (b) and (c) below ;
b - 1 will write to you when 1 have time,
c - I will write to you as soon as I have arrived India.
Further more, the simple present is used in subordinate clauses beginning with the conjunctions, after, before, as, as soon as. tUl, until, when, while, unless.... etc. Consider :
(3-214) They will not visit us unless we gay them a visit.
(3-215) 1 will shout as soon as the players come out.
(3-216) 1 shall come to you when I need you.
(3-217) He will not greet you before you ereet him.
Mui-phy (1994) states that both ‘present simple’ and ‘present perfect’ are often possible to use. But the present perfect is not used if two things happen together ;
(3-218) You will feel better after you have/liave had something to eat. 112
(3-219) UTien I phone her this evening, 1 will invite her to the party.
Swan (1980 : 623) states that in adverb clauses of time, ‘when is followed by a present tense with a future meaning ;
(3-220) 1 will start when I ^ ready.
But in reported speech after a present repoitiiig verb, when can be followed by a future tense :
(3-221) I ask when they ’11 be back.
(3-222) Atheer asks when father will be in.
How'ever, a present tense is normal after a future reporting verb as in
(3-220) above. The same writer (ibid) finds that the rule is much more general than this. “We use the present instead of the future in most subordinate clauses, if the main verb of the sentence is future (or has a future meaning)” (P.595)
Depraetere (1994: 460) thinks that the difference in tense choice between time clauses and main clauses, where a future tense can be used, is related to the different syntactic status of the clauses: a temporal clause is syntactically subordmated to the main clause, whereas a main clause is independent. Wekker
(1976 : 72) uses the temi ‘future subordmation’ to capture the tense system in temporal clauses. In this case, “tense- usage can be said to be non-deictic or temporally uimiarked”. .AJlen (1966) also makes a generalization that the use of the present tense/present perfect to refer to a situation that is simultaneous with a future time situation is not exceptional or due to ‘will deletion’, as claimed by other linguists. Depraetei?(1994 : 460) thinks that it is “just as the past perfect. 113
past tense is used to express anteriorit\' to another situation in the past tense, so the present perfect/present tense is used to express anteriority to a future tense situation.” (P.460)'^
But one should note that after a future reporting verb a present tense is nonnal :
(3-223) All will tell you when he comes.
It is well known that we generally use the present instead of the future after if and conjunctions of adverb clause of time such as when. as soon as, after, before, while, and until as seen above. Adverbial clauses started with in case indicate future time whether the main verb is present or past :
(3-224) I have got my tennis things in case we have time for a game.
In this respect, consider these sentences :
(3-225) - a) She will say she does not recognize him.
b) She will say she has borrowed the money.
c) She will say she borrowed the money the day before.
d) She will say she will never borrow money. in which the verb system in the subclauses constitutes an example of what Declerk calls a “shift of temporal perspective.’' (1991: 24). It is this system which enables
Declerk to explain why will cannot nonnally be used in temporal clauses : it is because these clauses must be temporally subordinated to the main- clause situation that future perspective sector form cannot be used. Leech (1971: 60) states that 114
the use of the simple present in the subordinate clause instead of repeating shall/ will consti'uction is preferred for st>'listic variation. Besides, shall/will construction is very rarely used and if ever, it is used when the modal meaning of shall and will IS needed.
Swan (1980; 595) states that the present is used not only in these cases but also after if, relative pronouns. than, whether, when the main verb is imperative :
(3-226) If It rains, we will cancel the match.
(3-227) She will be on the same plane ^ 1 am/will.
(3-228) The first person w^io opens the door will get a shock.
(3-229) 1 will alw'ays know where you
(3-230) me know how you ^ from time to time.
However, future tenses aie possible in both clauses if they refer to different future times :
(3-231) If it will rain tomorrow, we mmht as well cancel the match now,
(3-232) I will tell her that 1 will ring back later.
Quirk and S. Greenbaum (1973) state that “noininal that and wh- clauses tend to contain present tense verbs when the main clause (as well as the subordinate clause) refers to the future; but when the main clause refers to the present, the future will is likely to be used m the subordmate clause.” (P.49) Contrast;
(3-233) 1 shall ask him what he wants tomonow.
(3-234) 1 wonder ( ^ ) what he will do tomonow, 115
3.4.3 Future in If -Clauses
Although the expression of future time in English conditional clauses has been a notorious problem for many foreign students, the rule, as it is stated in most grammatical handbooks, is quite simple as stated by Eckersley and
Eckersley (1960): “The Future Tense carmot be used in the if - clause even when the meaning is future... Will is only possible ... if it is used to express not future time but willingness.” Of course, we know that the rule is not as simple as that
“although it does cover 99 % of the cases” (Declerk, 1984; 279). However, various linguists like Poutsma (1926), Palmer (1974), Quirk et al (1972),Tregidgo
(1974), Jespersen (1931), Wekker (1976, 1980), and Haegeman (1983) have drawn attention to exceptional examples and occasionally a mle has been suggested to account for the cases in question. Quirk et al (1972: 781), for example, state that will is used after if if “the future contingency expressed in the if -clause determines a present decision.” Close (1980), on the other hand, rejects this and other rules because they do not apply to all the examples that are available. Thus, he gives some difference between 'normal’ if -clauses and 'exceptional’ ones, as shown respectively in the two examples below, as the former express 'assumed future actuality^’ whereas the latter express 'assumed future predictability’ :
(3-235) If you come tomonow' I will tell you even,4hing.
(3-236) If the weather will be as cold as this, all these plants must be
killed soon. 116
Declerk (1984: 283) thinks that we may come closer to a solution of this problem if we stop considermg sentences with if + will as exceptions. To him (ibid) using will to refer to the future is more normal than using a present tense. The use of will is the rule in main clauses and most types of subclauses.
Consider :
(3-237) If it will make you feel better. 1 will take it back.
(Tregidgo, 1974:105)
In this respect, it seems that English as well as many other languages do
allow a modal auxiliary' to express futurity or counterfactualness in subordinate
conditional clauses. Wekker (1977, 1980) suggests that an explanation for the
use and non -use of will in if- clauses can be offered in terms of the notion of
‘temporal subordination’ withm a performative framework. To account for the use
of wall in future- referring if- clauses he posmlates the presence of some higher clause in underlying structure, of the fonn :
(3-238) If it is the case that ....
or
(3-239) If you say that ....
which is related drrectly to the moment of utterance. Thus, the use of the present
m futurate if- clauses is accounted for by the fact that the if-clause is subordinate
to the main future- refemng verb. This phenomenon of temporal subordination is
based on interpretive rules rather than deletion rules of the underlying futurity
marker will in subordinate clauses, as in : 117
(3-240) a) If you will smoke a packet a day, you will never get rid of
that caugh.
b) If you smoke a packet a day, you never get rid of
that cough.
In this respect, Leech (1971: 60), Palmer (1979), Close (1981: 108) and
Wekker (1976, 1980) fmd that the futurity of if- clauses in Enghsh need not be marked by the epistemic will, but is marked by a present tense combined with a future time adverbial, as in :
(3-241) If it rains tomorrow, the match will be postponed.
Moreover, they come to say that separate future marking in this case is unnecessary; and to Leech (ibid), the non- modal present tense in the example above is obligatory.
Christophersen (1969: 161) states that when the conditions are future and hypothetical, will/shall is used; and the occuirence of be going to is relatively
low in conditionals because future events are likely to be conditioned on future rather than on present time :
(3-242) If we save money, we wall buy a new house.
(3-243) If we saved money, we would buy a new house.
(3-244) If we had saved money, we would have bought a new house. 118
3.5 Adjectival Constructions that Indicate Future
3.5.1 Future Reference in Adjectives
There is no difficult}' in distinguishing various subclasses of adjectives referring to time. To start with those that are most straightforward, we have adjectives that include a reference to a particular time or period. The vocabulary' of English is quite well stocked with adjectives of relative time reference. We have for instance former, subsequent, past, previous, simultaneous, next. forthcoming, later, and so on; they fall naturally into three subclasses depending on whether they are dealing with time before or after or concurrent with their reference point. An observ'ation which should be made is that, unlike the adjectives of fixed time reference, these adjectives do locate the entity designated by their noun phrase at the time to which they refer us, even if that is only a relative time. That is because they are used without any need for any additional appeal to extialinguistic knowledge. Consider :
(3-245) The world forthcomino; system has caused a storm of protest.
(3-246) The lawyer’s subsequent words molified nobody.
Obviously, forthcoming in (3-245) refers to a time later than the time of utterance, i.e.. to future, (even though the verb in this sentence will tend to attract our attention to the apposite direction) and tlie svstem must belong to that time period. In (3-246) on the other hand, the use of subsequent will be taken to indicate time following (future), not the time of utterance, but some reference 119
point not given in the sentence; once again, however, the words identified in the
subject must be located in that temporal zone.
Many such adjectives open the way to ambiguities which depend on the
choice of reference point. Thus in :
(3-247) Your earlier preparations seem to have saved the situation.
We find a reference to ‘preparations’ which can be understood to have
been made prior to the point of utterance, or prior to some other (unspecified)
reference point. Similarly, if the coach of a team uses the words in (3-248) to
his players,
(3-248) Next time, we may have to justify our cuiTent peifoiTnances.
then without further information they will be quite unable to tell whether he is
talking about the performances of the time in which he is speaking or about the
possibly quite different perfonnances in the time which will follow.
We may in passing suggest as a broad general principle that, while the
speaker of course know's which time period is intended, hearers normally assume
that the temprol reference point of an adjective is the same as that of the verb
of the clause to which it belongs unless there is evidence to the contrary, in
which case the time of utterance will be taken as the reference point, unless that
also is excluded in favor of some other possibility provided verbally or by the
context.
It is curious that some adjectives of relative time seem strongly resistant,
at least, to occurence w'ith one or other of three t>'pes of time reference, i.e.. 120
the time of utterance itself, the time indicated by the verb, or some other point
mdicated. exphcitly or otherwise, within the situation about which the language is
used. Thus, on the one hand, later can occur with all three as in (3-249a to c).
(3-249) a) We came for the later match, not this one.
b) They did not foreseethe later difficulties.
c) Later events will be issued in this paper next week.
On the other hand, forthcoming seems hard to relate to some other point
indicated within the situation about which the language is used although it can
occur with either of the other two possibilities. Consider :
(3-250) Forthcoming events were listed in the newsletter until last year.
The same can be said about future in (3-251) below ;
(3-251) My future daughter- in- law is a teacher
where we are not talking about some girl whose existence is a matter for the
future; indeed she is explicitly stated to exist now as a teacher, as well as
presumably being currently engaged to my son; but it is her translation to the
status of daughter- in- law w'hich is a matter for the future. However, it is
conceivable that some might wish to say that such adjectives are really adverbs
-see Jespersen’s discussion of adjective qualifying nexus substantives (1924).
With respect to the particulanties, it seems that although most standard adjectives
can be paired off with an adverb, the majoritv' of separative adjectives lack the
requued adverbial partner; thus, to take the example already cited above, it is not
at all clear how this approach would agree with it. 121
3.5.2 Future in Relative Clauses
As mentioned before the difference m tense choice between subordinate clauses and mam clauses, where the future tense can be used, is related to the different syntactic status of the clause. Havmg said this, one might wonder if the tight syntactic bonds between a restrictive relative clause (RRC) and a main clause and the loose syntactic bonds between a nonrestrictive relative clause
(NRRC) and a main clause also result in different tense systems. The choice between Future Perspective System (FPS) and Present Perfective System (PPS) for RJ^Cs and NRRCs is not free one. As Declerck (1991; 55) points out
NRRCs appear to exclusively use the FPS, whereas in RRCs. either system can be used, though not w'ithout any constriants; Consider the examples given by
Declerck (ibid) ;
(3-252) a) I will ask John, who will know the answer, (knows) (NRRC)
b) 1 will ask John, who will have heard the news by then. (NRRC)
(3-253) When she gets paid next month she will tell us that
she will soon buy a new hat with the money
she has saved/will have saved from that pavcheck. (RRC)
Depraetere (1994: 462) provides us with the examples given in (3-254) showing that RRCs and NRRCs differ with respect to the verb fonns they allow to indicato future time,
(3-254) a) You will meet John, who will be weanne a red cap (NRRC).
b) You will meet John, who is wearing a red cap (NRRC). 122
c) You will meet a man who will be wearing a red cap (RRC).
d) You will meet a man who is wearing a red cap (RRC)
The present tense in the NRRC in (b), unlike that m its restrictive couterpart in (d). does not refer to a future time. Its tense, the ‘present progressive’, refers to now (present). It can be concluded that in RRCs the future tense is a possible, but not the only option; the present tense also establishes future-time
reference in such clauses and the future tense need not be used because the
context makes it sufficiently clear that there is reference to future time. This is not the case in NRRCs. The present tense does not establish future time reference,
since the use of the present tense results in a clash : the main clause referes to future time, whereas the NRRC refers to present; and if the sentense is to make
sense, the future tense has to be used m the NRRCs. In other words, NRRCs require the use of tlie FPS, whereas the PPS can be used in RRCs. (cf Depratere
1994). ^
3.6 Future Indicated Contextually (by Discourse)
It is known that the textual function meets the basic requirement of eveiy language that it should be able to creat texts. The speaker of a language has the ability to discriminate between a random stiing of sentences and one forming a discourse, and this is due to the inherent texture in the language and to his awaieness of it. According to HaUiday (1968). there are two aspects of discourse function : the one concerned with ‘granmiar above the sentence’ and the other 123
with ‘grammar below the sentence.’ Grammar above the sentence is the “area often known as ‘discourse structure’ and is concerned with the options that are available to the speaker for relating one sentence to the other.” (P.210). The texmal function involving giammar the sentence embodies means whereby what is said may be structured as a piece of communication. The construction of discourse demands resources not only for attaching a sentence to what has preceded it but also for organizmg a sentence in such a way that it is appropriate as a piece of information in the context.
Close (1975 : 259) thinks that “in most cases the context may clarify the ambiguity of a sentence time reference.”
As regards future, Ehrman (1966: 11) talks about the effect of surrounding context in the discourse on indicating future reference. Hornby (1975: 208) and
Joos (1964: 135) remark that a future reference in a removed context helps the simple present indicate futurit>' even if the latter is not collocated with an adverbial future reference. This means thats the same sentence does not necessarily contain an adverbial. The adverbial may occur in a removed context, i.e., for instance, m a previous sentence or in a subordinate clause, as in :
(3-255) London gets a new art gallery next Friday. Admission is free.
(Wekker, 1976: 81)
(3-256) UTien .Ameer joins the anny next month, he h ^ a chance to
participate m the march.
In some cases there is no adverbial in anv sentence at all, but the context 124
or the situation is such that the verb tense can be unambiguously used with future reference :
(3-257) We either victory or martyrdom.
(3-258) He leaves by the first available car.
(Mchayet, 1983: 71)
To sum up, it can be stated that although English seemingly has two tenses
: ‘present’ and ‘past’, grammarians of English generally agree to consider ‘future’ as linguistic; and so the English grammar deals with all the forms of ‘future’ as components in the English tense- system.
The ‘future’ (tense) in Enghsh differs mainly morphologically from the ‘present’ and the ‘past’ tenses. One of its markers is a modal verb rather than an inflection.
Nevertheless, whether future is a tense or not, English is perfectly capable of providing the speaker with means and constructions (verbal, adverbial, adjectival) to talk about future time with which tense is allegedly bound up. Going through the histoiy of the English grammars, it is found that such constructions are of different forms and syntactic functions.
Shall and will, as two intennmgled auxiliary verbs, however, provide the classical example. Both auxiliaries, whether ‘temporal’ or ‘modal’, cover a great deal area of the syntax of future in English. Will, however, is seemingly used wider than Shall in Modem English. The temporal will + infinitive is .the simplest forni of future which can be used with all persons. But it can be replaced, 125
obligatorily or optionally, by shall + infinitive with the first person.
The construction shall/will + Vs represents ‘simple future tense’ and when being aspectualized (progressive or perfect), ‘future progressive tense’ and ‘future perfect tense' are produced. Some other grammatical constructions, such as ^ goma to + Vs, simple present tense, present progressive tense, be to + Vs, ^ about to + Vs, modals other than shall and will, adverbial time references, adverbial and adjectival clauses, are used to form expressions of future in addition to their basic grammatical functions.
Some of these constructions are obligatorily collocated with future time adverbs, otherwise ambiguity emerges. Co- occurence of adverbials of future time in the other constructions is optional. 126
Notes :
1. From the semantic point of view, the traditional approach to 'tense and aspect’ is superior to the structural or transformational approach, since a greater number of meaningful distinctions can be made using the traditional approach.
However, this approach is quite limited in that it views both tense and time as linear ;
<----- past — present — future ------>
2. In America, and to some degree in Scotland and Irland is used for all three persons, (cf ; Allen. 1958 : 69, and Ehrman, 1966 ; 56)
3. Nearness of future time expressed by this verbal construction is clearly explained by the construction be on the point of, which similarly expresses nearness of the future event. Thus, in:
- The baby is about to cry, the speaker means that :
- The baby is on the point of crying.
4. (cf Chapter Four Note 8).
□□