没有人是完美的

A. Bertrand, Yurika Aonuki, Sihwei Chen, Henry Davis, J. Gambarage, Laura Griffin, M. Huijsmans, L. Matthewson, D. Reisinger, H. Rullmann, Raiane Salles, Michael Schwan, Neda Todorovic, Bailey Trotter, Jozina Vander Klok
{"title":"没有人是完美的","authors":"A. Bertrand, Yurika Aonuki, Sihwei Chen, Henry Davis, J. Gambarage, Laura Griffin, M. Huijsmans, L. Matthewson, D. Reisinger, H. Rullmann, Raiane Salles, Michael Schwan, Neda Todorovic, Bailey Trotter, Jozina Vander Klok","doi":"10.2307/j.ctv1jk0jwv.25","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper challenges the cross-linguistic validity of the tense–aspect category ‘perfect’ by investigating 15 languages from eight different families (Atayal, Brazilian Portuguese, Dutch, English, German, Gitksan, Japanese, Javanese, Korean, Mandarin, Niuean, Québec French, St’át’imcets, Swahili, and Tibetan). The methodology involves using the storyboard ‘Miss Smith’s Bad Day’ to test for the availability of experiential, resultative, recent-past, and continuous readings, as well as lifetime effects, result-state cancellability, narrative progression, and compatibility with definite time adverbials. Results show that the target forms in these languages can be classified into four groups: (a) past perfectives; (b) experientials; (c) resultatives; and (d) hybrids (which allow both experiential and resultative readings). It is argued that the main division is between past perfectives, which contain a ‘pronominal’ tense, on the one hand, and the other three groups on the other, which involve existential quantification, either over times (experiential) or over events (resultative). The methodological and typological implications of the findings are discussed. The main conclusion of the study is that there is no universal category of ‘the perfect’, and that instead, researchers should focus on identifying shared semantic components of tense–aspect categories across languages.","PeriodicalId":369333,"journal":{"name":"Picturing the Uncertain World","volume":"33 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"34","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Nobody’s Perfect\",\"authors\":\"A. Bertrand, Yurika Aonuki, Sihwei Chen, Henry Davis, J. Gambarage, Laura Griffin, M. Huijsmans, L. Matthewson, D. Reisinger, H. Rullmann, Raiane Salles, Michael Schwan, Neda Todorovic, Bailey Trotter, Jozina Vander Klok\",\"doi\":\"10.2307/j.ctv1jk0jwv.25\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper challenges the cross-linguistic validity of the tense–aspect category ‘perfect’ by investigating 15 languages from eight different families (Atayal, Brazilian Portuguese, Dutch, English, German, Gitksan, Japanese, Javanese, Korean, Mandarin, Niuean, Québec French, St’át’imcets, Swahili, and Tibetan). The methodology involves using the storyboard ‘Miss Smith’s Bad Day’ to test for the availability of experiential, resultative, recent-past, and continuous readings, as well as lifetime effects, result-state cancellability, narrative progression, and compatibility with definite time adverbials. Results show that the target forms in these languages can be classified into four groups: (a) past perfectives; (b) experientials; (c) resultatives; and (d) hybrids (which allow both experiential and resultative readings). It is argued that the main division is between past perfectives, which contain a ‘pronominal’ tense, on the one hand, and the other three groups on the other, which involve existential quantification, either over times (experiential) or over events (resultative). The methodological and typological implications of the findings are discussed. The main conclusion of the study is that there is no universal category of ‘the perfect’, and that instead, researchers should focus on identifying shared semantic components of tense–aspect categories across languages.\",\"PeriodicalId\":369333,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Picturing the Uncertain World\",\"volume\":\"33 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-06-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"34\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Picturing the Uncertain World\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv1jk0jwv.25\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Picturing the Uncertain World","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv1jk0jwv.25","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 34

摘要

本文通过调查来自8个不同语系的15种语言(泰雅族、巴西葡萄牙语、荷兰语、英语、德语、吉克桑语、日语、爪哇语、韩语、普通话、纽埃语、quacimbec法语、St ' át ' imcets、斯瓦希里语和藏语)来挑战时态- aspect类别“完美”的跨语言有效性。方法包括使用故事板“史密斯小姐糟糕的一天”来测试经验性、结果性、最近-过去性和连续性阅读的可用性,以及终生影响、结果状态可取消性、叙事进展和与确定时间状语的兼容性。结果表明,这些语言的目标形式可分为四类:(a)过去完成时;(b)经验;(c) resultatives;(d)混合型(既允许经验性阅读,也允许结果性阅读)。有人认为,主要的划分是在过去完成时之间,过去完成时一方面包含“代词”时态,另一方面涉及存在量化,要么涉及时间(经验),要么涉及事件(结果)。讨论了研究结果的方法学和类型学意义。这项研究的主要结论是,没有一个“完美”的通用类别,相反,研究人员应该专注于识别跨语言的时态-方面类别的共同语义成分。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Nobody’s Perfect
This paper challenges the cross-linguistic validity of the tense–aspect category ‘perfect’ by investigating 15 languages from eight different families (Atayal, Brazilian Portuguese, Dutch, English, German, Gitksan, Japanese, Javanese, Korean, Mandarin, Niuean, Québec French, St’át’imcets, Swahili, and Tibetan). The methodology involves using the storyboard ‘Miss Smith’s Bad Day’ to test for the availability of experiential, resultative, recent-past, and continuous readings, as well as lifetime effects, result-state cancellability, narrative progression, and compatibility with definite time adverbials. Results show that the target forms in these languages can be classified into four groups: (a) past perfectives; (b) experientials; (c) resultatives; and (d) hybrids (which allow both experiential and resultative readings). It is argued that the main division is between past perfectives, which contain a ‘pronominal’ tense, on the one hand, and the other three groups on the other, which involve existential quantification, either over times (experiential) or over events (resultative). The methodological and typological implications of the findings are discussed. The main conclusion of the study is that there is no universal category of ‘the perfect’, and that instead, researchers should focus on identifying shared semantic components of tense–aspect categories across languages.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Old Mother Hubbard and the United Nations The Mendel Effect Insignificant Is Not Zero: A Political Statistic Numbers and the Remembrance of Things Past
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1