为什么普通期货不同

IF 1.6 1区 文学 0 LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS Linguistic Inquiry Pub Date : 2022-12-22 DOI:10.1162/ling_a_00435
Hotze Rullmann;Marianne Huijsmans;Lisa Matthewson;Neda Todorović
{"title":"为什么普通期货不同","authors":"Hotze Rullmann;Marianne Huijsmans;Lisa Matthewson;Neda Todorović","doi":"10.1162/ling_a_00435","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In English, simple present (plain) and present progressive constructions can make reference to the future, in constructions known as futurates. In previous literature, these two types of futurate have often been discussed separately or treated as more or less equivalent. This squib argues that they convey different meanings: plain futurates presuppose the existence of a schedule, while progressive futurates do not. We propose a formal definition of a schedule and present novel empirical data based on a questionnaire study. We show that plain futurates are restricted to contexts providing a schedule, but progressive futurates are not.","PeriodicalId":48044,"journal":{"name":"Linguistic Inquiry","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Why Plain Futurates are Different\",\"authors\":\"Hotze Rullmann;Marianne Huijsmans;Lisa Matthewson;Neda Todorović\",\"doi\":\"10.1162/ling_a_00435\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In English, simple present (plain) and present progressive constructions can make reference to the future, in constructions known as futurates. In previous literature, these two types of futurate have often been discussed separately or treated as more or less equivalent. This squib argues that they convey different meanings: plain futurates presuppose the existence of a schedule, while progressive futurates do not. We propose a formal definition of a schedule and present novel empirical data based on a questionnaire study. We show that plain futurates are restricted to contexts providing a schedule, but progressive futurates are not.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48044,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Linguistic Inquiry\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-12-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Linguistic Inquiry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/10302097/\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Linguistic Inquiry","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/10302097/","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

在英语中,简单现在(普通)和现在进行结构可以指未来,在被称为futures的结构中。在以前的文献中,这两种类型的未来主义经常被单独讨论,或者被视为或多或少的等价物。这个哑炮认为它们传达了不同的含义:简单的未来主义预设了时间表的存在,而进步的未来主义则没有。我们提出了时间表的正式定义,并在问卷调查的基础上提供了新的经验数据。我们表明,朴素的未来主义仅限于提供时间表的上下文,而进步的未来论则不然。
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
Why Plain Futurates are Different
In English, simple present (plain) and present progressive constructions can make reference to the future, in constructions known as futurates. In previous literature, these two types of futurate have often been discussed separately or treated as more or less equivalent. This squib argues that they convey different meanings: plain futurates presuppose the existence of a schedule, while progressive futurates do not. We propose a formal definition of a schedule and present novel empirical data based on a questionnaire study. We show that plain futurates are restricted to contexts providing a schedule, but progressive futurates are not.
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
Linguistic Inquiry
Linguistic Inquiry Multiple-
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
12.50%
发文量
54
期刊介绍: Linguistic Inquiry leads the field in research on current topics in linguistics. This key resource explores new theoretical developments based on the latest international scholarship, capturing the excitement of contemporary debate in full-scale articles as well as shorter contributions (Squibs and Discussion) and more extensive commentary (Remarks and Replies).
期刊最新文献
Inverse Linking and Extraposition VP-Preposing and Constituency “Paradox” Using Computational Models to Test Syntactic Learnability Applicative Recursion and Nominal Licensing More on (the Lack of) Reconstruction in English Tough-Constructions
×
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