Re: Aspect vs. case; stative and dynamic verbs

Sounds like I've got to use my words more carefully. There seems to be some
confusion over what I meant by "not in the conventional sense." In fact
aspect and aktionsart are very closely linked, and it could be argued that
aktionsart becomes aspect if grammaticalised. However, it is hard to think
of them as the same thing when the concept is expressed through the meaning
of the word rather than the internal temporal constituency of an event. I
had intended to give you keywords to search rather than "correct" you. Note
that aktionsart is called lexical aspect and so is aspect but not in the
conventional sense, either way, I'd appreciate not having my head bitten
off.

This is not an easy distinction to understand but there is nothing subtle
about it. Aspect refers to the way in which the action was distributed
through time, actionsart refers to the meaning of the verb itself.How that
pans out when the aktionsart is grammaticalised, however, I don't know.

The best description of aspect I have found is:
http://www.rick.harrison.net/langlab/aspect.html

I haven't found a really satisfactory description of aktionsart (you'll
have to find your own or rely on people who post here), but as I said it
does provide fertile ground for constructed languages.

Reply