Re: Aspect vs. case; stative and dynamic verbs

On Saturday, November 13, 2004, at 10:14 , Trebor Jung wrote:

> Wow, this thread hasn't turned into YAEPT... yet! ;))
Umm - want to know how I pronounce 'aspectual'?   (Just kidding!)

> Ray írta: "Yes - it did. I have checked Trask also. He slightly
> inconsistently refers to "dynamic" as a 'superordinate aspectual label'
> and
> to "stative" as a 'superordinate aspectual category'  :)
>
> "But it is quite clear from his entries that such superordinate aspectual
> labels/categories are not the same as aspects themselves."
>
> AFAIK, dynamism is a grammatical category whereby the action is marked for
> level of change: no change (static) ~ change (dynamic).
Yes, indeed - and one has to be very careful here. Crystal lists _five_
different meanings of 'dynamic/dynamism' in linguistics:
(a) a grammatical classification
(b) a term used by some sociolinguists to characterize a view of language
(c) a term sometimes used in phonology for a one which varies in pitch
range
(d) a term used in functional sentence perspective
(e) a term used to describe a certain formal approach to semantics

Of course in all meanings, whether linguistic or not, the opposite of
_dynamic_ is generally denoted by the word _static_. In (a) however the
more commonly used opposite seems to be _stative_.

As Trask's dictionary is strictly "A Dictionary of Grammatical Terms in
Linguistics" he lists only meaning (a) and Trebor rightly draws attention
to the fact that the usage we are discussing in this thread is
_grammatical_.

>  Is there a specific
> category (cf. aspect) that dynamism would fall under? Or should it be
> classified without reference to other, larger groups of terms (cf. aspect)
> ?
In their definitions of 'dynamic' and 'stative' in the grammatical sense
both Crystal and Trask use the phrase 'aspectual category', but Trask does
make it clear that we are talking about a _superordinate_ aspectual
categories.

Perhaps it will help Scott who originally asked the questions, simply to
quote from Task:
ASPECT
"A grammatical category which relates to the internal temporal structure
of a situation. Aspect is most commonly reflected in the form of the verb,
  and in many languages the expression of aspect is intimately bound up
with the expression of *tense*, from which, however, aspect must be
distinguished. In English, for example, the forms _I did it_, _I was doing
it_ and _I used to do it_ are all past tense, but they express different
aspects. Among the aspectual categories often expressed in languages are
*perfective, imperfective, perfect, progressive, habitual, durative,
punctual* and *iterative.*"

TENSE
"The *grammatical category* which correlates most directly with
distinctions of time. Tense is a frequent category in the languages of the
world, but is far from universal, Chinese being an example of a language
which lacks tense entirely. Tense distinctions are frequently marked on
finite verbs. English exhibits a minimal tense system with a two-way
contrast between past and non-past forms, as illustrated by _Lisa lives in
France_ vs. _Lisa lived in France_; _Lisa is smoking_ vs. _Lisa was
smoking_; _lisa has finished her essay_ vs. _Lisa had finished her essay_;
_Lisa says she will come_ vs. _Lisa said she would come_. English lacks a
distinctive future tense. A few languages, of which the New Guinea
language Hua is the best-known example, have a two-term system contrasting
future and non-future. Latin and the Romance languages show a three-term
tense system with past, present and future tenses, though the use of the
future is highly restricted in some of these languages. Some languages
exhibit more elaborate tense systems, distinguishing, for example, recent
past from remote past. The New Guinea language Yimas has a remarkably rich
   system of seven tenses: four past tenses, distinguishing varying degrees
of remoteness, a present, a near future and a remote future."

(Trask goes on to note that traditional grammar often uses the term 'tense'
  in a loose manner to include aspect and other distinctions. For example
Latin is traditionally said to have six 'tenses'; in strictly linguistic
terms, however, it has only three tenses which intersect with two
aspectual categories. It would, as Trask observes, be convenient to have a
different term for the tense-aspect-mood distinctions made within any
individual language - but there is not.)

DYNAMIC
"[adjective] Denoting  a sentence, predicate, verb form or lexical verb
expressing an action, movement or change: _Lisa peeled the potatoes_,
_Lisa left the room_, Lisa turned bright red_. The term 'dynaic' is a
superordinate aspectual label contrasting with *stative.*"

STATIVE
"[adjective] Denoting a form or construction which expresses a state of
affairs, rather than an event. English does not always distinguish
statives from dynamic passives. The sentence _The window was broken_, for
example, is ambiguous between a stative reading and a dynamic reading,
though the addition of adverbials may force one or another reading: _The
window was broken by John_ (dynamic): _The window was broken all week_
(stative). Many other languages, however, have explicit stative
constructions: in German, _Das Fenster war gebrochen_ can only have a
stative reading (i.e. 'it had a hole in it already') while _Das Fenster
wurde gebrochen_ is strictly dynamic (i.e. 'the window got broken').
'Stative' is a superordinate aspectual category contrasting with *dynamic*
."

>> "Indeed - I am indebted to some members (current & not-current) on this
>> list
>> for putting me right on several occasions over the past few years."
>
> Many of my ideas were wrong at the time, but thanks to this list I have
> learned quite a bit :D
Yep - and sometimes it is obvious that there are different approaches, but
the exchange of ideas & opinions is valuable IMO for helping to sort out
ideas and arrive at a better understanding of things linguistic. This
interchange of ideas, opinions etc is, I think, one of the strengths of
this list.

================================================================
On Friday, November 12, 2004, at 08:05 , Philip Newton wrote:

>> On Thu, 11 Nov 2004 20:30:07 -0500, scott <sjcaldwell@...> wrote:
>> 1) What is the difference between aspect and case?
>
> I  think you mean "aspect and tense"? Since I've seen "aspect" applies
> to verbs but "case" to nouns.
Maybe - I admit it seems to me difficult to see how one would confuse
'case' and 'aspect'. But that may just be because I have been familiar
with both terms for some 40 or 50 years. It sort of makes a difference  :)

In case Scott really does mean 'aspect' and 'case', I will just add what
Trask says about the latter.

CASE (1st definition)
"A distinctive, overtly marked form which can be assumed by a N[oun]
P[hrase] to indicate that that NP bears some identifiable grammatical or
semantic relation to the rest of the sentence. In English, overt case
marking is confined to a few pronouns (_I/me_; _they/them_), but some
languages, such as German, Russian, Latin, Basque and Finnish, exhibit
elaborate case systems typically involving about three to six distinct
forms, but sometimes a dozen or more. Among the most frequently
distinguished cases are the *nominative, accusative, absolutive, ergative,
  dative, genitive, instrumental, comitative, locative, allative* and
*ablative*, but many others exist."

Trask's 2nd definition concerns its special use in Government Binding
theory and the 3rd refers to 'deep case' theories. If Scott were concerned
with these, he would not be asking the original questions. Normally when
we speak of 'case' we are using it in the sense of Trask's first
definition above.

Hopefully, all the above helps rather than confuses    ;)

Ray
===============================================
http://home.freeuk.com/ray.brown
ray.brown@freeuk.com
===============================================
Anything is possible in the fabulous Celtic twilight,
which is not so much a twilight of the gods
as of the reason."      [JRRT, "English and Welsh" ]

Replies