The Grammatical Category of Tense as a Means of Expressing Temporal Deixis in the Belarusian and the English Languages: The Comparative and Typological Aspect

About the author:

Olga A. Artsiomava, Cand. Sci. (Philol.), Associate Professor, Department of the Belarusian Language and Literature, Minsk State Linguistic University; olgaivanovaolga3@gmail.com

Abstract:

This article analyzes the grammatical category of time as a means of actualizing temporal deixis in the Belarusian and English languages in the comparative-typological aspect. A comparative study of the grammatical tense system of these languages has revealed that the absolute time model represented by verbal forms in the Belarusian and English languages is not identical to the physical objective temporal model. It has an indexical and subjective nature with the reference point that depends on the congruence or divergence of the moment of perception and the time of the speech act. In the narrative mode of interpretation, where the action or event expressed by the verb-predicate in the principal clause is the reference point, the Belarusian language is characterized by the shift of the personal deictic center in the subordinate clause in contrast to the English language, where there is a shift of the personal and temporal deictic centers as well.

References:

1. Apresyan Yu. D. 1986. “Dejksis v leksike i grammatike i naivnaya model' mira” [Deixis in Vocabulary and Grammar and the Naive Model of the World]. Semiotika i informatika. Moskva: Yazyki russkoy kul'tury, no 28, pp. 5-33. Accessed on 10 April 2015. www.lpcs.math.msu.su›~uspensky/journals/siio/35/35_12APRES.pdf
2. Bondarko A. V. 1987. Teoriya funkcional'noj grammatiki: Vvedenie. Aspektual'nost'. Vremennaya lokalizovannost'. Taksis [Theory of Functional Grammar: Introduction. Aspectuality. Temporal localization. Taxis]. Leningrad: Nauka.
3. Vasilyev A. Angliyskiy: pravila proiznosheniya i chteniya, grammatika, razgovornyj yazyk [English: Rules of Pronunciation and Reading, Grammar, Spoken Language]. Accessed on 14 February 2017. http://padaread.com/?book=177639
4. Veselkova O. N. 2004. “Temporal'naya organizaciya nemeckogo narrativa: Dejkticheskaya traktovka preterita” [Temporal Organization of the German Narrative: Deictic Interpretation of the Past Tense]. Cand. Sci. (Philol.) diss. Arhangelsk.
5. Lingvisticheskiy enciklopedicheskiy slovar' [Linguistic Encyclopaedic Dictionary]. “Vremya” [Tense]. Accessed on 10 April 2017. http://tapemark.narod.ru/les/089a.html
6. Kashkin V. B. 1991. Funkcional'naya tipologiya perfekta [Functional typology of the Perfect]. Voronezh.
7. Kozmin A. O. 2008. “Semantika form nastoyashchego vremeni glagola v angliyskom i nemetskom yazykakh” [The Semantics of the Present Verb Forms in English and German]. : Cand. Sci. (Philol.) diss. Moscow.
8. Kravchenko A. V. 1996. Yazyk i vospriyatie: kognitivnye aspekty yazykovoy kategorizatsii [Language and Perception: Cognitive Aspects of Language Categorization]. Irkutsk: Izd-vo Irkutsk. un-ta.
9. Natsional'niy korpus russkogo yazyka [National Russian Corpus]. Accessed on 16 May 2017. http://www.ruscorpora.ru/search-para-be.html 
10. Novozhilova A. A. 2006. “Vremennaya referenciya. Deyksis i anaphora” [Temporary Reference. Deixis and Anaphora]. Proceedings of the International Conference “Aktual'nye problemy lingvistiki XXI veka”. [Urgent Linguistics Problems of the 21st Century]. (6-7 December), pp. 182-188. Kirov.
11. Paducheva E. V. 2009. “Rezhim interpretacii kak kontekst, snimayushchiy neodnoznachnost'” [Interpretation Mode as a Context that Removes Ambiguity]. Proceedings of the International Conference “Dialog 2008”. Accessed on 10 April 2017. http://lexicograph.ruslang.ru›TextPdf2/dialog_2008_Paducheva.pdf
12. Pehrehgrynacyya Mіkalaya Kryshtafa Radzіvіla. Accessed on 5 May 2017. http://litaratura.org/aleksandryya?artid=2
13. Selezneva O. N. 2013. “Differentsiatsiya sredstv vyrazheniya budushchego vremeni v sovremennom angliyskom yazyke” [The Differentiation of Means of Expression of the Future Tense in Modern English]. Cand. Sci. (Philol.) diss. Tver.
14. Yakіmovіch A. 2016. “Sem gіstoryj pra vozhyka” [Seven Stories about the Hedgehog]. Gazeta Slonіmskaya [Slonim Newspaper]. Accessed on 14 February 2017. http://www.gs.by/ru/944/kids/26204/Sem-gіstoryj-pra-Voўka-i-Vozhyka.htm
15. Bühler K. 1982. “Deixis Ad Phantasma and the Anaphoric Use of Deictic Words”. Speech, Studies in Deixis and Related Topics, pp. 619-629. Chichester, New York, Singapore: John Wiley & Sons.
16. Hatcher A. G. 1951. “The Use of the Progressive Form in English: A New Approach”. Language, vol. 27, no 3, pp. 254-280. DOI: 10.2307/409755
17. Leech G. 2004. Meaning and the English Verb. London: Pearson Education ltd. 
18. Leitner C. 1986. “Reporting the ‘Events of the Day'’ Uses and Function of Reported Speech”. Studia Anglica Posnaniensia, vol. 18, pp. 189-204.
19. Marchand H. 1955. “On a Question of Aspect: A Comparison between the Progressive Form in English and That in Italian and Spanish”. Studia Linguistica, vol. 9, no 1, pp. 45-52. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9582.1955.tb00516.x
20. Matthews R. 1987. “Present Perfect Tenses: Towards an Integrated Functional Account”. In: Schopf A. (ed.). Essays on Tensing in English, vol. 1, pp. 111-176. Tübingen: Niemeyer. DOI: 10.1515/9783111358369-006
21. McKay J. H. 1978. “Some Problems in the Analysis of Point of View in Reported Discourse”. Centrum, vol. 6, no 1, pp. 5-26.
22. Online Etymological Dictionary. “Present”. Accessed on 3 June 2017. http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=present