Cover not available
Article published In:
International Journal of Chinese Linguistics
Vol. 8:2 (2021) ► pp.177–203

Perfective aspect and perfect aspect

The case of Russian and Mandarin Chinese

| Jiangsu Normal University
| Shanghai International Studies University
| Xi’an International Studies University
| Shanghai International Studies University
| Dalian Minzu University

The “perfective” (Chinese term: wánzhěngtǐ) and the “perfect”(Chinese term: wánchéngtǐ) seem to be two different terms that are distinguished by definition. But in the description of actual languages, the boundary between them is not clear. The use of these two terms in many literatures is very arbitrary. This arbitrariness frequently causes confusion in typological studies in tense and aspect. This arbitrary use has a lot to do with the classification and definition of Comrie (1976). Based on a description of the perfective/imperfective distinction in Russian, this paper finds that perfective is sensitive to the inner boundaries of events, and perfect is sensitive to the relation between event time and reference time. Based on a description of the four aspectual markers (zhe, le, guo, and zai) in Mandarin Chinese, this paper finds that they respectively express three different event phases (inchoative, durative and terminative) in realization aspect. The present study shows that Mandarin is not a language sensitive to boundaries of events, but to phasal aspect. Phasal aspect also exists in Japanese.

Keywords: perfective/imperfective, perfect/imperfect, phasal aspect, Russian, Mandarin Chinese
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Previous definitions of perfect aspect and perfective aspect
  • 3.Cores of Russian perfective aspect and imperfective aspect
  • 4.The distinguishing oppositions of Russian perfective aspect and imperfective aspect
  • 5.Division and functions of aspect in Mandarin
    • 5.1“chi” + “le”
    • 5.2“chi” + “guo”
    • 5.3“chi” + “zai”
    • 5.4“Chi” + “zhe”
    • 5.5The aspect categories corresponding to tense and aspectual markers
  • 6.Present relevance does not belong to distinguishing features of perfect
  • 7.Mandarin perfective aspect
  • 8.Summary
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 21 January 2022
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ijchl.20003.jin
References
Шведова Натаия Юьевна, т. д.
(1980) Русская грамматика. АН СССР, т. I. Mосква: Наука.Google Scholar
Bertinetto, P. M. & Delfitto, D.
(2000) Aspect vs actionality: Why they should be kept apart. In Ö. Dahl. (Ed.), Tense and Aspect in the Languages of Europe, 189–225. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Bybee, J. L. & Dahl, O.
(1989) The creation of tense and aspect systems in the languages of the world. Studies in Language, 131, 51–103. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bybee, J. L., Perkins, R. & Pagliuca, W.
(1994) The evolution of grammar: Tense, aspect, and modality in the languages of the world. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Chen, Q. -R.
(2008) Hanyu Timao Yanjiu De Leixingxue Shiye [A Typological Study on Chinese Aspectual System]. Beijing: The Commercial Press.Google Scholar
(2016) Wanchengti yu jingliti de leixingxue sikao [Typological considerations on perfect and experiential aspects]. Waiyu Jiaoxue Yu Yanjiu, 61, 803–814.Google Scholar
Chen, Q. -R. & Hu, Y.
(2015) Ciwei he juwei “le” de fenxi moshi [The analytical models of verb-final le and sentence-final le]. Hanyushi Xuebao, 11, 77–92.Google Scholar
(2016) Ciwei he juwei “le” de duogongneng moshi [The multifunctional model of verb-final le and sentence-final le]. Yuyan Jiaoxue Yu Yanjiu, 41, 66–74.Google Scholar
Comrie, B.
(1976) Aspect: An introduction to the study of verbal aspect and related problems. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Dahl, Ö.
(1985) Tense and aspect systems. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Dahl, Ö. & Velupillai, V.
(2013) Perfective/imperfective aspect. In M. S. Dryer & M. Haspelmath. (Eds.), Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. (available online at [URL], accessed on 2019-07-10).
Dai, Y. -J.
(1994) Lun xiandai hanyu shixianti de sanxiang yuyi tezheng [The three semantic features of modern Chinese realization aspect]. Fudan Xuebao (Shehui Kexue Ban), 21, 95–100.Google Scholar
(1997) Xiandai Hanyu Shiti Xitong Yanjiu [A Study on Chinese Tense and Aspect Systems]. Zhejiang: Zhejiang Education Press.Google Scholar
Givón, T.
(1982) Tense-aspect-modality: The creole prototype and beyond. In P. J. Hopper. (Ed.), Tense-Aspect: Between Semantics and Pragmatics, 115–163. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Guo, R.
(1993) Hanyu dongci de guocheng jiegou [A systematic analysis verbs representing course of event in Chinese]. Zhongguo Yuwen, 61, 410–419.Google Scholar
Hopper, P. J.
(1982) Aspect between discourse and grammar: an introductory essay for the volume. In P. J. Hopper. (Ed.), Tense-Aspect: Between Semantics and Pragmatics, 3–18. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hu, Y. & Chen, Q. -R.
(2017) “Le” de wanchengti yu wanzhengti gongneng de lianghua fenxi jiqi lilun yiyi [A quantitative analysis of the perfect and perfective functions of le and its theoretical significance]. Shijie Hanyu Jiaoxue, 31, 327–346.Google Scholar
Isao, I.
(2018) A comparative study of the tense-aspect system between Japanese and English: A foundation for a pedagogical grammar of Japanese using learners’ knowledge of their mother tongues. Hitotsubashi Journal of Arts and Sciences, 59(1), 1–16.Google Scholar
Jacobsen, W. M.
(2018) Tense and aspect. In Y. Hasegawa. (Ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of Japanese Linguistics, 332–356. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Jannah, A. N., Sumarlam, S. & Dwi, P.
(2019) The perfective aspect of compound verbs in Japanese. 3rd English Language and Literature International Conference (ELLiC) Proceedings, 31, 362–367.Google Scholar
Jin, L. -X.
(2000) Yufa De Duoshijiao Yanjiu [A Multi-Dimensional Study of Grammar]. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.Google Scholar
(2002) Ciwei “le” de shiti yiyi jiqi jufa tiaojian [The aspectual significance of the suffix le and its syntactic conditions]. Shijie Hanyu Jiaoxue, 11, 34–43.Google Scholar
(2003a) “S + le” de shiti yiyi jiqi jufa tiaojian [The grammatical meaning of “S + le” structure and its syntactic requirements]. Yuyan Jiaoxue Yu Yanjiu, 21, 38–48.Google Scholar
(2003b) “Zhe” “le” “guo” shiti yiyi de duili jiqi jufa tiaojian [The opposition of temporal and aspectual significances of “zhe”, “le” and “guo” and their syntactic conditions]. The 7th international Chinese teaching seminar (pp. 377–388). Beijing: Peking University Press.Google Scholar
(2004) Hanyu shiti biaoxian de tedian jiqi yanjiu fangfa [The characteristics of tense and aspect in Chinese and research methods]. An international collection of papers on tense and aspect in Chinese (pp. 54–66). Shanghai: Baijia Press.Google Scholar
(2004/2009) “Shi” “ti” fanchou de benzhi tezheng jiqi yunhan gongxing [The essential characteristics and implicational universals of tense and aspect]. Formal and functional linguistic research on Chinese (pp. 322–345). Beijing: The Commercial Press.Google Scholar
(2015) Guanyu “jiu” he “cai” ruogan wenti de jieshi [On some problems about jiu and cai in Mandarin Chinese]. Yuyan Jiaoxue Yu Yanjiu, 61, 35–44.Google Scholar
Jin, L. -X. & Shao, J.
(2010) Charles N. Li deng “lun hanyu wanchengti biaojici ‘le’ de yuyong qudong yinsu” zhong mouxie guandian shangque [Charles N. Li et al.’s “the discourse motivation for the perfect aspect: the Mandarin particle le” revisited]. Dangdai Yuyanxue, 41, 319–325.Google Scholar
Karimata, S.
(2015) Ryukyan languages: A grammar overview. In M. Shibatani & T. Kageyama. (Eds.), Handbook of Japanese Languages and Linguistics. Vol 11 1.Google Scholar
Kiparsky, P.
(1998) Partitive case and aspect. In M. Butt & W. Geuder. (Eds.), The Projection of Arguments: Lexical and Compositional Factors, 265–308. Stanford: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Li, C. N., Thompson, S. A. & Thompson, R. M.
(1982) The discourse motivation for the perfect aspect: The Mandarin particle LE. In P. J. Hopper. (Ed.), Tense-Aspect: Between Semantics and Pragmatics, 19–44. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Reichenbach, H.
(1947) Elements of symbolic logic. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Sasse, H. J.
(2002) Recent activity in the theory of aspect: Accomplishments, achievements, or just non-progressive state? Linguistic Typology, 61, 199–271. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Smith, C. S.
(1997) The parameter of aspect (2nd ed.). Dordrecht: Kluwer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Toshiyuki, O.
(1999) Tense and Aspect. In N. T. Tsujimura. (Ed.) The Handbook of Japanese Linguistics, 326–348. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Vendler, Z.
(1957) Verbs and times. The Philosophical Review, 66(2), 143–160. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wu, F. -X.
(2005) Hanyu tibiaoji “le” “zhe” weishenme buneng qiangzhixing shiyong [On the non-obligatory status of the Mandarin aspect markers “le” and “zhe”]. Dangdai Yuyanxue, 31, 237–250.Google Scholar
Yoko, H.
(2018) The Cambridge Handbook of Japanese Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Yu, X. -J.
(2013/2019) A typological approach to tense and aspect in English and Chinese: Tense-aspect universals and ERS tense-aspect structures. PhD Dissertation, Shanghai International Studies University.
Zhang, B. -J.
(2000) Lun “ba” ziju de jushi yuyi [The pattern and meaning of “ba” sentences]. Yuyan Yanjiu, 11, 28–40.Google Scholar