The perfective/imperfective distinction
Coercion or aspectual operators?
I defend an aspectual operator approach of the perfective/imperfective distinction against a coercion approach, as, for example, proposed for French by de Swart (1998). I propose an analysis that follows de Swart on many points, but keeps temporal and aspectual contributions separate. I argue that such an analysis has a larger cross-linguistic coverage than one that combines the two in a single operator. The argumentation is based on the aspectual system of Ancient Greek, but holds for any language in which temporal and aspectual information are encoded in separate morphemes, and in which the opposition perfective/ imperfective is not restricted to the past tense. In addition, I show that a coercion analysis is problematic for French as well.
Cited by (3)
Cited by three other publications
Mañas, Iban, Elisa Rosado, Natalia Fullana & Svetlana Alexeeva
2021.
Imperfect Spanish Meanings Acquisition by Advanced Russian Learners. Evidence from Acceptability Judgements Data.
Círculo de Lingüística Aplicada a la Comunicación 87
► pp. 17 ff.
Caudal, Patrick, Alan Dench & Laurent Roussarie
2012.
A Semantic Type-driven Account of Verb-formation Patterns in Panyjima.
Australian Journal of Linguistics 32:1
► pp. 115 ff.
Nordlinger, Rachel & Patrick Caudal
2012.
The Tense, Aspect and Modality System in Murrinh-Patha.
Australian Journal of Linguistics 32:1
► pp. 73 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 15 september 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers.
Any errors therein should be reported to them.