Cover not available
Part of
The Spanish and the Portuguese Present Perfect in Discourse
Lukas Müller
[Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 279] 2023
► pp. 259–269

Bibliography

Adli, A. 2015. What you like is not what you do: Acceptability and frequency in syntactic variation. In Variation in Language: Usage-based vs. System-based Approaches, A. Adli, M. García García & G. Kaufmann (eds), 173–200. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Aissen, J. 2003. Differential object marking: Iconicity vs. economy. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 21(3): 435–483. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Altshuler, D. 2016. Events, States and Times. Warsaw: De Gruyter Open. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Amaral, P. & Howe, C. 2012. Nominal and verbal plurality in the diachrony of the Portuguese Present Perfect. In Verbal Plurality and Distributivity, P. Cabredo Hofherr & B. Laca (eds), 25–54. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Asher, N. & Lascarides, A. 2003. Logics of conversation. Studies in Natural Language Processing. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Azpiazu Torres, S. 2015. El antepresente de noticias recientes en la prensa digital Española. Rilce. Revista de Filología Hispánica 31(2): 341–364. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2017. El sistema ps/pc en francés y español del s. xvii. estudio contrastivo a partir de la traducción del Quijote De César Oudin. Orillas. Rivista d’Ispanistica 6: 527–551.Google Scholar
2019. La composicionalidad temporal del perfecto compuesto en Español: Estudio sincrónico y dialectal. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2021. The impact of the simultaneity vector on the temporal-aspectual development of the perfect tense in romance languages. In The Perfect Volume. Papers on the Perfect [Studies in Language Companion Series 217], K. Melum Eide & M. Fryd (eds), 213–240. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bach, E. 1981. On time, tense, and aspect: An essay in English metaphysics. In Radical Pragmatics, P. Cole (Ed.), 63–81. New York NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Barbosa Bertucci, J. 2008. Tenho feito/fiz a tese: Uma proposta de caracterização do pretérito perfeito no Português. PhD dissertation, Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP).
Barr, D. J., Levy, R., Scheepers, C. & Tily, H. J. 2013. Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal. Journal of Memory and Language 68(3): 255–278. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bartens, A. & Kempas, I. 2007. Sobre el valor aspectual del pretérito perfecto en el Español peninsular: Resultados de una prueba de reconocimiento realizada entre informantes universitarios. Revista de Investigación Lingüística 10: 151–171.Google Scholar
Bary, C. L. A. 2009. Aspect in Ancient Greek. A Semantic Analysis of the Aorist and Imperfective. PhD dissertation, Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen.
Bates, D., Maechler, M., Bolker, B. & Walker, S. 2015. Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software 67(1): 1–48. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Becker, M. 2010a. Die ingredienzen des romanischen imperfekts. Linguistische Berichte 221: 79–108.Google Scholar
2010b. Passé composé versus passé simple alles passé? Romanische Forschungen 122(1): 3–27. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2016. O pretérito perfeito composto em diacronia – Uma evolução perfeita? Estudos de Lingüística Galega 8: 25–43. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2020a. Das pretérito perfeito composto – Ein Perfekt? Zur Semantik und Diachronie der ter + partizip-Konstruktion. In Zwischen Sprechen und Sprache / Entre fala e língua [Iberolinguistica. Studien zur Sprach- und Kulturwissenschaft 4], B. Meisnitzer & E. Pustka (eds), 83–110. Frankfurt: Peter Lang. (Cited version is a manuscript numbered 1–22).Google Scholar
2022. More about the ppc – The ppc and its interaction with quantifiers in a diachronic perspective. In Micro-variation and Complex Systems Theory in the Study of Portuguese Grammar, D. Gerards, B. Meinsitzer & A. Wall (eds). PhiN. Philologie im Netz: Beiheft 28: 56–89.Google Scholar
Becker, M. & Egetenmeyer, J. 2018. A prominence-based account of temporal discourse structure. Lingua 214: 28–58. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bertinetto, P. M. & Lenci, A. 2012. Habituality, pluractionality, and imperfectivity. In The Oxford Handbook of Tense and Aspect, R. I. Binnick (ed.), 852–880. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Bertinetto, P. M. & Squartini, M. 2000. The simple and compound past in romance languages. In Tense and Aspect in the Languages of Europe, Ö. Dahl (ed.), 403–439. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Bonami, O., Godard, D. & Kampers-Manhe, B. 2004. Adverb classification. In Handbook of French Semantics, F. Corblin & H. de Swart (eds), 143–184. Stanford CA: CSLI.Google Scholar
Botne, R. & Kershner, T. L. 2008. Tense and cognitive space: On the organization of tense/aspect systems in Bantu languages and beyond. Cognitive Linguistics 19(2): 145–218. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brocher, A. & von Heusinger, K. 2018. A dual-process activation model: Processing definiteness and information status. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics 3(1: 108): 1–34. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Burgos, J. M. 2015. El pretérito perfecto compuesto en el ámbito hispánico. Anuario de Letras. Lingüística y Filología 3: 87–130. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bybee, J., Perkins, R. & Pagliuca, W. 1994. The Evolution of Grammar: Tense, Aspect, and Modality in the Languages of the World. Chicago IL: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Cabredo Hofherr, P., Carvalho, S. & Laca, B. 2010. When perfect means “plural”: The present perfect in northeastern Brazilian Portuguese. In Layers of Aspect, P. Cabredo Hofherr & B. Laca (eds), 67–100. Chicago IL: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Campos, M. H. C. 1986. L’opposition du Portugais pretérito perfeito simples – Pretérito perfeito composto. In Actes du XVII Congrès International de Linguistique et Philologie Romanes, H. J. Verkuyl, H. de Swart & A. van Hout (eds), 409–422. Aix-Marseille: Publications Université de Provence.Google Scholar
Carrasco Gutiérrez, A. 2008. Los tiempos compuestos del Español: Formación, interpretación y sintaxis. In Tiempos compuestos y formas verbales complejas, A. Carrasco Gutiérrez (ed.), 13–64. Madrid: Iberoamericana Editorial. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Carston, R.1998. Informativeness, relevance and scalar implicature. In Relevance Theory: Applications and Implications [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 37], R. Carston & S. Uchida (eds), 179–236. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chamorro, M. D. P. 2012. Pluractionality and Aspectual Structure in the Galician Spanish Tener-Perfect. PhD dissertation, The Ohio State University.
Civardi, E. & Bertinetto, P. M. 2015. The semantics of degree verbs and the telicity issue. Borealis: An International Journal of Hispanic Linguistics 4(1): 57–77. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Comrie, B. 1976. Aspect. An Introduction to the Study of Verbal Aspect and Related Problems. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Dahl, Ö. 1985. Tense and Aspect Systems. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
2013. How telicity creates time. Journal of Slavic Linguistics 21(1): 45–76. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dahl, Ö. & Hedin, E. 2000. Current relevance and event reference. In Tense and Aspect in the Languages of Europe, Ö. Dahl (ed.), 385–401. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Davies, M. & Ferreira, M. 2006. Corpus do Português: 45 million words, 1300s-1900s. <[URL]> (2 September 2022).
De Oliveira, L. C. 2010. Estágio da gramaticalização do pretérito perfeito composto no Espanhol escrito de sete capitais Hispano-Falantes. PhD dissertation, Federal University of Santa Catarina, Florianópolis.
Declerck, R., Reed, S. & Cappelle, B. 2006. The Grammar of the English Verb Phrase. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
Depraetere, I. 1998. On the resultative character of present perfect sentences. Journal of Pragmatics 29(5): 597–613. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dery, J. E. 2012. Scene-salience-driven Effects in Discourse Processing. PhD dissertation, State University of New York at Buffalo.
Dessì Schmid, S. 2014. Aspektualität: Ein onomasiologisches Modell am Beispiel der romanischen Sprachen. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2006. Aspect and pragmatics. the passé composé in old French and the old Spanish perfecto compuesto. In Change in Verbal Systems. Issues on Explanation, K. Eksell & T. Vinther (eds), 47–72. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
2018. Te lo tengo dicho muchas veces. Resultatives between coercion, relevance and reanalysis. Open Linguistics 4: 260–279. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dowty, D. R. 1979. Word Meaning and Montague Grammar. Dordrecht: Reidel. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1986. The effects of aspectual class on the temporal structure of discourse: Semantics or pragmatics? Linguistics and Philosophy 9(1): 37–61. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Enfield, N.2008. Transmission biases in linguistic epidemiology. Journal of Language Contact 2(1): 299–310. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Enç, M. 1986. Towards a referential analysis of temporal expressions. Linguistics and Philosophy 9: 405–426. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fauconnier, G. 1997. Mappings in Thought and Language. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fernández, L. G. 1999. Los complementos adverbiales temporales: La subordinación temporal. In Gramática descriptiva de la lengua Española, Vol. 2, I. Bosque & V. Demonte (eds), 3129–3208. Madrid: Espasa.Google Scholar
Ferreira, M. 2017. On the indexicality of portuguese past tenses. Journal of Semantics 34(4): 633–657. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Filip, H. 2012. Lexical aspect. In The Oxford Handbook of Tense and Aspect, Robert I. Binnick (ed.), 721–751. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Fleischman, S. 1983. From pragmatics to grammar: Diachronic reflections on complex pasts and futures in romance. Lingua 60: 183–214. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fournier, N. 1998. Grammaire du Français classique. Paris: Belin Education.Google Scholar
García Fajardo, J. 2011. He esperado, he vuelto y he vivido: Su valor semántico en el Español de México. Nueva Revista de Filología Hispánica 2: 419–446. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
García Fernández, L. 1999. El perfecto continuativo. Verba: Anuario Galego de Filoloxia 27: 343–358.Google Scholar
2007. Características aspectuales de los predicados de estado. In El tiempo y los eventos, B. Camus Bergareche (ed.), 95–128. Castilla-La Mancha: Ediciones de La Universidade Castilla-La Mancha.Google Scholar
García Fernández, L. & Martínez-Atienza, M. 2003. La expresión de los eventos inconclusos en Español. Revista Española de Lingüística 33(1): 29–67.Google Scholar
Giorgi, A. & Pianesi, F. 1997. Tense and Aspect: From Semantics to Morphosyntax [Oxford Studies in Comparative Syntax]. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Grice, H. P. 1975. Logic and conversation. In Syntax and Semantics, Vol. 3: Speech Acts, P. Cole & J. L. Morgan (eds), 41–58. New York NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Grønn, A. & von Stechow, A. 2016. Tense. In The Cambridge Handbook of Formal Semantics, M. Aloni & P. Dekker (eds), 313–341. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Grønn, A. and von Stechow, A. (2020). The Perfect. In The Wiley Blackwell Companion to Semantics, D. Gutzmann, L. Matthewson, C. Meier, H. Rullmann and T. Zimmermann (eds), DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gutzmann, D. 2013. Expressives and beyond: An introduction to varieties of use-conditional meaning. In Beyond Expressives: Explorations in Use-conditional Meaning, D. Gutzmann & H.-M. Gärtner (eds), 1–58. Leiden: Brill. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gvozdanović, J. 2012. Perfective and imperfective aspect. In The Oxford Handbook of Tense and Aspect, R. I. Binnick & M.-E. Ritz (eds), 781–802. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Hallman, P. 2009. Proportions in time: Interactions of quantification and aspect. Natural Language Semantics 17(1): 29–61. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Harris, M. 1982. The “past simple” and the “present perfect” in romance. In Studies in the Romance Verb, N. Vincent & M. Harris (eds), 42–70. London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar
Haßler, G. 2016. Temporalität, Aspektualität und Modalität in romanischen Sprachen. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heim, I. & Kratzer, A. 1998. Semantics in Generative Grammar. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Heine, B. 2003. Grammaticalization. In The Handbook of Historical Linguistics, Brian D. Joseph & Richard D. Janda (eds), 575–601. Oxford: Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Henderson, C. 2005. Aspectos semánticos pragmáticos y discursivos del pretérito perfecto compuesto. XVI Congreso de Romanistas Escandinavos, Roskilde-Copenhague.Google Scholar
2010. El pretérito perfecto compuesto del español de Chile, Paraguay y Uruguay: Aspectos semánticos y discursivos. PhD dissertation, Stockholm University.
von Heusinger, K. 2002. Specificity and definiteness in sentence and discourse structure. Journal of Semantics 19(3): 245–274. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
von Heusinger, K. & Schumacher, P. 2019. Discourse prominence: Definition and application. Journal of Pragmatics 154: 117–127. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Himmelmann, N. & Primus, B. 2015. Prominence beyond prosody – A first approximation. In pS-prominenceS: Prominences in Linguistics. Proceedings of the International Conference, A. De Dominicis (ed.), 38–58. Viterbo: Disucom Press.Google Scholar
Hinrichs, E. 1981. Temporale Anaphora im Englischen. Magisterarbeit, Universität Tübingen.Google Scholar
Holmes, B. C. & Balukas, C. 2011. Yesterday, all my troubles have seemed (pp) so far away: Variation in pre-hodiernal perfective expression in peninsular spanish. In Selected Proceedings of the 5th Workshop on Spanish Sociolinguistics, J. Michnowicz & R. Dodsworth (eds), 79–89. Somerville MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.Google Scholar
Howe, C. 2013. The Spanish Perfects. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Howe, C. & Schwenter, S. A. 2003. Present perfect for preterite across spanish dialects. Penn Working Papers in Linguistics 9(2): 61–75.Google Scholar
Hundertmark-Santos Martins, M. T. 2014. Portugiesische Grammatik, 3rd edn. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hurtado González, S. 1998. El perfecto simple y el perfecto compuesto en el Español actual: Estado de la cuestión. Epos: Revista de Filología 14: 51–67. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Iatridou, S., Anagnostopoulou, E. & Izvorski, R. 2003. Observations about the form and meaning of the perfect. In Perfect Explorations, A. Alexiadou, M. Rathert & A. von Stechow (eds), 153–205. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ilari, R. 2001. Notas sobre o passado composto em Português. Intuições compartilhadas. Revista Letras 55: 129–152. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ilari, R. & Basso, R. M. 2008. O verbo. In Gramática do Português culto falado no Brasil: Classes de palavras e processos de construção, R. Ilari & M. H. de Moura Neves (eds), 163–365. Campinas SP: Editora da Unicamp.Google Scholar
Inoue, K. 1979. An analysis of the English present perfect. Linguistics 17: 561–590. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jara, M. 2009. El pretérito perfecto simple y el pretérito perfecto compuesto en las variedades del Español peninsular y americano. Signo y Seña 20: 263–291.Google Scholar
Jasinskaja, K., Chiriacescu, S., Donazzan, M., von Heusinger, K. & Hinterwimmer, S. 2015. Prominence in discourse. In pS-prominenceS: Prominences in Linguistics. Proceedings of the International Conference, A. De Dominicis (ed.), 134–153. Viterbo: Disucom Press.Google Scholar
Jasinskaja, K. and Karagjosova, E. (2020). Rhetorical Relations. In The Wiley Blackwell Companion to Semantics, D. Gutzmann, L. Matthewson, C. Meier, H. Rullmann and T. Zimmermann (eds), DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kamp, H. 2013. Deixis in discourse. Reichenbach on temporal reference. In Meaning and the Dynamics of Interpretation, K. von Heusinger & A. ter Meulen (eds), 105–159. Leiden: Brill. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kamp, H. & Reyle, U. 1993. From Discourse to Logic [Studies in Linguistics and Philosophy 42]. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
Kamp, H. & Rohrer, C. 1983. Tense in texts. In Meaning, Use, and Interpretation of Language, R. Bäuerle, C. Schwarze & A. von Stechow (eds), 250–269. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1985. Temporal reference in French. Ms, University of Stuttgart.Google Scholar
Kamp, H., van Genabith, J. & Reyle, U. 2011. Discourse representation theory. In Handbook of Philosophical Logic, 2nd edn, D. M. Gabbay & F. Guenthner (eds), 125–394. Dordrecht: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kaplan, D. 1999. The meaning of ouch and oops: Explorations in the theory of meaning as use. Ms, UCLA.Google Scholar
Kato, M. A. & Martins, A. M. 2016. European Portuguese and Brazilian Portuguese: An overview on word order. In The Handbook of Portuguese Linguistics, W. L. Wetzels, J. Costa, S. Menuzzi (eds), 15–40. Wiley Online Library. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kempas, I. 2002. Sobre las actitudes de estudiantes Españoles hacia el uso del pretérito perfecto prehodiernal en comparación con las de estudiantes santiagueños (Argentina). Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 103: 435–447.Google Scholar
2006a. Estudio sobre el uso del pretérito perfecto prehodiernal en el Español peninsular y en comparación con la variedad del Español Argentino hablada en Santiago del Estero. Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 107(3): 375–377.Google Scholar
2006b. “Me alegro de que por fin hayas visto a rafa ayer”. Acerca del uso del pretérito perfecto en los contextos prehodiernales: Caso Santiago del Estero, Argentina. Língua Americana 18: 9–26.Google Scholar
2008a. El pretérito indefinido y el pretérito perfecto aorístico en combinación con el adverbio hoy. Vox Romanica 66: 182–204.Google Scholar
2008b. La elección de los tiempos verbales aorísticos en contextos hodiernales: Sinopsis de datos empeíticos recogidos en la España peninsular. In Actas del XXXVII Simposio Internacional de la Sociedad España de Lingüística (SEL), 397–408. Pamplona: Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad de Navarra.Google Scholar
2009. El uso prehodiernal del pretírito perfecto desde el punto de vista de la deixis personal. Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 110: 177–196.Google Scholar
2017. ¿“pre-presente” o “pretérito perfecto compuesto aoristizado”? una mirada sobre dos planteamientos opuestos respecto a un cambio lingüístico en curso. Moenia 23: 239–256.Google Scholar
Klein, W. 1992. The present perfect puzzle. Language 68: 525–552. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1994. Time in Language. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
2000. An analysis of the german Perfekt. Language 76: 358–382. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2009. How time is encoded. In The Expression of Time, W. Klein & P. Li (eds), 39–81. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Koch, P. & Oesterreicher, W. 1985. Sprache der Nähe – Sprache der Distanz. Romanistisches Jahrbuch 36: 15–43. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Krifka, M. 2008. Basic notions of information structure. Acta Linguistica Hungarica 55: 243–276. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Krifka, M., Pelletier, F. J., Carlson, G. N., Ter Meulen, A., Chierchia, G. & Link, G. 1995. Genericity: An introduction. In The Generic Book, G. N. Carlson & F. J. Pelletier (eds), 1–124. Chicago IL: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Laca, B. 2008. Perfect semantics: How universal are ibero-american present perfects? In Selected proceedings of the 12th Hispanic Linguistics Symposion, C. Borgonovo, M. Español-Echevarría, & P. Prévost (eds), 1–16. Somerville MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.Google Scholar
2009. Acerca de los perfectos en las variedades ibero-americanas. In Romanística sin complejos. Homenaje a Carmen Pensado, F. Sánchez-Miret (ed.), 357–380. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Leal, A., Oliveira, F. & Silva, F. 2014. Pretérito perfeito composto e quantificação em Português Europeu. In Textos Selecionados, XXIX Encontro Nacional da Associação Portuguesa de Linguística, A. Moreno, F. Silva, I. Falé, I. Pereira & J. Veloso (eds), 407–418. Porto: API.Google Scholar
Lenth, R. 2020. Emmeans: Estimated marginal means, aka least-squares means. R package version 1.5.1.Google Scholar
Leonetti, M. 2018. Temporal anaphora with spanish imperfecto. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 47: 391–409. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lindstedt, J. 2008. The perfect – aspectual, temporal and evidential. In Tense and Aspect in the Languages of Europe 6, Ö. Dahl (ed.), 365–384. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lipski, J. M. 2012. Geographical and social varieties of Spanish: An overview. In The Handbook of Hispanic Linguistics, J. I. Hualde, A. Olarrea & E. O’Rourke (eds), 1–26. Wiley Online Library. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lohnstein, H. 2011. Formale Semantik und natürliche Sprache. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lope Blanch, J. M. 1972. Sobre el uso del pretérito en el Español hablado de México. In Estudios sobre el Español de México, J. M. Lope Blanch (ed.), 130–143. México City: Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México.Google Scholar
Maienborn, C. 2003. Against a Davidsonian analysis of copula sentences. In NELS 33 Proceedings, M. Kadowaki & S. Kawahara (eds), 167–186. Amherst MA: GLSA.Google Scholar
Maienborn, C. & Schäfer, M. 2012. Adverbs and adverbials. In Handbücher zur Sprach- und Kommunikationswissenschaft: Semantics, C. Maienborn, K. von Heusinger & P. Portner (eds), 1390–1420. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mani, I., Pustejovsky, J. & Gaizauskas, R. 2005. The Language of Time: A Reader. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Mann, W. C. & Thompson, S. A. 1988. Rhetorical structure theory: Toward a functional theory of text organization. Text 8(3): 243–281.Google Scholar
McCawley, J. D. 1971. Tense and time reference in English. In Studies in Linguistic Semantics, C. J. Fillmore & D. T. Langendoen (eds), 96–113. New York NY: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
McCoard, R. W. 1978. The English Perfect: Tense Choice and Pragmatic Inferences. Amsterdam: North Holland.Google Scholar
Meisnitzer, B. 2015. Tempusgebrauch im spanisch-deutschen Sprachvergleich: Was leisten Tempora eigentlich? In Aktuelle Perspektiven der kontrastiven Sprachwissenschaft. Deutsch-Spanisch-Portugiesisch: Zwischen Tradition und Innovation, M. Meliss & B. Pöll (eds), 77–104. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
Michaelis, L. A. 1994. The ambiguity of the English present perfect. Journal of Linguistics 30(1): 111–157. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mittwoch, A. 1988. Aspects of English aspect: On the interaction of perfect, progressive, and durational phrases. Linguistics and Philosophy 11, 203–254. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Moens, M. 1987. Tense, Aspect and Temporal Reference. PhD dissertation, University of Edinburgh.
Móia, T. 2000. Identifying and Computing Temporal Locating Adverbials. PhD dissertation, University of Lisbon.
Molsing, K. V. 2006. The present perfect at the semantics/pragmatics interface: American English and Brazilian Portuguese. Sinn und Bedeutung 10: 239–250. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2007. Universal and existential perfects in Brazilian Portuguese. Revista Letras (Curitiba) 73: 131–150.Google Scholar
2010. The Present Perfect: An Exercise in the Study of Events, Plurality and Aspect. PhD dissertation, Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul.
Montague, R. 1973. The proper treatment of quantification in ordinary English. In Approaches to Natural Language, P. Suppes, J. Moravcsik & J. Hintikka (eds), 221–242. Dordrecht: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Montoro del Arco, E. T. 2017. El pretérito perfecto compuesto con valor aorístico en el habla urbana de granada. Rivista d’Ispanistica 6: 455–470.Google Scholar
Moreno de Alba, J. 1978. Valores de las formas verbales en el Español de México. México City: Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México.Google Scholar
Moreno-Torres Sánchez, I. 1999. Perfecto simple y perfecto compuesto: De la gramática al discurso. ELUA. Estudios de Lingüística 13: 229–250. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Müller, L. 2017. Die zentralen und peripheren Lesarten des portugiesischen Perfekts – Eine explorative Studie für ein integratives Modell. MA thesis, University of Cologne. DOI logo
Musan, R. 2002. The German Perfect: Its Semantic Composition and its Interactions with Temporal Adverbials. Dordrecht: Kluwer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nedjalkov, V. P. & Jaxontov, S. J. 1988. The typology of resultative constructions. In Typology of Resultative Constructions. Translated from the Original Russian Edition (1983) [Typological Studies in Language 12]. V. P. Nedjalkov (Ed.), tranlation edited by B. Comrie, 3–62. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Newman, P. 1980. The Classification of Chad within Afroasiatic. Leiden: Universitaire Pers.Google Scholar
Nishiyama, A. & Koenig, J.-P. 2010. What is a perfect state? Language 86: 611–646. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Olbertz, H. 2018. The perfect in (Brazilian) Portuguese: A functional discourse grammar view. Open Linguistics 4: 478–508. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Oliveira, F. & Leal, A. 2012. Sobre a iteração do pretérito perfeito composto em Português Europeu. Revista de Estudos Linguísticos da Univerdade do Porto 7: 65–88.Google Scholar
Pakerys, J. 2018. On the development of past habitual from iterative in Lithuanian. Baltistica 52(2): 295–323. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Parsons, T. 1990. Events in the Semantics of English: A Study in Subatomic Semantics. Cambridge: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Partee, B. H. 1973. Some structural analogies between tenses and pronouns in English. Journal of Philosophy 70(18): 601–609. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1984. Nominal and temporal anaphora. Linguistics and Philosophy 7(3): 243–286. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pato, E. & Heap, D. 2008. La organización dialectal del Castellano: La distribución de las formas canté vs. he cantado en el Español peninsular. In Actas del VII Congreso Internacional de Historia de la Lengua Española: Merida (Yucatán), 4–8 septiembre de 2006, C. C. Company & J. G. M. de Alba (eds), 927–942. La Muralla: Arco Libros.Google Scholar
Perelman, C. & Olbrechts-Tyteca, L. 1971. The New Rhetoric: A Treatise on Argumentation. Notre Dame IN: University of Notre Dame Press.Google Scholar
Pinker, S. 2007. The Stuff of Thought: Language as a Window into Human Nature. London: Penguin.Google Scholar
Popper, K. 1935. Logik der Forschung – Zur Erkenntnistheorie der modernen Naturwissenschaft. Wien: Julius Springer.Google Scholar
Portner, P. 2003. The temporal semantics and modal pragmatics of the perfect. Linguistics & Philosophy 26: 459–510. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2012. Perfect and progressive. In Handbücher zur Sprach- und Kommunikationswissenschaft: Semantics, Vol. 2, C. Maienborn, K. von Heusinger & P. Portner (eds), 1217–1261. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
Prior, A. 1967. Past, Present and Future. Oxford: Clarendon Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
R Core Team. 2017. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.Google Scholar
Rathert, M. 2012. Adverbials. In The Oxford Handbook of Tense and Aspect, R. I. Binnick & M.-E. Ritz (eds), 237–268. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Recanati, F. 2004. Pragmatics and semantics. In The Handbook of Pragmatics, L. R. Horn & G. Ward (eds), 442–462. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Reichenbach, H. 1947. Elements of Symbolic Logic. New York NY: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Rocha, L. F. C.2017. Uma análise dos aspectos semânticos de ter, tener e haber em construções com o particípio passado, no Português Brasileiro e no Espanhol. Estudos Linguísticos 46(1): 280–295. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rodrigues Parrinha, S. 2014. Valores pragmáticos y discursivos en el uso del pretérito perfecto compuesto en Buenos Aires. In Formas simples y compuestas en el verbo Español, S. Azpiazu Torres (ed.), 103–115. Lugo: Axac.Google Scholar
2015. Sobre el uso del pretérito perfecto compuesto en el Español de Buenos Aires. In Jóvenes aportaciones a la investigación lingüística, C. J.Á. lvarez López, B. Garrido Martín & M. González Sanz (eds), 449–463. Sevilla: Ediciones Alfar.Google Scholar
Rogers, E. 1995. Diffusion of Innovations. New York NY: The Free Press.Google Scholar
Rojo, G. 1974. La temporalidad verbal en Español. Verba. Anuario Galego de Filoloxía 1: 68–149.Google Scholar
Rojo, G. & Veiga, A. 1999. El tiempo verbal. Los tiempos simples. In Gramática descriptiva de la lengua Española, Vol. II, I. Bosque & V. Demonte (eds), 2867–2934. Madrid: Espasa.Google Scholar
Rosemeyer, M. 2014. Auxiliary Selection in Spanish: Gradience, Gradualness, and Conservation [Studies in Language Companion Series 155]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rothstein, B. 2008. The Perfect Time Span: On the Present Perfect in German, Swedish and English [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 125]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Russell, B. 1905. On denoting. Mind 14(56): 479–493. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schaden, G. 2009. Present perfects compete. Linguistics and Philosophy 32(2): 115–141. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schmitt, C. 2001. Cross-linguistic variation and the present perfect: The case of Portuguese. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 19(2): 403–453. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schwenter, S. A. 1994a. The grammaticalization of an anterior in progress: Evidence from a peninsular spanish dialect. Rivista d’Ispanistica 18(1): 71–111. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1994b. “Hot news” and the grammaticalization of perfects. Linguistics 32(6): 995–1028. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schwenter, S. A. & Torres Cacoullos, R. 2008. Defaults and indeterminacy in temporal grammaticalization: The ‘perfect’ road to perfective. Language Variation and Change 20(1): 1–39. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Serrano, M. 1995. Sobre el uso del pretérito perfecto y pretérito indefinido en el Español de Canarias: Pragmática y variación. Boletín de Filología 35(1): 533–566.Google Scholar
Silge, J. & Robinson, D. 2016. Tidytext: Text mining and analysis using tidy data principles in r. JOSS 1(3), 1–3. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Smith, C. 1991. The Parameter of Aspect. Dordrecht: Kluwer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2003. Modes of Discourse. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Song, M.-Y. 2005. On the proper treatment of tense in English. Language Research 41: 829–854.Google Scholar
Spitzová, E. & Bayerová, M. 1987. Posición del perfecto compuesto en el sistema temporal del verbo en el Español de México. Études Romanes de Brno 18: 37–50.Google Scholar
Stalnaker, R. C. 1978. Assertion. In Syntax and Semantics 9: Pragmatics, P. Cole (ed.), 315–332. New York NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Suter, A. 1984. Das portugiesische Pretérito Perfeito Composto. Bern: Francke.Google Scholar
de Swart, H. 1991. Adverbs of Quantification: A Generalized Quantifier Approach. Groningen: Grodil.Google Scholar
1998. Aspect shift and coercion. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 16(2): 347–385. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2007. A cross-linguistic discourse analysis of the perfect. Journal of Pragmatics 39: 2273–2307. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2012. Verbal aspect. In The Oxford Handbook of Tense and Aspect, R. I. Binnick (ed.), 752–780. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Tenny, C. 1994. Aspectual Roles and the Syntax Semantics Interface [Studies in Linguistics and Philosophy 52]. Dodrecht: Kluwer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Veiga Rodríguez, A. 2014. Diacronía de “he cantado”/ “canté” en el sistema verbal Español. Subsistemas y variantes. In Historia del Español hoy: Estudios y perspectivas, J. L. R. Luengo & E. P. V. Upegui (eds), 151–179. Lugo: Axac.Google Scholar
Vendler, Z. 1957. Verbs and times. The Philosophical Review 66: 143–160. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Verkuyl, H. J. 2005. Aspectual composition: Surveying the ingredients. In Perspectives on Aspect, H. J. Verkuyl, H. de Swart & A. van Hout (eds), 19–40. Dordrecht: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vlach, F. 1993. Temporal adverbials, tenses, and the perfect. Linguistics and Philosophy 19: 231–283. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
von Stechow, A. 1998. Eine erweiterte Extended-Now-Theorie für Perfekt und Futur. Zeitschrift für Literaturwissenschaft und Linguistik 29(1): 86–118. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Weinrich, H. 1964. Tempus: Besprochene und erzählte Welt. Stuttgart: W. Kohlhammer.Google Scholar
1982. Textgrammatik der französischen Sprache. Stuttgart: Klett.Google Scholar
Westmoreland, M. 1988. The distribution and the use of the present perfect and the past perfect forms in american Spanish. Hispania 71(2): 379–384. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wickham, H., Averick, M., Bryan, J., Chang, W., McGowan, L. D., François, R., Grolemund, G., Hayes, A., Henry, L., Hester, J., Kuhn, M., Pedersen, T. L., Milller, E., Bache, S. M., Müller, K., Ooms, J., Robinson, D., Seidel, D. P., Spinu, V., Takahashi, K., Vaughan, D., Wilke, C., Woo, K. & Yutani, H.. 2019. Welcome to the tidyverse. Journal of Open Source Software 4(43), 1–6. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wigger, L.-G. 2005. Die Entwicklungsgeschichte der romanischen Vergangenheitstempora am Beispiel des Pretérito Perfeito Composto im Portugiesischen. PhD dissertation, University of Tübingen.
Wijffels, J. 2019. Udpipe: Tokenization, Parts of Speech Tagging, Lemmatization and Dependency Parsing with the ’UDPipe’ ’NLP’ Toolkit. R package version 0.8.3.Google Scholar
Wittgenstein, L. 1963[2016]. Tractatus Logico-philosophicus – Logisch-philosophische Abhanlung, 36th edn. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
Xiqués, T. M. 2015. Towards a Unified View of the Present Perfect. A Comparative Study on Catalan, English and Gĩkũyũ. PhD dissertation, Universitat Autónoma de Barcelona.
2021. More on hodiernality. In The Perfect Volume. Papers on the Perfect [Studies in Language Companion Series 217], K. Melum Eide & M. Fryd (eds), 181–212. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zwaan, R. A. 1996. Processing narrative time shifts. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 22(5): 1196–1207.Google Scholar