Cover not available
Article published In:
Narrative Inquiry
Vol. 30:2 (2020) ► pp.381–403

Grammatical uniformity of tense and aspect

Encoding narrator’s perspective and vantage point through Tense Shift

| University of Washington
This paper explores the pragmatic effects of Tense Shift in an Urdu narrative. A linguistic analysis of the semantic and pragmatic effects of Tense Shift is proposed. A key claim of this analysis is that the mechanisms of Tense Shift exist in sentence-level grammar in Urdu. The analysis seeks to provide an explanation for some of the properties of Tense Shift that have been pointed out in previous studies of Tense Shift in other languages. The paper discusses as well the extent to which this analysis is expected to apply to narratives in languages other than Urdu.
Keywords: narrative discourse, linguistic approach, tense and aspect shift, syntax, semantics, pragmatics
Article outline
  • Introduction
  • Background
    • Previous analyses
    • The markedness approach (Fleischman 1990)
    • New analytical theory: Motivations and importance
  • New approach: Grammatical Uniformity of Tense and Aspect (GUTA)
    • Theoretical background of GUTA
    • Temporal relations at sentence level
    • Temporal primitives: From sentences to narrative discourse
    • Tense and aspect in Urdu narrative and application of GUTA to Urdu examples
      • Passage 1 Umrao Jan Ada (1987, p. 39) (Urdu)
      • Passage 2 Umrao Jan Ada (1987, p. 81)
      • Present tense – progressive aspect
      • Present tense – perfect aspect
      • Past tense – perfective aspect
  • Conclusions
    • Evidence based claims
    • Linguistic claims: Tense – narrator’s location and aspect – narrator’s perception
    • Scope of GUTA across languages and narrative discourses
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 19 May 2020
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ni.19005.cha
References (23)
References
Andrews, E. (2012). Markedness. In R. I. Binnick (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Tense and Aspect (pp. 212–236). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bal, M. (1985). Narratology: Introduction to the Theory of Narrative. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
Barthes, R. (1975). An Introduction to the Structural Analysis of Narrative. (L. Duisit, Trans.). New Literary History: A Journal of Theory and Interpretation, 6(2), 237–72. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Carruthers, J. (2012). Discourse and Text. In R. I. Binnick (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Tense and Aspect (pp. 306–334). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Damsteegt, T. (2004). The Present Tense in Modern Hindi Fiction. Groningen: Egbert Forsten.Google Scholar
Demirdache, H., & Uribe-Etxebarria, M. (2000). The Primitives of Temporal Relations. In R. Martin, D. Michaels & J. Uriagereka (Eds.), Step by Step: Essays on Minimalist Syntax in Honor of Howard Lasnik (pp. 157–186). Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Fleischman, S. (1990). Tense and Narrativity from Medieval Performance to Modern Fiction. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
Fludernik, M. (1991). The Historical Present Tense Yet Again: Tense Switching and Narrative Dynamics in Oral and Quasi-Oral Storytelling. Text, 11(3), 365–98. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2003). Chronology, time, tense and experientiality in narrative. Language and Literature, 12(2), 117–134. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2012). Narratology and Literary Linguistics. In R. I. Binnick (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Tense and Aspect (pp. 75–101). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Genette, G. (1980). Narrative Discourse: An Essay in Method. Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Hopper, P. J. (1979). Aspect and Foregrounding in Discourse. In T. Givon (Ed.), Syntax and Semantics, Volume 12 Discourse and Syntax (pp. 213–241). London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Hornstein, N. (1990). As Time Goes By: Tense and Universal Grammar. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 119–165.Google Scholar
Labov, W. (1973). Narrative Analysis: Oral Versions of Personal Experience. In J. Helm (Ed.), Essays on Verbal and Visual Arts (pp. 12–44). Seattle and London: University of Washington Press.Google Scholar
Norrick, N. (2007). Conversational storytelling. In D. Herman (Ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Narrative (pp. 127–141). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Reichenbach, H. (1947). Elements of Symbolic Logic. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Rusva, M. H. (1987). Umrao Jān Adā. Delhi: Maqtaba Jamiya.Google Scholar
Schiffrin, D. (1981). Tense variation in narrative. Language, 571, 45–62. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Smith, C. (1993). The Parameter of Aspect. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
(2003). Modes of Discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Thornborrow, J. (2000). The Construction of Conflicting Accounts in Public Participation TV. Language in Society, 291, 357–77. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wallace, S. (1982). Figure and Ground: The Interrelationship of Linguistic Categories. In P. Hopper (Ed.), Studies in Transitivity (pp. 201–223). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Wolfson, N. (1982). The conversational Historical Present in American English narrative (Topics in Socio-Linguistics). Dordrecht: Foris. DOI logoGoogle Scholar