Article published in:
Language Description Informed by Theory
Edited by Rob Pensalfini, Myfany Turpin and Diana Guillemin
[Studies in Language Companion Series 147] 2014
► pp. 319–336

The case of the invisible postman

The current status of the French future tense

Three somewhat conflicting semantic theories of the Futur Simple (FS) in spoken European French are discussed here: Fleischman’s (1982) “diachronic model”, which portrays the current semantics of the FS as largely modal; Schrott’s (1997) “conditioning” model, which views both the FS and Futur Composé as temporal and modal exponents selected in terms of context of use; Sokol’s (1999) “aspectual model” which sees the FS not as a tense but as a perfective aspect marker interacting with different verb action-classes. Evidence from empirical work relating to these theories does not support the modal view of the FS, and raises some questions for the aspectual model. Robust support emerges, however, for the FS as a future tense.
Published online: 28 January 2014
https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.147.13wal
References

References

Bauche, Henri
. 1929. Le langage populaire . Paris: Payot.Google Scholar
Benveniste, Emile
. 1986. Mutations of linguistic categories. In Directions of Historical Linguistics: A Symposium , Winifred Lehmann & Yakov Malkiel (eds), 83–94. Austin TX: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
Bourciez, Eugène Joseph
. 1967. Éléments de Llinguistique romane . Paris: Klincksieck.Google Scholar
Boyd, Julian & Thorne, James
. 1969. The semantics of modal verbs. Journal of Linguistics 5: 57–74. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Brunot, Ferdinand
. 1953. La pensée et la langue . Paris: Masson.Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan L.
1985. Morphology [Typological Studies in Language 9]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bybee, Joan L, Perkins, Revere D.
. & Pagliucca, William. 1994. The Evolution of Grammar: Tense, Aspect and Modality in the Languages of the World . Chicago IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Damourette, Jacques & Pichon, Edouard
. 1931–36. Des mots à la pensée , Vol. 5 Verbe . Paris: Éditions d’Artrey.
Emirkanian, Louisette & Sankoff, David
. 1985. Le futur simple et le futur périphrastique. In Les tendances dynamiques du français parlé à Montréal , Monique Lemieux & Henrietta Cedergren (eds), 198–201. Montreal: Gouvernement du Québec.Google Scholar
Ernout, Alfred
. 1914. Morphologie historique du latin . Paris: Klincksieck.Google Scholar
Fleischman, Suzanne
. 1982. The Future in Thought and Language: Diachronic Evidence from Romance . Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Flydal, Leiv
. 1943. Aller et venir suivis de l’infinitif comme expressions de rapports temporels . Oslo: Dybwad.Google Scholar
Gobert, David & Maisier, Véronique
. 1995. Valeurs modales du futur et du conditionnel et leurs emplois en français contemporain. The French Review 68: 1003–1014.Google Scholar
Gougenheim, Georges
. 1962. Système grammatical de la langue française . Paris: d’Artrey.Google Scholar
. 1971. Étude sur les périphrases verbales de la langue française . Paris: Librairie A.G. Nizet.Google Scholar
Gougenheim, Georges, Rivenc, Paul
, Michéa, René, & Sauvageot, Aurélien. 1956. L’ Elaboration du français fondamental . Paris: Didier.Google Scholar
Grévisse, Maurice
. 1980. Le bon usage . Paris: Ducolot.Google Scholar
Hablützel, Ernst
. 1965. Der ausdruck des zukünftigen im Französischen . Winterthur: Keller.Google Scholar
Harris, Martin
. 1978. The Evolution of French Syntax: A Comparative Approach . London: Longman.Google Scholar
Helland, Hans
Petter. 1995. Futur simple et futur périphrastique: Du sens aux emplois. Revue Romane 30: 3–26.Google Scholar
Huddleston, Rodney D. & Pullum, Geoffrey
K. 2002. The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language . Cambridge: CUP. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Imbs, Paul
.1960. Emploi des temps verbaux en français moderne . Paris: Klincksieck.Google Scholar
Le Bidois, Robert & Le Bidois, George
. 1967. Syntaxe du français moderne . Paris: Auguste Picard.Google Scholar
Lightfoot, David
. 1979. Principles of Diachronic Syntax . Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Lorenz, Bettina
. 1989. Die konkurrenz zwischen dem ‘Futur Simple’ und dem ‘Futur Périphrastique’ im gesprochenen Französisch der gegenwart . Münster: Kleinheinrich.Google Scholar
Lyons, John
. 1977. Semantics . Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Nyrop, Kristoffer
. 1930. Grammaire historique de la langue française , Vol 6: Syntaxe: particules et verbes . Copenhagen: Gyldendansk.Google Scholar
Palmer, Frank R.
1986. Mood and modality . Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Poplack, Shana & Dion, Nathalie
. 2009. Prescription vs. praxis: The evolution of future temporal reference in French. Language 85(3): 557–588. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Reid, Thomas Bertram Wallace
. 1955. On the analysis of the tense system in French. Revue des Langues Romanes 19: 23–38.Google Scholar
Schrott, Angela
. 1997. Futurität im Französischen der gegenwart. Semantik und pragmatik der tempora der zukunft [Romanica Monacensia 50]. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
Sokol, Monika
. 1999. Das zusammenspiel der verbalkategorien und die französischen futura . Tübingen: Max Niemeyer.Google Scholar
Sundell, Lars-Göran
. 1991. Le temps futur en français moderne . Stockholm: Almquist & Wiksell.Google Scholar
Togeby, Knud
. 1982. Grammaire française , Vol II: Les formes personelles du verbe . Kopenhagen: Magnus Berg, Ghani Merad, Ebbe Spang-Hansen.Google Scholar
Vet, Co
. 1994. Future tense and discourse representation. In Tense and Aspect in Discourse , Co Vet & Carl Vetters (eds) 49–76. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wales, M.L.
1982. The rise of aller and Infinitive as a Periphrastic future. PhD dissertation, Monash University.
1983. The semantic distribution of aller and infinitive and the future tense in spoken French. General Linguistics 23: 19–28.Google Scholar
2007. Modal functions of future tenses in French. In Selected Papers from the 2006 meeting of the Australian Linguistic Society. Annual Meeting of the Australian Linguistic Society , Brisbane, Australia. 7–8 July, Ilana Mushin & Mary Laughren (eds), 1–14.Google Scholar
Wilmet, Marc
. 1970. Le système de l’indicatif en moyen français . Geneva: Droz.Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by other publications

Tristram, Anna
2020. Variation and change in future temporal reference with avoir and être. Journal of French Language Studies ► pp. 1 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 27 december 2020. 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.