A1. Analyze the following sentences with respect to (i) the basic aspectual class (bounded event, unbounded event, state) and (ii) the type of situation (e.g. accomplishment) they belong to. Justify your decision by using one of the diagnostic tests (e.g. type of question, preposition, or stop vs finish).

(a) Beethoven composed the Moonlight sonata.Bounded event; accomplishment: We can ask a question with how long did … take (How long did Mozart take to compose the Moonlight sonata?), use the time-span preposition in (Mozart composed the Moonshine sonata in three days), and use finish (Beethoven finished composing the Moonlight sonata after three days).

(b) Mozart received musical training from his father.Bounded event; bounded activity: We can ask a question with how long (How long did Mozart receive musical training?) and use the time-stretch preposition for (Mozart received musical training for three years).

(c) Mozart’s death occurred while he was composing his Requiem. (two situations)Mozart’s death occurred…: Bounded event; act: We can use neither the timespan nor a time-stretch question or preposition; the expression Mozart’s death occurred in this context does not invoke a preceding culminating phase, i.e. we are more likely to ask a question with when exactly (did his death occur?)rather than with when finally (did his death occur?).… while he was composing his RequiemUnbounded event; accomplishing activity

(d) Mozart is played all over the world.State; habitual state

(e) Verdi achieved his first real success with Nabucco in 1842.Bounded event; achievement

(f) Traditional opera consists of two modes of singing: recitative and aria.State; indefinitely lasting state

2. What type of activity (culminating, etc.) or state does the progressive aspect express in the following sentences?

(a) The picture is hanging on the wall.Temporary state

(b) We are losing the game.Culminating activity: The focus is on the culminating phase preceding an achievement; therefore the losing team may ultimately win the game.

(c) The phone is ringing.Iterative activity: iteration of punctual acts (d) The sun is shining.Unbounded activity; process. As with all activities, its boundaries are still implicitly present, i.e. the event will come to an end sometime.

(e) I’m sitting right over there. (pointing to my seat at the bar)

1

Temporary state. As pointed out in 8.1.2, the situation described in the progressive need not occur at the present moment. In this case, the speaker sat ona particular seat before he went to the bar and wants to resume his seat.

(f) Where are you living?Temporary state.

(g) I am missing you more and more.Temporary psychological state: The context of “increase”, i.e. ongoing change and intensity of involvement, warrants the use of the progressive.

3. What is the difference in meaning between the following pairs of sentences?

(a) I hope someone can help me. (a’) I am hoping someone can help me.(a) describes an indefinitely lasting state in a neutral way; (a’) suggests intensity of my hopes.

(b) I feel pain. (b’) I am feeling pain.(b) describes my experience of a sensation; (b’) focuses on my current awareness of the sensation, i.e. my bodily condition.

(c) The plane took off. (c’) The plane was taking off.(c) describes an achievement, i.e. the moment the plane is airborne; (c’) refers to the culminating phase of maximum runway speed just before take-off, i.e. the phase when the plane still touches the ground.

(d) You are silly. (d’) You are being silly.(d) describes an indefinitely lasting state or a person’s behaviour; (d’) only refers to a person’s temporary behaviour, i.e. it is an activity.

(e) I constantly receive junk mail. (e’) I’m constantly receiving junk mail.(e) describes a habitual state in a neutral way; (e’) suggests irritation.

(f) What did you say? (f’) What were you saying?(f) describes a bounded activity: the speaker asks about a conversation in the past in which s/he was not present; (f’) describes an unbounded activity: the speaker probably inquires about the previous topic of an ongoing conversation after an interruption.

(g) I wrote my term paper. (g’) I was writing my term paper.(g) describes an accomplishment and implies that the paper is finished; (g’) describes an accomplishing activity and invites the implicature that the term paper is not finished.B1. Supply the appropriate tense form in the following sentences and justify your decision.

(a) I hereby (renounce) all responsibility.I hereby renounce all responsibility.The adverbial hereby indicates that the sentence is meant as a performative speech act. The temporal boundaries of the present event described coincide with the time of uttering the sentence so that the use of the simple present tense is justified.

(b) I’ve bought you a little present. I (think) you might like it.I thought you might like it.

2

The sentence is probably meant in reference to the speaker’s present thoughts.Expressing one’s thoughts about the person talked to is potentially face threatening and should be mitigated. The use of the present tense (I think you might like it) therefore sounds very direct and rude. For reasons of politeness a deictic shift to the past is advisable: it has a distancing effect and therefore sounds less imposing.

(c) In March 1923 Lenin suffers his third stroke, loses the power of speech. In January 1924 Lenin (die).In January 1924 Lenin died / dies.The event happened in the past and is therefore adequately described in the past tense. Historical events in the form of a chronicle, however, tend to be presented in the historic present. The parataxis in the first sentences also signals the chronicle genre.

(d) Professor Alpers (note) the tendency of modern critics to treat metaphors as primary data in understanding Shakespeare’s plays.Professor Alpers noted / notes the tendency of modern critics to treat metaphors as primary data in understanding Shakespeare’s plays.The event occurred in the past time and may therefore be described in the past tense. Professor Alpers’ observation is then understood as a final statement on this issue. His position is, however, still discussed today. In general, academic debates tend to be seen as ongoing and timeless and hence are normally presented in the simple present tense.

(e) Oil tanker (sink) off French coast. A Maltese-registered tanker (sink) in stormy seas off north-western France last night. (newspaper article)Oil tanker sinks off French coast. A Maltese-registered tanker sank in stormy seas off north-western France last night.The events occurred in the past time. The first sentence is the headline, which forms an abstract of the story. Newspapers usually use the summary present for headlines and shift to the past tense in the body of the article.

2. Supply the appropriate tense and aspect forms in the following sentences, describe the use of the forms, and justify your decision:

(a) I only (know) him for a minute and already (hate) him.I have only known him for a minute and already hate him.The first sentence describes a state (know) which began a minute ago and stretches up to the present time and beyond. The beginning phase of the state is anterior to the present moment, hence it is expressed in the present perfect, even if has only lasted for a minute. It has current relevance for the ensuing state of hating him. This indefinitely lasting state is expressed in the present tense. It can only be expressed in the present perfect if its duration is specified, as in and have hated him ever since.

(b) I (sit) at the computer all day. My eyes are burning and my neck is stiff.I have been sitting at the computer all day.The appropriate tense to choose is the continuative present perfect progressive, which describes a temporary state reaching up to the present. The focus is on the duration of the state, which gives rise to currently relevant inferences: the burning of my eyes and my stiff neck.

(c) When the phone (ring), I (sip) coffee and (watch) TV.When the phone rang, I was sipping coffee and watching TV.The temporal clause describes a bounded event in the past, the main clause describes two unbounded events in the past progressive. The bounded event functions as the figure, the

3

unbounded events as the ground. The two unbounded events occur simultaneously; they cannot occur sequentially.

(d) I (be) away all week on a conference and (not arrive) home until late on Friday night. (four possibilities)(i) I had been away … and didn’t arrive home until late on Friday night.(ii) I was away … and didn’t arrive home until late on Friday night.(iii) I have been away … and will not arrive home until late on Friday night.(iv) I will be away … and will not arrive home until late on Friday night.(i) My being away on a conference occurred anterior to my arriving home, hence the earlier event may be described in the past perfect and the second event in the simple past.(ii) The events may be seen as occurring sequentially within the narrative so that both can also be expressed in the past tense.(iii) The first event may also have occurred anterior to the present moment and the second event in the future.(iv) The events may be seen as occurring sequentially within the future andboth described in the future tense.

(e) It (be predicted) that, by 2025, the number of vehicles on the road (increase) by over 100 per cent.It has been predicted that, by 2025, the number of vehicles on the road will have increased by over 100 per cent.The prediction was probably made some time ago before speech time and is still currently relevant, hence it is expressed in the present perfect. The prediction is about a future state (increased by over 100 per cent) which is anterior to a future reference time (2025). The prepositional by-phrase describes the state stretching from the turning point at which a 100% increase is reached to 2025.

3. Comment on the differences in meaning implied by the future tense forms in the following examples and explain which of them sounds better in a given context.

(a) Who will / is going to volunteer to clean the kitchen? – I’ll do it. / I’m going to do it.In the context of kitchen duties, the use of the future tense form will is most likely to mean volition, i.e. ‘I am volunteering to do the work’. The use of the present prospective form be going to is understood in the sense of intention,i.e. ‘I intend to do it’. The contingent sense of be going to is ruled out in the given context.

(b) I feel miserable. I’ll be sick. / I’m going to be sick.The future tense form will suggests a neutral, projected state in the future. The contingent be going to-future relates the future to the present. People normally feel a coming sickness, hence the be going to-future sounds more natural.

(c) The graduation ceremony is on August 1. / will be on August 1.In its future reference, the present tense describes a scheduled event. Graduation ceremonies are fixed events and hence appropriately described in the present tense. The neutral will-future would suggest variable dates of the graduation ceremonies.

(d) Susan, will you pass by the post office? / will you be passing …The future non-progressive suggests projected future. A more appropriate future tense form to use is the matter-of-course progressive, which portrays the future activity as one among other routine activities such as doing some shopping, taking the kids to school, etc.

4

(e) I’m getting married / I’m going to get married.The present progressive in reference to a future event suggests that it is planned, probably to happen within the near future. The use of the be going tofuture may be understood in the sense of intention—I want to get married, or in the sense of contingency—my future husband may already have popped the question.

(f) The English Theatre presents four plays during the coming season. / will present… / will be presenting …The present tense describes the plays as being scheduled, which sounds inappropriate for a theatre programme. It could, however, be used as a performative, perhaps at the beginning of the evening or on the printed programme:The English Theatre presents The Tempest by William Shakespeare. The willfuture makes us see the programme as being set up volitionally or as neutrally projected. The most appropriate future form to use is the future progressive, which makes us see the plays as a matter of course within the regular performances of the theatre.

C1. Point out the difference in meaning between the following pairs of sentences:

(a) (i) Sue is at home. Her car is parked in front of the house. (ii) Sue must be at home. Her car is parked in front of the house.The sentences under (i) describe strong, or categorical, assertions, i.e. the speaker commits himself to the truth of both statements. He may have gained his confidence about Sue’s being at home from seeing her car parked in front of her house, but this is immaterial for his assertion.The speaker cannot, for example, doubt his assertion by continuing, #butI may be wrong.The first sentence of (ii) describes a weak, or modalised, assertion, i.e. the speaker does not commit himself to the truth of his statement.The second sentence describes an assertion, i.e. the speaker claims its truth because he may have seen the car, i.e. it forms part of past or present reality. The epistemic necessity expressed in the modal sentence comes close to reality, but it still presents the speaker’s subjective assessment as a potentiality inferred from evidence presented in the second sentence. The modal assertion may therefore be said to be wrong.

(b) (i) Tom is perhaps in Washington. (ii) Jerry may be in Buffalo.The modal adverb perhaps in sentence (i) is used to describe an objective modal assessment based on external circumstances. Since the speaker does not necessarily identify with the assessment, he may ask for confirmation by using a tag question (?Tom is perhaps in New York, isn’t he?).Sentence (ii) presents the speaker’s subjective assessment, for which he would not ask the hearer’s confirmation. The tag question with may is not even used. Thus Jerry may be in Buffalo, mayn’t he? would not be said, and Jerry may be in Buffalo, isn’t he? sounds odd.

(c) (i) I heard that Jennifer is walking on crutches and has her head all bandaged up. (ii) Jennifer must have had an accident.The description under (i) presents pieces of evidence (from hearsay) which make us think, amongst other things, of a potential cause of Jennifer’s deplorable condition, her present state of health or lasting impairments.These are implicatures drawn from the evidence and could be expressed in terms of modal assessments, as in sentence (ii). The modal assessments, in their turn, may invite implicatures about the evidence they are based on. That is, on hearing sentence (ii), I

5

assume that the speaker has compelling evidence for his modal statement such as described in (i). (d) (i) My son may go to America. (ii) My daughter may be going to Australia. (iii) My cousins may have gone to New Zealand.Sentence (i) is ambiguous between an epistemic and deontic reading. In its epistemic reading, it expresses the possibility of a future event, in its deontic reading, it expresses the permission to do something, which can also only occur in the future. Sentence (ii) can only be interpreted epistemically: it refers to a present assessment of a present or future event.The progressive form includes the present moment and hence would be incompatible with the future orientation of deontic modality. Sentence(iii) is also only understood epistemically. The assessment of the past event is also made at the present moment.(e) (i) Yes, I permit you to store my personal data. (ii) Yes, you may store my personal data.Sentence (i) is a directive performative speech act of permissiongranting: the verb permit explicitly names the speech act, and the performative function of the speech act can be made explicit by adding hereby: I hereby permit you to store my personal data. Sentence (ii) describes a deontic act of permission-granting and is thus also performative.Both performative speech acts and expressions of deontic modality are tied to the present moment of speaking and concern events in the future.However, the directive speech act purely focuses on the action permitted, while the modal may also invokes the force-dynamic constellation underlying an act of permission, i.e. the speaker’s enablement in granting permission, which he would also have the power to refuse. As a result, the permission expressed by the performative speech act sounds confident and irrevocable, while the permission expressed by the deontic modality sounds less confident and potentially revocable.(f) (i) You must take a right turn now. (ii) You’ve got to take a right turn now. (iii) You have to take a right turn now (iv) You need to take a right turn now. (v) You should take a right turn now.The sentences express different strengths of obligation. The strongest obligation is expressed in (i), which might be said by a passenger at the point when the driver was just about to miss the right turn. Must conveys personally felt urgency. Have got to in (ii) also expresses strong urgency, but is less subjective. It might be said when giving directions from a map. Have to in (iii) suggests an even more objective, or “democratic”, obligation. The passenger might study the map and navigate the driver through the city. Need to in (iv) suggests a weak obligation: the obligation derives from some intrinsic attribute of a thing. The sentence might be said by a passenger who knows the area very well and can tell the shortest way. Should in (v) expresses a still weaker form of external obligation. From studying the map, the navigator may assume that it would be best if the driver took a right turn now, but it would probably be no harm if he missed it and took the right turn later on.

2. Identify and discuss the type(s) of modality in the following sentences.

(a) This car can run on water, alcohol or cow dung.The modal can describes a general ability of the car, which strongly invites the implicature of an intrinsic possibility: ‘it is possible for the car to run on water’. Even if cars are not, as a rule, powered by water, alcohol or cow dung, these petrol substitutes are within the

6

range of potential sources of energy of a car and hence can be seen as attributes. Abilities and intrinsic possibilities are expressed by can; the use of may is excluded in the sense of ability and rarely used in the sense of intrinsic possibility. If may was used instead of can, the sentence would be expressed as This car may be run on water. It suggests that the driver may choose the kind of petrol substitute to use, i.e. it might be paraphrased as ‘it is possible for drivers to run this car on water’. This sentence may also be interpreted in the sense of an epistemic possibility, and is the only interpretation with the progressive form: This car may be running on water.(b) The consumption of alcohol may cause you to think you can sing.May describes an epistemic possibility; the sentence can be paraphrased as ‘it is possible that the consumption of alcohol causes...’, where the assessment is based on the speaker’s subjective judgement. However, can both denotes an ability and invites the implicature of an intrinsic possibility: ‘it is possible for you to sing’.(c) I must warn you that I am quite stubborn.Literally, must in this sentence expresses an obligation: ‘I am obliged to warn you’. The meaning of the utterance is, however, not intended to be potential but much rather actual: it expresses the performative speech act of a warning: ‘I hereby warn you that I am quite stubborn’. The relation between the literal and the intended meaning is metonymic: POTENTIALITY FOR ACTUALITY. The use of must in such directive utterances is known as hedged performative.(d) I can see Venus in the evening sky.As in the preceding example, the intended meaning of this sentence is not to convey a potentiality but an actual experience. The relation between the literal and intended meaning of can also involves the metonymy POTENTIALITY FOR ACTUALITY. In this use, however, can is not a hedged performative because the utterance is not directive but describes an intrinsic possibility: ‘it is possible for me to see Venus’. The meaning of potentiality is not lost but still present in its association with a potentially rare experience.(e) A group of American tourists were being guided through an ancient castle in Europe.“This place,” the guide told them, “is 600 years old. Not a stone in it has been touched, nothing altered, nothing replaced in all those years.”“Wow,” said one woman dryly, “they must have the same landlord as I have.”The modal must describes epistemic necessity. It nicely illustrates that epistemic modality as expressed by must involves a subjective deductive process and differs from categorical assertions. The essence of the joke would have been lost if the punchline was: They have the same landlord I have.

3. Detect the modal ambiguity in the following sentences:

(a) The table should be laid.The sentence is ambiguous between a deontic and an epistemic reading.In the deontic reading, the speaker lays a weak obligation on some unnamed person or persons to lay the table, implicitly invoking some external rules such as household duties. The situation is an event to be performed in the future, i.e. the table is not yet laid. In the epistemic reading, the speaker makes an assessment of the potentiality of a present state of affairs, which he considers weakly necessary, i.e. the speaker assumes that the table is laid, possibly because at this time of the day the table is normally laid or because he heard the clinking of dishes in the dining room.(b) Your son must be at school.The sentence is also ambiguous between a deontic and an epistemic reading. In the deontic reading, the speaker lays a strong obligation on the hearer to send her son to school. The use of must makes the obligation sound more urgent than if it was expressed by have to. The sentence literally describes a state but is clearly understood in a directive sense of asking the person to perform some action as a result of which the young man will

7

be at school, i.e. it involves the metonymy RESULT FOR ACTION. In the epistemic reading, the speaker assesses a proposition (‘your son be at school now’) as necessarily being the case.

4. Analyse the negated modals in the following sentences by paraphrasing them and discuss differences in meaning resulting from the modal verb and the scope of negation.

(a) (i) You mustn’t play with these children. (ii) You don’t have to play with these children.Sentence (i) can be paraphrased as ‘you are obliged not to play with the children’, i.e. the proposition is negated. Sentence (ii) can be paraphrased as ‘you are not obliged to play with the children’, i.e. the modality is negated. Sentence (i) describes an obligation not to act, i.e. a prohibition; sentence (ii) describes an exemption from an obligation to act. The latter meaning is less compelling because it gives the options to comply or not to comply. (b) (i) You mustn’t open the door. (ii) You may not open the door. (iii) You can’t open the door.All three sentences convey the sense of a prohibition but express it in different ways. Sentence (i) can be paraphrased as ‘you are obliged not to open the door’, i.e., as in the sentence You mustn’t play with these children, the proposition is negated. In sentences (ii) and (iii) the modality is negated: ‘you are not permitted to open the door’. The use of mustn’t in (i) conveys the highest degree of imposition on the hearer, namely an obligation to refrain from performing an action. The speaker either imposes the prohibition himself or assumes it as an irresistible external force such as a general rule. As such, the compelling force is absolute.Such strong obligations may be found in a fairy tale, where they will, of course, eventually be violated. The use of may not in (ii) conveys a lower degree of imposition. A refusal of permission is not given in absolute terms but only when there is, or may be, someone’s potential desire or intention to do the forbidden thing, and it is only then that the person in authority can exert his power and bar the other person from having his will. The use of can’t in (iii) conveys the lowest degree of imposition. Here, the refusal of permission is based on external circumstances and hence is felt to be less imposing.

8