The category of aspect

The category of aspect is a linguistic representation of the objective category

of manner of action. It is realized through the opposition Continuous::Non-

Continuous (Progressive::Non-Progressive). The opposition is privative both in the

plane of content and in the plane of expression. It is easily neutralized, i. e. noncontinuous forms substitute continuous forms when the notion of duration is

expressed by other means (eg. lexical).

The realization of the category of aspect is closely connected with the lexical

meaning of verbs. There are some verbs in English that do not normally occur with

progressive aspect, even in those contexts in which the majority of verbs

necessarily take the progressive form. Among the so-called ‘non-progressive’

verbs are think, understand, know, hate, love, see, taste, feel, possess, own, etc. The most striking characteristic that they have in common is the fact that they are ‘stative’ - they refer to a state of affairs, rather than to an action, event or process.

It should be observed, however, that all the ‘non-progressive' verbs take the

progressive aspect under particular circumstances. As the result of internal

transposition verbs of non-progressive nature can be found in the Continuous form:

Now I'm knowing you. Generally speaking the Continuous form has at least two

semantic features - duration (the action is always in progress) and definiteness (the

action is always limited to a definite point or period of time). In other words, the

purpose of the Continuous form is to serve as a frame which makes the process of

the action more concrete and isolated.

A distinction should be made between grammatical aspect and semantic

aspectuality. English has an aspect system marked by the presence or absence of

the auxiliary be contrasting progressive and non-progressive. The major

aspectuality contrast is between perfective and imperfective. With perfective

aspectuality the situation described in a clause is presented in its totality, as a

whole, viewed, as it were, from the outside. With imperfective aspectuality the

situation is not presented in its totality, but viewed from within, with focus on the

internal temporal structure or on some subinterval of time within the whole. The

main use of progressive forms is to express a particular subtype of imperfective

aspectuality.

As for the Russian verb, it has two aspects, the perfective and the

imperfective. It is obvious at once that there is no direct correspondence between

English and Russian aspects; for instance, the English continuous aspect is not

identical with the Russian imperfective. The relation between the two systems is

not so simple as all that. On the one hand, the English common aspect may

correspond not only to the Russian perfective but also to the Russian imperfective

aspect; thus, he wrote may correspond both to написал and to писал. On the other

hand, the Russian imperfective aspect may correspond not only to the continuous

but also to the common aspect in English; thus, писал may correspond both to was

writing and to wrote.

Date: 2015-12-17; view: 883