Towards a Unified View of the Present Perfect. A Comparative Study on Catalan, English and Gĩkũyũ by Teresa Maria Xiqués Garcia PhD Dissertation Supervisors: Dr Olga Borik Dr Josep Maria Brucart PhD Program in Cognitive Science and Language Centre de Lingüística Teòrica Departament de Filologia Espanyola Facultat de Filosofia i Lletres Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona May 2015 Table of contents ! Ackowledgements……………………………………………………………………… i Abstract ..........................………………………………………………………………. iii Presentation of the study …….………………………………………………………… v List of abbreviations…………….……………………………………………………… vii Chapter 1 Outline of the data and main theories of the present perfect 1.1 Introduction………………………………………………………………………... 1 1.2 Working definitions of some basic concepts……………………………………… 3 1.2.1 Tense……………………………………………………………………….. 3 1.2.2 Aspect………………………………………………………………………. 4 1.2.3 Aktionsart …………………………………………………………………………... 5 1.2.4 The notion of the reference time…………………………………………… 6 1.2.5 The interpretation of the present perfect: tense or aspect? 7 1.3 The readings of the present perfect……………………….……………………….. 8 1.3.1 The experiential reading……………………………………………………. 10 1.3.2 The universal reading………………………………………………………. 15 1.3.3 The resultative reading……………………………………………………... 19 1.3.4 The recent past reading…………..…………………………..……………... 20 1.3.5 The hodiernal reading…..…………………………………………………... 20 1.3.6 Summary of section 1.3...…………………………………………………... 26 1.4 Dealing with different puzzles…………………………………………………….. 27 1.4.1 The present perfect puzzle………………………………………………….. 27 1.4.2 Narrative passages………………………………………………………….. 29 1.4.3 Past time adverbials………………………………………………………… 34 1.4.3 Summary of section 1.4…………………………………………………….. 35 1.5 The main theories of the perfect…………………………………………………… 35 1.5.1 The Anteriority analysis…………………………………..………………… 35 1.5.1.1. From Reichenbah’s theory to Demirdache & Uribe-Etxebarria’s framework…………………………………..……………………... 38 1.5.2 The Result State analysis…………………….…….…….………………….. 44 1.5.3 Extended Now or Perfect Time Span theory….……….……………………. 48 1.6 Summary of chapter 1………………………………………………….…………... 52 Chapter 2 The hodiernal reading 2.1 Introduction………………………………………………………………………... 55 2.2 Previous approaches……………………………………………………………….. 58 2.3 Revising the hodiernal reading…………………………………………………….. 63 2.3.1 The functional properties of the predicate……………….…………………. 63 2.3.2. Unmodified present perfect sentences…….……………………………….. 67 2.3.3 The role of temporal modification.…………………………………………. 70 2.3.4 The morphological content of the auxiliary verb…………………………... 71 2.3.5 Summary of section 2.3…………………………………………………….. 79 2.4 The contribution of locating time adverbials……………………………………… 79 2.4.1 Punctual time adverbials…………………………………………………… 79 2.4.2 Fa X time ‘makes X time’…………………...……………………………... 84 2.4.3 Proximate demonstrative + clock-calendar noun……………….………….. 89 2.4.4 Summary of section 2.4…………………………………………………….. 93 2.5 Deriving the hodiernal reading of the present perfect……………………………... 95 2.5.1 The properties of the perfect time span…………………………………….. 95 2.5.2 The conceptualization of the present tense……………………………….… 102 2.5.3 The meaning of the present perfect in Catalan……………………………... 106 2.5.4 The role of temporal modification (i): a la/les X time ‘in the X time’…...… 109 2.5.5 The role of temporal modification (ii): fa X time ‘makes X time’…………. 112 2.5.6 The role of temporal modification (iii): proximate demonstratives + 115 calendar noun……………………………………………………………… 2.6 Summary of chapter 2………………………………….…………………….. 116 Chapter 3 The expression of hodiernality in Gĩkũyũ 3.1 Introduction………………………………………………………………………... 119 3.2 The hodiernal temporal remoteness distinction…………………………………… 121 3.2.1 Past time sphere…………………………………………………………….. 121 3.2.2 Future time sphere………………………………………………………….. 125 3.2.3 Summary of section 3.2…………………………………………………….. 126 3.3 The presuppositonal semantics of temporal remoteness morphemes……………... 127 3.4 Temporal remoteness morphemes and event time in perfect contexts……………. 132 3.5 The role of temporal modification in hodiernal perfect contexts………………….. 137 3.6 The hodiernal TRM in Gĩkũyũ as an extended now marker………………………. 140 3.6.1 Data in support of the extended now analysis……………………………… 141 3.6.2 A link with the present tense in Catalan and the present progressive in 143 English.......................................................................................................... 3.6.3 The hodiernal TRM in perfect contexts……………………………………. 145 3.6.4 An alternative analysis………………...…………………………………… 148 3.7 Summary of the chapter…………………………………………………………… 151 Chapter 4 The universal reading 4.1 Introduction………………………………………………………………………... 153 4.2 The functional properties of the predicate………………………………………… 156 4.3 Different types of stativity………………………………………………………… 159 4.3.1 Individual-Level and Stage-Level predicates………....……………………. 160 4.3.2 Kimian and Davidsonian states…………………………………………….. 163 4.3.3 Summary of section 4.3…………………………………………………….. 164 4.4 Types of stativity and the universal reading………………………………………. 165 4.4.1 IL/SL states in unmodified present perfect sentences……………………… 165 4.4.2 Kimian and Davidsonian states in unmodified present perfect sentences.…. 169 4.4.3 Summary of section 4.4…………………………………………………….. 170 4.5 The role of temporal modifiers……………………………………………………. 170 4.5.1 Unambiguous universal readings…………………………………………... 173 4.5.2 Time modifiers in initial position…………………………………………... 174 4.5.3 Summary of section 4.5…………………………………………………….. 176 4.6 The universal reading of the present perfect in Catalan…………………………… 176 4.6.1 The functional properties of the predicate……………..…………………… 177 4.6.2 Unmodified present perfect sentences……………………………………… 178 4.6.3 Modified present perfect sentences………………..……………………….. 180 4.6.4 A comparison with the present perfect in Mexican Spanish………………. 186 4.6.5 Summary of section 4.6…………………………………………………….. 187 4.7 Deriving the universal reading of the present perfect……………………………… 188 4.7.1 The functional properties of the predicate…………………………………... 189 4.7.2 The temporal relation between the PTS and the reference time……………. 195 4.8 Summary of chapter 4……………………………………………………………… 200 Chapter 5 The grammatical properties of since 5.1 Introduction………………………………………………………………………... 203 5.2 Grammatical properties of since ………………………………………...………… 205 5.2.1 English since-adverbials ………………………………………….………… 206 5.2.2 Catalan des de-adverbials ……………………………………...…………… 208 5.2.3 Summary of section 5.2 …………………………………..………………… 212 5.3 More relevant cross-linguistic data …………………...…………………………… 213 5.3.1 German seit-adverbials ……………………………...……………………… 213 5.3.2 French depuis-adverbials …………………………………………………… 215 5.3.3 Summary of section 5.3 ………………….………….……………………… 218 5.4 Spatial uses of des de ……………………………………………………………… 218 5.4.1 Since-adverbials………………………………………………..…………… 219 5.4.2 Des de-adverbials…………………………………………………………… 221 5.4.3 Summary of section 5.4 ………………………………..…………………… 227 5.5 The present perfect and des de-paths………………….…………………………… 228 5.5.1 Previous attempts to derive the universal-existential ambiguity with since PPs... 228 5.5.2 Des de-paths in the temporal domain …………………………………………… 235 5.5.3 Universal and existential readings with des de-paths…………………………… 239 5.5.4 The nature of the right boundary………………………………………………… 244 5.5.5 The role of Aktionsart…………………………………………………………… 250 5.6 Summary of chapter 5………………………...…………………………………… 252 Conclusion…………………………………………………………...………………… 255 References…………………………………………………………………...………… 271 ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! Acknowledgements ! I would like to take this opportunity to thank all the people who encouraged me and helped me during this process. I would not have been able to accomplish this task without them. First of all, I am deeply grateful to my thesis supervisors, Olga Borik and Josep Maria Brucart. They have trusted in me since the beginning and have allowed me to work freely and independently. I thank them for all their guidance and encouragement throughout all these years, for sharing their knowledge in linguistics and providing me with insightful comments. Olga Borik always pushed me to improve with her corrections and meticulous comments on the drafts of the thesis, and Josep Maria Brucart provided me with very intuitive suggestions, which always made me reflect carefully on the data. During these years, I have benefited from two research stays. The first one was at the Department of Linguistics and Basque Studies at the University of the Basque Country. I thank my host, Myriam Uribe-Etxebarria, and all the faculty members and graduate students for their warm welcome. I felt part of their community from the very first day. As a visiting student, I had the opportunity to attend master’s classes, seminars, and discuss my work with Myriam Uribe-Etxebarria, who provided me with interesting ideas and references. I also want to thank Anamaria Fălăuş, with whom I discussed several papers and helped me to understand formal semantics in more detail. The second stay was at the Department of Linguistics at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst. I was very lucky to have been part of the community at one of the most renowned and leading departments in the field of linguistics. I am grateful to all the faculty members and graduate students, who I learned a lot from and with whom I shared one of the most exciting experiences of the thesis process. During my stay, I attended graduate courses, seminars and reading groups, which contributed to deepen and broaden my knowledge and interests in linguistics. In particular, I want to express my gratitude to Seth Cable, who hosted me during my stay. His comments and questions made me think about the main empirical problems and helped me to shape the thesis idea. Thanks to his research, I was introduced to the study of a typologically unrelated language, Gĩkũyũ, a Bantu language. This study was crucial for the thesis and allowed me to envisage some of its key issues. I would not have heard about Gĩkũyũ if I had not had met Hamida Demirdache. I met her at Chronos 10 and since then we have been in contact and had appointments to discuss the work in the earlier as well as the last stages of this study. I am indebted to Hamida Demirdache, for giving me enthusiasm and providing me with generous comments, which helped me to improve the thesis. I thank Anna Bartra, Montserrat Batllori, Hamida Demirdache, Maria Teresa Espinal and Josep Maria Fontana, for their interest in this work and accepting to be ! i! members of the defence committee. I also thank Antonio Fábregas and Anamaria Fălăuş for accepting to be the examiners for the international doctorate certification. During this process, I have also learned from comments through appointments and/or email correspondences by many linguists. I had the opportunity to discuss with Ignacio Bosque, Hortènsia Curell, Henriëtte de Swart, Luis García Fernández, Sabine Iatridou, Roumyana Pancheva, Marina Pantcheva, among many other linguists. A special thanks to Chege Githiora, Östen Dahl, Berit Gerhke, Michael Kennedy, Bjørn Lundquist, Gemma Rigau and Gerard Schaden, for kindly helping me with the data. I also thank Zoe Belk, Mark Henry, Peter Herbeck, Bryan Leferman, Megan Leigh, Olive Munene, Anna Pineda, Ethan Poole, Juan Romeu and Anna Svensson, for their comments on the data. All errors are my own. I want to express my gratitude to the faculty members as well as to my fellow graduate students at the Centre for Theoretical Linguistics at the Autonomous University of Barcelona. I want to thank Anna Bartra, Maria Lluïsa Hernanz and Gemma Rigau, who were part of my Master’s committee and gave me feedback at the beginning of this process, as well as Ángel Gallego for his advice and help at earlier stages of this research. The Centre for Theoretical Linguistics is an active research centre where I benefited from weekly seminars and reading groups. In particular, the semantics reading group led by Olga Borik was very beneficial for me. We were introduced to the study of formal semantics and could discuss different topics in a friendly atmosphere. I also want to thank Qiuyue, who always supported and helped me whenever I was in need. I want to express my appreciation to Ekaterina at the University of Girona. We travelled and went to conferences and seminars together and shared one of the experiences that I enjoyed the most during this period, the EGG summer schools! I have also shared very good moments with Haixa. Both of us were visiting students at Amherst and I am thankful for her support and friendship. My last words of gratitude are for my family. I thank my parents, Agustí and Caridad, and my sister, Irene, for all their support. I especially thank my mother for her endless patience and constant encouragement. This research has been supported by the pre-doctoral grant FI-DGR 2011, awarded by the Government of Catalonia. Thanks to the Comissionat per a Universitats i Recerca (CUR) of the Departament d’Innovació, Universitats i Empresa (DIUE) and the European Social Fund for financial support. This research has also been supported by the subproject FFI2011.29440.C03.01 La estructura de la periferia oracional directed by Mª Lluïsa Hernanz and funded by the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness. ii! ! Abstract ! ! In this thesis, I examine the properties of the Present Perfect (henceforth PrP) across different languages. In particular, I present a comparative study of Catalan, English and Gĩkũyũ, a Bantu language that has ‘graded tenses’. I begin my investigation by examining one of the most striking differences between the uses of the PrP in Catalan and in English, namely, a hodiernal reading of the PrP present in Catalan but not in English. I claim that the main property of the PrP in Catalan is not that is has an extra reading that English does not possess, but rather that hodiernal is a subtype of the existential PrP that allows, in addition, for a temporal modification of the event by punctual time adverbials. I suggest that a progressive meaning of the present tense, i.e., the possibility of locating an event at the utterance time, is connected to the compatibility of the PrP to appear with punctual time adverbials. In particular, the Catalan present can be used to report an ongoing event, but the English present has a habitual interpretation for almost all types of eventualities, apart for states. I also examine a type of hodiernal reading found in Gĩkũyũ, a language typologically not related to either Catalan or English. Gĩkũyũ has a specific prefix, i.e., a hodiernal temporal remoteness morpheme, which places the eventuality on the day surrounding the utterance time. Within this temporal interval, the location of the eventuality can be fixed on the time axis. Another major difference between Catalan and English has to do with the universal reading, which is a prototypical reading of the PrP in English. Catalan, however, has other means, apart from the PrP, to obtain a universal meaning, such as, for instance, the present tense or periphrastic temporal constructions (i.e., portar ‘carry’ X time + gerund). I claim that the universal meaning is not encoded in the semantics of the perfect per se, but is a reading that is always ensured by adverbial support. To derive a hodiernal and a universal reading, I follow Pancheva & von Stechow’s (2004) weak semantics of the PTS and distinguish between the PTS and the reference time intervals. The temporal relation between the PTS and the reference time in English is that of coextension, whereas in ! iii! Catalan can be that of identity or intersection. This latter temporal relation is made explicit via temporal modification. One type of the temporal adverbial that I study in depth is since adverbials. I compare the grammatical properties of English since-adverbials, which have been analysed as perfect-level adverbials (Iatridou et al. 2001), with Catalan des de-adverbials. I argue against the claim that either the perfect tense or prepositions like since are ambiguous between a universal and an existential interpretation. I show that an analysis based on the grammatical properties of the internal structure of the temporal path denoted by des de or since can contribute to a more fine-grained derivation of universal and existential interpretations of PrP sentences modified by since-type of intervals in both languages. iv! !