Re: [en] Englisch hat kein Futur
- From: Stephen Hust <shNOSPAM@xxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 19:48:39 -0500
naddy@xxxxxxxxxxxx (Christian Weisgerber) wrote:
"English has no future tense. Not a trace of one."
http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/005471.html
Das hätte er schon bei Jespersen lesen können:
| The English verb has only two tenses proper, the Present and the
| Preterit.
|
(Otto Jespersen, "Essentials of English Grammar", 23.I.3., University
of Alabama Press, 1964 (1933), p. 231.)
| This leads to the use of /is going to/ with an infinitive as
| what may be called a prospective present, and /was going to/ as
| a prospective past.
|
(Wie oben, 24.8.4., p. 267.)
| (2) Volition. Both E. /will/ and Dan. /vil/ to a certain degree
| retain traces of the original meaning of real volition, and
| therefore E. /will go/ cannot be given as a pure 'future tense,'
| though it approaches that function, as seen especially when it
| is applied to natural phenomena as /it will certainly rain
| before night/. There is also an increasing tendency to use
| /(wi)ll/ in the first person instead of /shall/, as in /I'm
| afraid I'll die soon/ (especially in Sc. and Amr.), which makes
| /will/ even more the common auxiliary of the future. [...]
|
| [...]
|
| (5) Motion. Verbs meaning 'go' and 'come' are frequently used to
| indicate futurity, as in Fr. /je vais écrire/, used of the near
| future, E. /I am going to write/, which sometimes, though by no
| means always, has the same nuance of nearness, and finally
| without that nuance Swed. /jag kommer att skriva/, Fr. /quand je
| viendrai à mourir/, E. /I wish that you may come to be ashamed
| of what you have done/ | /they may get to know it/.
|
(Otto Jespersen, "The Philosophy of Grammar", Chapter XIX, "Time and
Tense", Ninth Impression, London, George Allen & Unwin, 1963
(1924),p. 260-261.)
Weil Schüler vergessen, daß Englisch kein Futur hat, müssen sie
ständig daran erinnert werden, und deshalb greift man zu
verschiedenen Hilfsmitteln, wie z.B. diesem:
<http://tinyurl.com/2r9hxo>
Aber es kommt noch besser. Man hat schon Mitte des 19. Jahrhunderts
entdeckt, daß Englisch möglicherweise nicht einmal ein Präsens hat:
| § 48. [...] (24) In English we express only two of the above
| modifications of the sense of the verb, by means of the /root/
| and /inflexion/, without the help of other words. Or, to express
| the same thing otherwise, we have only two /simple/ tense forms
| in our language; and it is doubtful, as we shall see, whether
| one of these two can properly be called a tense.
|
| § 49. (1) We call those SIMPLE TENSES which consist either of
| the root of the verb alone, or of the root after undergoing some
| modification of its form. (2) When any modification of the
| /time/ or of the /condition/ of the action asserted by a verb is
| expressed by the help of other words, we call this combination a
| /compound tense/. We shall first consider the simple tenses.
| [Fußnote: It may admit a doubt whether what we have called the
| compound tenses should be considered as proper tense /forms/ of
| the respective verbs to which they are assigned in our grammars.]
|
| (3) We use the simple root of the verb, subject to certain
| modifications to indicate the /person/ of the subject [...], to
| express an assertion without reference either to the /time/ or
| the /condition/ of the action. Examples: /I write/, /he writes/,
| /the man thinks/, &c. (4) This may be called the INDEFINITE FORM
| of the verb - /indefinite/, we mean, as relates both to /time/
| and to /progressive/ or /completed/ action. (5) For the sake of
| uniformity, we shall call this the INDEFINITE TENSE. [Fußnote:
| This name, we admit, is not strictly proper, for this form of
| the verb is really no /tense/, because it does not indicate
| /time/. [...]] (6) This form has been generally, but improperly,
| as we think, called the present tense of English verbs, because
| it is very commonly used in assertions that have reference to
| present existing events or facts (7), but it certainly does not
| /indicate/ any necessary connection with the present or any
| other time. (8) This form is employed in asserting all general
| truths - truths which exist independent of all time; as, /God/
| IS /eternal/; /Truth/ IS /unchangeable/; /A triangle/ HAS /three
| sides and three angles/; and all mathematical and physical
| truths that are of an immutable nature. (9) It is, in fact, used
| precisely for the purpose described above, under form 1st;
| namely, to assert all kinds of action and existence, when we do
| not intend to limit the action definitely to either /past/,
| /present/, or /future/, nor to indicate whether it is
| /completed/ or /progressive/. (10) So far is this form from
| being confined to the assertion of actions or states of being
| connected with present time, that it is often employed to
| express what is manifestly past or manifestly future; as,
| /Plato/ THINKS /profoundly/, /Cicero/ WRITES /with great
| elegance/. (11) Here the actions asserted are past. /John/
| WRITES /to his father next Saturday. /He/ GOES /to town
| to-morrow/. Here the action is future. (12) Now, although
| neither the past existence of the actions in the one case, nor
| the future existence in the other is indicated by the verb, but
| either left to be inferred from the nature of the subject
| matter, or rendered manifest by the accompanying words
| expressive of time; yet, if it were the proper and inherent
| function of this form to assert present time (that is, if it
| were, as most grammarians teach, a /present tense/), it could
| never be employed in this manner.
|
| (13) Again, on the other hand, we cannot employ this form to
| express, in an explicit manner, that an agent actually performs
| an action in the present time. (14) For this purpose we must
| have recourse to a different form of expression. (15) If I am
| asked what John actually does at present, I do not answer, /He
| writes/, but /He is writing/. [...] [Fußnote: It may be added,
| in confirmation of the views expressed above, that in the
| Anglo-Saxon, the basis of the present English, there is nothing
| except this indefinite form to express /future/ action. Whether
| an assertion in that language is indefinite as to time, or
| present, or future, is not to be learned from the /form/ of the
| verb, but by some other means - from the nature of the
| assertion, the connection of the discourse, or modifying words
| added to indicate time. [...]]
|
(John Mulligan, A.M., "Exposition of the Grammatical Structure of the
English Language; Being an Attempt to Furnish an Improved Method of
Teaching Grammar. For the Use of Schools and Colleges", New York, D.
Appleton and Company, 1868, p. 90-92.)
--
Steve
My e-mail address works as is.
.
- References:
- [en] Englisch hat kein Futur
- From: Christian Weisgerber
- [en] Englisch hat kein Futur
- Prev by Date: Re: [en] Englisch hat kein Futur
- Previous by thread: Re: [en] Englisch hat kein Futur
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading
