Skip to main content
×
Home

A Cognitive Grammar account of the semantics of the English present progressive1

  • ASTRID DE WIT (a1) and FRANK BRISARD (a1)
Abstract

In this paper, we propose a unified account of the semantics of the English present progressive in the form of a semantic network, basing ourselves on the theoretical principles and analytical tools offered by the theory of Cognitive Grammar, as laid out by Langacker (1987, 1991). The core meaning of the English present progressive, we claim, is to indicate epistemic contingency in the speaker's immediate reality. It thus contrasts with the simple present, which is associated with situations that are construed as structurally belonging to reality. On the basis of a study of the Santa Barbara Corpus of spoken American English, an inventory has been made of the more specific uses of the present progressive, temporal as well as modal. It is shown that each of these uses can be derived from this basic meaning of contingency in immediate reality via a set of conceptual branching principles, in interaction with elements in the context.

Copyright
Corresponding author
Authors' addresses: Department of Linguistics, University of Antwerp, Prinsstraat 13, 2000 Antwerpen, Belgiumastrid.dewit@ua.ac.befrank.brisard@ua.ac.be
Footnotes
Hide All
[1]

Parts of the research for this paper have already been reported in De Wit & Brisard (2009). We wish to thank Ron Langacker and three anonymous Journal of Linguistics referees for their useful comments on earlier versions of this text. Thanks are also due to the Research Foundation – Flanders (FWO) for its financial support of the first author (grant 4740).

Footnotes
References
Hide All
Adamczewski Henri. 1978. BE+ING dans la grammaire de l'anglais contemporain. Paris: Librairie Honoré Champion.
Asher Nicholas. 1992. A default, truth conditional semantics for the progressive. Linguistics and Philosophy 15, 463508.
Austin John L. 1962. How to do things with words. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Bach Emmon. 1986. The algebra of events. Linguistics and Philosophy 9, 516.
Benveniste Emile. 1966. Problèmes de linguistique générale, vol. 1, 2nd edn.Paris: Gallimard.
Brinton Laurel J. 1988. The development of English aspectual systems: Aspectualizers and post-verbal particles. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Brisard Frank. 2001. Be going to: An exercise in grounding. Journal of Linguistics 37, 251285.
Brisard Frank. 2002a. The English present. In Brisard (ed.), 251297.
Brisard Frank (ed.). 2002b. Grounding: The epistemic footing of deixis and reference. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Calver Edward. 1946. The uses of the present tense forms in English. Language 22, 317325.
Collins Peter. 2008. The progressive aspect in World Englishes: A corpus-based study. Australian Journal of Linguistics 28, 225249.
Comrie Bernard. 1976. Aspect: An introduction to the study of verbal aspect and related problems. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Comrie Bernard. 1985. Tense. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Culioli Antoine. 1990. Pour une linguistique de l'énonciation, vol. 1: Opérations et representations. Paris: Ophrys.
Culioli Antoine. 1999. Pour une linguistique de l'énonciation, vol. 2: Formalisation et opérations de repérage. Paris: Ophrys.
De Wit Astrid & Brisard Frank. 2009. Expressions of epistemic contingency in the use of the English present progressive. Papers of the Linguistic Society of Belgium 4. http://webh01.ua.ac.be/linguist/SBKL/sbkl2009/dew2009.pdf (accessed 22 November 2012).
Declerck Renaat, Reed Susan & Cappelle Bert. 2006. The grammar of the English verb phrase, vol. 1: The grammar of the English tense system. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
DeLancey Scott. 1997. Mirativity: The grammatical marking of unexpected information. Linguistic Typology 1, 3352.
Dowty David R. 1975. The stative in the progressive and other essence/accident contrasts. Linguistic Inquiry 6, 579588.
Dowty David R. 1977. Toward a semantic analysis of verb aspect and the English imperfective progressive. Linguistics and Philosophy 1, 4577.
Dowty David R. 1979. Word meaning and Montague Grammar: The semantics of verbs and times in generative semantics and in Montague's PTQ. Dordrecht: Reidel.
Du Bois John W., Chafe Wallace L., Meyer Charles & Thompson Sandra A.. 2000. Santa Barbara Corpus of Spoken American English, part 1. Philadelphia, PA: Linguistic Data Consortium.
Emenanjo E. Nolue. 1987. Elements of modern Igbo grammar: A descriptive approach. Ibadan: University Press.
Furmaniak Grégory. 2005. The BE+-ING form: Progressive aspect and metonymy. Corela 3. http://corela.edel.univ-poitiers.fr/document.php?id=741 (accessed 1 January 2011).
Giorgi Alessandra & Pianesi Fabio. 1997. Tense and aspect: From semantics to morphosyntax. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Goldsmith John & Woisetschlaeger Erich. 1982. The logic of the English progressive. Linguistic Inquiry 13, 7989.
Güldemann Tom. 2003. Present progressive vis-à-vis predication focus in Bantu: A verbal category between semantics and pragmatics. Studies in Language 27.2, 323360.
Jespersen Otto. 1931. A modern English grammar on historical principles, vol. 4. London: Allen & Unwin. [Page number citation from 1954 reprint.]
Joos Martin. 1964. The English verb: Form and meanings. Madison, WI: The University of Wisconsin Press.
Kaltenböck Gunther. 2003. Review of Christopher Williams, Progressive and non-progressive aspect in English, 2002. English Language & Linguistics 7, 344347.
Kay Paul & Fillmore Charles J.. 1999. Grammatical constructions and linguistic generalizations: The What's X doing Y? construction. Language 75, 133.
Kranich Svenja. 2010. The progressive in Modern English: A corpus-based study of grammaticalization and related changes. Amsterdam: Rodopi.
Lakoff George & Johnson Mark. 1980. Metaphors we live by. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
Landman Fred. 1992. The progressive. Natural Language Semantics 1, 132.
Langacker Ronald W. 1987. Foundations of Cognitive Grammar, vol. 1: Theoretical prerequisites. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Langacker Ronald W. 1991. Foundations of Cognitive Grammar, vol. 2: Descriptive application. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Langacker Ronald W. 1995. The symbolic alternative. In Kardela Henryk & Persson Gunnar (eds.), New trends in semantics and lexicography, 89118. Umeå: Swedish Science Press.
Langacker Ronald W. 2001. The English present tense. English Language & Linguistics 5, 251273.
Langacker Ronald W. 2002. Deixis and subjectivity. In Brisard (ed.), 128.
Langacker Ronald W. 2011. The English present: Temporal coincidence vs. epistemic immediacy. In Patard Adeline & Brisard Frank (eds.), Cognitive approaches to tense, aspect and epistemic modality, 4586. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Larreya Paul. 1999. BE+-ING est-il un marqueur d'aspect? Anglophonia 6, 135150.
Lascarides Alexandra. 1988. A formal semantic analysis of the progressive. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Edinburgh.
Leech Geoffrey. 2004. Meaning and the English verb. Harlow: Pearson Education.
Leiss Elisabeth. 1992. Die Verbalkategorien des Deutschen. Berlin: de Gruyter.
Ljung Magnus. 1980. Reflections on the English progressive. Göteborg: Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis.
Michaelis Laura A. 2004. Type shifting in Construction Grammar: An integrated approach to aspectual coercion. Cognitive Linguistics 15, 167.
Mindt Dieter. 2000. An empirical grammar of the English verb system. Berlin: Cornelsen.
Núñez-Pertejo Paloma. 2004. The progressive in the history of English. Munich: Lincom Europa.
Palmer Frank R. 1989. The English verb. London: Longman.
Portner Paul. 1998. The progressive in modal semantics. Language 74, 760787.
Quirk Randolph, Greenbaum Sidney, Leech Geoffrey & Svartvik Jan. 1985. A comprehensive grammar of the English language. Longman: London.
Rydén Mats. 1997. On the panchronic core meaning of the English progressive. In Nevalainen Terttu & Kahlas-Tarkka Leena (eds.), To explain the present: Studies in the changing English language in honour of Matti Rissanen, 419429. Helsinki: Société Néophilologique.
Scheffer Johannes. 1975. The progressive in English. Amsterdam: North-Holland.
Searle John R. 1969. Speech acts: An essay in the philosophy of language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Searle John R. 1975. Indirect speech acts. In Cole Peter & Morgan Jerry (eds.), Syntax and semantics, vol. 3: Speech acts, 5982. New York: Academic Press.
Smith Carlota S. 1997. The parameter of aspect, 2nd edn.Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Sperber Dan & Wilson Deirdre. 1986. Relevance: Communication and cognition. Oxford: Blackwell.
Swart Henriette de. 1998. Aspect shift and coercion. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 16, 347385.
Tharaud François. 2008. Monosémie et diversité des emplois: Le cas de BE+V-ing en anglais. In Lauze Audrey, Barceló Gérard-Joan & Patard Adeline (eds.), De la langue au discours: L'un et le multiple dans les outils grammaticaux, 83197. Montpellier: PULM.
Twaddell Freeman W. 1960. The English verb auxiliaries. Providence, RI: Brown.
Van Bogaert Julie. 2009. The grammar of complement-taking mental predicate constructions in present-day spoken British English. Ph.D. dissertation, Ghent University.
Vendler Zeno. 1957. Verbs and times. The Philosophical Review 66, 143160. [Reprinted in Zeno Vendler, Linguistics in philosophy. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1967.]
Wekker Herman C. 1976. The expression of future time in contemporary British English. Amsterdam: North-Holland.
Williams Christopher. 2002. Non-progressive and progressive aspect in English. Fasano: Schena.
Wright Susan. 1994. The mystery of the modal progressive. In Kastovsky Dieter (ed.), Studies in Early Modern English, 467485. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Journal of Linguistics
  • ISSN: 0022-2267
  • EISSN: 1469-7742
  • URL: /core/journals/journal-of-linguistics
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 26
Total number of PDF views: 220 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 311 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 24th November 2017. This data will be updated every 24 hours.