Skip to main content

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
Cancel
×
×
Home
  • Home
Article
  • Cited by 9
  • Cited by
    Crossref Citations
    Crossref logo
    This article has been cited by the following publications. This list is generated based on data provided by CrossRef.
    DE WIT, ASTRID BRISARD, FRANK and MEEUWIS, MICHAEL 2018. The epistemic import of aspectual constructions: the case of performatives. Language and Cognition, Vol. 10, Issue. 02, p. 234.
    Martínez-Vázquez, Montserrat 2018. I’m loving it! A Corpus-Based Study of the Progress of love. Journal of English Linguistics, Vol. 46, Issue. 2, p. 140.
    Durst-Andersen, Per 2018. Aspect as a communicative category. Evidence from English, Russian and French. Lingua, Vol. 209, Issue. , p. 44.
    PETRÉ, PETER 2017. The extravagant progressive: an experimental corpus study on the history of emphatic [be Ving]. English Language and Linguistics, Vol. 21, Issue. 02, p. 227.
    De Wit, Astrid 2017. The expression of mirativity through aspectual constructions. Review of Cognitive Linguistics, Vol. 15, Issue. 2, p. 385.
    Petré, Peter 2016. Unidirectionality as a cycle of convention and innovation. Belgian Journal of Linguistics, Vol. 30, Issue. , p. 115.
    DE WIT, ASTRID 2016. The relation between aspect and inversion in English. English Language and Linguistics, Vol. 20, Issue. 01, p. 107.
    Anthonissen, Lynn De Wit, Astrid and Mortelmans, Tanja 2016. Aspect Meets Modality: A Semantic Analysis of the German Am-Progressive. Journal of Germanic Linguistics, Vol. 28, Issue. 01, p. 1.
    van Rooy, Bertus and Piotrowska, Caroline 2015. Grammatical Change in English World-Wide. Vol. 67, Issue. , p. 465.
    ×
  • Get access
    Add to cart USD25.00
    Check if you have access via personal or institutional login
    Log in Register Recommend to librarian

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
COPYRIGHT: © Cambridge University Press 2013 
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, 463–508.
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, 5–16.
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, 251–285.
Brisard, Frank. 2002a. The English present. In Brisard, (ed.), 251–297.
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, 317–325.
Collins, Peter. 2008. The progressive aspect in World Englishes: A corpus-based study. Australian Journal of Linguistics 28, 225–249.
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, 33–52.
Dowty, David R. 1975. The stative in the progressive and other essence/accident contrasts. Linguistic Inquiry 6, 579–588.
Dowty, David R. 1977. Toward a semantic analysis of verb aspect and the English imperfective progressive. Linguistics and Philosophy 1, 45–77.
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, 79–89.
Güldemann, Tom. 2003. Present progressive vis-à-vis predication focus in Bantu: A verbal category between semantics and pragmatics. Studies in Language 27.2, 323–360.
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, 344–347.
Kay, Paul & Fillmore, Charles J.. 1999. Grammatical constructions and linguistic generalizations: The What's X doing Y? construction. Language 75, 1–33.
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, 1–32.
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, 89–118. Umeå: Swedish Science Press.
Langacker, Ronald W. 2001. The English present tense. English Language & Linguistics 5, 251–273.
Langacker, Ronald W. 2002. Deixis and subjectivity. In Brisard, (ed.), 1–28.
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, 45–86. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Larreya, Paul. 1999. BE+-ING est-il un marqueur d'aspect? Anglophonia 6, 135–150.
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, 1–67.
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, 760–787.
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, 419–429. 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, 59–82. 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, 347–385.
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, 83–197. 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, 143–160. [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, 467–485. 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? *

CAPTCHA *

Skip to the audio challenge
×

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Cancel
Confirm
×