The Perfect in (Brazilian) Portuguese: A Functional Discourse Grammar View

In most Germanic and Romance languages the present perfect has developed from a resultative meaning via an anterior into absolute past. In Functional Discourse Grammar terms this corresponds to the grammaticalization of a phasal aspectual operator at the layer of the Configurational Property, via a relative tense operator at the layer of the State-of-Affairs, into an absolute tense operator at the layer of the Episode. This is what happened in Romance languages, such as French and Italian, while Peninsular Spanish is developing in the same direction, without as yet having fully reached the absolute past stage. The Portuguese present perfect, however, is different as it does not express resultative aspect, relative past or absolute past meaning but rather the iteration or continuity of an event from some past moment onward until after the moment of speaking. A further idiosyncrasy of the perfect in Portuguese is that the auxiliary is based on Latin tenere rather than habere, as is the case in the other Romance languages. This paper describes the semantic and the morphosyntactic aspects of the grammaticalization of the (Brazilian) Portuguese perfect in diachrony and synchrony. It turns out that (i) the medieval habere-based Portuguese present perfect becomes obsolete and the past perfect develops into a relative past, (ii) the post-medieval tenere-based past perfect turns into a relative past as well, whereas (iii) the tenere-based present perfect undergoes semantic specialization in the course of the 20th century. This paper shows how these facts can be accounted for within the Functional Discourse Grammar approach to the grammaticalization of aspect and tense.

Towards a New Explanation of Sequence of Tense

Past-under-past embeddings have two readings, a simultaneous and a backward-shifted one. While existing accounts derive these readings via distinct mechanisms, be it by means of an ambiguity at the level of LF or via blocking of a cessation implicature, we propose an alternative account which avoids such ambiguity. For us, the meaning of a past tense morpheme, like -ed, is comprised of two components. Syntactically, every past tense morpheme carries an uninterpretable past feature [uPAST], to be checked by a (single) covert past tense operator Op- PAST carrying an interpretable feature [iPAST]. Semantically, the past tense marker encodes a relative non-future with respect to its closest c-commanding tense node (informally: ‘not later than’), immediately yielding the two distinct readings.

The development of the copula in Child English

The dissertation summarized here provides an account of the fact that young children acquiring English (around age 2) often produce utterances like (1), in which they omit a form of the copula, be. (1)I in the kitchen. Children’s production of forms like (1) is interesting for two main reasons: firstly, utterances like these do not occur in the input (adult English); secondly, children’s omission of the copula conforms to a systematic pattern (it is neither across the board, nor haphazard). In particular, children omit the copula far less frequently in utterances like (2). (2)He’s a dog. The difference between the constructions in (1) and (2) can be characterized in terms of the well-known semantic stage-level/individual-level contrast. That is, a location such as ‘in the kitchen’ denotes a stage-level property of the subject; a predicate such as ‘a dog’ denotes an individual-level property of the subject. I argue for a syntactic difference between stage- and individual-level predicates: stage-level predicates contain additional functional structure (AspP) that individual-level predicates lack. Cross-linguistic support for this proposal is provided. As for why children acquiring English omit the copula in main clauses, I link this to the fact that non-finite main clauses are permitted in child English. I define finiteness in terms of a binding relation between an abstract Tense Operator (TOP) (located in CP) and Infl. In certain grammars (among them child English) TOP may bind Asp instead of Infl, if Asp is projected in the particular clause. However, this binding relation does not result in the clause being finite. Since Asp is projected in clauses with stage-level predicates, but not in those with individual-level predicates, it follows that stage-level predicates may occur in non-finite clauses while individual-level predicates occur with a finite clause. Coupled with the hypothesis that an overt copula is finite (in the sample studied here it is inflected over 99% of the time) and an omitted copula indicates non-finiteness, the pattern of copula omission and production in child English is accounted for.