The Category of Tense

1. Time and tense.

Time is an unlimited duration in which things are considered as happening in the past, present or future. Time stands for the concept with which all people are familiar. Time is independent of language. Tense, which is derived from the Latin word tempus, stands for a verb form used to express a time relation. Time is the same to the mankind while tenses vary in different languages.

Graphically, time can be represented as a straight line, with the past to the left and the future to the right. Between these two points there is the present.

Time can be expressed linguistically in two basic ways: lexically and grammatically. Cf. John is in his study now. This sentence expresses the present time in two ways: grammatically (is) and lexically (now). As for lexical means, English has three sets of temporal adjuncts: those which refer to the present (now, today, this morning, this week, this month, this century, this epoch, etc.); those which refer to the past (yesterday, last week, last month, last year, last century, last decade, two minutes, days, weeks, months ago); and those which refer to the future (tomorrow, next minute, hour, week , a minute, hour, day, week, month, decade from now). But the choice of lexical means for expressing time is very poor in English. Stripped of their temporal adjuncts English sentences sound indefinite. They express the time distinctions in a rather general way, i.e. the processes are conceived to be tied to some specific time which, unfortunately, is not made explicit. Our analysis shows that English needs both ways of expressing time - lexical and grammatical.

1. John walks to school every morning.

2.I leave for London tomorrow.

It is obvious that the present forms of the verbs used in the above sentences do not show real time, i.e. they are not directly associated with the moment of speaking: John may not be walking to school now and I may not be leaving for London now.

The first sentence describes a habitual situation, i.e. a situation that holds at all times. However, this does not suggest that it does not happen at the time of speaking. In the second example, the present tense is used to refer to the future. This form is generally used for programmed (planned) events. A clash between tense and time can also be observed in sentences retelling the plots of books and films.

In the same way the past forms of the verbs do not always express the past time.

To sum it up, we cannot simply equate the Present Tense with the meaning of 'present time' and the Past Tense with the meaning of 'past time'. However, the basic meaning of the present form of the verb is present time and the basic meaning of the past form of the verb is past time.

The category of tense in English is a system of two-member oppositions showing the relation of the time of the process denoted by the verb to the present or past moment, or the moment of speaking. The existence of a future tense in English is problematic.

The present tense is the unmarked member of the opposition: it is the least specific in meaning and therefore can be used to express a wide range of temporal meanings. The present tense is also unmarked morphologically (except for the -s inflection); its forms are identical with the forms of the 'bare' infinitive. The past tense is marked both semantically and morphologically. It refers to a process that is visualized as remote in time or as unreality, and in the vast majority of verbs it has a distinct past form.

Traditional grammar usually presents English as having the future tense expressed by will (for some speakers, also shall) and the verb, e.g. Mary will get married tomorrow. There are several objections to the traditional treatment of this construction. The first objection concerns the meaning of the future tense in general: the future tense differs from the past and the present tense - the future describes a non-factive situation while the past and the present tense describe a factive situation. So, when we say that Mary will get married tomorrow, we do not present the situation as a fact; we only make a prediction or say what we think will happen. The second objection concerns the meaning peculiarities of will: the auxiliary will, apart from the meaning of prediction, has modal uses which do not necessarily have future time reference, e.g. He will go swimming in dangerous waters or He will be swimming now. The third objection concerns the expression of the future meaning by the present tense, e.g. Peter leaves for London tomorrow or If it rains tomorrow, we will get wet. These examples show that we can refer to future time by using the present tense.

So, the expression of the future is not disconnected with modal semantics. To refer the forms shall/should and will/would to grammatical word-morphemes, we must prove that these words have lost their modal meanings. As we cannot do this, all attempts to prove the existence of a grammaticalized future tense, or the grammatical category of posteriority or prospect, are futile. At present we could speak of a semi-grammaticalized future tense despite the existence of the so-called predictive future forms expressed by shall or will which are only demodalized (i.e. lose the meaning of obligation and volition) in specific contexts.