Category of Aspect

The category of aspect is a linguistic representation of the objective category of Manner of Action. Grammatical aspective meanings form a variable grammatical category which is traditionally associated with the opposition of continuous and non-continuous forms of the verb. The realization of the category of aspect is closely connected with the lexical meaning of verbs (Fig. 63).

Fig. 63

A great divergence of opinions can be found on the problem of the English aspect (Table 5).

Table 5

Evolution of Views

The “tense view”	H. Sweet, O. Espersen
The “tense-aspect blend view”	I.P. Ivanova
The “aspect view”	A.I. Smirnitsky, V.N. Yartseva, B.A. Ilyish, L.S. Barchudarov

The main difference lies in the interpretation of the categorial semantics of the oppositional members continuous and indefinite forms: the categorial meaning of the continuous form is usually defined as the meaning of duration, while the interpretation of the categorial semantics of the indefinite form causes controversy: the indefinite form may be interpreted as

• having a temporal meaning (H. Sweet, O. Espersen),

• having no aspective meaning (I.P. Ivanova),

• as a form having a vague content (N. Voronlsova),

• as a form stressing the fact of the performance of the action (A.I. Smirnitsky). In Modern Linguistics A.I. Smirnitsky’s interpretation of the categorial semantics of the indefinite form is widely accepted.

Category of Retrospect

The category of retrospect or the category of perfect is as fundamental to the English verb as the categories of tense and aspect, whereas it is quite alien to the Russian verb. The category of perfect is constituted by the opposition of the perfect to the non-perfect (Fig. 64).

Fig. 64

The perfect forms denote action preceding certain moments of time in the present, past or future. The non-perfect forms denote actions belonging to certain moments of time in the present, past or future.

In theoretical grammar the interpretation of perfect / non-perfect verb-forms refers to disputable questions (Table 6).

Table 6

Evolution of Views

The “tense view”	H. Sweet, G. Curme, M. Bryant, J.R. Aiken, N.F. Irtenyeva, M.A. Ganshina
The “aspect view”	M. Deutschbein, E.A. Sonnenschein, A.S. West, G.N. Vorontsova
The “tense-aspect blend view”	I.P. Ivanova
The “time correlation view”	A.I. Smirnitsky
The “retrospective coordination view”	M.Y. Bloch

Some linguists interpret the opposition of perfect / non-perfect forms as aspective (0. Jespersen, I.P. Ivanova, G.N. Vorontsova), others as the opposition of tense forms (H. Sweet, G.O. Curme, A. Korsakov).

A.I. Smirnitsky was the first to prove that perfect and non-perfect make up a special, self-sufficient, category which he called the “category of time correlation”. This viewpoint is shared now by a vast majority of linguists.

Developing A.I. Smirnilsky’s views on the categorial semantics of perfect / non-perfect forms, M.Y. Bloch comes to the conclusion that in English there exist two aspective categories: the category of development (based on the opposition of continuous and non-continuous forms) and the category of retrospective coordination (based on the opposition of perfect and non-perfect forms).