The Future Tense

Classifications of Tenses

There exist classifications embracing a rich variety of tenses. Temporal relations are considered by some scholars to be more complex than merely the present, the past and the future. Otto Jespersen’s classification is most peculiar. He distinguishes main or simple times (Present and Past), subordinate times which are points in time posterior or anterior to some other point (in the present, in the past or in the future). This is a logical scheme(the before past time, the after past time, the before future time, the after future time), with no simple future (She gave birth to a son who was to cause her great anxiety (the after past). He excluded the future on the ground that in English there are no grammatical means to express pure futurity, the “so called future” being modal.

The writer of a popular manual in practical grammar prof. Kaushanskaya distinguished 16 tenses. Her practical scheme of tenses is based on O. Jespersen’s scheme and comprises Progressive tenses (continuous, long) and Perfect tenses. There are 4 Indefinite tenses, 4 Continuous tenses, 4 Perfect tenses and 4 Perfect Continuous tenses.

The classifications embracing 3 tenses were advanced by Profs. Smirnitsky, Ilyish, Khlebnikova, et al. These classifications are based on a three tenses oppositional approach. It is the Past, the Present and the Future (a tertiary equipollent opposition: went::goes:shall/will go). In two-tense classifications we find The Past and the Present, or The Present and the Future (a binary privative opposition). In some schemes the Present is treated as an abstraction which cannot be objectively established. Others treat the Present stretching limitlessly into the future and into the past (prospectively and retrospectively).

As a colourless, neutral synthetic future which is to be found in Russian and French it is non-existent in English. O. Jespersen, Palmer, L. Barkhudarov hold that shall and will are modal verbs meaning obligation and volition. English does very well without regular auxiliaries to express futurity (The train leaves tomorrow. The train is leaving tomorrow. The train is to leave tomorrow. The train is about to leave tomorrow. The train is on the point of leaving). We do not find the Future in clauses of time and condition (If he comes, tell me about it. When he comes, tell me about it).

According to N.A.Kobrina, B.A.Ilyish, E.A.Korneeva, the English Tense system is represented by the opposition The Past: the Present: the Future. These scholars find that shall and will indicate merely futurity, they have become fully grammaticalized, losing their modality. N.A. Kobrina and E.A.Korneeva add that there exist two constructions shall/will + infinitive, in one shall and will are modals and in the other they are future auxiliaries. When they are auxiliaries, they can be contracted into ‘ ll. This marker of futurity can be attached to any class of words (What he says ’ll have authority).

M.Y.Blokh distinguishes newer categories within the Future. On the basis of the oppositions come:: shall come, come:: will come he distinguishes the category ofprospect, on the basis of the opposition sha ll come:: will come he distinguishes the category of futurity option. The distinction between the members of this opposition is neutralized in the element ‘ll. Shall and will are not substitutable. Will can be used in all persons, shall is relevant only for the first person singular and plural. So we can conclude that The Future is an unfinished system in English.

Дата добавления: 2014-01-07