1
When “Perfect” means “Plural”
Brenda Laca, Patricia Cabredo-Hofherr, Sandra de Carvalho⊕
(UMR 7023 – Université Paris 8)
1. Introduction
The facts
“Compound tenses” whose auxiliary is in the present indicative tend to show a
more restricted distribution than non-present or non-indicative forms. In a
particularly restrictive Northeastern variety of Brazilian Portuguese (BP), the
felicitous use of the construction ter ‘have’ + PP in the present indicative
(henceforth ‘PRES-PERF’) requires a plurality of events/intervals.
Proposal
The ‘PRES-PERF’ is to be analyzed as a temporal pluractional, contributing an
undespecified pluractional operator (frequentative/ habitual/ incremental). It not
only affects temporal structure, but also determines a particular relation between
this temporal structure and the time of evaluation, and of the time of evaluation
and Utt-T. The ‘PRES-PERF’ conflates the expression of eventuality modification
with that of the relations between Ev-T and Ast-T, and between Ast-T and Utt-T
Plan of the talk
•
•
•
•
•
Peculiarities of the ‘PRES-PERF’ in (NE)-BP: non-resultative, unambiguously
universal, highly restricted universal
Pluractional properties of the ‘PRES-PERF’
The internal structure of the ‘PRES-PERF’-interval.
A non-compositional analysis
Towards an explanation
2. Peculiarities of the ‘PRES-PERF’ in NE-BP.
2.1. The distribution of the ‘PRES-PERF’ clearly differs from the distribution of other
Perfect forms whose auxiliary is not in the present indicative (Amaral & Howe 2004,
Schmitt 2001).
1
a. Eu não encontrei ela. Ela tinha
saído.
I not find.PF.1SG her. She have.IMPF.3.SG go-out.PP
‘I didn’t find her. She had gone out”
b. Eu não encontro ela. #Ela tem
saído
[saiu OK].
I not find.PR.1SG her. She have.PR.3.SG go-out.PP [go-out. PF.3SG]
‘I don’t find her. She has gone out’
2
a. Pedro vai
entrar pela porta de trás. Eu ja vou
ter
Pedro go.PR.3.SG enter.INF by+the door behind. I already go.PR.1.SG have.INF
⊕
This is a preliminary report on ongoing joint work. The first author takes full
responsibility for all possible errors.
2
desarmado o segurança.
disarm.PP the guard
‘Pedro will come in through the back door. I will have already disarmed the
guard’
b. Pedro está
entrando pela porta de trás. #Eu ja tenho
Pedro LOC-be.PR.3.SG enter.GER by+the door behind. I already have.PR.1.SG.
desarmado [desarmei OK]
o segurança.
disarm.PP [disarm.PF.1.SG OK] the guard
‘Pedro is coming in through the back door. I have already disarmed the guard’
3
a. Não acredito
que João tenha
matado o segurança.
not believe.PR.1.SG that J. have PR.SUBJ.3.SG kill.PP the guard
‘I don’t believe that Joao has killed the guard”
b. #Acho
que João tem
matado [matou OK]
o segurança.
find PR.1.SG that J.
have PR.3.SG kill.PP [kill.PF.3.SG OK] the guard
‘I think that Joao has killed the guard’
2.2. The ‘PRES-PERF’ lacks not only resultative or (recent) anteriority readings, but
also (a) inferential uses, (4a); (b) future perfect uses (4b); (c) combinations with ja
‘already’ (4c); (d) generic/habitual contexts (4d).
4
a. [PFQU 14. Situation: It is morning. A wakes up, looks out of the window
and sees that the street is wet]
#Tem
chovido durante a noite. [Deve ter chovido/ (Parece que) choveu]
have.PR.3.SG rain.PP during the night. [must have rain.PP/ seem.PR.3.SG that rain.PF]
‘It has rained during the night’ [It must have rained/ It looks like it’s rained]
b. #Quando a Ana regressar de Groningen,
when the Ana return.INF of Groningen
já
tu tens
acabado a tese (Amaral & Howe 2004: ex. 12 OK)
already you have.PR.3.SG finish PP the thesis
‘When Ana gets back from Groningen, you will have already finished your thesis’
c. Ela (#já)
tem
escrito artigos.
She (#already) have.PR.3.SG write.PP articles
‘She has already written articles’
d. #Ultimamente, quando eu ligo,
o responsável
tem
saído.
Lately
when I phone. PR.1.SG, the person in charge have.PR.3.SG go-out.PP
‘These days, every time I phone, the person in charge is away’
2.3. “Universal” (or “Inclusive”) readings are obligatory
5
a. Since 2000, Alexandra has been living in LA.
b. Petros has been sick for the past two weeks.
6
a. Você tem
feito seus deveres de casa ?
you have.PR.3.SG do.PP your homework ?
‘Have you done/been doing your homework regularly?’
b. Pedro tem
dormido na varanda o inverno inteiro.
Pedro have.PR.3.SG sleep.PP in-the balcony the winter whole
‘Pedro has been sleeping on the balcony all this winter’
3
c. Esse tipo de cinema
tem
desaparecido na cidade a toda velocidade.
This type of movie-theater have.PR.3.SG disappear.PP in+the town to all speed
‘Movie-theaters of the kind have been rapidly disappearing from town’
In English and in other languages, universal readings arise only in the context of
certain interval or measure adverbials (Iatridou, Anagnostopoulu & Izvorsky
2001/2003):
7
a. Peter has been in Boston. [NON-UNIVERSAL]
b. Peter has been in Boston since Tuesday/for two months [AMBIGUOUS]
c. Peter has been in Boston at least since Tuesday/ for two months now
[UNIVERSAL]
By contrast, the ‘PRES-PERF’ consistently exhibits universal readings in any context.
2.3. A peculiarly restricted instance of a universal perfect
Universal readings require “homogeneous” situation descriptions (statives, habituals)
and are incompatible with perfective or bounded aspect. Thus, they can be analyzed as
the result of embedding a homogeneous eventuality description or an instance of
[UNBOUNDED]/ [IMPERFECTIVE] aspect under a Perfect operator (Iatridou,
Anagnostopoulu & Izvorsky 2001/2003, Pancheva 2003). But by far not all types of
homogeneous situations can be felicitously embedded under the ‘PRES-PERF’.
•
8
a. She hasn’t arrived yet.
b. #Ela ainda não tem
chegado [chegou OK]
she still not have.PR.3.SG arrive.PP [arrive.PF.3.SG OK]
•
9
negation
stage-level states
a. #Esse livro sempre tem
estado na prateleira da direita.
This book always have PR.3.SG be. PP in+the shelf of+the right
‘This book has always been on the righthand shelf’
b. #Essa loja tem
estado fechada (ultimamente).
This shop have PR.3.SG be. PP closed (lately).
‘This shop has been closed for some time’
c. #Pedro tem
estado no jardim/ nos Estados Unidos.
Pedro have PR.3.SG be. PP in+the garden/ in+the United States
‘Pedro has been in the garden / in the US’
d. Pedro tem
estado muito doente nos últimos tempos.
Pedro have PR.3.SG be. PP very ill
in+the last
times
‘Pedro has been very ill lately’
e. Pedro tem
estado bêbado / aborrecido.
Pedro have PR.3.SG be. PP drunk / upset
‘Pedro has been drunk / upset’
4
10
a. Como tenho
??estado/ andado deprimida últimamente,
as have.PR.3.SG be.PP / walk.PP depressed lately
ler
o seu texto me fez
acreditar que tudo ficaria
bem.
read.INF the your text me make.PF.3SG believe that all turn-out.COND.3.SG well
‘Since I have been depressed lately, reading your text led me to believe that all
would go well’
• iteration is a necessary condition for felicitous use of the ‘PRES-PERF’
(Schmitt 2001, Amaral & Howe 2004).
11
a. Pedro tem
dormido na varanda o inverno inteiro.
Pedro have.PR.3.SG sleep.PP in-the balcony the winter whole
‘Pedro has been sleeping on the balcony all this winter’
b. #O urso tem
dormido na sua caverna o inverno inteiro.
The bear have.PR.3.SG sleep.PP in-the his cave the winter whole
‘The bear has been sleeping in his cave all this winter’
•
12
iteration is not a sufficient condition for felicitous use
a. #Maria tem
tossido sem parar/ muito desde ontem.
Maria have.PR.3.SG cough.PP without stop / a lot since yesterday
‘Mary has been coughing non stop/ a lot since yesterday’
b. #Desde que ele conheceu Maria, ele tem
esperado as cartas dela.
since that he meetPF.3.SG Maria, he have.PR.3.SG await.PP the letters of-her.
‘Since he met Maria, he has waited for her letters’
•
13
a comparison with the English Present Perfect Progressive
a. Mary has been singing for some time. CONTINUATIVE
b. Mary has been calling you since this morning. FREQUENTATIVE
c. Mary has been dining out a lot lately. HABITUAL
d. Oil prices have been rising for some time. INCREMENTAL
In accordance with what we have seen for negated events, for states, and for
protracted events (11b), continuative readings are not possible for the ‘PRES-PERF’.
By contrast, frequentative, habitual and incremental readings are possible, as shown in
(14a-b):
14
a. (#)Eu tenho
feito as camas desde segunda feira. FREQUENTATIVE/
I have.PR.1.SG do.PP the beds since Monday
HABITUAL
‘Since Monday, I have been doing the beds’
b. Desde os anos 80 o número de estudantes tem aumentado. INCREMENTAL
since the years 80 the number of students have.PR.3.SG increase.PP
‘The number of students has increased since the eighties’
•
•
15
conditions on the length of the interval
a. #Eu tenho
feito
as camas desde as oito da
manhã.
5
I have.PR.1.SG do.PP the beds since the eight of+the morning
‘I have been doing the beds since eight o’clock in the morning’
b. #Ela tem
perguntado por você toda a manhã.
she have.PR.3.SG ask.PP
for you all the morning
‘She’s been asking for you the whole morning”
•
16
Conditions on the structure of the interval : discontinuity
a. Desde os anos 80, o número de estudantes tem
aumentado.
since the years 80 the number of students have.PR.3.SG increase.PP
‘The number of students has increased since the eighties’
b. ?? O nível do
rio tem
aumentado muito nos últimos anos.
The level of+the river have.PR.3.SG increase.PP a lot in+the last years
“The water level has risen a lot these past years’
In (16a) the increase in the number of students can only be measured by comparing
values at the beginning of each school year, whereas in (16b), the increase in the level
of water can be measured by comparing values at the beginning of much shorter
intervals.
Summing up: the‘PRES-PERF’ lacks resultative or anteriority readings, and
consistently behaves like a Universal perfect of a particularly restricted kind. It
requires that the interval stretching from some point in the past up to Utt-T not be a
homogeneous interval of validity for the temporal property denoted by the eventuality
description, i.e. that it not be “filled” by the temporal trace of a single event – and thus
excludes continuative readings. Discontinuity and distribution of the temporal
property over a sufficiently large interval are necessary conditions for felicitous use of
the ‘PRES-PERF’
3. Pluractional characteristics
Discontinuity and conditions on the length of the interval are typical for some
bona fide temporal pluractionals, such as described by Van Geehoven (2004). The
interaction of the ‘PRES-PERF’ with nominal arguments and with some adverbials also
replicates well-known properties of temporal pluractionals.
•
17
no multiplication effects on singular indefinite arguments.
a. #Tenho
comido uma maçã.
have PR.1.SG eat.PP an apple
‘I have eaten an apple’
b. # Qaartartoq sivisuumik qaaqattaarpoq
[=VG 2004 (30)]
qaartartuq
sivisuu-mik qaar-qattaar-puq
bomb.ABS
lengthy.INS explode-QATTAAR- IND.[-tr].3SG
‘A/the bomb exploded again and again for a long time.’
c. # Juan anduvo disparando un tiro [=Laca 2006]
Juan walk.SP.3.SG shoot.GER. a shot
‘Juan has been shooting a shot”
6
•
18
a. Tenho comido maçãs.
have PR.1.SG eat.PP apples
‘I have been eating apples’
b. Qaartartut sivisuumik qaaqattaarpoq
[=VG 2004 (30)]
qaartartuq
sivisuu-mik qaar-qattaar-put
bomb.ABS.PL lengthy.INS explode-QATTAAR- IND.[-tr].3SG SIC!
‘A/the bomb exploded again and again for a long time.’
c. Juan anduvo disparando tiros [=Laca 2006]
Juan walk.SP.3.SG shoot.GER. shots
19
a. Muitas / #Vinte pessoas têm
morrido no
Iraque.
many / twenty people have.PR.3.PL die.PP in+the Irak
‘A lot of / #twenty people have been dying in Irak’
b. Muitos / # Vinte estudantes têm
aderido ao
Partido Comunista.
many / twenty students have.PR.3.PL join.PP to+the Communist Party
‘A lot of / #twenty students have been joining the Communist Party’
•
20
interaction of pluractionals with adverbials indicating repetition: pluractionals
only admit degree quantifiers, never precise or vague cardinals (Yu 2003,
Laca 2006).
a. Eu tenho
visto muito /??muitas vezes a sua irmã ultimamente.
I have.PR.1.SG see.PP much/ many times the your sister lately.
‘I’ve been seeing your sister a lot/ ?many times lately’
b. #Eu tenho
visto três / várias vezes a sua irmã ultimamente.
I have.PR.1.SG see.PP three/ several times the your sister lately.
#‘I’ve been seeing your sister three/ several times lately’
c. #Eu tenho
dito milhões de vezes pra não fazer isso.
I have.PR.1.SG tell.PP millions of times for not doing this
#‘I’ve been telling you millions of times not to do this’
•
21
possibility of distributive correspondences with some plural nominal
arguments (most notably with bare plurals, but also with cumulative degree
quantifiers): distinct subevents or subintervals of validity of the verb are
mapped onto different ‘individual parts” of a plural participant.
cyclic quantified expressions (“every day”) and distributive expressions
(“once a week”), versus frequency adverbs
a. Tenho
visto (a) sua irmã todo dia.
have.PR.1.SG see.PP the your sister every day
‘I have been seeing your sister every day’
b. Ela tem
ligado uma vez por semana.
She have.PR.3.SG phone.PP one time by week
‘She’s been phoning once a week’
c. #Geralmente/ #Na maior parte do tempo tenho
visto a sua irmã
na escola.
usually / in+the most part of+the time have.PR.1.SG see.PP the your sister at school
?‘Usually/ Most of the time I’ve been seeing your sister at school’
7
Summing up: Like pluractionals, the ‘PRES-PERF’ has no multiplication effects on
indefinite arguments which could be attributed to an operator scoping over the
arguments, but it allows for distributive correspondences between subevents and
plural participants. The associated event plurality cannot be cardinalized, and the
distribution with other adverbs points to the lack of an accessible level of atomic
subevents.
4. The internal structure of the ‘PRES-PERF’ interval
Discontinuity: what counts as a multiplicity of events of the same type by contrast
with the occurrence of a single protracted event ?
4.1. Temporal gaps
•
22
a. Tenho
viajado muito nos últimos tempos.
have.PR.1.SG travel.PP much in+the last times.
‘I’ve been travelling a lot lately’
b. Decidi
ir ao médico
porque tenho
tido dores de cabeça muito fortes.
decide.PF.1.SG go to+the doctor, because have.PR.1.SG have.PP aches of head very strong
‘I’ve decided to go to the doctor, because I’ve been having very bad headaches’
•
23
iteration and intermittency readings with telic event descriptions that can be
easily shifted into activities (Amaral & Howe 2004).
a. O João tem
lido esse livro. [Amaral & Howe 2004]
The Joao have.PR.3.SG read.PP this book.
(i) ‘João has been reading this book repeatedly’.
(b) ‘João has been reading this book on and off.’
b. João tem
lido
tudo que o professor indica/
os livros de P. Freire.
Joao have.PR.3.SG read.PP all that the professor recommends/the books of P.Freire.
‘Joao has been reading everything the teacher recommends/ the books by P. Freire’
a. Maria anda
leyendo la Guerra y la Paz. (Laca 2006)
Maria walk.PR.3.SG read.GER the War and the Peace
‘Mary has been reading War and Peace (repeatedly/on an off)’
24
•
25
S-cumulative descriptions (Rothstein 2004) require temporal gaps for “plural
instantiation” readings.
incremental predicates (degree achievements)
a. Desde os anos 80, o número de estudantes tem
aumentado.
since the years 80 the number of students have.PR.3.SG increase.PP
‘The number of students has increased since the eighties’
b. ?? O nível do rio
tem
aumentado muito nos últimos anos.
The level of+the river have.PR.3.SG increase.PP a lot in+the last years
“The water level has risen a lot these past years’
8
4.2. Aspectual periphrases
estar + Gerund PROGRESSIVE (King & Suñer 1980),
ir + Gerund INCREMENTAL temporal structure (gradual or successive aspect)
andar + Gerund FREQUENTATIVE and/or HABITUAL temporal structure
viver + Gerund HABITUAL and CONTINUOUS temporal structure (see Campos1980)
26
a. Esse menino está
fazendo besteira.
This kid LOC-be.PR.3.SG do.GER nonsense
‘This kid is doing nonsense’
b. A gente vai
vivendo como pode.
The people go.PR.3.SG live.GER as can. PR.3.SG
‘We go on living as well we can”
c. Esse menino anda
fazendo besteira.
This kid
walk.PR.3.SG do.GER nonsense
‘This kid is doing nonsense’
d. Esse menino vive
fazendo besteira.
This kid
live.PR.3.SG do.GER nonsense
‘This kid is always doing nonsense’
•
27
The ‘PRES-PERF’ is only compatible with andar + Gerund:
a. *Esse menino tem
estado fazendo besteira.
This kid
have.PR.3.SG be.PP do.GER nonsense
b. *Esse menino tem
ido melhorando.
This kid
have.PR.3.SG go.PP improve.GER
c. Esse menino tem
andado fazendo besteira.
This kid
have.PR.3.SG walk.PP do.GER nonsense
d. *Esse menino tem
vivido fazendo besteira.
This kid
have.PR.3.SG live.PP do.GER nonsense
andar + Gerund ensures discontinuity of the distribution of the temporal property
throughout the interval. The progressive, the incremental and the continuous habitual
all presuppose a homogenous distribution, at least at the relevant level of granularity.
4.3. A potential exception to discontinuity: stage-level states without gaps
• gradable versus yes/no-states1
deprimido ‘depressed’, bébado ‘drunk’, doente ‘ill’, aborrecido ‘upset’: OK
vázio ‘empty’, fechado ‘closed’, locative predicates : OUT
28
1
a. Como tenho
?estado/andado deprimida ultimamente,
as
have.PR.3.SG be.PP / walk.PP depressed lately
ler o seu texto me fez bem.
read.INF the your text me do.PF.3.SG. well.
In the variety described by Amaral & Howe (2004), all stage-level states are
admissible and give rise to continuative or iterative readings.
9
‘Since I have been depressed lately, it was good for me to read your text’
b. # Paulo tem
estado no jardim.
Paulo have PR.3.SG be. PP in+the garden
“Paulo has been in the garde (for some time)”.
c. # Essa loja tem
estado fechada (ultimamente).
This shop have PR.3.SG be. PP closed (lately).
‘This shop has been closed for some time’
The definition of states as totally homogeneous predicates (Dowty 1979, Rothstein
2004) ignores a relevant difference between gradable and simply yes/no properties.
One is depressed, drunk or upset to different degrees, so that there is no total
homogeneity for the intervals of which the property holds.
• slight preference for the copula andar in these contexts
As a copula, andar conveys the same sense of intermittency or discontinuity that
characterizes its uses as a modifier verb in the periphrasis andar + Gerund.
5. The analysis
Two properties of the ‘PRES-PERF’:
(a) the location of the described eventuality in a sentence in the ‘PRES-PERF’:
the left boundary (LB) of the temporal trace precedes the highest anchor (Utt-T) and
its right boundary (RB) cannot strictly precede the highest anchor (and must probably
follow it).
(b) the internal structure of the interval: discontinuous, but regular distribution
of the temporal property/ event predicate denoted by the basic eventuality description
(verb plus arguments and V/VP-internal adjuncts) throughout the whole interval.
28
•
•
2
Utt-T
|
[V_V_V_V_V_V_V......]
LB
RB
Analytical problem: property (a) involves ordering relations between
intervals, and can thus be captured by time-relational approaches to aspect,
whereas property (b) concerns the temporal structure of the described
eventuality, and thus falls into the realm of eventuality modification. 2
The time-relational problem would not disappear by eliminating Utt-T as
highest anchor: we would still need to say that there is an interval (the interval
of evaluation) which is properly included in another interval with a particular
temporal structure.
Note that the problem would subsist even under the wholesale adoption of interval
semantics: relative location of an interval still remains quite distinct from the
distribution of a temporal property over this interval. An analogous problem arises in
the analysis of habitual aspect, if it is indeed the case that habitual aspect is associated
to imperfectivity, since the latter requires that the interval of evaluation be included in
the interval of which the eventuality holds.
10
The problem in a neo-Reichenbachian framework (Smith 1991, Demirdache &
Uribe-Etxebarria 2000)
29
Utt-T
|
[---------------------] Ast-T
[V_V_V_V_V_V_V......] Ev-T
The position attributed to Ast-T (not including the RB of the iteration, with its LB
possibly coinciding exactly with the LB of the iteration, and with its RB coinciding
with Utt-T) is justified by the behavior of some interval adverbials with the ‘PRESPERF’. Interval adverbials introduced by desde ’since’ and by até ‘until’ modify Ast-T
by giving its left resp. right boundary (Schaden (2007).
30
31
a. Até agora, tenho
andado no
mundo de cabeça levantada.
until now, havePR.1.SG walk.PP in+the world of head raised.
‘Up to know, I have walked around this world holding my head up’
b.#Até ontem,
tenho
andado no mundo de cabeça levantada.
until yesterday, havePR.1.SG walk.PP in+the world of head raised.
‘Until yesterday, I have walked around this world holding my head up’
a. Desde os anos 80, o número de estudantes tem
aumentado.
since the years 80 the number of students have.PR.3.SG increase.PP
‘The number of students has increased since the eighties’
b. Tenho
feito as camas desde a segunda feira.
have.PR.1.SG do.PP the beds since the Monday
‘Since Monday, I have been doing the beds’
Perfect Time Span- adverbials : últimamente ‘lately’, nos últimos tempos / anos /
meses ‘recently, these last years/ months’.
The ‘PRES-PERF’ operator
32
‘PRES-PERF’ : λP λi ∃E
∃e, e’ [e ∈ Ε & e’∈ Ε] & ∀e, e’ ∈ Ε [(P (e) & P (e’) & ¬ τ(e) o τ(e’)]
& i ⊂ τ(E) & RB τ(E) ⊄ i & RB(i) = Utt-T
[first line: pluractional properties; first two conjuncts in the second line: aspectual
properties (i=AstT, interval of evaluation); last conjunct: deictic temporal location]
• Non-compositionality
Given the morphological makeup:
[Tense/Mood (present indicative) + [auxiliary (ter) + [Past Participle]]]
an analysis in which bits of semantic information are attached to bits of morphology
would be clearly preferrable.
•
Two purportedly compositional analyses.
Giorgi & Pianesi (1997: 123-126)
1. The Portuguese Present Perfect refers to a habit.
11
2. The form ter in this construction is not an auxiliary, but a homophonous full verb
(a predicate of events) meaning ‘keep’.
3. The participial clause combining with this full verb contains a hidden generic
operator, Gen, which ensures repetition.
4. When ter + PP appears in the Present tense, ter cannot function as an auxiliary,
because the resulting form would compete with the synthetic simple (perfective) past
form, which is itself able to act as a “present perfect” (with resultative, inferential,
present relevance, and experiential readings). The auxiliary version of ter can surface
in the case of the pluperfect (and the prospective/future perfect, the perfect infinitive,
the perfect subjunctive etc.) because a competing form is lacking.
This solution is not entirely compositional: hidden operator modifying temporal
structure in order to fulfill the requirements of the higher element (ter ‘keep’) →
coercion (de Swart 1998) → non-compositional mechanism.
There is no justification for the operator being a generic one –or one requiring some
sort of iteration (If the ter appearing in the ‘PRES-PERF’ literally means ‘keep’, it
would select for any homogenous situation, and only to give rise to iteration effects
in the case of non-homogenous (punctual, telic) basic eventuality descriptions, as
illustrated by (33a-c):
33
a. Mary kept singing for hours.
b. Mary kept arriving late.
c. Mary kept knocking at the door.
There is no conclusive syntactic evidence for the assumption that ter has the status
of a full verb in the‘PRES-PERF’ and the status of an auxiliary in the other “compound
tenses” (Schmitt 2001).
Schmitt (2001)
1. The Present Tense, both in Portuguese and in English, selects for stative predicates.
2. The Perfect in English has a homogeneous, stative predicate as output, whereas it
has a non-homogeneous (bounded) predicate as output in Portuguese. Combination of
a Present with a Perfect in Portuguese would require a coercion operator with a
homogeneous stative predicate as output between the Perfect and the Present. Since
the output of the Perfect is “bounded”, the coercion operator will produce an
unbounded iteration of bounded eventualities as the state description required by the
Present.
Coercion → non-compositional mechanism.
Portuguese vs Spanish
The Spanish Present Perfect –even in highly restrictive varieties such as Mexican
and Rio de la Plata Spanish- does not convey iteration accross the board.
The Spanish Present does not differ from the English and Portuguese Present in
requiring homogenous situations, but not necessarily stative ones (pace Schmitt 2001)
The following contrasts (from Schmitt 2001) are at best dubious:
34
a. Pedro canta (en este momento).
Pedro sing.PR.3.SG (in this moment)
‘Pedro is singing (at this moment)’
b. O Pedro canta (*neste momento).
SPANISH
PORTUGUESE
12
The Pedro sing.PR.3.SG (in this moment)
35
a. Pedro canta un aria (en este momento) SPANISH
Pedro sing.PR.3.SG an aria (in this moment)
‘Pedro is singing an aria (at this moment)’
b. O Pedro canta uma ária (#neste momento) PORTUGUESE
The Pedro sing.PR.3.SG an aria (in this moment)
36
a. Pedro come una manzana (en este momento)
Pedro eat.PR.3.SG an apple (in this moment)
‘Pedro is eating an apple (at this moment)’
b. O Pedro come uma maçã (#neste momento)
The Pedro eat.PR.3.SG an apple (in this moment)
SPANISH
PORTUGUESE
Attributing the differences between the Present Perfect in Spanish and Portuguese to
differences in the makeup or selectional restrictions of the Present in both languages is
thus unwarranted.
Summing up: these two purportedly compositional analyses of the ‘PRESPERF’ fail in a number of points. Giorgi & Pianesi’s analysis builds on a doubtful
distinction between ter as a full verb and as an auxiliary, whereas Schmitt’s builds on
a doubtful distinction between Presents that select for states and Presents that only
select for homogeneous situations (including processes). Both analyses resort to the
insertion of hidden operators (Gen in the former case, ITER or HAB in the latter), but
the selectional properties of the element triggering coercion do not sufficiently justify
that only these, and not other operators, should be required. In brief, the coercion
mechanism assumed is not really able to account for the fact that “perfect” means
“plural” in the case under discussion.
6. Towards an explanation
Q. What is the obvious diference between the ‘PRES-PERF’ and the rest of the
Romance Present Perfects ?
A. The auxiliary for compound tenses in Portuguese is not a descendant from habere,
but a descendant from tenere ‘hold, keep’, and auxiliary substitution of ter for haver
is a relatively recent process.
The specialization of the ‘PRES-PERF’ (be it as a form including a pluractional
component, NE-BP, or as a non-resultative, universal perfect in other less restrictive
varieties) is also a relatively recent process (Sten 1973, Suter 1984).
Speculation:
•
•
The key to the explanation lies in ter, but the relationship between the
lexical choice of an auxiliary and the semantic peculiarities is much
less direct than assumed by G& P.
Auxiliary substitution of ter for haver did not particularly affect the
other compound forms, but in the case of the ‘PRES-PERF’, it led to the
replacement of a construction conveying resultativity or anteriority
(w.r.t. Utt-T or another non-past anchor) by a “grammatical idiom”
with the semantics defined in (32) above.
13
Unstable competition situations in languages in which a (new) (Present) Perfect is
created along an already existing form expressing anteriority w.r.t. Utt-T:
Cases of a complete “aoristic-drift” of the Perfect: the old “past” form ends up
losing the competition against a Perfect which has taken over most of its uses (Meillet
1909).
“When the old guy wins”: no diachronic law requires that an innovation will expand
at the expense of an older form; instead of winning over a potentially competing older
form, the innovation may either disappear or become confined to a very special
semantic contribution.
‘PRES-PERF’: The old guy won...and the enabling factor for the restrictive
development of the ‘PRES-PERF’ is to be found in auxiliary substitution, which did
away with any rests of the resultative profile of the ‘PRES-PERF’.
Ter gives rise in fact to a clearly resultative construction, which Portuguese shares
with Spanish and Catalan, but it is a different construction, in which ter embeds a
small clause constitued by an object and an agreeing Past Participle:
37
a. Eu tenho
feitas
as
camas desde segunda-feira (Schmitt 2001)
I have.PR.1.SG do.PP.FEM.PL the.FEM.PL bed.FEM.PL from Monday.
‘The beds are made since Monday’
b. Ele tem
duas
costelas quebradas.
He have.PR.3.SG two.FEM.PL rib.FEM.PL break.PP.FEM.PL
‘He has two broken ribs’
c. ??A essa hora já tenho
os cabelos
escovados,
to this hour already have.PR.1.SG the hair.MASC.PL comb.PP. MASC.PL
a roupa
engomada,
e a maquilhagem
feita.
the clothes.FEM.SG iron.PP.FEM.SG and the make-up.FEM.SG do. PP. FEM.SG
‘At this time, my hair is already combed, my clothes ironed and my makeup
done’
The fact that ter (and not haver) enters into the composition of the ‘PRES-PERF’
does play a role in the semantic peculiarities of this form, but it is an indirect one. Ter
is not a full verb in the construction –at most, it should be classified as a semantic
modifier like the rest of the periphrastic “semiauxiliaries” of the Romance languages.
As such, it preserves some of the properties that characterize its use as a full verb, in
particular properties relating to argument structure (external argument/topic).
38
a. #Tem chovido muito ultimamente.
have.PR.3.SG rain.PP much lately
b. #(Os ricos) têm construido muitas casas nesse barrio.
the rich have.PR.3.SG build.PP many houses in+this neighborhood
c. #(Aquí) tem feito um frio danado.
here have.PR.3.SG do.PP a cold terrible
Development of a construction into a “grammatical idiom” and semantic restriction
of a construction are not exceptional processes. Mutatis mutandis, this case is
analogous to what happened to gerundial periphrases with verbs of movement in
Romance: from the point of view of the medieval languages, they were well on their
14
way to become expressions for the Progressive, but they lost out against STARE +
Gerund (Laca 2000).
References
Alexiadou, Artemis & al. (eds) (2003), Perfect explorations. Berlin : Mouton/de Gruyter.
Amaral, Patricia & Chad Howe, 2004, Reexamining the Portuguese Perfect Puzzle. 8th Hispanic Linguistics
Symposium, University of Minnesota (handout)
Campos, Odette de Souza, 1980, O gerúndio no português. Rio de Janeiro. Presença.
Dahl, Östen (ed) (2000), Tense and aspect in the languages of Europe. Berlin : Mouton/de Gruyter.
Demirdache, H. & M. Uribe- Etxebarria (2000) The syntax of temporal relations : a uniform approach to tense and aspect,
in R. Martin & al. (eds), Step by Step : Essays on Minimalist Syntax in Honor of Howard Lasnik. Cambridge,
Mass : MIT Press.
Dowty, David, 1979, Word meaning and Montague grammar. Dordrecht. Reidel.
Giorgi, Anna & Pianesi, Fabio (1997), Tense and aspect. From semantics to morphosyntax. New-York/Oxford :
Oxford University Press.
Iatridou, Sabine, Agnastonopolou, Elena & Izvorski, Roumania, 2003, Observations about the form and meaning
of the Perfect, in Alexiadou & al. (eds). 153-204.
King, Larry & Margarita Suñer, 1980, The meaning of the Progressive in Spanish and Portuguese. The Bilingual
Review/Revista Bilingue VII, 3. 222-238.
Laca, Brenda, 2000, Auxiliarisation et opularisation dans les langues romanes, Revue de Linguistique Romane, 64.
427-443.
Laca, Brenda, 2006, Indefinites, quantifiers, and pluractionals. What scope effects tell us about event pluralities, in
Tasmowski, L. & Vogeleer, S. (eds). Non-definiteness and Plurality, Amsterdam. Benjamins.
Meillet, Antoine, 1909, Disparition des formes simples du prétérit, in Linguistique historique et linguistique
générale, Paris, Champion. 1965.
De Swart, Henriette, 1998, Aspect shift and coercion. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 16. 347-385.
Pancheva, Roumania, 2003, The aspectual makeup of Perfect participles and the interpretations of the Perfect, in
Alexiadou & al. (eds) 277-306.
Rothstein, Susan, 2004, Structuring Events, Oxford, Blackwell.
Schaden, Gerhard, 2007, La sémantique du Parfait : étude des “temps composés” dans un choix de langues
germaniques et romanes. Doctoral Diss. Université Paris 8.
Schmitt, Cristina, 2001, Cross-linguistic variation and the Presen Perfect: the case of Portuguese, Natural
Language and Linguistic Theory 19. 403-453.
Smith, Carlota, 1991), The parameter of aspect, Dordrecht, Kluwer Academic Press.
Squartini, Mario & Bertinetto, Pier Marco 2000, The Simple and compound past in Romance languages, in Dahl
(ed) 2000. 405-475.
Sten, Holger, 1973, L”emploi des temps en portugais moderne. Copenhaguen, Munksgaard.
Suter, Alfred, 1984, Das portugiesische Pretérito Perfeito Composto. Bern, Francke.
Van Geenhoven, Veerle, 2004, For-adverbials, frequentative aspect, and pluractionality,
Semantics 12.135-190.
Natural Language