在作者极富理论探索的讨论下，本书叙述了他从所收集的材料中发现的各种语言中相应的变体，并且也揭示了这些变异的条件限制，显示了作者非同一般的敏感和洞察力。从本书，我们可以建立起一个对语言做进一步时态研究的理论体系来。

 Preface  vii

I·Some th∞reticIl and methodologieal preliminaries 1

I．1scope ofthe work  1

I．2 Time and language  2

I．3 Location in time  7

I．4 Tense as grammaticalised location in time  9

I．5 Tense and deixis  13

I．6 Basic and secondary meanings  18

I·7 Meaning and implicature  23

I．8 Tense，grammar。and discourse  26

2．Abmlutetense  36

2．I Present tense  36

2．2 Pasttense  41

2·3 Future tense  43

2．4 Binary tense systems  48

2·5 Tenseless languages  50

2·6 Combinations of absolute tenses  53

3．Relativetense  56

3．I Pure relative tense  56

3．2 Absolute"relative～tense  64

4·De|：ree-of r~moteness  83

S．Tenseand syntax  102

5．I Tense neutralisation  102

5．2 Sequence of tenses  104

5．3 Indirect speech in English and Russian  107

5．4 Future time reference in English subordinate clauses  107

6·Conclusion：Towards_formal theory of tense  122

6．I Absolute tense  I 22

6．2 Relative tense  124

6．3 Combined absolute-relative tense  125

6．4 Degrees of remoteness  I 29

6．5 Tense combinations  129

6．6 Conclusion  130

References  11I

Index oflanguages  134

Index of names   136

Index of subject  138

My aim in wrltmg this book has been to provide an introduction to the nature of tense in language．This has entailed two more specific obiectives： first，the definition of tense(Chapter I，especially section I．4)。and。secondly，an account 0f the range of variation found in tense systems across the languages of the world．Because of this second more specific aim．I have tried to make the book rich in illustrative material from a wide range 0f Ianguages·However，tt should always be borne in mind that this material presented not solely as being of interest in its own right or to specialists in tnat particular language；rather。the language-specific material is designed t0。llustrate the range of variation found cr088·linguistically and to suggest the limitations which a general theory of tense must place on such possibilities for variation． It IS my belief that the best pedagogical approach is to present a coherent account of some domain，rather than to attempt to describe in overview the tull range of theories and pre-theoretical statements that have been made about that domain·I have not，therefore，felt myself oblied to take account ot the various competmg approaches to tense that abound in the general and "anguage。specific literature．I have striven rather to present and iustify the approach that I believe to be correct；in a few instances．where I am genuinely unsure as to the relative merits of competing viewpoints．I have indicated this·As discussed in chapter I，I take tense to be defined as the grammaticalisation 0¨ocation in time，and I believe that at least much of what has traditionally been called tense does fall under this definition． While I believe that this approach to tense is correct，clearly if the rcader。having worked through the various data and claims presented in this book。can show that they can be accounted for more elegantly in a theory where tense lS not viewed In this way，then I still believe that the presentation of a range of tense data in this book will have served a purpose in the advancement of our science． unlike much recent work on tense，the present book contains Iittle byway of formalism。nor is it written within the framework of any specificcurrent theory of linguistics．This is not intended as a denigration of work inthese areas．in particular tense logic．Rather，I believe that there is a certainsystematised set of facts about tense in human language that must be takeninto account by any general theory of tense，and therefore by any generaltheory of language that incorporates an account of tense．It is these facts thatI have attempted to systematise in the present work．I believe that thisshould serve as a corrective to current formal approaches to the representation of tense which do not take account of the range of variation foundacross languages，or conversely predict a greater range of variation than ispossible in human language．It is therefore to be hoped that this book willlcad to a dialogue between those interested in establishing the range of tenseoppositions made cross-linguistically or in individual languages，and thoseinterested in constructing a formal theory of tense or in incorporating such a formal approach into a formal theory of language overall．Some suggestionsas to how the material in this book might serve to foster a more formalaccount are given in chapter 6． The approach outlined in the previous paragraph is felt by many linguistst0 be un．theoretical fa．theoretical，even anti·theoretical)．This is not myintention nor。l believe，my achievement．My aim in this book is to present a theory of tense，a theory which is sensitive both to the range of tenseoppositions found cross．1inguistically and to the limitations on that variation．My ultimate hope is，of course，that the ideas propounded in thisbook will be incorporated into a more general theoD of language，but at the ined in this book will provide constraints on the evaluation of such a theory in terms of its adequacy in handling material on tense．When these ideas on tense are incorporated into a more generaltheory，then the more general theory may well suggest further questions about tense which have been overlooked in the present work．This is simplythe general interaction between work in a specific sub·domain of linguistics and the overall theoretical framework．1 would be sad indeed if the present book had exhausted all the interesting questions that could be asked abouttense．0n the other hand，my hope fof the future is somewhat tempered bythe fact that many current linguistic theories(as opposed to theories specifically about tensel seem to have remarkably little of interest to say about tense。 The main area of concentration of this book is the typology of tense， establishment of the range within which languages can vary In the gram·maticalised expression of location in time．There are many adjacent areas which l have chosen not to discuss in this book，not because I feel that theyare uninteresting．but because I am either not competent to discuss themand evaluate the often conflicting Iiterature concerning them，or becausethey would take me too far afield from my main concerns．I have alreadymentioned tense logic．although I believe that a thorough grounding intense logic will prove an invaluable aid in trying to integrate the ideascontained in this book into a more general formal theoretical perspective．Inaddition。I have not considered the acquisition of tense systems，whether byfirst or second language learners．I have not discussed in detail the use oftense in discourse：this decision is likely to be particularly controversial．andI have therefore included some iustification for my position here in sectioni．8．Finally．I have not considered in any detail recent work on thepsychology，philosophy，or physics of time；the discussion of conceptualisa-tion of time in section i．2 is no doubt naive，but I believe iustified by thekinds of time location distinctions found in naturaI language．While I findcurrent philosophical work on the nature of time fascinating，it is not clearto me that it provides any insight into the linguistic phenomenon of tense． Examples from languages other than English are usually presented asgiven in the source cited，or transliterated where a non-Roman alphabet isused in the source．While I have tried to keep to reliable sources for a11 mymaterial．it should be borne in mind that the establishment of the correctmeaning of a grammatical category like tense is by no means straight·forward，so that even for a language as thoroughly studied as English there remains controversy concerning the definition of the various tenses，and statements that turn out to be erroneous can be found in what are otherwisereliable and insightful sources．I hope that readers who find errors of analysis in the examples presented will communicate their objections to me． While l have carefully checked all examples against original sources． experience suggests that in a book citing examples from a wide range oflanguages typographical errors invariably slip past the author．I hope that readers spotting such errors will forgive me．and communicate the errors tome． Portions of the material contained in this book have been presented atvarious fora。in North America，Australia，Brazil and the Netherlands，andI am grateful to all those who have offered me comments on these earlierversions of this material．I am particularly grateful to the students and~uests in my seminar on Tense at the Universitv of Southern California． For comments on a slightly earlier draft。I am grateful to John Lyons，N．V． Smith and Dieter Wunderlich．I have also benefited from general discussion with()sten Dahl．More specific acknowledgements are included in the relevant footnotes．Preparation of the pre．final draft was carried out while I was a guest at the Max-Planck-Institut ffir Psycholinguistik in Nijmegen．1n cnapter I,I have attempted to discuss various theoretical and methodolog"cal assumptions which underlie the body of the book fchapters 2-4"Keade;。who are new to the area of tense may prefer，on first reading， tokim through chapter I and concentrate on the more central chapters:the easons why some of the problems discussed in chapter I are problems will then be cIearer after the more central material has been assimilated．and this capter can then more profitably be studied in detail． May 1984  Bernard comrie