FINITE VERB. PERSON AND NUMBER. TENSE.

expresses

the processual relations of substances and phenomena is related to such sentenceconstitutive factors as: predication, communication purposes, subject-object relation, gradation of probabilities,

 The

categories of person and number are closely connected with each other Are reflective categories for the verb the process itself cannot be "person-setting the same as it cannot be either "singular" or "plural"

In the present tense the expression of the category of person is divided into three subsystems: 1. the modal verbs that have no personal inflexions: can, may, must, shall, will, ought, need, dare 2. made up by the unique verbal lexeme be (am, is, are) 3. remaining multitude of the English verbs. Is one-personal:the third person singular -(e)s [-z, -s, -iz] (the other two are unmarked)

The archaic person-conjugation has one extra feature:a special inflexion for the second person singular 1. The modal person-conjugation is distinguished by the second person: canst, may(e)st, wilt, shalt, shouldst, wouldst, ought(e)st, need(e)st, durst. 2. The personal be-conjugation is complete in three explicitly marked forms, am, art, is. 3. In the archaic person-conjugation of the rest of the verbs two of the three of its forms, the third and second persons, are positively marked, while the first person remains unmarked, e.g. comes comestcome, blows blowest blow, stops stoppest stop,

 the

future tense marks not the third, but the first person in distinction to the remaining two and it includes in its sphere also the plural.
will

Shall

from the formally morphemic point of view the grammatical expression of number is hardly featured the more or less distinct morphemic featuring of the category of number can be seen only with the archaic forms of the unique be, both in the present tense and in the past tense. cannot be called quite explicit, since the opposition of the category consists in the unmarked plural form for all the persons being contrasted against the marked singular form for each separate person

 This

self-indicative role is performed lexically by the personal pronoun I. The semantic content of the second person is the indication of the individual who is listening to the first person speaking . This listener-indicative function is performed by the personal pronoun you. These two express the immediate participants of the communication

 the

third person indicates all the other entities of reality, i.e. beings, things, and phenomena not immediately included in the communicative situation

The category of number represented in the forms of personal pronouns

The

number of a substantive normally expresses either the singularity or plurality of its referent ("one more than one", or "plural non-plural"), the quality of the referents, as a rule, not being reinterpreted with the change of the number With the personal pronouns, though, it is different

the first person plural does not indicate the plurality of the "ego", it can't mean several I's. it denotes the speaker plus some other person or persons belonging, from the point of view of the utterance content The second person plural is essentially different from the first person plural it denotes either more than one listener or, similar to the first person, one actual listener plus some other person or persons belonging to the same background

one might think that the third person plural would wholly coincide with the plural of an ordinary substantive name. On closer observation we note that the plural of the third person is not the substantive plural proper, but the deictic, indicative, pronominal plural; it may either be related to the singular hepronoun, or the she-rnun, or the itpronoun, or to any possible combination of them according to the nature of the plural object of denotation.

VERB: TENSE

is one of the typical functions of the finite verb the meaning of process finds its complete realisation only if presented in certain time conditions the expression or non-expression of grammatical time, together with the expression or non-expression of grammatical mood in person-form presentation, constitutes the basis of the verbal category of finitude, i.e. the basis of the division of all the forms of the verb into finite and non-finite

 it

is necessary to strictly distinguish between the general notion of time, the lexical denotation of time, and the grammatical time proper, or grammatical temporality time exposes it as the universal form of the continual consecutive change of phenomena. Time, as well as space are the basic forms of the existence of matter

All the lexical expressions of time are divided into "present-oriented", or "absolutive" expressions of time, and "non-present-oriented", "nonabsolutive" expressions of time words and phrases like now, last week, in our century, in the past, in the years to come, very soon, yesterday, in a couple of days, giving a temporal characteristic to an event from the point of view of its orientation in reference to the present moment, are absolutive names of time

The non-absolutive time denotation does not characterise an event in terms of orientation towards the present. This kind of denotation may be either "relative" or "factual The relative expression of time correlates two or more events showing some of them either as preceding the others, or following the others, or happening at one and the same time with them: after that, before that, at one and the same time with, some time later, at an interval of a day or two, at different times,

 The

factual expression of time either directly states the astronomical time of an event, or else conveys this meaning in terms of historical landmarks: in the year 1066, during the time of the First World War, at the epoch of Napoleon, at the early period of civilisation

 It

is the verbal expression of abstract, grammatical time that forms the necessary background for the adverbial contextual time denotation in an utterance; without the verbal background serving as a universal temporal "leader", this marking of time would be inadequate.

What informative content should the following passage convey with all its lexical indications of time {in the morning, in the afternoon, as usual, never, ever), if it were deprived of the general indications of time achieved through the forms of the verb? My own birthday passed without ceremony. I worked as usual in the morning and in the afternoon went for a walk in the solitary woods behind my house. I have never been able to discover what it is that gives these woods their mysterious attractiveness. They are like no woods I have ever known.

In Modern English, the grammatical expression of verbal time, i.e. tense, is effected in two correlated stages. At the first stage the opposition the past tense to the present tense. The marked member of this opposition is the past form. At the second stage, the process receives a non-absolutive relative time characteristic by means of opposing the forms of the future tense to the forms of no future marking.

 In

accord with the oppositional marking of the two temporal categories under analysis, we shall call the first of them the category of "primary time", and the second, the category of "prospective time", or, contractedly, "prospect".

The category of primary time

The formal sign of the opposition constituting this category is, with regular verbs, the dental suffix -(e)d [-d, -t, -id], and with irregular verbs, phonemic interchanges The suffix marks the verbal form of the past time (the past tense), leaving the opposite form unmarked. Thus, the opposition is to be rendered by the formula "the past tense the present tense", the latter member representing the non-past tense

 The

specific feature of the category of primary time is, that it divides all the tense forms of the English verb into two temporal planes: the plane of the present and the plane of the past, which affects also the future forms

 the

present tense is the unmarked member of the opposition the present time may be understood as literally the moment of speaking, the zero-point of all subjective estimation of time made by the speaker at this very moment, or this instant, or exactly now

 the

present will still be the present if we relate it to such vast periods of time as this month, this year, in our epoch, in the present millennium the implication of constancy, unchangeability of the truth at all times "Two plus two makes four", or "The sun is a star"

 Worthy

of note, however, are utterances where the meaning of the past tense stands in contrast with the meaning of some adverbial phrase referring the event to the present moment. :
Today again I spoke to Mr. Jones on the matter, and again he failed to see the urgency of it

A case directly opposite is the transpositional use of the present tense of the verb with the past adverbials: Then he turned the corner, and what do you think happens next? He faces nobody else than Mr. Greggs accompanied by his private secretary! The stylistic purpose of this transposition, known under the name of the "historic present"

Prospective time (prospect)

The

meaningful contrast underlying the category of prospective time is between an after-action and a non-afteraction. The after-action, or the "future", having its shall/will-feature, constitutes the marked member of the opposition

the prospective time is purely relative; it means that the future form of the verb only shows that the denoted process is prospected as an afteraction relative to some other action or state or event, the timing of which marks the zero-level for it.

 In

analysing the English future tenses, the modal factor, naturally, should be taken into consideration. the expression of the future in other languages is not disconnected from modal semantics either;

. , , . (. ). . , : . (. ). The future forms clearly express promise

 In

the clear-cut modal uses of the verbs shall and will the idea of the future either is not expressed at all, or else is only rendered by way of textual connotation the central semantic accent is laid on the expression of obligation, necessity, inevitability, promise, intention, desire He who does not work neither shall he eat He who does not work must not eat, either

traditional grammar gives the following rules: shall + Infinitive with the first person, will + Infinitive with the second and third persons express pure future; the reverse combinations express modal meanings, the most typical of which are intention or desire for I will and promise or command on the part of the speaker for you shall, he shall. (apply to refined British English.) In American English will is described as expressing pure future with all the persons, shall as expressing modality.

Meanings of shall and will

Observing combinations with will in stylistically neutral collocations, as the first step of our study we note the adverbials of time used with this construction. The environmental expressions, as well as implications, of future time do testify that from this point of view there is no difference between will and shall, both of them equally conveying the idea of the future action expressed by the adjoining infinitive.

The first person will-future expresses an action which is to be performed by the speaker for choice, of his own accord. ("voluntary future") the first person shall expresses a future process that will be realised without the will of the speaker, irrespective of his choice. ("non-voluntary future) The future in the second and third persons, formed by the indiscriminate auxiliary will, does not express this category

This category is neutralised in the contracted form -'ll, As is known, the traditional analysis of the contracted future states that -'ll stands for will, not for shall. However, this view is not supported by textual data I'll marry you then, Archie, if you really want it (M. Dickens). I will marry you. I'll have to think about it (M. Dickens). I shall have to think about it.

 The

system of the British future is by far more complicated than the expression of the future tense in the other national variants of English, in particular, in American English, where the future form of the first person is functionally equal with the other persons In British English negative and interrogative forms are preserved with shall: shant, Shall I/we...

 Apart

from shall/will + Infinitive construction, there is another construction be going with the infinitive conveying the idea of an immediate future action The combination may denote a sheer intention thus entering into the vast set of "classical" modal constructions

 despite

its primary meaning of intention, presupposing a human subject, is not infrequently used with non-human subjects and even in impersonal sentences She knew what she was doing, and she was sure it was going to be worth doing

 The

oppositional basis of the category of prospective time is neutralised in certain uses, in keeping with the general regularities of oppositional reductions. The process of neutralisation is connected with the shifting of the forms of primary time (present and past) from the sphere of absolute tenses into the sphere of relative tenses.

 Using

a non-future temporal form to express a future action which is to take place according to some plan or arrangement. : E.g.The government meets in emergency session today over the question of continued violations of the cease-fire. The government will meet in emergency session.

Another type of neutralisation of the prospective time opposition is observed in modal verbs and modal word combinations. There's no saying what may happen next. At any rate, the woman was sure to come later in the day. another typical case of neutralisation of the analysed categorial opposition, which is strictly obligatory (clauses of time and condition) If things turn out as has been arranged, the triumph will be all ours.

the presentation of reported speech in the plane of the past, where the Russian present tense is changed into the tense of simultaneity, the past tense is changed into the tense of priority, and the future tense is changed into the tense of prospected posteriority. : (1) , . (2) , . (3) , .

In English, the primary tenses in similar syntactic conditions retain their absolutive nature and are used in keeping with their direct, unchangeable meanings. Compare the respective translations of the examples cited above: (1) He said that he was learning German (then). (2) He said that he had learned German (before). (3) He said that he would learn German (in the time to come).