temporal interpretation in standard and jordanian arabic

© 2015 DAR Publishers/University of Jordan. All Rights Reserved.

Dirasat, Human and Social Sciences, Volume 42, No. 3, 2015

- 999 -

Temporal Interpretation In Standard and Jordanian Arabic*

Rania Nayef Al-Aqarbeh*

ABSTRACT

This paper addresses the temporal interpretation in Standard and Jordanian Arabic. Both varieties have two

distinctive morphological verbal forms: Perfective and Imperfective, which are grammaticalized forms of Aspect

and not Tense. However, they employ direct and indirect linguistic tools to achieve temporal interpretation. The

aspectual viewpoints provide pragmatic cues to temporal location of eventualities through their Boundedness

properties. In the default case: bounded eventualities are interpreted as past; unbounded ones as present. On the

other hand, some pseudo verbs, e.g. ‘aSbaHa ‘be in the morning’ and temporal adverbs, e.g. amsi ‘yesterday’,

introduce temporal interpretation lexically, i.e. by their meanings. The similar contribution of these verbs and

adverbs is supported by the similar logical forms of sentences including them analyzed within the

NeoDavidsonian Framework.

Keywords: Tense, Aspect, Semantics, Pragmatics, Pseudo verbs, temporal interpretation.

1. Introduction

All languages employ linguistic tools to locate a situation temporally (Stanely 2000). Nonetheless, languages differ in

how the temporal location of situations is achieved. In languages with Tense and Tense-like forms such as English, French

and German, temporal interpretation is assumed to be achieved directly (Kamp and Reyle 1993; Bohnemeyer 2002; Smith

et al. 2007). However, temporal interpretation can be arrived at indirectly by inferences guided by some pragmatic cues or

temporal adverbs in the languages that lack overt tense morphemes or forms such as Mandarin Chinese, Thai and Inuktitut

(Lin 2003, Smith et al. 2007). There are languages that have a mixed system as is the case in Navajo that has optional tense

inflections (Smith et al. 2007). The present study aims at accounting for how temporal interpretation is achieved in

Standard Arabic (SA) and Jordanian Arabic (JA) to identify where these varieties fit in the cross-linguistic temporal

continuum. The paper is almost entirely devoted to the verb system with a little reference to the discourse or temporal

adverbs because the main distinction between tensed and tenseless languages is in the contribution of verbal inflections

and particles.

There is no consensus in the literature on Arabic linguistics regarding whether the distinctive verbal forms encode

Tense or Aspect. This paper has three main purposes. The first purpose is to establish whether the binary distinctive

Perfective-Imperfective verbal forms encode Tense or Aspect. I propose that these forms are the grammaticalized forms of

Aspect in SA and JA. The second goal of the study is to establish how temporal interpretation is established. I claim that

temporal interpretation is established pragmatically and lexically.

The paper is organized as follows. Section 2 lays down the theoretical framework adopted in the analysis. Section 3

presents the major standpoints in the literature on Arabic Tense-Aspect debate followed by the proposal I advocate for SA

and JA as aspectual languages. Then it demonstrates how temporal interpretation is inferred pragmatically. Section 4 offers

a brief non-exhaustive description of the lexical contribution of some temporal adverbs, pseudo verbs and tensed negative

particles in SA and JA supported by comparing the logical forms of sentences including them within the NeoDavidsonian

framework. Section 5 concludes.

* Print This Research in One Column Referred to Technical Considerations. * Mutah University, Jordan. Received on 29/11/2013 and Accepted for Publication on 23/5/2014.

Temporal Interpretation … Rania Nayef Al-Aqarbeh

- 1000 -

2. Theoretical Framework

Expressing temporality is essential in all languages for the sake of evaluating the truth conditions of situations

(Hinrichs 1986; Stanely 2000; Smith 2005). Tense is ‘the grammaticalized expression of location in time’ (Comrie, 1985:

9). Tense forms include inflections like Spanish affix corrio’ ‘s/ he ran’ and English -ed in past verbs, e.g. helped, saved,

or auxiliaries as in English will. Tense is deictic since it locates the time of the situation relevant to the Speech Time, the

default orientation point. Tense is examined in terms of ordering temporal relations following Reichenbach’s (1947) model

according to which there are three main time points or intervals identified on a timeline as the Speech Time (ST), the time

of utterance, Reference Time (RT), the orientation time established in the context relevant to the ST, and the Event Time

(ET), the time at which the event takes place. In the neo-Reichenbachan model, the temporal orderings are distinctly

elaborated as follows (cf. Hornstein 1990).

Simple Perfect

Past E, R < S E < R < S

Present E, R, S E < S, R

Future S < R, E S < E < R

Commas are used between unordered times; angle brackets are used between ordered times by which the one on the

left is anterior to the one on the right. For example, in the simple past tense, the ET and RT are simultaneous, but they are

ordered anterior to the ST. In the Past Perfect Tense, the ET is ordered anterior to the RT and both are anterior to the ST.

In the present study, I adopt this model, but instead of the ET, I will use the SitT which stands for the time of situation

because situations include both events and states.

If Tense is associated with a grammatical morpheme, then languages with overt Tense morphemes are tensed;

languages that lack such morphemes are tenseless. The intriguing question is: how is temporal interpretation achieved in

each language type? The answer is that tensed languages introduce Tense directly via the obligatory overt Tense

morphemes and temporal adverbs modify the temporal location introduced by Tense. On the other hand, tenseless

languages employ other strategies to locate the situation in time. Temporal interpretation can be conveyed directly in those

languages by the use of temporal adverbs whose meanings involve the three times: ST, RT and SitT (Kamp and Reyle

1993; Smith et al. 2007). For example, the adverb yesterday relates a situation to the ST. The contribution of Tense and

temporal adverbs follows from the pragmatic Deictic Principle:

(1) Deictic Principle: Situations are located with respect to Speech Time.

I will adhere to this principle in accounting for temporal interpretation in sentences.

Furthermore, temporal reference can be achieved indirectly by inferences drawn from the temporal properties of

aspectual viewpoints. Aspect, as a semantic category, encodes the internal consistuency of the event as complete versus

incomplete, and it conveys how a situation unfolds in time (Comrie 1976). Aspect can be realized morphologically on

verbs in what is known as grammatical aspect or aspectual viewpoints that allow the speaker to express different points of

view concerning a certain situation (Comrie 1976; Chung and Timerlake 1985; Smith 1997). The most common aspectual

viewpoints across languages that are also relevant to the current study are the Perfective and Imperfective. Both aspectual

viewpoints make all or part of a situation visible for assertion at the RT (ibid). The Perfective is considered bounded

because it brings into assertion the temporal endpoints or boundaries of the event as it asserts the event in its entirety at the

RT. On the other hand, the Imperfective is unbounded since it asserts part of the event as ongoing at the RT excluding the

temporal ending boundaries (Kamp and Reyle 1993; Depraetere 1995; Krifka et al. 1995; Smith 1997; Bohnemeyer 2002).

What is relevant to the present study is how the temporal properties of aspectual viewpoints contribute temporal

location of situations in aspectual languages like SA and JA. Following Kamp and Reyle (1993), Krifka et al. (1995),

Bohnemeyer (2002) and Smith (2007), I will assume that the key point is Boundedness, an aspectual notion that indicates a

property of the situations embodied in sentences. The Perfective is bounded. Thus, the situation is interpreted to be

included in the SitT interval symbolized as (e ≤ SitT). In John wrote a letter, for example, the writing event is included


- 1001 -

within the past interval referred to in the sentence. On the other hand, the Imperfective is unbounded. The inference then is

that the situation overlaps the SitT represented as (e 0 SitT). For instance, the writing event in the sentence John was

writing a letter goes beyond the interval indicated in the sentence. In a nutshell, the boundedness of a situation determines

its location in time. The inferences of the temporal location of situations are constrained by the Bounded Event Constraint:

(2) Bounded Event Constraint: Bounded events are not located in the Present.

This constraint hinges on the assumption that the bounds of a bounded event stretch beyond the moment of speech and

this is why they are not located in the present (Kamp and Reyle 1993). This is known as Punctuality Constraint by Lyons

(1977) and Giorgi and Pianesi (1997).

The second part of the analysis centers around explaining the lexical temporal contribution of temporal adverbs, pseudo

verbs, and some tensed negative particles by enumerating their lexical contribution and representing the logical forms of

sample sentences containing them within the NeoDavidsonian framework which develops Davidson’s (1967) original

theory of action sentences. Davidson (1967) argues that predicates have an extra argument other than traditional

arguments, i.e. subjects, object, etc. which is the event variable (e henceforth). He argues that each predicate has a fixed

number of arguments that must be satisfied to form a well-formed proposition. He also assumes that the e variable is

quantified existentially. The logical form of the sentence in (3a) below is sketched in (3b).

(3) a. Johns buttered the toast.

b. Ǝe BUTTER (Jones, the toast, e)

According to Davidsonian framework, the predicate BUTTER is a three-place relation between a person who butters,

an object that is buttered and a buttering event.

The Davidsonian framework analyzes adverbs as adjuncts that modify the e variable. Adverbs are treated like

predicates of the e variable, and so adverbs are coordinated with the verb as conjuncts and the existential quantifier scopes

over the whole structure.

(4) a. Jones buttered the toast with a knife in the bathroom at midnight.

b. Ǝe [BUTTER (Jones, the toast, e) & WITH (e, a knife) & IN (e, the bathroom) & AT (e, midnight)].

The Davidsonian Model is modified and extended to account for states in what has been known as the Neo-

Davidsonian approach by which the verb is analyzed as a one-place predicate of eventualities (Parsons, 1990). The

arguments: subjects, objects, are represented in terms of the thematic relations to the event to account for cases where an

argument is dropped as in passive sentences in which the agent is dropped. Consider the logical form of the sentence

below.

(5) a. Brutus stabbed Caesar.

b. Ǝe [(STAB (e) & AGENT (e, Brutus) & PATIENT (e, Caesar)]

The proposition is consequently decomposed into the semantic components, i.e. arguments, of the verb.

In conclusion, this section clarifies the theoretical framework adopted in this study. At the outset, I address the Tense-

Aspect debate in the literature on the Arabic verbal inflection in the following section.

3. The Pragmatic-Based Temporal Interpretation

Verbs in all Arabic varieties including SA and JA, in particular, have two morphological verb forms: the Perfective and

the Imperfective, the latter has an aspectual prefix bi- in JA, I will use the term Imperfective for both forms for the ease of

reference. The Perfective has the agreement inflections suffixed, whereas the Imperfective has them as prefixes and

suffixes. Below, I use the typical verb, katab ‘write’, as an illustrative example of these forms in both varieties. Inflections


- 1002 -

are written in bold for the ease of identification.

Perfective Imperfective

SA katab

‘write’

katab-u

write-plm

ya-ktub-u

3-write-plm

JA katab

‘write’

katab-u

write-plm

bi-yi-ktub-u

Asp-3-write-plm

There has been a longstanding debate in the literature concerning what Arabic verbs morphologically represent. Some

advocate that verb forms encode Aspect only and Tense follows from the context (Wright 1859). Others contend that they

encode Tense only and Aspect follows from the context (Sibawayh 1938, Al-Anmbari 1970; Fassi Fehri 2004; Rashiid

2007). A third account assumes that verb morphology encodes neither Tense nor Aspect (Aoun, Benmamoun and Choueiri

2010). The last account considers Tense and Aspect as indispensable; the verbal morphology encodes both. Following

Grice (1975) and Smith (1997), I tested whether the temporal or aspectual interpretations elicited form these verb forms

are inherently semantic or a result of pragmatic implicature by using them in contexts with contradictory temporal or

aspectual interpretations. The assumption is that if the interpretation cancels with the context, then it is pragmatic;

otherwise, it is semantic. In what follows, I discuss each standpoint.

Some Western Philologists and Semitists advanced the account that Arabic verbal distinction is aspectual. For

example, Wright (1859) states that verbs morphologically encode completive versus incompletive actions, which is the

core function of the Perfective-Imperfective aspectual distinction. However, the verbal morphology does not locate the

event relative to the speech time, which is the function of Tense. Cohen (1924) argues that Tense is not part of the Semitic

morphological system. Rather, it is inferred from the context. Fleisch (1973) adds that only the Perfective encodes Past

tense because it is used exclusively in past tense contexts, but the Imperfective is only aspectual because it occurs in past

and non-past contexts. These accounts are problematic because they concluded that if Tense is not expressed then what is

encoded must be Aspect without examining whether Aspect is not established pragmatically or lexically as well. The other

problem is that they did not address auxiliaries and tensed particles, e.g. lam ‘not’.

Another position assumes that the morphological distinction is Tense-based. The main evidence put forth is the

adverbial compatibility test (Sibawayh 1938; al-Anbari 1970; Kurylowicz 1972, Fassi Fehri 2004; Rashiid 2007) as shown

below.

(6) kataba ar-risalat-a ‘amsi/ *ghad-an

Perf.write.3sgm the-letter-ACC yesterday-GEN/ tomorrow-ACC

‘He wrote the letter yesterday.’

He argues that the Perfective, for example, is only compatible with deictic temporal adverbs with past tense

interpretation in root non-embedded contexts.

Furthermore, Fassi Fehri argues that in complex tense contexts, the Perfective morphology encodes perfect when

embedded under past or future auxiliary as in the example.

(7) kaana (qad) kataba r-risaalat-a lammaa daxal-tu

Perf.be.3sgm already perf.write.3sgm the-letter-ACC when perf.enter.1sg

‘He had (already) written the letter when I entered.’

In this example, the same morphology on the auxiliary kaana and the thematic verb kataba in the matrix clause

encodes anteriority relation: Past on the former but perfect on the latter. He argues that the anteriority relations will be

rendered unexplained in the aspectual standpoint. He extends the same logic to the Imperfective showing that it encodes

present tense in root clauses but simultaneity in complex tenses. He, further, elaborates on Kurylowicz’s (1973) stand that

Tense is expressed overtly on verbs whereas Aspect follows. His evidence is that Tense induces Aspect but the opposite is


- 1003 -

not true. Fassi Fehri supports his claim by showing that past or perfect tenses are exclusively interpreted perfectively, and

the present or imperfect is interpreted imperfectively.

The problem with his account is that it does not account for cases where the Perfective inflection appears on the

negative particle laysa ‘not’ and the aspectual verb maa zaala ‘still’, but they are not used in past tense contexts. Consider

the following examples.

(8) a. lays-at fii al-bayit-i (‘alaan-a/ *’ams-i/ *ghad-an)

Perf.not.3-sgf in the-house-GEN (now-ACC/ yesterday-GEN/ tomorrow-ACC)

‘She is not at home now.’

b. maa zaal-at fii il-bayit-i

Perf.still.3-sgf in the-house-GEN

‘She is still in the house.’

Thus, if the inflection is mainly Past or Perfect, how then it can account for such a case where the inflection is

incompatible with past deictic adverbs.

Moreover, there are two tensed sentential negative particles in SA: lam ‘not’ and laan ‘not’. The former is exclusively

used in the past contexts, whereas the latter in the future contexts. In present tense contexts, the neutral counterpart laa

‘not’ is used (cf. Sibawayh 1938; Al-Samiraa’i 1980; Ouhalla 1993; Rashiid 2007). They do not carry any verbal

inflection, though. Consider the following examples:

(9) a. lam ya-druss-u (‘ams-i/ *ghad-an)

not 3-study-plm (yesterday-GEN/ tomorrow-ACC)

‘They did not study (yesterday).’

b. lan ya-druss-u (*‘ams-i/ ghad-an)

not 3-study-plm (yesterday-GEN/ tomorrow-ACC)

‘They will not study (tomorrow).’

c. laa ya-druss-un

not 3-study-plm

‘They don’t study.’

These cases require revising the tense-based analysis.

The presence of the Perfective inflection on these particles laysa ‘not’ and maa zaala ‘still’ in present tense contexts

has motivated some researchers to argue that Arabic verbal morphology does not encode Tense at all (Aoun, Benmamoun,

and Choueiri 2010). Based on this evidence, Aoun et al. (2010) claim that the Perfective in Arabic does not encode Past

Tense morphologically. As for the Imperfective, they argue that this form is used in heterogeneous temporal and aspectual

contexts that cannot be attributed to a single temporal or aspectual interpretation. For example, the Imperfective is used in

past tense contexts (See Example 9 above), future contexts (10a) and ordinary present tense contexts (10b).

(10) a. sa-ya-drus

will-3-study.sgm

‘He will study.’

b. ya-drus

3-study.sgm

‘He is studying.’


- 1004 -

Accordingly, they concluded that verbs in Arabic do not denote Tense morphologically.

Furthermore, Aoun et al. (2010) assume that verbal inflection in Arabic is not a grammaticalized realization of Aspect,

either. Their evidence comes from the current Arabic spoken dialects that employ distinct aspectual markers attached to

the Imperfective realized as the aspectual particles ta- and 9am in Moroccan and Lebanese Arabic respectively. Below are

examples from Aoun et al. (2010).

(11) a. ta-y-qra

Prog-3-read.sgm

‘He is reading.’

b. 9am yi’ra

Prog 3-read.sgm

‘He is reading.’

However, it is not clear how this can be taken as evidence that verbal inflections do not encode Aspect. Therefore, even

though their account sounds well regarding Tense, it is weakened by the lack of evidence on the Aspect part. Nonetheless,

the study pinpoints the need to reconsider aspectual and tensed particles because considering thematic verbs without these

verbs and particles has rendered many of the previous accounts incomplete.

Finally, Comrie (1976) and Fassi Fehri (1993) argue that verbal inflection in Arabic encodes both Tense and Aspect.

He claims that in the absence of any temporal adverbs or contextual clues, the Perfective encodes Past Tense and

Perfectivity; the Imperfective encodes Present Tense and Imperfectivity. However, if Tense is established in the context,

these forms receive the Tense established besides encoding Aspect. Below is an example from Comrie (1976).

(12) ‘a-jii’u-ka ‘thaa iHmarr-a al-buSr-u

Impf.1-come.sg-you if Perf.redden-3sgm the-unripe-NOM

‘I will come to you when the unripe date ripens.’

The Perfective iHmarra ‘reddened’ receives a future interpretation established in the context by the conditional clause.

The problem with this account is that it is not organized as the same morphology can convey Absolute Tense in root

clauses but Relative in embedded contexts, whereas Aspect is expressed across the board.

I used the Arabic verb forms in contexts with contradictory temporal interpretations. For instance, the Perfective, which

is commonly associated with past tense, is predicted to be unacceptable in future tense contexts. This prediction is not

borne out by data from SA and JA.

(13) a. ya-kuun-u 9ali-un qad kataba a-risaalat-a ghad-an SA

3-be-sgm Ali-NOM already perf.write.3sgm the-letter-ACC tomorrow-ACC

‘Ali will have written the letter tomorrow.’

b. itha nathaff-at hind il-beit bukrah, iHk-i-li-i JA

if perf.clean.3-sgf Hind the-house tomorrow, Impr.tell-sgf-to-me

‘If Hind cleans the house tomorrow, tell me.’

The SA Perfective thematic verb kataba ‘wrote’ and the JA verb nathaffat ‘cleaned’ are acceptable in future tense

context in (13 a-b).

Similarly, the Imperfective form is insensitive to the Tense of the context as it can occur in non-past contexts in SA and

JA. The examples below are illustrative.

(14) a. marar-it bi-9ali-in ‘ams-i wa huwa ya-ktub-u a-risaalat-a SA


- 1005 -

Perf.pass-1sg by-Ali-GEN yesterday-GEN and he 3-write.sgm-IND the-letter-ACC

‘I passed by Ali while he was writing the letter yesterday.’

b. ‘a-tayit-u-ka sa9ay-an muHafiz-an qadam-i

Perf.1-come-IND-you striving-ACC motivating-ACC foot-my

yu-Hafizuni ash-shawqu thumma taHtajibu

Impf.3-motivate.sgm-me the-longing-NOM then Impf.3-hide.sgm-IND

Literally: I came striving and longing to see you, but you ignored me.

c. imbariH, hind bi-ti-naththif bi-il-beit wa ana na’yim JA

yesterday, Hind ASP-3-clean.sgf in-the-house and I AP.sleeping.sgm

‘Yesterday, Hind was cleaning the house while I was sleeping.’

d. sareit bi-leil wa-hal-i ma daraw bi-yia

Perf.come.1sg in-the-night and-parents-my not Perf.know.1sg of-me

ana law ‘adrii in al-manya 9ala idruubi

I if Impf.1-know-sg that the-death on ways-my

Literally: I came at night and my parents did not know. If I know that death was waiting for me ….

The SA Imperfective verbs, e.g. yaktubu ‘writing’, yuHafizuni ‘motivate’ and taHtajibu ‘hide’ in Al-BuHturi’s (1977)

verse, are acceptable in past tense contexts as shown in (14a-b). Likewise, the JA Imperfective verbs: bitinaththif ‘clean’

and ‘adrii ‘know’ from Al-9amad’s (1996) Jordanian folk song, are also acceptable in past tense contexts (14c-d).

Due to the insensitivity of the Arabic verb forms to the Tense of the sentence, I concluded that these forms are not

grammaticalized forms of Tense. Are they aspectual then? To answer this question, I used a conjunction that asserts the

incompletion of an action which is assumed to be acceptable only with the Imperfective. Indeed, this prediction is borne

out by empirical data from both varieties as illustrated below.

(15) a. #kataba 9ali-un a-risaalat-a wa ma zaala ya-ktub-u SA

Perf.write.3sgm Ali-NOM the-letter-ACC and still 3-write.sgm

‘Ali wrote the letter and he is still writing.’

b. #naththaf-at hind il-beit wi-lisaat-ha bi-ti-naththif JA

Perf.clean.3-sgf Hind the-house and-still-her ASP-3-clean.sgf

‘Hind cleaned the house and she is still cleaning.’

(16) a. 9ali-un ya-ktub-u a-risaalat-a wa ma zaala ya-ktub-u SA

Ali-NOM 3-write.sgm-IND the-letter-ACC and still 3-write.sgm-IND

‘Ali is writing the letter and he is still writing.’

b. hind bi-ti-naththif il-beit wi-lisaat-ha bi-ti-naththif JA

Hind ASP-3-clean.sgf the-house and-still-her ASP-3-clean.sgf

‘Hind is writing the letter and she is still writing.’

The conjunction that asserts the incompletion of the event in the matrix clauses renders the statements unacceptable in

SA (15a) and JA (15b). However, the same conjunction does not affect the acceptability of the statements in SA (16a) and

JA (16b). The explanation is that it contradicts the semantic meaning of the Perfective in the main clause in (15) while


- 1006 -

being consistent with the semantic contribution of the Imperfective in (16).

Another thread of evidence comes from Performative sentences as they encode reaching a terminating endpoint.

Performatives are not relevant to past tense (Fassi Fehri 2004). In SA and JA, only the Perfective is used in performatives

as illustrated below.

(17) a. dham’-itu / *’a-dhma’-u SA

Perf.feel thirsty-1sg/ Impf.1-feel thirsty.sg-IND

‘I feel thirsty.’

b. 9iTish-it /*ba-‘a-9Tash JA

Perf.feel thirsty-1sg /ASP-1-feel thirsty.sg

‘I feel thirsty.’

The compatibility of the Perfective in the Performative utterances supports the aspectual nature of this morphological

form as being bounded; the incompatibility of the Imperfective in Performative utterances asserts its aspectual nature as

being unbounded.

A further piece of evidence on the aspectual nature of the verbal distinction comes from the modal qad in SA, which

serves different meanings according to whether it is followed by a Perfective or Imperfective (Ibn Siraaj 1973; Al-Girgani

1988; Rashiid 2007). Below are some illustrative examples.

(18) a. sa-ya-kuun-u 9ali-un qad kataba i-risaalat-a

will-3-be.sgm-IND Ali-NOM already Perf.write.3sgm the-letter-ACC

‘Ali will have already written the letter.’

b. an-naar-u qad ta-xbu-u

the-fire-NOM about/Maybe 3-extinguish.sgf-IND

‘The fire maybe extinguishes.’

In SA, the modal qad asserts the accomplishment or occurrence of the action when followed by the Perfective and it

can almost be translated into the English adverb ‘already’ as shown in (18a). However, it indicates the probability of the

occurrence of the action when followed by the Imperfective as shown in (18b). Thus, it asserts the completion of the event

with the Perfective, but it indicates the probability of the action when expressed in the Imperfective which entails that if it

occurs, the terminated point is excluded.

Lastly, the bounded nature of the Perfective form is obvious in the Past/ Present Perfect ambiguity when used in root

clauses in the absence of temporal adverbs as shown below.

(19) katab-u a-risaalat-a SA

Perf.write.3-plm the-letter-ACC

‘He wrote the letter.’

‘He has written the letter.’

My contention is that the bounded nature of this form explains this ambiguity. The simple past encodes a complete

event at a definite time in the past; the present perfect encodes a complete event with a current relevance and in this case to

the present. In my point of view, this ambiguity is a corollary of the aspectual nature of the Perfective.

If the Perfective-Imperfective morphological distinction is aspectual, how is it interpreted as Past versus non-past

respectively in root non-embedded clauses in the absence of any contextual clues? I argue that the key answer to this

question lies in the temporal boundary information associated with the aspectual viewpoints at issue.


- 1007 -

(20) katab-a 9ali-un ar-risaalat-a SA

Perf.write.3sgm Ali-NOM the-letter-ACC

‘Ali wrote the letter.’

‘Ali has written the letter.’

According to the pragmatic Deictic Constraint, situations are located relative to Speech Time. The canonical ST is

now. The event is bounded as it is conveyed in the Perfective, and so it is included in the SitT. The inclusion provides a

pragmatic cue that the SitT is anterior to the ST. As for the RT, it can be interpreted as anterior to the ST without any

indication whether it is ordered with respect to the SitT giving the simple past interpretation represented as

(SitT, RT < ST), or as being unordered with the ST giving the present perfect reading sketched as (SitT < RT, ST). In

either interpretation, the SitT is inferred to be anterior.

Because the Simple Past/ Present Perfect interpretations are pragmatic inferences, they can be overridden by the

introduction of deictic future temporal adverbs. Consider the following example.

(21) ghad-an, ya-kuun-u 9ali-un qad kataba-ha SA

tomorrow-ACC, 3-be.sgm-IND Ali-NOM MOD Perf.write.3sgm-it

‘Tomorrow, Ali will have written the letter.’

The meaning of the deictic temporal adverb ghadan ‘tomorrow’ locates the RT posterior to the ST. The Perfective on

kataba asserts the writing event as bounded and so it is understood as being contained in the SitT leading to the inference

that the SitT is anterior to the established RT. The resulting temporal interpretation of the sentence is: (ST< SitT < RT), the

future perfect interpretation.

To sum up, the default interpretation of the Perfective aspectual viewpoint is Past or anteriority in absence of temporal

adverbs. This is the pragmatic implicature of the semantic boundedness of the Perfective. This interpretation is constrained

by the pragmatic principle “The Bounded Event Constraint” which states that Bounded events are not located in the

present because the bounds of a bounded event stretch beyond the moment of speech.

Furthermore, the Imperfective encodes an unbounded event since the boundaries are not made visible for assertion at

the RT. This implies that the situation overlaps the ST giving the present tense interpretation of these forms in absence of

any clear temporal reference like adverbs. Consider the following example.

(22) ya-ktub-u 9ali-un ar-risaalat-a SA

Impf.3-write.sgm-IND Ali-NOM the-letter-ACC

‘Ali is writing the letter.’

The writing event is semantically progressive or ongoing as encoded by the Imperfective aspectual viewpoint yaktubu

and biyiktub ‘write’. The SitT is inferred to overlap the RT, but there is no information regarding whether the SitT is

ordered or not relative to the ST. The resulting representation is then (SitT, RT, ST) giving the present tense interpretation.

The pragmatically established present interpretation can be overridden by the presence of temporal adverbs as the

following example shows.

(23) daxal-at wa 9ali-un ya-ktub-u-ha ‘ams-i SA

Perf.enter.3-sgf and Ali-NOM Impf.3-write.sgm-IND-it yesterday-GEN

‘She entered while Ali was writing it yesterday.’

The meaning of the deictic adverb ‘amsi ‘yesterday’ locates the RT anterior to the ST. The writing event in the

adverbial clause sets the background by the instantaneous event daxalat ‘entered’ in the matrix clause. The verb in the

matrix clause is in the Perfective, so it is inferred to be contained in the SitT whereas the one in the embedded clause is in

the Imperfective, and so the implication is that it overlaps the SitT. The event in the matrix clause receives a past


- 1008 -

interpretation from the temporal adverb, and it is simultaneous with the SitT. The resulting interpretation is: (SitT, RT <

ST). In this context, the past tense interpretation is established lexically by the meaning of the adverb.

Below are further non-exhaustive illustrative contexts with the Perfective in SA from the Holy Quran (Chapter 17 Al-

Israa’ verses: 1, 17 and 45, respectively).

(24) a. wa kam ‘ahlak-na min ilquruun-i min ba9d-i nuuH-in

and many destroy-1pl from the-generations-GEN from after-GEN Noah-GEN

‘How many generations have We destroyed after Noah!’

b. al-masjid-i al-aqSa allathi bark-na Hawla-hu

the-mosque-GEN the-Aqsa that perf.bless.1pl around-it

‘Al-Aqsa Mosque, the environs of which we have blessed.’

c. wa itha qara’-at il-quraan ja9al-na bayin-ak wa baiyna althein

and if Perf.read-2sgm the-Quran Perf.put-1pl between-you and between those

la yi-yu’muuna bi-il-‘axirat-i Hijaab-an mastuur-an

not 3-believe-plm in-the-Hereafter-GEN veil-ACC hidden-ACC

‘And when thou recites the Quran, We put between these and those who believe not in the Hereafter a hidden veil’

The context in (24a) establishes RT anterior to the ST as many generations were destroyed after Noah and before

Mohammad. This gives the simple past reading represented as (SitT, RT < ST). Example (24b) establishes that AlAqsa

Mosque was blessed before the verse was revealed and afterwards. This can be interpreted as present perfect with respect

to the ST, and can be sketched as (SitT < ST, RT). In (24c), the verse establishes that after this verse whenever

Mohammad recites Quran, he will be separated from the non-believers. This can be interpreted as a future action to take

place with respect to the ST, and can be symbolized as (S< R, SitT). Assuming that the Perfective encodes a bounded

event understood as being included within the SitT, these different temporal interpretations follow from the pragmatic

cues.

I concluded that the Perfective-Imperfective forms encode Aspect and not Tense in SA and JA, still temporal reference

can be established pragmatically. The next section addresses how temporal interpretation can be achieved lexically.

4. The Lexical-Based Temporal Interpretation

This section starts with a description of the lexical contribution of some adverbs, verbs and particles to the temporal

interpretation of sentences in SA as well as JA. Then, it analyzes this contribution within the NeoDavidsonian framework.

In what follows, I use examples from SA as a representative of both varieties if there is no difference.

4.1 Temporal Adverbs

While Tense is language-specific, all languages have temporal adverbs that are optional (Lyons, 1977). When

available, they directly introduce temporal reference by anchoring the situation in time by their meaning. Consider the

following illustration with two deictic adverbs: ams ‘yesterday’ and ghadan ‘tomorrow’ in SA.

(25) a. sa-yazuur-u 9ali-un umm-a-hu ghada-an SA

will-visit-IND Ali-NOM Mom-ACC-his tomorrow-ACC

‘Ali will visit his Mom tomorrow.’

b. 9ali-un zaara umm-a-hu ams-i SA

Ali-NOM Perf.visit.3sgm mom-ACC-his yesterday-GEN


- 1009 -

‘Ali visited his mom yesterday.’

The adverb, ghadan ‘tomorrow’, means the day after today, and so it lexically establishes the RT as posterior to the ST,

giving the future reading. The adverbs amsi ‘yesterday’ means the day before today. It anchors the situation as anterior by

ordering the RT before the ST, giving the past interpretation symbolized as (SitT, RT < ST).

There are also other temporal adverbs that specify the time of the situation as in SA SabaHan ‘morning’ demonstrated

below.

(26) ghad-an, 9ali-un musafir-un SabaH-an SA

tomorrow-ACC, Ali-NOM AP-travel-NOM morning-ACC

‘Ali is travelling tomorrow morning.’

The adverbs ghadan ‘tomorrow’ establishes the RT posterior to the ST as illustrated above. The adverb SabaHan

specifies when the SitT will hold in the RT interval. The temporal interpretation can be schematized below:

(27) --SitT-- morning (SabaHan)

--------ST----[---------RT-----------------]-----

now tomorrow (ghadan)

Likewise, there are some pseudo verbs like ‘SbaH ‘be in the morning’ whose lexical contribution is similar to temporal

adverbs like SabaHan ‘morning’ in introducing temporal interpretation via their meanings. The following thumbnail

sketch summarizes their lexical contribution.

4.2 Pseudo Verbs

I studied the morphological, semantic and syntactic properties of pseudo verbs in SA in specialized old and modern

references including: Al-Anbari 1970, Ibn-Siraaj 1973, Sharaf Al-Diin 1976, Al-Samiraa’i 1980, Al-Girgani 1988, Al-

Naabi 2004, Al-Mansuur 2007, Rashiid 2007, Husaam El-Diin 2008. I also checked their lexical contributions in these

references as well as some old and modern Arabic dictionaries such as: Al-Fayruuz Abaadi 1956, Inbn Manthuur 1970,

and Al-Ma9jam Al-wassiT 2004. In terms of the morphological properties, pseudo verbs in SA can be divided into three

groups: fully inflected, partially defective and fully defective. Fully inflected pseudo verbs allow all the verbal

morphological forms of ordinary verbs including the Perfective, Imperfective, Imperative, Gerund and Active Participle,

and they are used with no conditions or constraints. This group includes the verbs: kaana ‘be’, ‘SbaHa‘be in the morning’,

‘amsa ‘be in the evening’, ‘DHa ‘be in the prenoon’, dhalla ‘all day’, baata ‘all the night’, Saara ‘become’, and some

Arabic syntacticians argue that the set also includes‘afjara ‘be in the dawn’, ‘sHara ‘be in the pre-dawn’, and ‘adhahara

‘be in the afternoon’.The second group is partially defective as they allow only the Perfective and Imperfective forms, and

they are used as pseudo verbs only when preceded by a negative particle.This set includes the verbs: ma fati’a ‘still’, ma

infakka ‘still’, ma bariHa ‘still’, and ma zaala ‘still’. The third group contains defective pseudo verbs that can only take

one form, the Perfective, like laysa ‘not’ and ma daama ‘as long as’.

On the other hand, JA has some verbs similar to the the first set, and they are fully inflected, such as kaan ‘be’, ‘SbaH

‘be in the morning’, ‘amsa ‘be in the evening’, ‘DHa ‘be in the prenoon’, dhall ‘remain’, ‘adhhar ‘be in the afternoon’,

Saar ‘become’, and there are other verbs that are used very restrictively just to denote the different prayer times, like

‘ghrab ‘be in the sunset’, ‘a9sha ‘be the evening prayer’, ‘9Sar ‘be the afternoon prayer’. I use kaan ‘be’ to show the

possible inflections it allows in both varieties.


- 1010 -

Perfective Imperfective Imperative Gerund Active Participle

SAkaana

‘be’

kaan-u

be-plm

ya-kuun-u

3-be-plm

kuun-u

be-plm

kawin

being

Kaa’in

JAkaan

‘be’

kaan-u

be-plm

bi-yi-kuun-u

Asp-3-be-plm

kuun-u

be-plm

kawin

being

kaayin

As for the other sets, JA lacks equivalent partially or fully defective verbs. Instead, it employs adverbs to give the

meaning of the other groups, e.g. ba9du ‘still’ as illustrated in the example below:

(28) a. 9ali-un ma zaala ta9ib-an SA

Ali-NOM still.3sgm tired-ACC

‘Ali is still tired.’

b. 9ali ba9d-uh ta9baan JA

Ali still-sgm tired

‘Ali is still tired.'

Therefore, only the first group of the pseudo verbs is similar to ordinary verbs in terms of their morphological

properties. The table below illustrates this similarity.

Perfective Imperfective Imperative Gerund Active Participle

SA katab

‘write’

katab-u

write-3plm

ya-ktub-u

3-write-plm

‘ktub-u

write-plm

kitabah

writing

katib

writer

SA kaana

‘be’

kaan-u

be-plm

ya-kuun-u

3-be-plm

kuun-u

be-plm

kawin

being

Kaa’in

be?

SA ma zaala

‘still’

ma zaal-u

not-continue-3plm

ma ya-zaal-u

not 3-continue-plm

-------

-------

---------

SA laysa

‘not’

layis-u

not-3plm

-------

------

-----

--------

Pseudo verbs can take verbal predicates in any form allowed in the language.

(29) a. kaana 9ali-un (qad) katab-ha

Perf.be.3sgm Ali-NOM MOD Perf.write.3sgm-it

‘Ali has already written it.’

b. kaana 9ali-un yi-ktub-ha

Perf.be.3sgm Ali-NOM Impf.write.3sgm-it

‘Ali was writing.’

c. kaana 9ali-un sa-ya-ktub-ha

Perf.be.3sgm Ali-NOM will-3-write.sgm-it

‘Ali was going to write it.’

The embedded verbal predicate can be Perfective (29a), Imperfective (29b) or preceded by the modal sa- (29c).

As for the lexical contribution, pseudo verbs can be used as main verbs as well as auxiliaries with related meanings and

contribution. The table below presents two verbs only. For the other verbs, see Appendix A.


- 1011 -

Verbs Main verbs Pseudo verbs

kaana ‘happen or occur’

(30) a. kaana il-‘mr-u

occur.3sgm the-matter-NOM

‘The matter happened.’

‘exist, be’

b. kaana 9ali-un mariiD-an

be.3sgm Ali-NOM sick-ACC

‘Ali was sick.’

‘SbaHa ‘get in the morning’

(31) a. ‘fa-subHana alla Hiina

and-glorify Allah when

tu-misu-una wa Hiina

Impf.3-evening-plm and when

tu-SbiHu-un

Impf.3-morning-plm’ (The Rome: 17)

‘so glorify Allah when you come up to the

evening and when you enter the morning.’

‘the subject has the property in the predicate in the

morning’

b. ‘aSbaHa 9ali-un mariiD-an

Perf.morning.3sgm Ali-NOM sick-ACC

‘Ali is sick in the morning.’

Besides confining the subject with the property expressed in the predicate to a specific time, most pseudo verbs except

kaana can also mean ‘become’ as shown in the example below:

(32) ‘SbaHa 9ali-un Tabib-an

Perf.become.3sgm Ali-NOM doctor-ACC

‘Ali became/ has become a doctor.’

Under careful inspection, these verbs, main or pseudo, chiefly introduce temporal information to the sentence lexically.

In the table below, each verb is presented next to the adverb that provides similar meaning. Kaana ‘be’ is special in this

regard as it is not relevant to a specific time in the day or night.

Verbs Time adverbs Time prepositional phrases meaning ‘sHara saHar-an

morning-ACC fi i-saHar-i in the-pre-dawn-GEN

pre-dawn

‘afjara fajr-an dawn-ACC

fi il-fajir-i in the-dawn-GEN

at dawn

ghada ghadw-an after dawn-ACC

fi il-ghdat-i in the-after dawn-GEN

between dawn and sunrise

‘SbaHa sbaH-an morning-ACC

fi i-SabaH-i in the-morning-GEN

in the morning

‘DHa DuH-an Prenoon-ACC

fi i-DuHa in the-prenoon.GEN

pre-noon

dhalla Dhallatan shadow-ACC

---- at the beginning of morning; when the sun still has a shadow

‘adhhara dhuhr-an noon-ACC

fi i-dhuhr-i in the-noon-GEN

at noon

raaHa rawaH-an walking before sunset-ACC

fii-rwaH-i in-before sunset-GEN

before sunset

baata bayaat-an at night-ACC

------ at the beginning of night

‘amsa masaa’-an evening-ACC

fi al-masaa’-i in the-evening-GEN

in the evening


- 1012 -

The table above illustrates the similarity in meaning between some temporal adverbs and prepositional phrases and

those verbs which can further be demonstrated in the example below.

(33) a. ‘amsa 9ali-un ta9ib-an

Perf.be in evening.3sgm Ali-NOM tired-ACC

‘Ali was tired in the evening.’

b. 9ali-un ta9ib-un masaa’-an/ fi al-masaa’-i

Ali-NOM tired-NOM evening-ACC / in the-evening-GEN

‘Ali is tired in the evening.’

Based on the observed similarity, I propose that these verbs introduce temporal information on a par with temporal

adverbs.

As for JA, the situation is less elaborate than SA. The table below illustrates some of the main meanings of two verbs,

the others are presented in Appendix B.

Verbs Main verbs Pseudo Verbs

kaan ‘occur or happen’

(34) a. kaan illi kaan

Perf.occur.3sgm that Perf.occur.3sgm

‘That would occur occurred.’

‘be’

b. kaan-u ta9ban-iin

be.3-plm tired-plm

‘They were tired.’

‘aSbaH ‘get in the morning’

(35) a. keif ‘aSbaH-it

How Perf.morning.2-sgm

‘How are you in the morning?’

‘have a certain quality in the morning’

b. ‘aSbaH-it ta9ban

Perf.morning-2sgm tired

‘I am tired in the morning.’

The table reveals that kaan and Saar mean ‘happen or occur’ as main verbs and ‘exist’ or ‘become’ as auxiliaries. All

the other verbs refer to different times when used as main verbs or restrictively as auxiliaries.

The meanings of the second set of pseudo verbs, i.e. maa zaala ‘still’ as main verbs imply negation. For instance,

bariHa means ‘leave, go’, infakka ‘separate’, fati’a ‘forget’ and zaala ‘disappear’. As pseudo verbs, they must be preceded

by negation meaning ‘still, remain, keep or continue’. Therefore, they convey an aspectual meaning of continuity that the

subject continues to have the property indicated by the predicate as far as the conditions indicated hold. They do not

contribute time to the proposition. Consider the following examples from the Holy Quran.

(36) a. qaal-u lan na-baraHa 9ali-hi 9akif-iin (Taha Chapter: verse 91)

Perf.say.3plm not 1-leave.plm on-him AP.worship-plm

‘They said: We will not stop worshipping it (i.e. the calf)’

b. ma zaala Jibril yu-wiSi-ni bi-il-jaar (Agreed upon)

not leave.3sgm Jibril 3-recommend.sgm-me of-the-neighbor

‘Jibril kept recommending treating neighbors with kindness.’

In (36a), Moses’ followers started worshipping the calf before the moment of Speech which is the time when they were

talking to his brother Aaron and continued afterwards, and they might continue even after Moses got back. This means that

the worshipping action started in the past up to the present and may continue to the future. In other words, the bold verb

does not contribute any specific time. It only encodes continuity of the action. Likewise, the verb ma zaala ‘still’ in (36b)

Jibril started to recommend treating neighbors with kindness before the ST and he continued doing that over the ST and


- 1013 -

might continue afterwards. This means that it is not specific to a certain time per se. As for their forms, the former is

Imperfective; the latter is Perfective. Nonetheless, they function the same in either case.

According to their lexical contribution, the second set of pseudo verbs resembles aspectual predicates such as

istamarra ‘continue’ in SA.

(37) a. ma zaala 9ali-un ya-Hiki il-qiSt-a

not Perf.leave.3sgm Ali-NOM 3-tell.sgm the-story-ACC

‘Ali is still telling the story.’

b. istamarra 9ali-un ya-Hiki il-qiSt-a

Perf.continue.3sgm Ali-NOM 3-tell.sgm the-story-ACC

‘Ali continued telling the story.’

In (37), both ma zaala and istamarra mean that Ali started telling the story before the ST and he is still telling it and

may tell it afterwards. Based on this contribution, I will consider this set of pseudo verbs aspectual verbs.

The last set of pseudo verbs includes morphologically defective verbs like ma daama ‘as long as’ and layisa ‘not’ in

SA. The former means ‘continue’. It can be used as a pseudo verb only if preceded by the negative particle, and it means

as long as. Below is an illustration from the Holy Quran (Mariam Chapter; verse 31).

(38) wa awSaa-ni bi-il-Salaat-i wa i-zakaat-i

and Perf.recommend-1pl of-the-prayer-GEN and the-zakat-GEN

madum-tu Hayi-a

Perf.continue-2sgm alive-ACC

‘and has enjoined on me Salat (prayer) and Zakat (poor due) as long as I live.’

In this verse, ma daama covers the period of Jesus’ whole life from the beginning till the end. It is not restricted to a

certain period of time. It means that the subject will have the property indicated by the predicate as long as all the

necessary conditions hold. On the other hand, laysa is only used as a pseudo verb and it mainly negates the proposition in

the sense that the subject does not have the property conveyed by the predicate.

(39) a. fa-layisa 9ali-ka hudaa-hum (Al-Bakrah Chapter, Verse 272)

and-not.3sgm on-you guidance-their

‘Not upon you (Mohammad) is their guidance.’

b. fa-layisa 9ali-kum junaaH-un ‘an ta-qiSir-u min al-Salaat-i

and-not.3sgm on-you sin-NOM COMP 2-shorten-plm from the-prayer-GEN

‘There is no sin on you if you shorten your prayer.’

The time collocated with layisa is not specific. In the first verse, it is present or timeless at the time when the verse was

delivered to Mohammad. The second verse implies a timeless truth. It is interpreted as whenever any Muslim needs to

shorten prayers, there is no sin on him in doing so. In fact, there is no consensus among syntacticians regarding the time

layisa negates, but it seems that it is appropriate with present time even though it is used only in the Perfective form.

Consider the following example:

(40) a. layisa zaid-un qaa’m-an alaan-a

Perf.not.3sgm Zaid-NOM AP.stand-ACC now-ACC

‘Zaid is not standing now.’


- 1014 -

b. *layisa zaid-un qaa’m-an ghad-an

Perf.not.3sgm Zaid-NOM AP.stand-ACC tomorrow-ACC

I contend that the morphology pseudo verbs carry encode Aspect and not Tense. I will use the verb kaana as a

representative. It is a stative verb that conveys the existence of a state embodied in the proposition. The Perfective form of

the verb is not sensitive to the Tense interpretation of the context. Below are some examples from the Holy Quran.

(41) a. kaana fi il-madinat-i tis9at-u rahaT-in yu-fisdu-una fi il-‘arD-i

Perf.exist.3sgm in the-city-GEN nine-NOM group-GEN 3-destroy-plm in the-city

‘And there were in the city nine men who made mischief.’ (Al-Namil, 48)

b. wa kaana al-insaan-u akthar shay’-in jadal-a

and Perf.be.3sgm the-Man-NOM more thing-GEN quarrelsome-ACC

‘and man is ever more quarrelsome than anything’ (Al-Kahif, 54)

c. wa futiH-at as-samaa’s-u fa-kaan-at abwaab-a

and Perf.open.3-sgf the-sky-NOM and-Perf.be.3-sgf doors-ACC

‘And the heaven shall be opened, and it will become as gates.’ (Al-Naba’, 19)

d. qaala rab-i anna ya-kuun-u li-i ghulaam-un

said Allah-my how 3-be.sgm-IND for-me child-NOM

wa kaan-at imra’t-i 9aqir-an

and Perf.be.3-sgf wife-my barren-ACC

‘He said: “My Lord: how can I have a son, when my wife is barren.’

The context in (41a) is about a pre-Islamic era concerning Prophet SaliH’s tribe, Thamoud. God tells his prophet that

there were nine men in that tribe before Islam who made mischief. The pragmatic inference is that this is a past tense

context. In (41b), the verse states a timeless fact that Man is always more quarrelsome. In (41c), it is a future tense context

because the verse declares the state of the sky in the Day of Judgment. The verse in (41d) addresses Zakaria’s story whose

wife was barren up to the moment of speech, but then she got a baby. The best tense interpretation that can be inferred

from this context is present perfect.

The heterogeneous Tense interpretation ranging from simple past, simple present, future, and future perfect that kaana

may receive suggests that it does not encode Tense. What kaana actually encodes is Boundedness indicating the existence

of the proposition expressed by the subject and the predicate in each context.

There are some thorny issues that have to be resolved. The first issue is that the fully inflected pseudo verbs are stative.

States are atelic and unbounded because they have no inherent endpoints or culminations. They are also homogenous

because they do not imply internal change. For these properties, states should be permissible only with the Imperfective

and not the Perfective. In fact, Arabic pseudo verbs can be used in both forms with no problem, but what is the meaning

that can be derived from the use of a stative verb in the perfective bounded viewpoint? In essence, aspectual viewpoints

convey how speakers view a situation, and speakers view different situations from different perspectives asserting a certain

aspect of the situation: the beginning, end, or internal. For example, the English verb think in I think she is smart is stative,

but when used in the progressive as in I am thinking about this Syntactic problem is an activity. The former usage is

standard and unmarked, whereas the latter is marked which involves a shift of the situation type from a state into an

activity, which is known as a derived or shifted situation type (Krifka et al. 1995; Smith 1997). The basic stative verb is

coerced from stative to achievement, which is bounded and implies a transition from one state to another. Therefore, the

Imperfective on stative verbs asserts the state, whereas the Perfective asserts the coming out of state.

The second issue concerns the interaction between the lexical and morphological temporal contribution of temporal


- 1015 -

verbs. For the sake of illustration, consider the following examples:

(42) a. ‘SbaHa 9ali-un mariiD-an

Perf.morning.3sgm Ali-NOM AP.sick.sgm-ACC

‘Ali got sick in the morning.’

b. yi-SbiH-u 9ali-un mariiD-an 9indma ya-naam-u muta’xir-an

Impf.3-morning.sgm-IND Ali-NOM AP.sick-ACC when 3-sleep-sgm late-ACC

‘Ali gets sick when he sleeps late.’

By its meaning, the verb ‘SbaHa or yiSbiHu reveals that the subject, Ali, has the property conveyed by the predicate of

being sick in the morning regardless of whether this state holds in the past, present or future. The Perfective morphology

on the verb in (42a) leads to the pragmatic inference that RT is anterior to the ST, which is the past interpretation. On the

other hand, the Imperfective morphology the verb carries in (42b) encodes unbounded situation leads to the pragmatic

inference that the RT is simultaneous with the ST giving the present tense interpretation. Thus, there is no contradiction

between the lexical contribution of these verbs and the pragmatic inferences drawn according to the aspectual viewpoints

of them. The former modifies the SitT; the latter establishes the RT with respect to the ST.

The third issue concerns the interaction between the lexical and morphological contributions of aspectual verbs. Below

are some illustrative examples.

(43) a. maa zaala 9ali-un ya-ktub-u ar-risaalat-a

Perf.still.3sgm Ali-NOM 3-write.sgm-IND the-letter-ACC

‘Ali is still writing the letter.’

b. maa kataba 9ali-un ar-risaalat-a

not Perf.write.3sgm Ali-NOM the-letter-ACC

‘Ali did not write the letter.’

(44) a. maa ya-zaal-u 9ali-un ya-ktub-u ar-risaalat-a

Impf-3-still.sgm-IND Ali-NOM 3-write.sgm-IND the-letter-ACC

‘Ali is still writing the letter.’

b. laa ya-ktub-u 9ali-un ar-risaalat-a

not Impf.3-write.sgm-IND Ali-NOM the-letter-ACC

‘Ali did not write the letter.’

The negative particle maa scopes over the verb zaala ‘leave’ in (43a) and over the verb kataba in (43b). Both leaving

and writing events are presented as bounded by the Perfective aspectual viewpoints. The resulting meaning is that Ali does

not leave writing the letter in (43a), but he did not write in (43b). In other words what is negated by the former is the entire

event of leaving giving the continuity meaning. The same verbs are used in the Imperfective and so they are presented as

unbounded and the endpoints are not brought into assertion. The negative particles scope over these verbs negating the

internal part of the event that is emphasized giving the interpretation that Ali does not leave writing in (44a) and is not

writing in (44b). In fact, there is no information regarding the endpoints of both events since they are not emphasized in

either case. Whether the leaving event in ma zaala is negated in its entirety by the Perfective or in part by the Imperfective,

the meaning is that the following event or state denoted by the thematic verb is in force as the speaker does not stop doing

it. That explains why the inferred interpretation is always present. If we consider the Perfective as encoding past, then we

cannot explain the present tense interpretation associated with this set.

The last set of verbs is always problematic to Tense-Aspect debate because these verbs are only permissible in the

Perfective but with present tense interpretation. These verbs are actually considered verbs because they carry verbal


- 1016 -

inflection even though they are actually akin to adverbs and negative particles in their functions. Maa daama states that

what is in the proposition holds from the beginning till the end. This means that the end bounds are included under

assertion. To illustrate, Example (38) means that Jesus was recommended to pray from the beginning of his life till the end

including the middle part of the interval. That should explain why the Perfective is the only permissible form because the

endpoints must be included. This also explains why the temporal interpretation is not restricted to past tense. The interval

over which the assertion is made stretches over the past, present, or future.

On the other hand, layisa negates the entire proposition and not only the internal part of it. Compare the following

examples.

(45) a. ma kataba 9ali-un al-qiSat-a

not Perf.write.3sgm Ali-NOM the-story-ACC

‘Ali did not write/ has not written the story.’

b. la ya-ktub-u 9ali-un al-qiSat-a

not 3-write.sgm-IND Ali-NOM the-story-ACC

‘Ali is not writing the story.’

c. layis-at al-qiSat-u maktuub-at-an

Perf.not.3-sgf the-story-NOM PP.written-sgf-ACC

‘The story is not written.’

In (45a), the Perfective verb kataba is in the scope of negation and so the entire writing event including the endpoints is

negated. In (45b), the internal part of the writing event is in the scope of negation; no information is given concerning the

initial and final bounds. The inferred temporal interpretation is past or present perfect in the former and present in the

latter. In (45c), layisa means ‘not exist’ and the inflection it carries is the Perfective which is bounded. The resulting

meaning is that the proposition does not hold at the ST. This present temporal interpretation poses a problem to the

Bounded Event Constraint which states that bounded events are not located in the Present. In fact, this verb implies

negation that scopes over the bounds and negates the existence of the entire proposition and it is true iff the story is not in

the state of being written or at least the final endpoint has not been reached yet. This leads to the inference that the non-

existence of the state is still in force at the ST.

This section sheds light on the lexical contribution of pseudo verbs and the interaction between the meanings and the

verbal inflection they carry. The next section is designated to address some uninflected particles that lack verbal inflection;

however, they contribute some aspectual and temporal interpretations.

4.3 Un-Inflected Particles

The particles: sawfa and sa- in SA and raH in JA are assumed to convey future tense (Fassi Fehri 1993, Aoun et. Al.

2010). Nonetheless, they occur in future and past tense contexts as indicated below.

(46) a. sa-ya-l9ab-u al-‘awald-u ghad-an SA

will-3-play.sgm-IND the-boys-NOM tomorrow-ACC

‘The boys will play tomorrow.’

b. al-bariHat-a, kaana al-‘awald-u sa-ya-l9ab-un SA

the-yesterday-ACC, Perf.be.3sgm the-boys-NOM will-3-play-plm

‘Yesterday, the boys were going to play.’

(47) a. raH yi-l9ab-u il-iwlaad bukrah JA

will 3-play-plm the-boys tomorrow


- 1017 -

‘The boys will play tomorrow.’

b. imbariH, kann-u il-iwlaad raH yi-l9ab-u il-iwlaad JA

yesterday, perf.be.3-plm the-boys will 3-play-plm the-boys

‘Yesterday, the boys were going to play.’

In SA, sawfa or its shortcut sa- can be used in future context (46a), but it can also be embedded in past tense contexts

(46b). Similarly, raH in JA can be used in future (47a) and past tense contexts (47b). This clearly indicates that these

particles are insensitive to Tense. Thus, I argue that they do not introduce Tense. Instead, they introduce prospective

aspect, which means that the event is about to occur regardless of Tense. These particles do not carry aspectual verbal

inflection, so how do they contribute this aspectual meaning? A possible explanation can be proposed by considering their

meanings. More precisely, sawfa is derived from the root sawafa which means postponing an action to a subsequent time

rather than doing it at the moment. Similarly, raH is the shortcut of the verb raaH that means ‘go’. Based on this, I claim

that those particles contribute the aspectual meaning lexically and not morphologically.

On the other hand, the negative particles lam and lan are sensitive to the Tense of the sentence in which they are used.

Consider the examples below.

(48) a. lam ya-l9ab 9ali-un al-bariHat-a/ *ghad-an

not 3-play.sgm.JUSS Ali-NOM the-yesterday-ACC/ tomorrow-ACC

‘Ali did not play yesterday.’

b. *ghad-an, sa-ya-kuunu 9ali-un lam ya-l9ab

tomorrow-ACC, will-3-be-sgm Ali-NOM not 3-play.sgm

(49) a. lan ya-l9ab 9ali-un ghad-an/ *al-bariHat-a

not 3-play.sgm.JUSS Ali-NOM tomorrow-ACC/ the-yesterday-ACC

‘Ali won’t play tomorrow.’

b. *al-bariHat-a, kaana 9ali-un lan ya-l9ab

the-yesterday-ACC, perf.be.3sgm Ali-NOM not 3-play.sgm

The negative particle lam is only acceptable in past tense contexts (48); the negative particle lan is only acceptable in

future tense contexts (49). The resulting Tense interpretation cannot be attributed to any morphology because these

particles do not carry verbal inflection. For the sake of a unified account, I would claim that these tensed particles

introduce Tense lexically rather than morphologically.

To recapitulate, temporal adverbs, pseudo verbs and some particles contribute Tense to the proposition lexically. The

following section examines the logical forms of sample sentences including pseudo verbs and temporal adverbs and how

Aspect should be represented.

4.4 The Logical Forms of Sentences in Arabic

The similarity in the temporal contribution of the temporal pseudo verbs, e.g. ‘SbaHa ‘be in the morning’ and some

temporal adverbs such as SabaaHan ‘in the morning’ is apparent in the similar logical forms of the sentences that include

them. Both specify the SitT at which the situation holds. Consider the following examples with their logical forms for

comparison, leaving the representation of Aspect aside for now.

(50) a. ‘SbaHa 9ali-un mariiD-an

Perf.monring.3sgm Ali-NOM sick-ACC

‘Ali got sick in the morning.’


- 1018 -

b. Ǝs [ASBAHA (s) & EXPERIENCER (9ali, s) & MARIIDAN (s)]

c. ‘There is a state of sickness such that Ali is the experiencer of this state, and the state is sickness, and this state is

true of Ali in the morning.’

(51) a. 9ali-un mariiD-un SabaH-an

Ali-NOM sick-NOM morning-ACC

‘Ali is sick in the morning.’

b. Ǝs [EXPERIENCER (9ali, s) & MARIIDAN (s) & SABAHAN (s)]

c. ‘There is a state of sickness such that Ali is the experiencer of this state, and the state is sickness, and this state is

true of Ali in the morning.’

According to the identical lexical temporal contribution, the co-occurrence of these verbs and adverbs is predicted to

lead to unacceptability or redundancy as illustrated below.

(52) a. #’SbaHa 9ali-un mariiD-an SabaH-an

Perf.morning.3sgm Ali-NOM sick-ACC morning-ACC

b. ’SbaHa 9ali-un mariiD-an al-bariHat-a

Perf.morning.3sgm Ali-NOM sick-ACC the-yesterday-ACC

‘Ali was sick in the morning yesterday.’

Example (52a) shows that the pseudo verb does not collocate with the temporal adverb SabaHan ‘morning’; however,

it collocates with other temporal adverbs such as albariHata ‘yesterday’ as shown in (52b). This is because the former

adverb conveys the exact meaning that is conveyed by the verb whereas the latter is different. The logical form of Example

(52b) demonstrates the different non-contradictory temporal contribution of the pseudo verb and the temporal adverb.

(53) a. Ǝs (‘SBAHA (s) & EXPERIENCER (9ali, s) & MRIIDAN (s) & ALBARIHATA(s)]

b. ‘There was a state of sickness such as Ali was the experiencer of this state, and it was sickness, and the state held

yesterday and it was true of Ali in the morning.’

The temporal adverb albariHata ‘yesterday’ establishes the RT as anterior to the ST. The temporal pseudo verb shows

that the state is true in the morning of yesterday.

In tensed languages like English, Tense on verbs is obligatory and represented in the logical forms of sentences as a

Tense Operator that scopes over the whole proposition as well as the existential quantifier when introduced to the

NeoDavidsonian framework to disentangle the scopal ambiguity between the operator and quantifier. This is shown in the

example below taken from Kearns (2000).

(54) a. Jones left.

b. Past Ǝe [LEAVE (e) & AGENT (jones, e)]

‘At a past time there was an event and the event was a leaving and Jones was itsagent.’

c. # Ǝe Past [LEAVE (e) & AGENT (jones, e)]

‘There is an event when at a past time was a leaving and Jones was its agent.’

The event exists if it is located in time and the e variable has to be bound by time. If it scopes over time, this means that

this variable will be unbounded and so vacuous. This is why the logical form in (54b) is appropriate whereas (54a) is not.

The other important issue is the relation between the Tense Operator and temporal adverbs in tensed languages because


- 1019 -

both operate on one dimension, which is the time interval. Tense is obligatory and introduces temporal interval that

establishes RT with respect to the ST. On the other hand, temporal adverbs are optional and they specify the time interval

introduced by Tense. There are two possible ways to represent temporal adverbs in the logical form. The first

representation is to consider the temporal adverb as a quantifier phrase, and then a scopal ambiguity may arise. Below is an

illustration.

(55) a. Jones left yesterday.

b. # [yesterday (t)] Past Ǝe [t ˂ t* & LEAVE (e) & AGENT (jones, e)]

‘There is a time that is yesterday and at a past time there was an event which was Leaving and Jones was its agent.’

c. Past [yesterday (t)] Ǝe [t ˂ t* & LEAVE (e) & AGENT (jones, e)]

‘At a past time which was yesterday, there was an event that was leaving and its Agent was Jones.’

The logical form in (55b) is not acceptable because the variable t is unbounded by the past operator and the unbounded

past introduced by the Tense Operator is included in the temporal interval established by the temporal adverb yesterday.

On the other hand, the representation in (55c) is better because it captures the correct interaction between Tense and

temporal adverbs that the Tense Operator introduces an unbounded interval and the temporal adverb encodes a bounded

interval within the unbounded one that is why the Tense operator must also scope over temporal adverbs.

Turning to the logical forms in SA and JA, Tense is not morphologically expressed on verbs and so the assumption that

logical forms include a Tense Operator is not motivated. Rather, Aspect is conveyed. The question then: how to represent

Aspect. There are two ways to represent Aspect: either as an Aspect Operator on a par with the Tense Operator in tensed

languages or as a modifier just like adverbs. I will adopt the proposal made about JA in AlAqarbeh’s unpublished

dissertation (2011) in assuming that the first possibility is not well-motivated. Consider the following examples.

(56) a. 9ali katab il-qiSah

Ali Perf.write.3sgm the-story

‘Ali wrote/ has written the story.’

b. Ǝe Perf [KATAB (e) & AGENT (9ali, e) & THEME (il-qSah, e)]

‘There is an event and the event is completed and the event is writing and Ali is its agent and alqiSah is its theme.’

c. # Perf Ǝe [KATAB (e)& AGENT (9ali, e) & THEME (il-qSah, e)]

‘A complete event, there is an event and the event is writing and Ali is its agent and alqiSah is its theme.’

Al-Aqarbeh (2011) claims that Representation (56b) does not show what Aspect operates over and how it scopes over

the whole proposition. In fact, Aspect modifies the e variable as complete or incomplete, this is not captured in the logical

form in (56c) where Aspect scopes over the existential quantifier. Since Aspect modifies the event as complete or

incomplete whereas Tense operates over time; then they are different and so the analogy is not motivated.

The other possible representation is to consider Aspect as a modifier of an event. This prediction is not borne out as

illustrated in the examples below from Al-Aqarbeh (2011).

(57) a. 9ali katab il-qSah imbariH

Ali Perf.write.3sgm the-story yesterday

‘Ali wrote the story yesterday.’

b. # [IMBARIH(e)] Ǝe [Perf(e) & KATAB(e) & AGENT (9ali,e) & THEME (il-qiSah,e)]

‘For yesterday, there was an event, the event was complete, and the event was a writing, and its agent was Ali, and its

theme was the story.’


- 1020 -

c. # Ǝe [Perf(e)] [IMBARIH(e)] (KATAB (e) & AGENT (9ali,e) & THEME (il-qiSah,e)]

‘There exists an event, the event is complete, and the event was yesterday, and the event was a writing, and Ali is its

agent, and the storyis its theme.’

As the logical forms in (57) demonstrate there is no scopal ambiguity between adverbs and Aspect because Aspect

modifies the event as complete or not whereas temporal adverbs modify the event temporally. More precisely, they operate

on two different dimensions even though they are similar in the sense that they both modify the event. Based on this, Al-Aqarbeh (2011) assumes that they must be represented as two separate conjuncts within the NeoDavidsonian framework.

(58) a. Ǝe [Perf(e) & KATAB (e) & AGENT (9ali,e) & THEME (il-qiSah,e) & IMBARIH(e)]

‘There exists an event, the event is complete, and the event is a writing, and Ali is its agent, and the story is its theme,

and the event was yesterday.’

In the present study, I will extend this proposal to represent the logical forms of sentences in SA as shown below.

(59) a. kataba 9ali-un al-qiSat-a al-bariHat-a SabaH-an

Perf.write.3sgm Ali-NOM the-story-ACC the-yesterday-ACC morning-ACC

‘Ali wrote/ has written the story yesterday morning.’

b. Ǝe [Perf (e) & KATABA (e) & AGENT (9ali, e) & THEME (alqiSat, e) & ALBARIHATA (e) & SABAHAN (e)]

‘There exists an event such that the event was complete and its agent was Ali and its theme was the story and it was

yesterday and it was in the morning.’

(60) a. ‘SbaHa 9ali-un mariiD-an al-bariHat-a

Perf.morning.3sgm Ali-NOM sick-ACC the-yesterday-ACC

‘Ali got sick in the morning yesterday.’

b. Ǝs [Perf (s) & ‘SBAHA (s) & EXPERIENCER (9ali, s) & MARIIDAN (s) & ALBARIHATA (s)]

‘There exists a state of sickness such that the state was complete and it was in the morning and its experiencer was Ali

and it was sickness and it was yesterday.’

The logical form in (59b) of a sentence with the temporal adverb SabaHan ‘morning’ is similar to the logical

representation in (60b) with the pseudo verb ‘SbaHa. This similarity suggests that the semantic contribution of these

linguistic items is similar. This, in turn, supports the assumption that the fully inflected pseudo verbs introduce temporal

information lexically.

The negative verb layisa implies negation, but still it carries Perfective morphology that contributes Boundedness.

Consider the following representation.

(61) a. layis-at laila mariiD-at-un

not-3sgf Laila sick-sgf-NOM

‘Laila is not sick.’

b. Ǝs [Perf (s) & EXPERIENCER (laila, s) & MRIIDATUN (s)] ¬ >> Ǝs

‘There is no state in which Laila is sick.’

c. Ǝs ¬ [Perf (s) & EXPERIENCER (laila, s) & MRIIDATUN (s)] * Ǝs >> ¬

‘There is a state in which Laila is not sick.’


- 1021 -

Sentence (61a) only has the reading in (c) and cannot mean (b) in which negation scopes over the whole proposition of

Laila being sick. The inflection on layisa is Perfective and it modifies the state independently as shown in the logical form

by bringing the entire state under the scope of negation. No information is given about time. The meaning is that the state

does not hold. The implication is if there is no such state, then it is still true that there exists no such a state, which implies

the present tense reading.

Sentences combining both pseudo and thematic verbs are common. To analyze their logical forms, I will compare them

to sentences with a pseudo verb only and another one with just a thematic verb in what follows.

(62) a. kaana 9ali-un mariiD-an

Perf.be.3sgm Ali-NOM sick-ACC

‘Ali was/ has been sick.’

b. Ǝs [KAANA (s) & Perf (s) & EXPERIENCER (9ali, s) & MRIIDAN (s)]

‘There is a state of sickness such that Ali is its experiencer of this state.’

(63) a. 9ali-un rasama aS-Surat-a

Ali-NOM Perf.draw.3sgm the-picture-ACC

‘Ali drew the picture.’

b. Ǝe [RASAMA (e) & Perf (e) & AGENT (9ali, e) & THEME (aSsurata, e)]

‘There is an event, the event is complete, and it is a drawing, and its agent is Ali, and its theme is the picture.’

Sentence (63) can be embedded under a pseudo verb giving the following example.

(64) kaana 9ali-un rasama aS-Surat-a

Perf.be.3sgm Ali-NOM Perf.draw.3sgm the-picture-ACC

Ali was in the state of having completed drawing the picture.

‘Ali has/ had written the picture.’

Kaana is a stative verb that asserts the existence of a certain state. The thematic verb rasama ‘draw’ is a thematic verb

that denotes the writing event with the agent, Ali, and the theme, the letter. To capture this meaning, I suggest the

following logical representation of Sentence (86).

(65) Ǝs Ǝe [KAANA (s) & Perf (s) & RASAMA (e) & Perf (e) &AGENT (9ali, e) & THEME (aSSurata, e)]

The same is true for other pseudo verbs with thematic verbs in the Imperfective as illustrated below.

(66) a. ‘SbaHa 9ali-un ya-ktub-u ar-risaalat-a

Perf.morning.3sgm Ali-NOM 3-write.sgm-IND the-letter-ACC

Ali was in the state of writing the letter in the morning.

‘Ali was writing the letter in the morning.’

b. Ǝs Ǝe [‘SBAHA (s) & Perf (s) & yaktubu (e) & Impf (e) & AGENT (9ali, e) & THEME (arrisalat, e)]

The logical form in (66) reads as follows: there exists a state of Ali writing the letter in the morning. The semantic bi-

clausal proposal implies that the clause structure of sentences with pseudo and thematic verbs is syntactically bi-clausal.

In short, the discussion of the logical forms of some sentences including temporal adverbs, pseudo verbs and thematic

verbs reveals that Aspect and temporal adverbs modify eventualities independently.


- 1022 -

5. Conclusion

I have shown that the distinctive verbal forms are not grammaticalized forms of Tense in SA and JA. Rather, they

denote Aspect. Nonetheless, eventualities located in time directly by some linguistic items that introduce temporal

interpretation lexically such as temporal adverbs, or pragmatically by inferences drawn indirectly according to the

temporal Boundedness properties of the aspectual viewpoints. The significance of the proposal advanced in this paper is

that it places SA and JA among languages that lack overt tense morphology, and it suggests how temporal interpretation

can be achieved in these languages. I also argue that the presence of Tense in the logical forms of sentences in Arabic is

not motivated. This proposal significantly questions the availability of an independent projection of Tense in the clause

structure of SA and JA is not motivated on morphological grounds. I leave the last issue for future research.

Appendix A


‘amsa

‘get in the evening’

(1) look at (40a) tu-misu-un

Impf.3-evening-plm

‘So glorify Allah when you come up to the

evening.”


evening’

b. ‘amsa 9ali-un mariiD-an

Perf.evening.3sgm Ali-NOM sick-ACC

‘Ali is sick in the evening.’

‘DHa

get in the pre-noon’

(2) a. aDHay-na

Perf.prenoon-1pl

‘We got in the pre-noon.’


pre-noon.’

b. ‘aDHa 9ali-un mariiD-an

Perf.prenoon.3sgm Ali-NOM sick-ACC

‘Ali is sick in the prenoon.’

dhalla

‘all the day, when the sun has a shadow on earth’

(3) a. dhalla il-yawim

Perf.have shadow.3sgm the-day

‘We got in the time when the sun has a

shadow on the earth.’


daytime (the beginning of the day when there is

shadow).’

b. dhalla 9ali-un mariiD-an

Perf.daytime.3sgm Ali-NOM sick-ACC

‘Ali is sick in the daytime.’

baata

‘he slept or visited someone at night’

(4) a. baata bi-him

Perf.sleep.3sgm at-them

‘He visited them at night.’

‘the subject has the property in the predicate at the

beginning of night’

b. baata 9ali-un mariiD-an

Perf.night.3sgm Ali-NOM sick-ACC

‘Ali is sick in the beginning of night.’

ghada

‘travel or move early in the day in the period

between the dawn and sunrise’

(5) a. wa-itha ghadaw-ta min

and-if Perf.go-2sgm from

ahli-ka

family-your

‘when you left your household in the

morning’ (Al-Imran: 121)


period of time between the dawn and sunrise’

b. ghada 9ali-un mariiD-an

Perf.be.3sgm Ali-NOM sick-ACC

‘Ali is sick in the time between the dawn

and sunrise.’


- 1023 -


raaHa

‘go, walk in the afternoon or any time in the day

or night’

(6) ghada ilyi-him

Perf.walk.3sgm to-them

‘He went to them.’


period of time just before the sunset’

(b) raaHa 9ali-un

Perf.before sunset.3sgm Ali-NOM

munTaliq-an

running-ACC

‘Ali was in hurry before sunset’.

‘afjara

‘get in the dawn’

(7) ‘a-rjul-u itha

Impf.1-go.sg-IND if

‘a-fjar-it-u

Impf.1-get in the dawn-tu-IND

‘I go in the dawn.’

------

‘sHara

‘go in the time before dawn or we are in time

before dawn’

(8) a-sHar-na

1-go in pre-dawn-pl

‘We get/ go in the time before the dawn.’

-----

‘dhhara

‘go or get in the time at noon’

(9) ‘wa Hiina tu-dhhir-uun’

and when Impf.2-be at noon-plm

‘and when you are at noon.’

(Al-Ruum: 18)

------

Saara

‘move from one place to another’

(10) a. Saara zayd-un

Perf.go.3sgm Zaid-NOM

ila al-Hadiiqat-i

to the-park-GEN

‘Zaid went to the park.’

‘become/ change from one state to another’

b. Saara zayd-un

Perf.become.3sgm Zaid-NOM

muHami-an

lawyer-ACC

‘Zaid became a lawyer.’


- 1024 -

Appendix B

Verbs Main verbs Pseudo Verbs

‘amsa

‘get in the evening’

(1) a. keif ‘amsei-it How Perf.evening-sgm ‘How are you in the evening?’

‘have a certain quality in the evening’ b. ‘-amse-it ta9ban

1-evening-sg tired ‘I am tired in the evening.’

‘DHa ‘adhhar i9Sar ‘aghrab i9sha

All those verbs are used only to show the time of prayer enters as in the example below: (2) ‘idhhar-at

Perf.Dhuhir prayer enter.3-sgf ‘The noon prayer enters.’

Those prayers are: a-DuHa ‘the-prenoon’ a-dhuher ‘the-noon’ al-9aSir ‘the-afternoon’ al-maghrib ‘the-sunset’ al-9ishaa’ ‘the-evening’

----- ----- ----- ------ ------

Saar

‘occur’ (3) a. Saar-at mushkil-ih

occur.3-sgf problem-sgf “A problem occurred.’

‘become’ b. Saar muHami

Perf.become.3sgm lawyer.sgm ‘He became/ has become lawyer.’

REFERENCES

Al-Aqarbeh, R. 2011. Finiteness in Jordanian Arabic: A Semantic and Morphosyntactic Approach. The University of Kansas,

unpublished dissertation.

Aoun, J., Elabbas, B., and Lina C. 2010. The Syntax of Arabic. Cambridge Syntax Guides.

Bohnemeyer, J. 2002. The grammar of time reference in Yukatek Maya. Munich: LINCOM.

Chung, S. and Alan T. 1985. Tense, aspect, and mood. In T. Shopen (Ed.), Language Typology and Syntactic Description, III:

Grammatical Categories and the Lexicon, pp. 202-258. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Comrie, B. 1976. Aspect. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Comrie, B. 1985. Tense. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Cohen, M. 1924. Le système verbal sémitique et l'expression du temps. Paris 1924.

Davidson, D. 1967. The logical form of action sentences. In N. Rescher (ed.), The Logic of Decision and Action, pp. 81-120.

Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.

Depraetere, I. 1995. ‘On the Necessity of Distinguishing between (un)Boundedness and (a) Telicity’. In Linguistics and

Philosophy, 18, 1-19.

Fass,i F. 1993. Issues in the Structure of Arabic Clauses and Words. Kluwer.

Fassi, F. 2004. ‘Temporal/ Aspectual Interaction and Variation across Arabic Heights’. In Jacqueline

Fleisch, H. 1979. Traite de Philologie Arabe. Beirut: Librairie Orientale.


- 1025 -

Giorgi, A. and F. Pianesi. 1997. Tense and aspect. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Grice, H. P. 1975. ‘Logic and Conversation’. In P. Cole and J.L. Morgan (eds.). In Speech Acts, New York : Academic Press, 41-

58.

Hinrichs, E. 1986. ‘Temporal anaphora in discourses of English’. In Linguistics and Philosophy 9, 63-82.

Hornstein, N. 1990. As Time Goes By. Cambridge: MIT Press, MA.

Kamp, H., and Uwe R. 1993. From discourse to logic : Introduction to model theoretic semantics of natural language, formal

logic and Discourse Representation Theory. Dordrecht : Kluwer.

Kearns, Kate. 2000. Semantics. London: Macmillan Press Ltd.

Krifka, M., F.J. Pelletier, G. Carlson, A. Ter Meulen, A.G. Link, and G. Chierchia. 1995. Genericity. An Introduction in Carlson

et. Al. (eds.). 1-124.

Kurylowicz, J. 1973. Verbal Aspect in Semitic. Orientalia, New Series, 42 pp. 114 – 120.

Lin, J. 2003. ‚Temporal Reference in Mandarin Chinese‘. In Journal of East Asian Linguistics 12, 259-311.

Lyons, J. 1977. Semantics I and II. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Ouhalla, J. 1993. ‘Negation, Focus and Tense: The Arabic maa and laa. In Rivista di Linguistica 5: 275-300.

Parsons, T. 1990. Events in the Semantics of English. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Reichenbach, H. 1947. Elements of Symbolic Logic. New York: The Free Press.

Smith, C.S. 1997. The Parameter of Aspect. Dordrecht: Kluwer.

-----, and Mary S. Erbaugh. 2005. ‘Temporal Interpretations in Mandarin Chinese’, In Linguistics 43: 713-756. -----, S. Ellavina, T. Perkins, and Theodore B. Fernald. 2007. ‘Time in Navajo: Direct and Indirect interpretation’. In

International Journal of American Linguistics 73 (1): 40-71.

Stanely, J. 2000. ‘Context and logical form’. In Linguistics and Philosophy 23: 391-434.

Vendler, Z. 1957. ‘Verbs and Times’. Philosophical Review. In 1967, Linguistics in Philosophy. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

Wright, W. 1859. A Grammar of the Arabic Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

المراجع العربية

القرآن الكريم .، الأصول في النحو، تحقيق عبد المحسن الفتلي، مطبعة النعمان، النجف الأشرف1973ابن سراج، ابو بكر،

.لقاهرة، لسان العرب، دار المعارف، ا1980ابن منظور، جمال الدين محمد بن مكرم، .4، ج3، دار المعارف، القاهرة، ط1977البحتري، الديوان، تحقيق حسن كامل الصيرفي،

.4، الانصاف في مسائل الخلاف بين النحويين البصريين والكوفيين، المكتبة التجارية في مصر، ط1970الانباري، ابو بركات، .كاظم محمد المرجان، دار الرشيد للنشر، منشورات وزارة الثقافة في العراق. تحقيق د، كتاب المقتصد في شرح الايضاح، 1988الجرجاني، عبد القاهر، .3دراسة لغوية لمفهوم الزمن وألفاظه في التقافة العربية، الهيئة المصرية العامة للكتاب، ط: ، الزمان الدلالي2008حسام الدين، كريم زكي،

.ة، دار عالم الثقافة، الأردن، الزمن النحوي في اللغة العربي2007رشيد، كمال، .2، الفعل زمانه و ابنيته، مؤسسة الرسالة، بيروت، ط1980السامرائي، ابراهيم، .1938، الكتاب، بلاق، القاهرة، اعيدت الطباعة عام 793سيبويه، ابو بشر،

.129-113، مجلة حوليات كلية دار العلوم، "كان بين يدي النحويين" ،1976. شرف الدين، محمود .، الأدب الشعبي في الاردن، منشورات لجنة تاريخ الاردن1996هاني، العمد،

.، القاموس المحيط، مكتبة التربية، بيروت1956الفيروز أبادي، مجد الدين محمد بن يعقوب، .4، المعجم الوسيط، مكتبة الشروق الدولية، ط2004مجمع اللغة العربية،

.86-17مجلة كلية دار العلوم، ،ها من المعجمية الى الوظيفيةكان و أخوات ،2007 ،المنصور، وسيمة .، الصرف، دار الفكر العربي2004النابي، علي محمود،


- 1026 -

التعبير الزمني في اللغة العربية واللهجة الأردنية

* رانيا نايف العقاربة

صـملخوتفترض الدراسة أنّ الصيغ الصرفية للأفعال العربية تدّل على . تتطرق هذه الدراسة إلى التعبير الزمني في اللغة العربية

فصيغ الفعل الصرفية . لذا تعتمد اللغة على أساليب أخرى لتحديد زمن الحدث. حالة حدوث الفعل وليس على زمن حدوثهن الحدث فالصيغة الصرفية التي تقدّم حدثا محدودا تفُسّر بالماضي، أما التي تمدّ السياق بقرائن غير مباشرة توحي بزم

وقد يحدد زمن الحدث بأسلوب مباشر من خلال المعاني المعجمية لبعض . تقدّمه بالحالة غير المحدودة فتفسّر بالمضارعمة هذه الأفعال والظروف ويظهر هذا التماثل في مساه. الأفعال الناقصة مثل أصبح و بعض ظروف الزمان مثل أمس

.جليّا من خلال الصيغ المنطقية المتماثلة للجمل التي تحويه .التعبير الزمني، اللغة العربية، الصيغ الصرفية :الكلمـات الدالـة

________________________________________________ .23/5/2014، وتاريخ قبوله 29/11/2013تاريخ استلام البحث . مؤتة، الأردنجامعة *

temporal interpretation in standard and jordanian arabic

Documents