The grammar of the english verb phrase part 43 docx

VII. Factors influencing the choice of temporal W-interpretation 287
VII. Factors influencing the choice of temporal
W-interpretation
5.30 The indefinite reading versus the continuative
interpretation
5.30.1 As we have seen, there are present perfect sentences that can only
receive a continuative reading (for one of the reasons given in 5.9) and others
that can only receive an indefinite reading (e. g. because the situation time is
punctual, as in He has been shot). In some cases the same VP in the present
perfect can be used in a sentence receiving a continuative interpretation and in
a sentence receiving an indefinite reading. In that case, if there is an adverbial
specifying a period leading up to now (e. g. since then) the continuative inter-
pretation is the unmarked reading (i. e. it is the reading that is automatically
selected unless it is rendered unlikely or impossible by the context).
19
If there
is no such adverbial and no contextual specification of a particular period
leading up to now, only the indefinite interpretation suggests itself.
Since 1982 John has lived in Paris. (naturally interpreted as continuative)
Since 1982 John has lived in Paris, and in London, and in several other places too.
(The continuative interpretation of has lived in Paris is blocked by the rest of the sen-
tence.)
John has lived in Paris. (indefinite interpretation)
5.30.2 Nonprogressive present perfect clauses containing a duration adverbial
with for can in principle yield either the indefinite or the continuative reading.
This is true of each of the following:
John has watched TV for 3 hours. (The continuative reading is ‘It is now three
hours that John has been in the progress of watching TV’, while the indefinite
reading is ‘It has happened (at least once) in a pre-present period that the situation
of John-watching-TV-for-three-hours actualized’.)
John has {played tennis / dug the garden / sat on that stool} for 3 hours.

However, an indefinite reading can be imposed by the context or by an adverb
like ever, before, yet or still … not:
19. The following are examples in which a present perfect sentence with since then receives
an indefinite interpretation:
(i) Since then I have lived in Paris, Rome, Budapest and Oslo.
(ii) [She was Ellen Leicester, and Mr. Castonel ran away with her, and she died. That
was last spring,] and it’s since then that Mr. Leicester has got so ill. (www)
Example (ii) expresses a mixture of indefinite and continuative reading Ϫ see 5.21.2.
288 5. The absolute use of the present perfect
John has lived in Paris for three years and in Moscow for two and a half years. [For
the rest he has been a Londoner.] (indefinite reading imposed by the fact that a list
of bounded situations is given)
You still haven’t {done / *been doing} what I asked you to do. (indefinite reading)
Has John ever {played tennis / dug the garden / sat on that stool} for 3 hours?
Have you lived in Paris for three years yet? (ϭ ‘Has there yet been a three-year-
period in your life during which you lived in Paris?’)
Have you stayed in Paris for three days before? (ϭ ‘Has it happened before that you
stayed in Paris for three days?’)
Conversely, only the continuative interpretation is possible in nonprogressive
sentences involving a for-adverbial combined with an adverb like now or today
which anchors the situation to t
0
:
John has lived in Paris for three years now. (‘For three years’ indicates the duration
of the ‘factual full situation’, i. e. the situation as it has actualized up to t
0
Ϫ see
5.7. The addition of ‘now’ entails that the full situation includes t
0
, in other words

that the sentence is given the continuative interpretation.)
John has {watched TV / played tennis / dug the garden} for many years now.
(continuative habit)
Today John has been our leader for exactly five years. (continuative state)
She’s been a non-smoker for three years today. (continuative state)
5.30.3 If the verb is in the progressive form, present perfect sentences with a
for-adverbial only allow an interpretation on which the situation time is co-
extensive with the pre-present and therefore exclude the indefinite reading.
Thus, the following all naturally yield a continuative interpretation:
John has been watching TV for 3 hours.
John has been playing tennis for 3 hours.
John has been digging the garden for 3 hours.
John has been sitting on that stool for 3 hours.
5.30.4 The adverb never (or not … ever) is also incompatible with a continua-
tive reading. However, it allows either an indefinite or a constitution reading:
Never in my life have I worked as a waitress. (indefinite: ‘The situation of my work-
ing as a waitress has never actualized in my lifetime.’)
I’ve never been there in my life. (indefinite or quantificational constitution reading,
depending on the context Ϫ see 5.32.3.)
[She’s very punctual.] I’ve never had to
wait for her. (indefinite)
[“How often have you had to wait for her?”] Ϫ “I’ve
never had to wait for her.”
(quantificational constitution reading: ‘The number of times I’ve had to wait for her
is zero’.)
VII. Factors influencing the choice of temporal W-interpretation 289
The incompatibility of a continuative reading with never is, of course, logical:
a situation that has never actualized before t
0
cannot be still continuing at t

0
.
5.30.5 In the absence of adverbials like those mentioned above, a negative
present perfect clause invites a continuative interpretation if it refers to a state
(which may be a habit) and has a context (adverbial or other) which allows a
continuative reading. On the other hand, a negative present perfect clause trig-
gers an indefinite reading if it is taken to refer to a ‘
nonevent’. We speak of
a ‘nonevent’ if a (dynamic or static) situation that is expected to actualize (or
could actualize) in fact does not actualize, and this nonactualization is treated
as a situation in its own right, so that it is associated with a particular time
which can serve as time of orientation or anchor time for the expression of a
temporal relation (as in The terrorists left the country soon after the bomb
they had hidden in the theatre did not explode). Compare:
He hasn’t been here for some time. (state; continuative reading)
We haven’t had a car since Maggie died. (state; continuative reading)
We haven’t visited Uncle Ben once since we haven’t had a car. (idem)
[Boggs is hoping to play well this weekend and take another step towards getting
the Jackets back to Omaha for the College World Series for the first time since 1994.
“When I came to college, that was the top priority. It feels like] something’s missing
since we haven’t been there.” (www) (state; continuative reading) (The sentence is
interpreted as ‘Something is missing and has been missing {throughout the period
in which our going there hasn’t taken place / throughout the period in which we
haven’t gone there}’. This is a continuative interpretation.)
He hasn’t sent the letter after all. (nonevent; indefinite reading)
The expected terrorist attack on the White House hasn’t taken place. (nonevent;
indefinite reading)
I’ve been very angry with him since he {didn’t send / *hasn’t sent} the letter. (The
reference is to a ‘T-bygone’ Ϫ see 4.2.2 Ϫ nonevent. However, the present perfect
cannot be used because it is a general rule that, in a temporal since-clause, the

present perfect can only be used on a continuative reading. If the situation is felt to
be over at t
0
we have to use the past tense.)
5.31 The up-to-now reading versus the continuative
reading
What the up-to-now reading and the continuative reading have in common is
that the situation (which may be a single situation, a repetitive hypersituation
or a habit) fills the whole of the contextually or pragmatically determined
period leading up to (but not including) t
0
. What distinguishes them is the fol-
lowing:
290 5. The absolute use of the present perfect
(a) On the up-to-now reading, the time of the full situation does not include
t
0
,
20
whereas it does on the continuative reading. For example:
I’ve been helping John for hours now. (continuative: I am still helping John.)
[“Oh, there you are. Where have you been?”] Ϫ “I’ve been helping John. [He didn’t
understand his homework.”] (up-to-now reading: I’m not helping John any more.)
(b) The use of the progressive form is partly different on the two readings Ϫ
see 5.23Ϫ4 and 5.26Ϫ29 above. In fact, there are also differences within
the up-to-now reading.
Let us consider the continuative reading first. Here, the sentence in the present
perfect does not use the progressive form if it refers to a permanent habit, even
if that consists of dynamic subsituations.
I’ve helped John for many years now.

We’ve always worked very hard in the past.
A continuative reading does, however, require the progressive form if the refer-
ence is to a temporary habit made up of dynamic subsituations and (at least
in most cases) if the reference is to a single dynamic agentive situation:
I’ve {been helping /
??
helped} John for hours now. (The reference is to a single
nonstative situation which is still continuing.)
I’ve been helping John for months. (The reference is to a temporary habit which
includes t
0
.)
As to the up-to-now reading, we notice a similar use of the (non)progressive
form on an unmarked up-to-now reading: the verb form is progressive if the
situation is temporary and nonprogressive if it is habitual Ϫ see 5.26:
(Up to now) we’ve been telling people that the car was reliable. (temporary habit)
(Up to now) we’ve always told people that the car was reliable. (permanent habit
because of always)
A present perfect sentence (referring to a durative dynamic agentive situation)
is as a rule in the progressive form if it is to receive the nonquantificational
constitution reading Ϫ see 5.27:
[At last you’re there!] What have you {been doing / *done}?
[“You’re late!”] Ϫ “Yes. I’ve {been talking / *talked} with the janitor.
By contrast, a quantificational constitution reading is as a rule incompatible
with the progressive form Ϫ see 5.28Ϫ29:
20. With the exception of sentences of the type This is the third cigarette I have smoked
today (spoken while the speaker is smoking his third cigarette) Ϫ see 5.21.3.
VII. Factors influencing the choice of temporal W-interpretation 291
Six years have {passed / *been passing} since my accident.
It’s two years since I have {spoken / *have been speaking} with him.

“How many times have you {watched / *been watching} that film?” Ϫ “I have
{watched / *been watching} it four times.”
(c) There are adverbials that are compatible with the continuative reading
only (see 5.9.1). Compare:
The Johnsons have lived in London for three years. (This sentence in principle
allows an indefinite reading, an up-to-now reading or a continuative reading. The
latter is the preferred interpretation if the sentence is used out of context.)
The Johnsons have lived in London for three years now. (The presence of now in
the adverbial means that the period indicated includes t
0
. The continuative inter-
pretation is therefore enforced.)
I’ve worked in London since I left home. (naturally interpreted as continuative,
though the other readings are not ruled out)
Since I left home, I’ve worked in London, Liverpool and Lincoln. (The continuative
and the up-to-now interpretations of I’ve worked in London are ruled out by the
other indications of place, at least if the latter are taken to indicate the consecutive
places where I have worked.)
I’ve worked in London ever since I left home. (The continuative reading is imposed
by the addition of ever to the since-clause.)
(d) As noted in 5.9.2, when the situation referred to is a permanent (unalter-
able, irreversible) state, the present perfect sentence will automatically be
interpreted as continuative:
He’s been dead for a while. (The indefinite reading is excluded because an irrevers-
ible state of affairs is L-nonbounded and cannot be interpreted as W-nonbounded.
An attempt to cancel the continuative reading by adding but he no longer is leads
to unacceptability, at least in the world as we know it.)
5.32 The up-to-now reading versus the indefinite
interpretation
5.32.1 The up-to-now reading implies that the time of the full situation

(which is often a hypersituation possibly involving gaps) coincides with the
situation time, which is co-extensive with the pre-present. This means that the
time of the full situation leads up to t
0
without including it. In this respect the
up-to-now reading differs from the indefinite reading, which implies that the
pre-present situation time is located at some distance from t
0
. (However, as
noted in 5.1.6, if there is no temporal adverbial like ever, before, in the past,
etc., this distance is as short as is allowed by the semantics and pragmatics of
292 5. The absolute use of the present perfect
the sentence and its context. Thus, I haven’t had breakfast yet implies ‘this
morning’, not ‘in the last week’.)
5.32.2 A point of similarity between the up-to-now reading and the indefinite
reading is that they both imply that the situation time coincides with the time
of the full situation. A point of dissimilarity is that an indefinite reading is
seldom compatible with the progressive form Ϫ see 5.25 Ϫ whereas an un-
marked up-to-now reading normally requires the progressive form (though a
quantificational constitution reading forbids using it) Ϫ see 5.26Ϫ29.
5.32.3 The indefinite reading is the only one possible in present perfect sen-
tences involving adverbs like ever, yet and before:
Have you {helped /
??
been helping} your daughter with her homework before?
Have you ever {helped /
??
been helping} your daughter with her homework?
Have you {helped /
??

been helping} your daughter with her homework yet?
In the absence of such an adverbial, a present perfect sentence may sometimes
allow an indefinite reading as well as a quantificational constitution reading.
This is the case, for example, in negative sentences involving never, such as
I’ve never seen him. According to the context in which it is used, such a sen-
tence can receive a different interpretation:
[“What can you tell me about the man in this picture?” Ϫ “Nothing.] I’ve never
seen him. (indefinite reading: ‘It has not happened yet that I saw the man’; the
default location of the nuclear accent is on seen.)
[“How many times have you seen the man in this picture?”] Ϫ “I’ve never seen
him.” (constitution reading: ‘The number of times I have seen the man is zero’. This
reading is enforced by the fact that both the question and the reply are specificational
sentences Ϫ see 5.20.)
The second example can be compared with the following:
[“How many times have you seen the man in this picture?”] Ϫ “Actually, I’ve never
seen him.”
The nuclear accent is again on never, but this time the sentence is not used to
specify the number of subsituations making up the hypersituation filling the
pre-present. Instead, it is used to reject the presupposition ‘You have seen the
man in this picture at least once’ which forms part of the interpretation of
How many times have you seen the man in this picture?. The interpretation of
the reply sentence is therefore an indefinite one: ‘Contrary to what you suggest,
it has not happened yet that I saw this man’. Because of this, the sentence can
involve before or yet:
[“How many times have you seen the man in this picture?”] Ϫ “Actually, {I’ve never
seen / I haven’t seen} him {yet / before}.”
VII. Factors influencing the choice of temporal W-interpretation 293
5.32.4 As will be noted in 5.37.5, the use of a present perfect with an indefi-
nite reading may be an indirect way of drawing attention to a present result.
Thus, I’ve opened the door can be an indirect way of saying ‘The door is open’.

A present perfect with a constitution reading is never used in this way (i. e. to
draw attention to a present result) because its function is specificational, i. e.
it is concerned with the question what value satisfies the variable Ϫ see 5.20.1.
For example, in This is the first cigarette I’ve smoked today there may be a
clear ‘message’ that the speaker has achieved a longer period than usual (or
than assumed) without a cigarette, but it is not really possible to see what
result of this being the first cigarette he has smoked today is directly implied
or implicated by this utterance.
When the up-to-now reading is not a constitution reading but an unmarked
up-to-now interpretation, the speaker is clearly concerned with a present result
when the sentence is used with an explanatory-resultative function Ϫ see
5.18.3. However, the result is not a ‘direct result’, as in the case of an indefinite
perfect, but an ‘indirect’ one Ϫ see 5.37.1.
5.32.5 If a head clause in the present perfect supports a temporal while-
clause, its interpretation (‘up to now’ vs ‘indefinite’) can help to determine the
choice of tense Ϫ present perfect versus past tense Ϫ in the while-clause.
When the head clause is to receive an up-to-now reading, the while-clause
(whose situation time then coincides with the situation time of the head clause)
must also receive an up-to-now reading and must therefore also be in the pres-
ent perfect:
Has this house been deserted all the time while I {have been /*was} away? (un-
marked up-to-now reading of the head clause situation)
(Both speaker and hearer enter a room, but from different sides.) What have you
been doing while I {have been /*was} feeding the chickens? (nonquantificational
constitution reading of the head clause situation)
This is the third cigarette I have smoked while {I’ve been /*Iwas} waiting in here.
(quantificational constitution reading of the head clause situation)
Have all these things been fizzling away in here while we’ve been at the inquest?
[Suppose they’d been all burnt up.] (FFFP)
What’s been going on while I’ve been gone?

When the head clause is to receive an indefinite reading, the while-clause can
in principle use either the present perfect or the past tense, but there are restric-
tions on both choices:
Has he ever mentioned his son while he {was / has been} talking to you?
Have they ever wrecked the house while their parents {were / have been} on holi-
day?
They’ve wrecked the house while their parents {
??
were / have been} on holiday.