The grammar of the english verb phrase part 76 doc

518 9. Temporal subordination in the various time-zones
(10b) [She was determined to buy the house.] The moment she had seen it she had
fallen in love with it. (W-simultaneous reading; had seen effects indirect bind-
ing.)
(11a) I promised that some day I would tell the news to John, who {would be /
#was} interested to hear it. (W-posterior reading; only indirect binding is
possible on the intended interpretation.)
(11b) What we hoped was that the next day we would be freed by the police, who
{would have been /*had been} notified by then. (Only indirect binding is
allowed: the binding situation time has to be the situation time of hoped, not
the situation time of would be freed.)
(12a) Many years before, she had given the money to someone who needed it more
than she did. (W-simultaneous readings; direct binding)
(12b) Many years before, she had given the money to someone who had needed it
more than she had done. (W-simultaneous readings; indirect binding)
What we notice is that whereas the adverbial time clauses of (9aϪb) must be
bound directly, those in (10) may be bound either directly, as in (10a), or indi-
rectly, as in (10b). The nonrestrictive relative clauses in (11) must be bound
indirectly, while the restrictive relative clause in (12) allows the two possibil-
ities. This means that the speaker cannot always choose freely between direct
and indirect binding: the choice depends in the first place on the kind of clause
that is used to describe the bound situation.
It is also worth noting that the sentences in (9), (11) and (12) are the exact
past time-sphere counterparts of the following sentences, which locate the situ-
ation times in the present time-sphere:
(13a) We expect that Elsie will still be in bed when we {arrive /*will arrive}. (W-
simultaneous reading; direct binding is obligatory; shifting the domain by
using the future tense is ungrammatical.)
(13b) We hope that the kidnappers will release the girl after the ransom {has been
paid /*will have been paid}. (W-anterior reading; direct binding is obligatory;
shifting the domain by using the future perfect tense is ungrammatical.)

(14a) I promise that some day I will tell the news to John, who {will be /*is}
interested to hear it. (W-simultaneous reading; shifting the domain by using
the future tense is obligatory; direct binding is ungrammatical.)
(14b) What we hope is that tomorrow we will be freed by the police, who {will
have been /*have been} notified by then. (W-simultaneous reading; shifting
the domain by using the future tense is obligatory; direct binding is ungram-
matical.)
(15a) By the end of this week she will have given the money to someone who needed
it more than she did. (W-simultaneous readings; direct binding)
(15b) By the end of this week she will have given the money to someone who will
have needed it more than she will. (W-simultaneous readings; the future per-
fect forms create post-present domains of their own.)
V. Direct and indirect binding 519
As is clear from the comments added to (9)Ϫ(15), these examples do not show
that the system of tenses for direct vs indirect binding in a past domain parallels
the system of tenses for direct vs indirect binding in a post-present domain.
What they do show is the following. Firstly, there is a perfect parallelism be-
tween past and post-present domains as far as direct binding is concerned: the
forms expressing direct binding in a past domain are the past counterparts of
the forms expressing direct binding in a post-present domain. Secondly, there
is a perfect parallelism between indirect binding in a past domain and the use
of the future tense or future perfect to establish a post-present domain. In other
words, direct and indirect binding in a past domain parallel the use of the
‘
Pseudo-t
0
-System’ and the ‘Absolute Future System’, respectively, when the
reference is to the post-present Ϫ see 10.1 and 10.2.
9.28.3 Up to now we have only given examples of indirect binding in a past
domain. The phenomenon is obviously not to be observed in present domains,

which do not allow binding at all: any relation to t
0
is expressed by an absolute
tense (see 9.14). In pre-present domains, indirect binding can be observed only
when the pre-present domain is expanded as if it were a past one, as in the
following example:
Have you ever treated a woman who had broken an ankle as she {had stepped /
stepped} out of her car? (Had stepped relates its situation time to the situation time
of have treated rather than to the situation time of had broken; in doing so it effects
indirect binding. For direct binding we use stepped, which represents the situation
of stepping out of the car as T-simultaneous with the situation of breaking an ankle.
With had stepped, the latter two situations are interpreted as W-simultaneous with-
out being represented as T-simultaneous with each other.)
The following examples illustrate direct and indirect binding (respectively) in
a subdomain of a post-present domain:
Some day you will announce that Blackwell will publish a book of yours that has
taken you three years to write. (direct binding: has taken is a pseudo-absolute tense
form which represents the writing as T-anterior to the situation time of will publish.)
Some day you will announce that Blackwell will publish a book of yours, which will
have taken you years to write. (indirect binding: will have taken is a pseudo-abso-
lute-relative tense form which T-relates the writing to the situation time of will
announce rather than to the situation time of will publish.)
16
16. Like the conditional tense (see the previous footnote), the future perfect expresses one
T-relation, which is, however, ‘absolute-relative’ in that it combines the idea ‘The situa-
tion time is anterior to an orientation time’ (ϭ the relative part) and ‘That orientation
time is posterior to t
0
’(ϭ the absolute part) Ϫ see 2.47.
520 9. Temporal subordination in the various time-zones

9.29 The distribution of direct and indirect binding
9.29.1 As noted in 9.28.2, the past counterpart of the choice between the
present tense expressing T-simultaneity in a post-present domain (on the one
hand) and the future tense or future perfect establishing a post-present domain
(on the other) is the choice between the relative past tense (expressing T-simul-
taneity), on the one hand, and the conditional tense or conditional perfect
(effecting indirect binding), on the other. It follows that the distribution of the
tenses in the latter option will be the same as the distribution of the tenses in
the former option. This was already illustrated in section 9.28.2, where we
noted the complete parallelism between (9) and (11)Ϫ(12) on the one hand and
(13)Ϫ(15) (respectively) on the other. (The distribution of the tenses in (14)Ϫ
(15) will be discussed in more detail in chapter 10.)
9.29.2 As far as the past perfect expressing indirect binding in a past domain
is concerned, we notice first of all that it is used in the same clause types as
those which use a verb form establishing a post-present domain (rather than
expressing T-simultaneity in such a domain) and make use of indirect binding
by means of would or would have rather than of direct binding in a past
domain by means of the relative past tense. This is the case in independent
clauses and in such subclauses as result clauses, nonrestrictive relative clauses,
(al)though-clauses, clauses expressing a ‘closed’ condition, etc. (see 10.8):
[She was let in by the janitor.] The latter had closed the door and had had to get
out of his bed when she rang the bell.
17
(independent clause)
The house in question, which he had visited the day before, had instantly pleased
him. (nonrestrictive relative clause)
He boasted that he had never been afraid in his life, though he had found himself
in a lot of dangerous situations. (though-clause)
If, as you say, he had never worked in his life, he had never earned any money. [So,
how had he managed to survive?] (clause expressing a closed condition)

She said that the previous summer she had been to Italy for a brief visit to a friend
who had been spending her holidays in Sienna. (In a restrictive relative clause like
this, direct binding by means of the relative past tense (was spending) is also pos-
sible.)
9.29.3 However, there are two extra uses of the past perfect for indirect bind-
ing. Firstly, indirect binding can be found in adverbial time clauses introduced
by a conjunction whose unmarked interpretation is that of W-simultaneity, viz.
17. If we used had to instead of had had to, we would be using an absolute past tense form
(creating a new past domain) rather than a relative past tense form. This would mean
that the relevant situation time would not be bound at all, neither directly nor indirectly.
V. Direct and indirect binding 521
while, when and as.
18
Thus, in the following examples the past perfect ex-
presses indirect binding, while the past tense expresses direct binding (T-simul-
taneity):
The police said the man had waited in the car while the others {had robbed /
robbed} the bank. Penelope had been biting her nails while she {had been waiting /
was waiting}.
He had considered, as he {had walked / walked} back to the hotel, what he should
do next.
As he {had walked /
?
walked} back to the hotel, he had considered what he should
do next.
Secondly, in ‘past represented speech’ (see 8.25.1) examples can be found in
which the past perfect expresses indirect binding in the complement clause of
cognition verb (verb of thinking):
[Every time that Nick’s name was brought up, she relived the moment that she had
woken up beside Aj, relived the second that] she had known that she had been

pregnant [and re-cried all of the tears that she had shed when she realized what she
must do.] (www)
I had known that she had been sick for some time but put off calling her. (www)
[He couldn’t bear to tell me that] the whole village had known that he had been
carrying on with a local teacher. (www) (The context makes it clear that this is to
be understood as equivalent to … the whole village had known that he was carrying
on with a local teacher, in which was carrying on expresses T-simultaneity and is
therefore an instance of direct binding.)
[In an interview with a Los Angeles TV station, she said that] she had been aware
that her mother had been at her bedside. (www, from an article on a girl who has
woken from a coma) (Had been at her bedside is naturally interpreted as W-simulta-
neous with had been aware: while her mother was at her bedside she was conscious
of the fact of her being there. The reading in which she was aware of her mother’s
having been at her bedside at some earlier time is possible but less plausible.)
[As reported by Wednesday’s Los Angeles Times, Nasso’s attorney said that] he had
been aware that Seagal had been talking to a federal grand jury. (www) (The W-
simultaneity reading is at least a possible one.)
[Recently I stopped in at the workplace of a consumer so that we could discuss some
mutual concerns.] I had known that she had been having some difficulty with her
eyesight, [but I hadn’t realized the extent of it until I walked into her darkened
office. Light bothers her, and she wears different pairs of dark glasses for different
18. In the same way as adverbial time clauses do not normally allow the future tense (see
10.3.2), they do not normally allow indirect binding by means of the conditional or
conditional perfect. Still, occasional exceptions can be found:
(i) so I suggested she should come down the week-end after Christmas while the
family would still be there. (FFFP)
522 9. Temporal subordination in the various time-zones
situations.] (www) (Had been having refers to a situation that is W-simultaneous
with that of had known. A W-anteriority interpretation would be very odd since it
is evident from the context that the difficulty continues and there is no indication

that the speaker thought at some time that the difficulty had ceased prior to the
knowing.)
In the above examples, the reporting verb is each time a cognition verb (know,
feel, be aware). We have not found any examples with indirect binding in a
that-clause depending on a verb of communication (say, tell, hear …). This is
in keeping with the fact that the italicized past perfects in the following exam-
ples can only be interpreted in terms of W-anteriority:
[Nasso’s attorney said that] he had {told / informed} his colleague that Seagal had
been talking to a federal grand jury.
I had heard that she had been sick for some time [but had put off calling her].
The use of was having, rather than had been having, in the following example
is in keeping with the above observation:
[Recently I stopped in at the workplace of a consumer so that we could discuss some
mutual concerns.] I had {heard / been told} that she {was having /#had been
having} some difficulty with her eyesight, [but I hadn’t realized the extent of it until
I walked into her darkened office. Light bothers her, and she wears different pairs
of dark glasses for different situations.] (Had been having is not ungrammatical here,
but it receives a ‘co-extensive interpretation’ Ϫ see 5.2.2 Ϫ in which the situation
time leads up to the time of the speaker’s learning about the difficulty. However,
this interpretation is hardly reconcilable with the context that follows.)
VI. Summary 523
VI. Summary
9.30 The expression of T-relations in a past domain
9.30.1 T-anteriority in a past domain is expressed by means of the past per-
fect, irrespective of whether the binding time is the central orientation time or
another orientation time within that past domain.
She said that John had told her that he had done it all by himself. (The past perfect
form had told represents its situation time as T-anterior to the central orientation
time, namely the situation time of said, while had done represents its situation time
as T-anterior to another orientation time, namely the situation time of had told.)

There are some grammatical environments, subject to further conditions, in
which the absolute past tense alternates with the past perfect, in which case
the inferred anteriority relation is a matter of W-interpretation rather than T-
representation. Of particular note are after-clauses, head-clauses of a before-
clause, and since-constructions:
He retired soon after he {turned / had turned} sixty.
Some students {had left / left} before the lecture ended.
The tree had grown a lot since it {had been / was} planted.
9.30.2 T-simultaneity in a past domain is expressed by means of the relative
past tense, irrespective of whether the binding time is the central orientation
time or another orientation time in that past domain.
Were you there when John announced that he would retire from business when he
was sixty, [which is in two years’ time?] (The past tense form announced represents
its situation time as T-simultaneous with the central orientation time, namely the
situation time of were, while was represents its situation time as T-simultaneous
with another orientation time, namely the situation time of would retire. As we
argued in chapter 8, the fact that this latter orientation time happens to lie after t
0
is important theoretically, since it demonstrates the need for positing the existence
of the relative past tense, distinct from the absolute past tense.)
9.30.3 T-posteriority in a past domain is expressed by means of the condi-
tional tense (i. e. ‘{would / should} ϩ present infinitive’) or by means of the
past tense of a ‘futurish form’, irrespective of whether the binding time is the
central orientation time or another orientation time within that past domain.
The choice of a form to express T-posteriority depends on the precise meaning
which is to be expressed.
He promised that he would soon tell her when he would make his decision. (The
conditional tense form would tell represents its situation time as T-posterior to the
524 9. Temporal subordination in the various time-zones
central orientation time, namely the situation time of promised, while would make

represents its situation time as T-posterior to another orientation time, namely the
situation time of would tell.)
[Anxiously, he looked at the clouds.] There was going to be a storm within minutes.
(Free indirect speech; the situation is not only posterior to but also predictable at a
past orientation time)
He told me he was leaving the next day.
9.30.4 The ‘complex temporal relation’ of anteriority to an orientation time
which is itself posterior to some other orientation time in a past domain is
expressed by means of the conditional perfect tense (‘{would / should} ϩ
perfect infinitive’), irrespective of whether this latter orientation time is the
central orientation time or yet another orientation time within the past domain.
Bill (had) promised that he would have finished by the end of the day. (The condi-
tional perfect tense form would have finished represents its situation time as T-
anterior to an orientation time, which is interpreted here as being the time indicated
by the end of the day, and this orientation time is represented by the same tense
form as T-posterior to another orientation time, namely the time of the promising.
This latter time is the central orientation time if the tense form is promised; it is an
orientation time which is represented as itself T-anterior to an implicit central orien-
tation time if the tense form is had promised.)
9.31 The expression of T-relations in a pre-present
domain
9.31.1 If the pre-present domain is established by an indefinite perfect (which
is the case when the pre-present situation time, as well as the time of the full
situation, is interpreted as lying completely before t
0
rather than as leading up
to it), it can be expanded as if it were a past domain. This means that there is
a shift of temporal perspective: the pre-present central orientation time is
treated as if it were a past orientation time, to which other situation times
can be T-related by means of the same tenses as are used in past domains.

For example:
The former prime minister has never admitted that he had misled the public when
he promised he would create a modern welfare state.
A pre-present domain is not normally expanded by means of such a shift of
perspective if the pre-present situation receives a recency (e. g. a ‘hot news’)
interpretation. In that case, the speaker usually shifts the domain by using an
absolute tense in the added subclause:
Hey guys, I’ve just been told that the boss {will /
??
would} come round this af-
ternoon.