Abstract
Traditional as well as modern linguistics are in many ways biased by a one-sided diet of examples. Our ideas about tense, mood, definiteness and indefiniteness, to mention but these, are mainly tuned to utterances which describe singular situations in reality. In these contexts, it makes sense to say, for example, that tense relates the time of the situation to the deictic time of speech. But there are many other discourse types, for example laws and other legal texts, which do not seem to function in this way. It is difficult to see, for example, what the ›time of speech‹ in this type of texts is. Still, they use tense marking, such as the present and the perfect. A number of examples from legal texts are examined, and it is shown that standard assumptions about the functioning of tense, definiteness and other categories reflect very special cases of their meaning.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: Zeitschrift für Literaturwissenschaft und Linguistik
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
