Use Of Tense Forms Research Articles

Comparative analysis of the Perfect in German, English and Chechen languages

Recently, a lot of research has been devoted to the typological analysis of languages. The article examines the functional features of the Perfect in German, English and Chechen languages. A comparative analysis shows that these three languages have many similarities and differences in the formation and use of tense forms. The Perfect forms of the three languages differ in grammatical tenses in exactly the same way as the non-perfect forms. In addition to effective action, Perfect tenses are used in colloquial speech and denote action in the Past. The Perfect (Present Perfect tense) in German is more flexible, whereas in English and Chechen it is necessary in some situations to be expressed in other tenses. These differences and the reasons behind them attract the attention of many researchers to a comparative analysis of the category of time, in particular the Perfect.

Error Analysis in The Travel Writing Made by The Students of English Study Program

This study was conducted to identify the kinds of errors in surface strategy taxonomy and to know the dominant type of errors made by the fifth semester students of English Department of one State University in Malang-Indonesia in producing their travel writing. The type of research of this study is document analysis since it analyses written materials, in this case travel writing texts. The analysis finds that the grammatical errors made by the students based on surface strategy taxonomy theory consist of four types. They are (1) omission, (2) addition, (3) misformation and (4) misordering. The most frequent errors occuring in misformation are in the use of tense form. Secondly, the errors are in omission of noun/verb inflection. The next error, there are many clauses that contain unnecessaryphrase added there.

한국어 L1 화자와 L2 화자의 서사 텍스트에 나타난 응결성 비교

This paper aims to analyze the differences between Korean L1 group and L2 group in cohesive expression in narrative text writing. The previous studies have been pointed out that the Korean L2 texts lack cohesive expression, but not enough contrast studies have been done comparing cohesive expressions between L1 and L2 texts. Thus, it was difficult for L2 speakers to recognize how their textual composition should be modified in comparison to L1 speakers. This paper analyzes the characteristics of L1 text that L2 speakers can refer to for text writing. It examined the method of lexical cohesion, the use of tense forms, the use of sentential conjunctions and conjunctive endings for semantic cohesion, and the use of determinative phrases as representative language devices in cohesive expression. There was no significant difference between the two groups in the expression of lexical cohesion, which was considered to be related to the lack of substitutive pronouns in Korean. In use of the tense form, the two groups showed a distinct contrast, with L2 speakers using the tense form as a deitic function, while L1 speakers used it as a modal function. In addition, although both groups used sentential conjunctions and conjunctive endings as cohesive devices, the L1 group used sentential conjunctions much more diversely and more often. In contrast, the L2 group showed a relatively high dependence on conjunctive endings than sentential conjunctions. Finally, semantic cohesion by determinative phrase differed significantly in the two groups. In L1 text, unlike in L2, noun phrases in each sentential component have been modified by a determinative phrase. In conclusion, L2 speakers need to be trained with the use of sentential conjunctions, along with the modal function of tense forms. In addition, they need to use determinative phrases for semantic cohesion more often. (Jeonju University)

Foreground and background in the narrative discourse of Luke's Gospel: Some remarks on the function of the Greek imperfect and pluperfect indicative tense-forms

The distinction between foreground and background in narrative discourse is a pervasive phenomenon in the literatures of the world, and languages have a variety of devices to indicate this distinction. These include, amongst others, the use of specific tense-forms of the verb, morphosyntactic features, the distinction between events and non-events, lexical verb types (achievement, accomplishment, activity, state, etc.), voice, and word order. The use of the tense-forms of the verb to indicate foreground and background has been studied in depth in a variety of languages. In the last three decades there have been a number of studies on the Greek of the New Testament, following the upsurge of interest in the aspect and time characteristics of Greek in the early nineties of the previous century. This study focused on the function of the Greek imperfect and pluperfect indicative tense-forms (henceforth, imperfect and pluperfect) to indicate foreground and background in the Gospel of Luke’s narrative discourse. The study also included embedded narratives, such as the parables of Jesus. It did not include direct and indirect discourse, and comments by the author. The findings are that the major function of the imperfect in the Gospel of Luke’s narrative discourse is to provide background information, and particularly to set the scene for events in the main storyline. In this function the link between the imperfect and background information is very strong. The imperfect also typically occurs in the introduction of participants in a scene by means of presentational articulation, in situations where background details are provided, and in epilogues. The imperfect appears in explanatory clauses too, but the aorist indicative is also used. In a few instances the imperfect is used to express foreground information. Although occurences of the pluperfect are rare in Luke’s Gospel, it is used a few times to express background information, especially to set the scene and to provide background details. It is rarely used to indicate foreground information, and occurences are restricted to verbs like oἶδα, ἵστημι, εἴωθα, etc., where the pluperfect has the force of an aorist indicative. In a number of instances the function of the pluperfect is purely descriptive, for example, as part of a restrictive relative clause.

Features of Reporting Verbs in Modern English

<p>The article is devoted to the problem of reporting verbs in Modern English. The research has been done to define the most appropriate features of reporting verbs: the notion they can indicate, the classification of reporting verbs in present-day English, the use of tense forms with reporting verbs, and reporting verbs and citations.</p><p>Consequently, reporting verbs can express the author’s personal viewpoint, your viewpoint regarding what the author says, and the author’s viewpoint regarding other literature. As a result of investigation, 14 types of verbs according to the general meaning that they express have been determined.</p><p>A great attention has been paid to the use of tense forms - present simple, present perfect and past tense forms. Besides the above mentioned points, the types of citation, which is closely connected with reporting verbs, and also, the evaluative function of reporting verbs have been investigated, too.</p>

A functional typology of English when-clauses

This paper offers a typology of English when-clauses (WCs) on the basis of their semantic, syntactic and functional characteristics. It distinguishes six major classes of dependent WCs: WCs used as indirect questions, relative clauses, free relative clauses in nominal function, adverbial WCs, narrative WCs and atemporal WCs. A further subciassification of these reveals many different categories and uses. All of these are illustrated lavishly, mostly with the help of attested examples. It is also shown that the various categories differ as regards the use of tense forms: some WCs can use the future tense auxiliary and/or combine with a head clause in the present tense or present perfect, whereas other WCs do not allow this.