| Pages in topic: < [1 2] | Why do some languages not have continuous tenses Thread poster: Anmol
|
|---|
Tim Drayton 
Cyprus
Local time: 15:35
Turkish to English
+ ...
| Turkish makes this distinction | Oct 14, 2008 |
Turkish has:
1. giderim - I go (in general)
and
2. gidiyorum - I am going (now),
except that this distinction appears to be dissapearing in the modern language and form number 2. can also be used in a general sense.
The Cypriot dialect of Turkish (quite probably under the influence of Greek) does not distinguish between a present continuous and simple present tense. A Turkish Cypriot, if speaking in dialect and not using the standard language, uses "giderim"... See more Turkish has:
1. giderim - I go (in general)
and
2. gidiyorum - I am going (now),
except that this distinction appears to be dissapearing in the modern language and form number 2. can also be used in a general sense.
The Cypriot dialect of Turkish (quite probably under the influence of Greek) does not distinguish between a present continuous and simple present tense. A Turkish Cypriot, if speaking in dialect and not using the standard language, uses "giderim" to mean "I go" and "I am going". In standard Turkish you would ask somebody "Nereye gidiyorsun?" for "Where are you going" (i.e. present continuous), whereas the same question in Cypriot dialect would be "Nereye gidersin?", which sounds very strange to speakers of other forms of Turkish, in which this verbal form cannot be used to ask about an action that is currently happening. ▲ Collapse
| | | | Kaspars Melkis
United Kingdom
Local time: 13:35
English to Latvian
+ ...
| Latvian doesn't have continuous tenses | Oct 14, 2008 |
Does your language have a continuous tense? Did your language have a continuous tense which was discontinued at some point?
As far as I am aware Latvian does not have a continuous tense and has not had it in the past.
How does your language deal with continuous actions?
For me it is hard to imagine why Latvian would need a continuous tense because it is usually clear from the context. For example, both sentences"Right now I am drinking tea" and "I drink tea with sugar" would use the same phrase es dzeru tēju. If necessary certain adverbs can be used although in a spoken language they are often omitted.
Latvian also uses perfective/imperfective verb pairs similar to many Slavic languages but the usage is more fluid. Sometimes they can be used to indicate continuous aspect in perfect tenses. The difference (1) "I have been doing it" vs. (2) "I have done it" can be shown as Es to daru (imperfective) vs. Es to esmu izdarījis (perfective). But then again simple (3) "I do" is also translated as Es to daru. But in the real life the phrase (1) most likely would be continued by the particle jau (already). And to complicate matters, the Latvian grammar, in contrast to Russian, actually have perfect tenses but the usage is somewhat different than in English.
This ambiguity also creates problems in translation. While simple continuous tenses are easy, the perfect continuous requires more context to correctly convey the meaning into Latvian despite that in English that seems very clear.
| | | | Neil Coffey
United Kingdom
Local time: 13:35
French to English
+ ...
| They took a while to 'catch on' in English | Oct 14, 2008 |
Anil was saying he couldn't imagine a language without continuous/progressive forms, but even in English, it appears they actually took a while to fully "catch on" as part of the standard language. The combination of 'be' plus a present participle appears in Old English (though not necessarily interpreted as a true 'continuous verb form' as would be today), but even up to the 1700s, they appear to have been described as being part of 'discourse' (informal speech).
On the surface, th... See more Anil was saying he couldn't imagine a language without continuous/progressive forms, but even in English, it appears they actually took a while to fully "catch on" as part of the standard language. The combination of 'be' plus a present participle appears in Old English (though not necessarily interpreted as a true 'continuous verb form' as would be today), but even up to the 1700s, they appear to have been described as being part of 'discourse' (informal speech).
On the surface, the idea of languages influencing each other seems tempting, but it's not clear that this is necessary or adequate to account for how continuous forms came about. If we accept that:
- "continuous aspect" is a common thing that languages grammaticalise;
- it's a common pattern to get verbs such as 'be', 'stand', 'become' followed by a participle, even with their 'literal' meaning;
then the continuous forms arguably come out of a fairly normal process of grammaticalisation.
[That is, the process where a common "pattern" of words with their literal meaning take on a "functional" interpretation where each word doesn't have its literal meaning, e.g. "I'm going to [the river to] fetch some water" involves movement, but eventually "I'm going to stay in bed" just denotes 'immediate future' without movement; similarly, "sto leggiendo", "estoy leyendo" may well have once meant something closer to "I am standing (and) reading".]
Influence from other languages and/or literal Latin translations could have had an indirect influence. But in currentday English we see "foreign" constructions, e.g. the use of 'filler' subjects in passives in scientific writing ("It was investigated whether..."), which, although native speakers appear to use them, are probably still perceived as "not really grammatical". Something else is needed to explain how such foreign constructions eventually become "natively grammatical". Similarly, the Latin scholars that use translations such as "the house having been built, Caesar retired", are probably aware that this isn't "natural English", and despite several generations having read such unnatural translations, the construction has failed to take off.
[Edited at 2008-10-14 19:38] ▲ Collapse
| | | | | Participium praesens :) | Oct 14, 2008 |
I dunno why, my post was duplicated, so I deleted it.
Please, see the next post.
Cheers
GG
[Edited at 2008-10-14 22:46]
| | |
|
|
|
| Participium praesens :) | Oct 14, 2008 |
M. Anna Kańduła wrote: Grzegorz Gryc wrote: M. Anna Kańduła wrote:
My language does not have "continuous tense". You're imprecise. In our language (Polish), we have perfective and imperfective verbs. The function of the imperfective verbs is approx. the same that the function of the continuous tenses. /quote] That's exactly what I meant. We have other ways to say some things, not "tenses" per se. Be it "continuous", or "perfect"/"imperfect" tenses in some languages.
It's very complex.
A lot of perfective verbs in th Slavic languages (with the s/z- prefix) may be historically assimilated to the ancient Greek aorist (eu-) or with the German ge-.
Of course, we can't say it's an aorist now, but the s/z- is not an ordinary prefix.
Unlike a lot of other prefixes, it always modifies the aspect, it acts as a "perfect" tense "ending".
It just works a little different. I didn't mean we do not express such notions, but that there is no such grammar form, as "continuous tense". Or did I miss some "czas ciągły" in school? 
No
But the things we learn at school are often too simple
BTW.
I often laugh when I see the English linguistic terminology.
E.g. the "present continuous" is simply "to be" + participium praesens (activum).
If one understands the function of this is structure, the tense notion seems to be exagerated.
The English name is just a strange, peripheral tradition.
PS.
We have structures like "to be" + participium praesens (activum).
But they have a different signification, it's more static.
E.g.:
"Jest umierający" (literally "he's dying") means something like "he's about to die" or "his health is critical" but possibly, it's still a hope.
Normally, we say "umiera" (imperfective) and it's definitive.
Cheers
GG
[Edited at 2008-10-14 22:41]
| | | | Giles Watson
Italy
Local time: 14:35
Italian to English
In memoriam | Terminology and stuff | Oct 15, 2008 |
Grzegorz Gryc wrote: No But the things we learn at school are often too simple
Very true.
BTW.
I often laugh when I see the English linguistic terminology.
It does have to be said that many teachers and grammars of English as a foreign language are a little cavalier in their use of terminology: continuous forms are aspects of the verb, not tenses, for example. But their purpose is to teach people the basics of English, not to describe its finer points.
Luckily, there are good descriptive grammars around that try to explain how the forms are actually used and to do so, they have to be a bit more rigorous about terminology.
E.g. the "present continuous" is simply "to be" + participium praesens (activum).
If one understands the function of this is structure, the tense notion seems to be exagerated.
Form and substance are two different things, whatever you call them. The interesting thing from a translator's point of view is how those forms are used, alone or in conjunction with other language structures, to express meaning.
Giles
| | | | Kaspars Melkis
United Kingdom
Local time: 13:35
English to Latvian
+ ...
| continuous not the same as imperfective | Oct 15, 2008 |
Grzegorz Gryc wrote:
In our language (Polish), we have perfective and imperfective verbs.
The function of the imperfective verbs is approx. the same that the function of the continuous tenses.
Probably the continuous aspect could be classified as a subclass of the imperfective aspect.
From Wikipedia (my emphasis):
The continuous and progressive aspects are grammatical aspects that express incomplete action in progress at a specific time: they are non-habitual, imperfective aspects.
Latvian imperfective verbs do not make distinction between habitual, regular, repeated and non-habitual actions. As such they are broader than the continuous tense.
| | | | | Define tense please | May 28, 2019 |
Some linguists would argue English lacks future tense. However there are ways to express things
I am having lunch with my boss after our meeting
I am going to have lunch with my boss after our meeting
I will have lunch with my boss after our meeting
You understand that the event is taking place in the future either from the context or thanks to the use of "be going to" and "will", which are technically in present continuous and simple pres... See more Some linguists would argue English lacks future tense. However there are ways to express things
I am having lunch with my boss after our meeting
I am going to have lunch with my boss after our meeting
I will have lunch with my boss after our meeting
You understand that the event is taking place in the future either from the context or thanks to the use of "be going to" and "will", which are technically in present continuous and simple present tenses.
It is not any different when it comes to continuous tenses in German, Dutch, Swedish etc. Although technically the language lacks the tenses there are ways of expressing them with the help of other adverbs or verbs. ▲ Collapse
| | | | | Pages in topic: < [1 2] | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » Why do some languages not have continuous tenses | Trados Studio 2022 Freelance | The leading translation software used by over 270,000 translators.
Designed with your feedback in mind, Trados Studio 2022 delivers an unrivalled, powerful desktop
and cloud solution, empowering you to work in the most efficient and cost-effective way.
More info » |
| | CafeTran Espresso | You've never met a CAT tool this clever!
Translate faster & easier, using a sophisticated CAT tool built by a translator / developer.
Accept jobs from clients who use Trados, MemoQ, Wordfast & major CAT tools.
Download and start using CafeTran Espresso -- for free
Buy now! » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
