Cover not available

Article published In: Robert Lowth (1710-1787): The making of his grammar and its influence
Guest-edited by Ingrid Tieken-Boon van Ostade
[Historiographia Linguistica 39:1] 2012
► pp. 77–92

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
authorization required

Lowth and ‘Perfect Time’

The periphrastic have-perfect in 18th-century English grammars

 | Université Lumière Lyon 2
Published online: 22 March 2012
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/hl.39.1.06wal
Summary
This article examines the influence that Robert Lowth (1710–1787) had both on the terminology and the analysis of the English verb form now generally referred to as the present perfect. It demonstrates that while Lowth did not coin the term, he was largely responsible for its popularization, and for establishing a pattern of analysis that has lasted over the years. The article also examines how the normative tradition established in the 18th century may have been a factor in hiding the evidence of diachronic change in the use of the present perfect.
Résumé
Cette contribution se penche sur l’influence exercée par Robert Lowth (1710–1787) sur la terminologie et le cadre descriptif que les linguists sont encore nombreux à utiliser pour analyser le present perfect en anglais contemporain. Elle démontre que meme si le terme lui-même ne trouve pas son origine dans l’oeuvre de Lowth, nous lui devons de l’avoir largement popularise et d’avoir fourni une matrice analytique qui a perduré. Cette contribution examine, en outre, la manière dont la tradition normative, née en grande partie au cours du XVIIIe siècle, a certainement eu pour effet de dissimuler des changements diachroniques dans l’utilisation du present perfect.
Zusammenfassung
Dieser Artikel untersucht den Einfluss, den Robert Lowth (1710–1787) auf die Terminologie und die Analyse einer Funktion des englischen Verbs gehabt hat, die heute allgemein als ‘present perfect’ bezeichnet wird. Auch wenn Lowth diese Bezeichnung nicht geprägt hat, so ist er doch weitgehend verantwortlich für seine Verbreitung und für die Etablierung eines Analysemusters, das sich über die Jahre gehalten hat. Der Artikel untersucht auch, wie die normative Tradition im 18. Jahrhundert ein Faktor gewesen sein kann, der den Nachweis für diachrone Veränderungen in der Verwendung des ‘present perfect’s in den Hintergrund hat treten lassen.
References (46)
References
Beattie, J[ames]. 1788. The Theory of Language. In two parts, London: printed for A. Strahan.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Binnick, Robert I. 1991. Time and the Verb. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brightland, John & Charles Gildon. 1711. A Grammar of the English Tongue. London: printed by R. Brugis.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brinton, Laurel J. 2009. The Development of English Aspectual Systems: Aspectualizers and postverbal particles. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brittain, L[ewis]. 1788. Rudiments of English Grammar. Louvain: printed by L. J. Urban.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bullokar, W[illiam]. 1586. Pamphlet for Grammar. London: Henry Denham.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan L., Revere Dale P[erkins] & William P[agliuca]. 1994. The Evolution of Grammar: Tense, aspect, and modality in the languages of the world. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Campbell, G[eorge]. 1776. The Philosophy of Rhetoric. London: printed for W. Strahan.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Clarke, S[amuel]. 1729. Homeri Ilias Græce et Latine: Annotationes in usum serenissimi Principis Gulielmi Augusti, Ducis de Cumberland, &c. Volume I1, London.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cotte, P[ierre]. 1987. “Réflexions sur l’emploi des temps du passé à la lumière de deux évolutions récentes du système verbal de l’anglais”. Contrastes, 14:15.89–161.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Comrie, B[ernard]. 1976. Aspect: An introduction to the study of verbal aspect and related problems. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Denison, D[avid]. 1993. English Historical Syntax: Verbal constructions. London: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
ECCO: Eighteenth Century Collections Online. Thomson Gale.
Engel, Dulcie M. & Marie-Eve A. Ritz. 2000. “The Use of the Present Perfect in Australian English”. Australian Journal of Linguistics 20:2.119–140. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fogg, Peter W[alkden]. 1792. Elementa Anglicana; or, the Principles of English Grammar Displayed and Exemplified. Stockport: printed by J. Clarke.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fryd, M[arc]. 1998. “Present Perfect et datation: Une dérive aoristique”. Cahiers Chronos 21.29–50.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Harris, J[ames]. 1751. Hermes: or, A Philosophical Inquiry concerning Language and Universal Grammar. London: printed for J. Nourse.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hodgson, I[saac]. 1770. A Practical English Grammar, for the use of schools. London: the Author and sold by B. Law & J. Linden. (5th ed., London: B. Law, 1787.)Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Huddleston, R[odney] & Geoffrey K. P[ullum]. 2002. The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kruisinga, E[tsko]. 1931. A Handbook of Present-day English. Part II1: English Accidence and Syntax. Groningen: P. Noordhoff.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Linacre, T[homas]. 1524. De emendata structura Latini. London: apud Richardum Pynsonum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Long, C. C. 1800. Lessons in English: Grammar and composition. New York: American Book Co.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Loughton, W[illiam]. 1735. Practical Grammar of the English Tongue. 2nd ed. London: printed for Ward & Chandler.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lowth, R[obert]. 1762. A Short Introduction to English Grammar. London: J. Hughs for A. Millar, and for R. & J. Dodsley.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mackintosh, D[uncan]. 1797. A Plain, Rational Essay on English Grammar. Boston: printed by Manning & Loring.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
McCafferty, K[evin]. 2006. “Be after V-ing on the Past Grammaticalisation Path: How far is it after coming?”. The Celtic Englishes IV ed. by Hildegard L. C. Tristram, 130–151 Potsdam: Universitätsverlag.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
McCawley, James D. 1993. Everything that Linguists have Always Wanted to Know about Logic but were Ashamed to Ask. 2nd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Michael, Ian. 1970. English Grammatical Categories and the Tradition to 1800. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Michaelis, Laura A. 1994. “The Ambiguity of the English Present Perfect”. Journal of Linguistics 30:1.111–157. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Murray, Lindley. 1797. An Abridgment of L. Murray’s English Grammar. York: printed by Wilson, Spence & Mawman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
OED: The Oxford English Dictionary. Online edition: [URL]
Perry, William. 1775. The Royal Standard English Dictionary. Edinburgh: printed by David Willison.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pickbourn, James. 1789. A Dissertation on the English Verb. London: printed by J. Davis.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Postlethwaite, Richard. 1795. The Grammatical Art Improved. London: printed for J. Parsons.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Raine, Matthew. 1776. English Rudiments, or, an Easy Introduction to English Grammar. Darlington: printed by Marshall Vesey.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rhodes, Benjamin. 1795. A Concise English Grammar. Birmingham: printed by J. Belcher.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ritz, Marie-Eve. 2010. “The Perfect Crime? Illicit uses of the present perfect in Australian police media releases”. Journal of Pragmatics 421.3400–3417. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Scott, William. 1789. Lessons in Elocution. Edinburgh: printed for J. Watson & Co.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Shaw, John. 1778. A Methodical English Grammar. London: printed for the author by Richardson & Urquhart.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Story, Joshua. 1783. An Introduction to English Grammar. London: printed for T. Longman & T. Evans.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Upton, John. 1758. Spenser’s Faerie Queene: A new edition with a glossary, and notes explanatory and critical by John Upton […]. In two volumes. London: printed by Jacob & John Knapton.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Visser, F[ederik] T[heodor]. 1963–1973. An Historical Syntax of the English Language. Leiden: E. J. Brill.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Walker, Jim. 1998. “The Footballer’s Perfect – are footballers leading the way?”. The Linguistics of Football ed. by Eve Lavric, Gerhard Pisek, Andrew Skinner & Wolfgang Stadler, 24–38. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Walker, Jim. 2011. “The Emergence of Narrative Present Perfect in British English: Reality or illusion?”. GAGL: Groninger Arbeiten zur Germanistischen Linguistik 53:2.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ward, John. 1758. Four Essays upon the English Language, London: printed for John Ward.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
White, James. 1761. The English Verb. London: printed for A. Millar.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue