Cover not available

Article published In: The Linguistic Expression of Mirativity
Edited by Agnès Celle and Anastasios Tsangalidis
[Review of Cognitive Linguistics 15:2] 2017
► pp. 385–410

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

The expression of mirativity through aspectual constructions

 | Université Libre de Bruxelles
Published online: 8 December 2017
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/rcl.15.2.04dew
Abstract
While some languages appear to have dedicated mirative constructions, others convey mirative meanings through originally “non-mirative categories which acquire mirative meanings in a given context” ( (2012). The essence of mirativity. Linguistic Typology, 161, 435–485. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar, p. 462). Such mirative extensions of existing constructions have been observed and analyzed at length for evidentials, yet this paper demonstrates that mirative meanings can also be conveyed through certain aspectual constructions, specifically those that select event verbs. A detailed discussion of various aspectual constructions in diverging languages shows that progressive, perfect and perfective aspect markers often prompt mirative interpretations of surprise, novelty or incongruity. I claim that these mirative features are a consequence of the intrinsic association of these aspectual constructions with event verbs and the ‘phenomenal’ situations they refer to, i.e., situations that are susceptible to change. Such phenomenal situations lend themselves more naturally to mirative readings, as their occurrence and development at a certain point in time cannot be fully predicted.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Definitions: Mirativity and aspect
  • 3.Cross-linguistic observations
    • 3.1Mirative uses of progressive aspect
    • 3.2Mirative uses of the present perfect
    • 3.3Mirative uses of Slavic perfective aspect
    • 3.4Some additional remarks
  • 4.Discussion
  • 5.Conclusion
  • Notes
  • References
References (64)
References
Aikhenvald, A. Y. (2004). Evidentiality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2012). The essence of mirativity. Linguistic Typology, 161, 435–485. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Anthonissen, L., De Wit, A., & Mortelmans, T. (2016). Aspect meets modality: A semantic analysis of the German am-progressive. Journal of Germanic Linguistics, 28(1), 1–30. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(submitted). Mirative uses of the Dutch progressive constructions.
Barentsen, A. A. (1985). ‘Tijd’, ‘aspect’ en de conjunctie poka: Over het gebruik van enkele vormen in het moderne Russisch . Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam Dissertation.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bertinetto, P. M., & Delfitto, D. (2000). Aspect vs. actionality: Why they should be kept apart. In Ö. Dahl (Ed.), Tense and aspect in the languages of Europe (pp. 189–226). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bybee, J., Perkins, R., & Pagliuca, W. (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
Calver, E. (1946). The uses of the present tense forms in English. Language, 221, 317–325. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Celle, A., & Lansari, L. (2015). On the mirative meaning of aller + infinitive compared with its equivalents in English. Cahiers Chronos, 271, 289–305.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Comrie, B. (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
Dahl, Ö. (1985). Tense and aspect systems. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
De Wit, A. (2017). The present perfective paradox across languages. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
De Wit, A., Patard, A., & Brisard, F. (2013). A contrastive analysis of the present progressive in French and English. Studies in Language, 37(4), 846–879. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
De Wit, A. & Brisard, F. (2014). A Cognitive Grammar account of the semantics of the English present progressive, Journal of Linguistics, 50(1), 49–90. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
DeLancey, S. (1997). Mirativity: The grammatical marking of unexpected information. Linguistic Typology, 11, 33–52. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2001). The mirative and evidentiality. Journal of Pragmatics, 31, 371–384.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2012). Still mirative after all these years. Linguistic Typology, 161, 529–564.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Depraetere, I. (1995). The effect of temporal adverbials on (a)telicity and (un)boundedness. In P. M. Bertinetto, V. Bianchi, J. Higginbotham, & M. Squartini (Eds.), Temporal reference, aspect and actionality, Volume 11: Semantic and syntactic perspectives (pp. 43–53). Turin: Rosenberg & Sallier.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dickey, S. M. (2000). Parameters of Slavic aspect: A cognitive approach. Stanford: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dowty, D. R. (1975). The stative in the progressive and other essence/accident contrasts. Linguistic Inquiry, 61, 579–588.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Emenanjo, E. N. (1987). Elements of modern Igbo grammar: A descriptive approach. Ibadan: University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Forsyth, J. (1970). A grammar of aspect: Usage and meaning in the Russian verb. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Franckel, J. J. (1989). Étude de quelques marqueurs aspectuels du français. Geneva: Droz.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Friedman, V. A. (2005). Admirativity: Between modality and evidentiality. Sprachtypologie und Universalienforschung, 581, 26–37.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2012). Perhaps mirativity is phlogiston, but admirativity is perfect: On Balkan evidential strategies. Linguistic Typology, 161, 505–527. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Galton, H. (1976). The main functions of the Slavic verbal aspect. Skopje: Macedonian Academy of Sciences and Arts.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Goldsmith, J., & Woisetschlaeger, E. F. (1982). The logic of the English progressive. Linguistic Inquiry, 131, 79–89.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Guentchéva, Z. (this volume). An enunciative account of admirativity in Bulgarian.
Guéron, J. (2014). Perfect parameters. Paper presented at Chronos 11, International Conference on Actionality, Tense, Aspect, Modality/Evidentiality, Scuola Normale Superiore Pisa, 16–19 August.
Hengeveld, K., & Olbertz, H. (2012). Didn’t you know?: Mirativity does exist! Linguistic Typology, 161, 487–503. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hill, N. W. (2012). “Mirativity” does not exist: hdug in “Lhasa” Tibetan and other suspects. Linguistic Typology, 161, 389–433. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Israeli, A. (2001). The choice of aspect in Russian verbs of communication: Pragmatic contract. Journal of Slavic Linguistics, 9(1), 49–98.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kamp, H., & Reyle, U. (1993). From discourse to logic. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lambrecht, K. (1994). Information structure and sentence form. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Langacker, R. W. (1987). Foundations of Cognitive Grammar. Volume 1: Theoretical prerequisites. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1991). Foundations of Cognitive Grammar. Volume 2: Descriptive application. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2001). The English present tense. English Language and Linguistics, 51, 251–273. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lazard, G. (1999). Mirativity, evidentiality, mediativity, or other? Linguistic Typology, 31, 91–110. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lemmens, M. (2015). Zit je te denken of ben je aan het piekeren? Nederlandse Taalkunde, 201, 5–36. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
McCawley, J. D. (1971). Tense and time reference in English. In C. Fillmore & D. T. Langendoen (Eds.), Studies in linguistic semantics (pp. 96–113). New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1981). Notes on the English present perfect. Australian Journal of Linguistics, 11, 81–90. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
McQuaid, G. A. (2012). Variation at the morphology-phonology interface in Appalachian English. Georgetown, Washington D.C.: Georgetown University PhD thesis.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Michaelis, L. A. (1994). The ambiguity of the English present perfect. Journal of Linguistics, 301, 111–157. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1998). Aspectual grammar and past-time reference. London: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2004). Type shifting in Construction Grammar: An integrated approach to aspectual coercion. Cognitive Linguistics, 151, 1–67. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2011). Stative by construction. Linguistics, 491, 1359–1399. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nishiyama, A., & Koenig, J. P. (2010). What is a perfect state? Language, 86(3), 611–646. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Olbertz, H. (2012). The place of exclamatives and miratives in grammar: A functional discourse grammar view. Revista Linguística, 81, 76–98.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Peterson, T. (this volume). Problematizing mirativity.
Prince, E. F. (1992). The ZPG letter: Subjects, definiteness, and information status. In S. A. Thompson & W. C. Mann (Eds.), Discourse description: Diverse analyses of a fund raising text (pp. 295–325). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rett, J., & Murray, S. E. (2013). A semantic account of mirative evidentials. Proceedings of SALT, 231, 453–472. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sasse, H. J. (1991). Aspect and aktionsart: A reconciliation. Belgian Journal of Linguistics, 61, 31–45. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2002). Review article. Recent activity in the theory of aspect: Accomplishments, achievements, or just non-progressive state. Linguistic Typology, 61, 199–271. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schwenter, S. A. (1994). “Hot news” and the grammaticalization of perfects. Linguistics, 321, 995–1028. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Serrano-Losada, M. (this volume). Raising turn out in Late Modern English: The rise of a mirative predicate.
Slobin, D., & Aksu, A. (1982). Tense, aspect, modality, and more in Turkish evidentials. In P. Hopper (Ed.), Tense-aspect: Between semantics and pragmatics (pp. 185–200). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Torres Bustamante, T. (2012), Real tense and real aspect in mirativity. Proceedings of SALT, 221, 347–364. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Vallduví, E. (1992). The informational component. New York: Garland.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Vendler, Z. (1967[1957]). Verbs and times, The Philosophical Review , 66(2), 143–160. Reprinted in: Vendler, Z. (1967), Linguistics in philosophy. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Vinnitskaya, I., & Wexler, K. (2001). The role of pragmatics in the development of Russian aspect. First Language, 211, 143–186. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (5)

Cited by five other publications

Türkyılmaz, Bahar
2024. Özbek Türkçesinde Miratif (Beklenmeyen Bilgi) Kategorisi. Korkut Ata Türkiyat Araştırmaları Dergisi :15 ► pp. 507 ff. DOI logo
DE WIT, ASTRID & FRANK BRISARD
2020. Aspect beyond time: Introduction. Journal of Linguistics 56:3 ► pp. 459 ff. DOI logo
DE WIT, ASTRID, PETER PETRÉ & FRANK BRISARD
2020. Standing out with the progressive. Journal of Linguistics 56:3 ► pp. 479 ff. DOI logo
Anthonissen, Lynn, Astrid De Wit & Tanja Mortelmans
2019. (Inter)subjective uses of the Dutch progressive constructions. Linguistics 57:5 ► pp. 1111 ff. DOI logo
Depraz, Natalie & Agnès Celle
2019. Introduction. In Surprise at the Intersection of Phenomenology and Linguistics [Consciousness & Emotion Book Series, 11], ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 30 november 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue