In:Interdisciplinary Perspectives on Vietnamese Linguistics
Edited by Nigel Duffield, Trang Phan and Tue Trinh
[Studies in Language Companion Series 211] 2019
► pp. 141–154
Chapter 7Semantics of Vietnamese đã
Nguyễn Hoàng Trung | University of Social Sciences and Humanities, Vietnam National University – Ho Chi Minh city, Vietnam
Published online: 9 October 2019
https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.211.07tru
https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.211.07tru
Abstract
The analysis of đã has always been a highly controversial topic among Vietnamese linguists. Several accounts of the semantics of đã centre around the questions of whether it is used to locate a situation in the past (Bùi Đức Tịnh 1967, Lo-Cicero 2001) or to express an aspectual distinction (Nguyen 2006) – or both: see Trinh (2005), Phan (2013), and Phan & Duffield (this volume). In this article, it is claimed that đã does not function as tense marker, but that it is used instead to express a modal meaning which the speaker intends to provide for the situation she is communicating. Furthermore, contra those who assume that this marker is aspectual, it is claimed that the aspectual meaning is only derived from the interaction between đã and the semantics of the following predicate.
Keywords: tense, aspect, modality, data judgments
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Đã is not a past tense marker
- 3.Đã is not a purely aspectual marker
- 4.Đã as modal operator
- 5.Conclusion
Notes References
References (24)
Bui, Thuy. 2017. The Vietnamese Perfect. In SuB 21: Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung 21, Robert Truswell, Chris Cummins, Caroline Heycock, Brian Rabern & Hannah Rohde (eds), 249–266. Edinburgh: University of Edinburgh.
Cao, Xuân Hạo. 2003. Tiếng Việt. Mấy Vấn đề Ngữ Âm, Ngữ Pháp, Ngữ Nghĩa (Vietnamese: Some Issues in Phonetics, Grammar, Semantics). Đà Nẵng: Nhà xuất bản Giáo dục.
Duffield, Nigel. 2014. Minimalism and semantic syntax: Interpreting multifunctionality in Vietnamese. In International Conference on the Linguistics of Vietnam in the Context of Renovation and Integration, 1090–1113. Hà Nội: Nhà xuất bản Khoa học Xã hội. [LingBuzz/001919].
Givón, Talmy. 1984,1990[2001]. Syntax: A Functional-Typological Introduction, 2 Vols. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
. 1998. Assertion and finiteness. In Issues in the Theory of Language Acquisition. Essays in Honor of Jürgen Weissenborn, Norbert Dittmar & Zvi Penner (eds), 222–245. Bern: Peter Lang.
Lin, Jo-Wang. 2005. Time in a language without tense: The case of Chinese. Journal of Semantics 23: 1–53.
. 2012. Tenselessness. In The Oxford Handbook of Tense and Aspect, Robert I. Binnick (ed.), 669–695. Oxford: OUP.
Lo-Cicero, Minh Ha. 2001. L’expression du temps et de l’aspect du verbe vietnamien. The Review of Vietnamese Studies 1(1): 1–12.
Nguyễn, Hoàng Trung. 2006. Thể trong tiếng Việt (Có so sánh với tiếng Pháp và tiếng Anh) (Aspect in Vietnamese, in comparison to French and English). Ho Chi Minh City: University of Ho Chi Minh City.
Nguyễn, Minh Thuyết. 1995. Các tiền phó từ chỉ thời thể trong tiếng Việt (The preverbal markers of tense and aspect in Vietnamese). Ngôn ngữ (Language) 2: 1–10.
Panfilov, Vladimir Zinovʹevich. 2002. Một lần nữa về phạm trù thì trong tiếng Việt (One more time on the category of tense in Vietnamese). Ngôn ngữ (Language) 7: 1–7.
