Cognitive semantics of the tense-aspect form Present Simple
https://doi.org/10.51955/2312-1327-2025-1-160
Abstract
Despite tireless attention of linguists-theorists and teachers-grammarians to the semantics and functioning of tense-aspect forms in English, theories about the grammar meaning and information in grammar references or textbooks leave much to be desired due to their contradictoriness and weak explanatory clarity. This state of affairs motivates researchers to seek for new, cognitive approaches to studying the semantics of tense-aspect forms. Therefore, the article, on the one hand, provides an overview of traditional interpretations of the Present Simple form available in the research field, and, on the other hand, introduces the reader to a cognitive analysis of the grammar form in question.
About the Authors
T. L. Verkhoturova
Irkutsk State University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Tatyana L. Verkhoturova, Doctor of Philology, Associate Professor
1, Karl Marks st., Irkutsk, 664043, Russia
S. V. Shubina
Irkutsk State University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Svetlana V. Shubina, Postgraduate student
1, Karl Marks st., Irkutsk, 664043, Russia
References
1. Arutyunova N. D. (1999). Language and the human world. 2-nd ed. revised. Moscow: Russian Culture Languages, 1999. 896 p. (In Russian).
2. Baugh L. Sue. (1996). Essentials of English Grammar. A Practical Guide to the Mastery of English. Second Edition. USA: Passport Books, 1996. 145 p.
3. Boldyrev N. N. (2019). Language and the system of knowledge. Cognitive theory of language. 2-nd ed. Moscow: Publishing house LSC, 2019. 480 p. (In Russian).
4. Cambridge Dictionary. Available at: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/grammar/britishgrammar/present-simple-i-work?q=Present+simple%3A+form (accessed 17 March 2024)
5. Dmitriyev D. V. (2003). Russian Language Dictionary. Moscow: AST Astrel Publishing House, 2003. 1584 p. (In Russian).
6. Dorokhina M. N. (2015). To the question of the aspect category in the English language. The Almanac of Modern Sciences and Education. 1 (91): 48-50. (In Russian).
7. Druzhinin A. S. Cognitive semantics methods in teaching English verb tenses. Bryansk State University Bulletin. 2 (32): 193-197. (In Russian).
8. Druzhinin A. S., Pesina S. A. (2018). Biocognitive approach to the linguistic tense categorization. Philological Sciences. Theoretical and practical issues. 4-2 (82): 361-354. (In Russian).
9. Fauconnier G. (2003). Mental Spaces: Aspects of Meaning Construction in Natural Language. N. Y.: Cambridge University Press, 2003. 190 p.
10. Hewings M. Advanced Grammar in Use. London: Cambridge University Press, 1999. 340 p.
11. Huddleston R. D. (1969). Some observations on tense and deixis. Language. 45(4): 777-806.
12. Kiklevich A. K. (2007). Language gravity. Volume 1. Semantics, text linguistics, communication linguistics. University of Warmia and Mazury in Olsztyn, 2007. 411 p. (In Russian).
13. Kozlova R. P. (1998). To the problem verb tense forms meaning in the Russian language. Tambov State University Bulletin. Human sciences series. 1: 28-32. (In Russisn).
14. Kravchenko A. V. (1992). Indexicality theory issues: Egocentrism. Deixis. Indexicality. Irkutsk State University. 210 p. (In Russian)
15. Kravchenko A. V. (1996). Language and perception: Cognitive aspects of linguistic categorization. Irkutsk State University. 160 p. (In Russian).
16. Kubryakova E. S. (2004). Language and knowledge: On the way to acquiring knowledge about language: Parts of speech from cognitive point of view. The role of language in cognizing the world. Moscow: Languages of Slavic Culture. 2004. 556 p. (In Russian).
17. Lakoff G. Hedges: A Study in Meaning Criteria and the Logic of Fuzzy Concepts. Journal of Philosophical Logic. 458-508.
18. Langacker R. W. (2000). Grammar and Conceptualization. Berlin, New York: Mouton de Gruyter. 2000. 427 p.
19. OALD. Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary of Current English. 8th edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015. 1796 p.
20. Pesina S. A., Druzhinin A. S. (2016). Cognitive and anthropocentric approach to communication process. Bryansk State University Bulletin. 3 (29): 161-165.
21. Present Tenses with Examples, Rules, Usage: Englishan.com. Available at: https://englishan.com/present-tenses/ (accessed 17 March 2024).
22. Pris I. E. (2017). Knowledge as the most general factual mental state. Philosophical Thought. Philosophy. Ethics. Religion Studies. 6: 29-34. (In Russian).
23. Study-English.info. Available at: https://study-english.info/presentsimple.php (accessed 24.09.2024).
24. Taylor J. R. (1995). Linguistic Categorization: Prototypes in Linguistic Theory. 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995. 312 p.
25. Tsybova I. A. (2019). On reflection of the category of time in language. Philological Sciences in MSIFR. 2 (18): 41-47. (In Russian).
26. Verkhoturova N. L. (2008). The factor of observer in scientific language: monograph. Irkutsk: ISLU. 2008. 289 p. (In Russian).
27. Voronets M. V. (2015). Perfect – Imperfect aspect opposition as action and its limit opposition. Philology and Human Being. (4): 157-162. (In Russian).
28. Yartseva V. N. (1998). The Large Encyclopedic Dictionary. Moscow: The Large Russian Encyclopedia, 1998. 685 p. (In Russian).
29. Yule G. Oxford Practice Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010. 280 p.
30. Zastupova Yu. S. (2006). Cognitive factors of tense-aspect forms learning in studying English in higher education schools: Autoref. diss. …cand. psychol. sciences. 19.00.07. St. Petersburg. 2006. 23 p.
Review
For citations:
Verkhoturova T.L., Shubina S.V. Cognitive semantics of the tense-aspect form Present Simple. Crede Experto: transport, society, education, language. 2025;(1):160-175. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.51955/2312-1327-2025-1-160
Views:
6
JATS XML
Email this article 