I. Introduction 371 ‘present zone’; and the portion that follows t 0 (and starts immediately after t 0 ) is the ‘post-present zone’. To locate situations in these three zones we use the present perfect, the present tense and the future tense (or a ‘futurish form’ Ϫ see 7.3.1), respec- tively. Each of these tenses shows present (nonpast) morphology. I have already read that article. (Have read is a present perfect tense form locating its situation time somewhere in the pre-present zone.) I am very angry with her. (Am locates its situation time at t 0 .) I{will / am going to} be in France tomorrow. (Note that am going to be locates its situation time in the post-present. As stressed in 2.13.2, the situation time is the time of the actualization of the predicated situation, not the time of anticipation of that actualization. See also the definition of ‘tense’ in 2.12.1 and the discussion of futurish forms in 7.3.) 8.7 Visual representation of time-spheres and zones As noted in 2.36, the linguistic conceptualization of time in terms of time- spheres and zones can be represented as in Figure 8.1. In this diagram the time line is represented as consisting of two time-spheres. The dotted line in the middle of the time line represents the fact that there is felt to be a break between the two time-spheres. (As stressed in 2.36, the diagram should not be interpreted as representing the pre-present as more recent, i. e. closer to t 0 , than the past Ϫ see also 2.39.) Figure 8.1. Linguistic conceptualization of the time line in English. 8.8 Absolute zones Whereas the present time-sphere is automatically divided into three zones by t 0 , the past time-sphere consists of a single time-zone, which is defined as lying completely before t 0 . The past time-sphere and the three present time-sphere zones can therefore be said to make up the set of absolute zones, i. e. the four time-zones that are defined in direct relation to t 0 . (Note that, because the past time-sphere consists of only one zone, it does not really matter whether we speak of ‘past zone’ or ‘past time-sphere’.) 372 8. Temporal domains and relative tenses: theoretical foundations 8.9 The length of the time-spheres and zones Except for the present zone, which is by definition conceived of as punctual (see 2.35), the length of the time-spheres and the zones cannot be defined in terms of objective time. As noted in 2.39, everything depends on how the speaker conceptualizes time. Thus, the pre-present can be conceived of either as very short (e. g. I have just met your brother) or as stretching indefinitely far back (e. g. The universe has always existed), while the past time-sphere may be conceived of as distant from t 0 (e. g. In those days Cleopatra ruled over Egypt) or as almost reaching up to it (e. g. The manager left his office a minute ago). It follows that one and the same situation can often be conceptualized either as lying in the past time-sphere or as lying in the pre-present (compare I met her just now with I have just met her). This is in keeping with the observation (made in 2.36) that the past time-sphere is not conceptualized as more distant from t 0 than the pre-present zone. (The past time-sphere is con- ceived of as separated from the present time-sphere, whereas the pre-present zone forms part of it, but the actual distance between the situation time and t 0 is immaterial to this conceptualization.) 8.10 Absolute vs relative tenses An absolute tense relates its situation time (ϭ the time of its predicated situation) directly to t 0 by locating that situation time in one of the absolute zones. As we have seen, English uses the (absolute) past tense, the present perfect, the present tense and the future tense (or one of the ‘futurish tense forms’ Ϫ see 2.9) to locate a situation in the past, the pre-present, the present and the post-present, respectively. A relative tense relates its situation time to an orientation time other than t 0 . In doing so it expresses a T-relation in a temporal domain (see 8.11 below). The two terms can be illustrated by the sentence Yesterday I already knew that I was getting ill. Here knew is an absolute past tense form representing its situation time as lying in the past, while was getting is a relative past tense form representing its situation time as T-simultaneous (ϭ coinciding) with the situation time of knew. 8.11 Temporal domain 8.11.1 A temporal domain has been defined as a structured set of orienta- tion times with the following characteristics: (a) except for the ‘central orienta- tion time’ Ϫ see 8.15, each orientation time is temporally related to another orientation time in the domain by means of a tense; (b) at least one of the I. Introduction 373 orientation times in the domain is a situation time (see 2.15.4). A domain is established by an absolute tense form and expanded by relative tense forms. Thus, in John said he had worked hard all day, the reference is to a past domain. This is established by the absolute past tense form said and expanded by had worked, which is a relative tense form representing its situation time as T-anterior to the situation time of said. See Figure 8.2. Figure 8.2. The tense structure of John said that he had worked hard all day. When representing a temporal domain by means of a diagram, we observe the following conventions. The domain is represented by a Venn-diagram because it is a set of orientation times (each related to another orientation time by a tense form). The ‘central orientation time’ (see 8.15) is the only orientation time that is placed on the time line, since it is the only orientation time that is directly related to t 0 . A vertical line is used to represent the relation of T- simultaneity, whereas a slanting line represents either T-anteriority or T-poste- riority. A situation time that is T-anterior to its binding orientation time is located to the left of the latter; a situation time that is T-posterior to its binding orientation time is located to the right of the latter. All orientation times and situation times are represented by a cross (or ‘x’), irrespective of whether they are durative or punctual. 8.11.2 A domain is unexpanded when it consists of just one situation time. In that case the set of orientation times forming the domain is a singleton. An example of this is He left at five and I will leave at eight, where each tense form establishes a domain of its own (the one in the past, the other in the post- present), neither of which is further expanded. 8.12 Two past tenses: the absolute preterite vs the relative preterite English has an absolute past tense, which establishes a past domain, as well as a relative past tense, which expresses T-simultaneity in a past domain. 374 8. Temporal domains and relative tenses: theoretical foundations The semantics of the absolute preterite is ‘The situation time is located in the past time-sphere (defined relative to t 0 )’; the semantics of the relative preterite is: ‘The situation time is T-simultaneous with an orientation time in a past domain’. 4 Arguments for this distinction are adduced in sections 8.23Ϫ32 below. 8.13 Past vs present (time-sphere) tenses The past (time-sphere) tenses are the tenses showing past tense morphology: the absolute past tense, the relative tenses expressing a single relation in a past domain, viz. the relative past tense (T-simultaneity), the past perfect (T- anteriority) and the ‘conditional’ tense (T-posteriority), and the complex-rela- tive tenses with past tense morphology, viz. the ‘conditional perfect’ tense (would have V-en) and such (nameless) tenses as are built with had been going to, would have been going to and would have been going to have V-en. The present (time-sphere) tenses are the tenses showing present tense mor- phology. These are the present tense, the present perfect, the future tense (plus the present tense of the ‘futurish’ tense forms) and the absolute-relative tenses (i. e. the future perfect and such (nameless) tenses as are built with have been going to, will have been going to and will have been going to have V-en). 5 8.14 Temporal subordination or temporal binding (T-binding) By this we mean the phenomenon that a tense form T-relates a situation time to another orientation time in a domain. Thus, in John said he would do 4. This is actually a simplification. In 9.17.1 we will see that a post-present binding orienta- tion time may be treated as if it were t 0 , i. e. as a ‘pseudo-t 0 ’, and that in that case we can speak of a ‘pseudo-past time-sphere’ and ‘pseudo-past subdomains’. A pseudo-past subdomain is established by a ‘pseudo-absolute’ past tense and expanded by the relative tenses typical of (true) past domains: (i) [Even if there are witnesses to the hold-up we are planning] they will no doubt say to the police that they didn’t notice what was going on. In this example, didn’t notice is a pseudo-absolute past tense form establishing a pseudo- past subdomain in the post-present domain established by will say; was going on ex- presses T-simultaneity in that pseudo-past subdomain Ϫ see section 9.18.3. It follows that the correct definition of the semantics of the relative past tense is: ‘The situation time is T-simultaneous with an orientation time in a past or pseudo-past domain or subdomain’. (Another example of a relative past tense expressing T-simultaneity in a pseudo-past (sub)domain is when a pre-present domain is developed as if it were a past one: He’s told me once or twice that he was an only child Ϫ see 9.10.1.) 5. Judging from the Internet, some of these ‘nameless’ tenses are hardly ever used, but this does not alter the fact that they are theoretically possible and that their semantics (i. e. the structure of temporal relations which they express) is fully transparent. I. Introduction 375 it, the situation time of would do is temporally bound by (ϭ temporally subordinated to) the situation time of said. The latter is the binding orien- tation time . In order to avoid any confusion with other meanings attributed to the terms ‘bind’, ‘binding’ and ‘bound’ in the linguistic literature (e. g. ‘bound pronouns’, ‘bound variables’) we will regularly use ‘ T-bind’, ‘T-binding’ and ‘ T-bound’ in our discussion of T-relations (i. e. temporal relations expressed by tenses Ϫ see 2.16.1). It is important to see that T-binding is only possible within one and the same temporal domain. A T-relation between a situation time and t 0 is not a T-binding relation: in a clause using an absolute tense, the situation time is by definition not T-bound (i. e. not temporally subordinated). 376 8. Temporal domains and relative tenses: theoretical foundations II. Temporal domains: further terminological apparatus The one orientation time that is not T-bound by any other in a domain is the central orientation time. The absolute zone in which it is located determines the overall tempo- ral nature of the domain. Thus, in (He said) he would do it tomorrow, the situation time referred to by would do forms part of a past domain, established by the past tense form said (or, in the absence of a head clause in the past tense, by an unspecified central orientation time located in the past zone). There is a certain correlation between temporal subordination and syntactic subordination: for one, the use of a relative tense to express T-simultaneity is excluded in a syntactically independent clause; for another, the use of an absolute tense is excluded in some types of subclauses. If a situation time is represented as T-simultaneous with another situation time, the exact duration and temporal location of the T-bound situation time is unidirectionally determined by the binding situation time. Thus, in I noticed at once that Jim was ill, the situation time expressed by [Jim] was [ill] strictly coincides with the time of my noticing it, which is merely a point (rather than a durative interval) in the past time- sphere. Of course, the full situation time of Jim being ill will be extralinguistically interpreted as much longer than, and as properly including, the time of me noticing it and may possibly even include t 0 , which shows that W-simultaneity is a concept quite different from T-simultaneity. Sometimes the speaker does not use a relative tense form, expanding an already established domain, but instead uses an absolute tense form, causing a shift of domain, either within the same time-zone or from one time-zone to another. When the shift of domain is within the same zone, the hearer may draw clues as to the temporal ordering of the situation times from such sources as the presence of temporal adverbials, the order of appearance of the clauses, the linguistic and extralinguistic context, his prag- matic knowledge of the world or, as will be summarized below in 8.45, the (non)- bounded representations of the situationsreferred to. We speak of a shift of temporal perspective when a situation intended to be interpre- ted as located in one absolute zone is referred to by a tense form that is characteristic of another zone, as when the present tense is used with reference to the post-present zone (e. g. They’re leaving soon), to the past zone (e. g. Napoleon strikes back)orto the pre-present zone (e. g. I hear John has been promoted). 8.15 Central time of orientation (central orientation time) The central orientation time is the one orientation time in the domain that is not T-bound by any other orientation time in the domain but is directly II. Temporal domains: further terminological apparatus 377 related to t 0 . In most cases the central orientation time is the situation time of the clause which establishes the domain by using an absolute tense form (as in He left yesterday). When an absolute-relative tense is used (e. g. He will have left by tonight) the central orientation time is the unspecified post-present ori- entation time (here ‘contained’ in the Adv-time specified by tonight) to which the situation time is temporally subordinated. As noted in 2.42.2, the central orientation time is the only orientation time of the domain that is put on the time line when we represent the semantics of a tense (i. e. the tense structure) by means of a tense diagram. 8.16 The temporal nature of the domain The temporal nature of the domain is determined by the absolute zone in which the central orientation time is located. Thus, in He said he would do it tomor- row the reference is to a past domain, established by said. The form would do locates its situation time in that past domain, even though the ‘doing it’ is W- understood as lying in the post-present. Similarly, in He would do it tomorrow (interpreted as free indirect speech), the situation time forms part of a past domain because the unspecified central orientation time (ϭ the time of ‘his’ thinking, saying, etc.) which T-binds the situation time is located in the past time-sphere. This definition of the nature of a temporal domain accords with the claim that a relative tense expresses no temporal relation other than a domain-internal relation between a T-bound situation time and a T-binding orientation time. (As pointed out in 2.16.1, tenses express T-relations, not W- relations.) 8.17 The definition of T-simultaneity 8.17.1 As noted in 2.16.1, the simultaneity relation expressed by a relative tense form can be referred to as T-simultaneity (‘tense simultaneity’) in order to distinguish it from W-simultaneity (‘world simultaneity’ Ϫ see also 8.18.1). In section 2.17, T-simultaneity was defined as a relation of strict coincidence. This is in keeping with the distinction made between a situation time (the time of a ‘predicated situation’ Ϫ see 8.1.3) and the time of a full situation: what is represented as T-simultaneous with an orientation time is always a situation time, not the time of a full situation. 6 Thus, in I noticed at once that Jim was ill, the situation time expressed by [Jim] was [ill] and represented as T- simultaneous (coinciding) with the situation time of [I] noticed is only a subin- 6. Of course, if the situation is L-bounded, the situation time is also the time of the full situation Ϫ see 2.12.2. . a domain of its own (the one in the past, the other in the post- present), neither of which is further expanded. 8.12 Two past tenses: the absolute preterite vs the relative preterite English. time in the post-present. As stressed in 2.13.2, the situation time is the time of the actualization of the predicated situation, not the time of anticipation of that actualization. See also the. shift of domain, either within the same time-zone or from one time-zone to another. When the shift of domain is within the same zone, the hearer may draw clues as to the temporal ordering of the