IV. T-relations in a post-present domain 511 The use of the past perfect in (4aϪb) versus the use of the present perfect in (5aϪb) is accompanied by further differences between the two types of sen- tences. To begin with, in (4aϪb) the head clause in the future tense is each time positive while the relative clause in the past perfect is each time negative. It follows that there can be a contrast in interpretation between the future actualization of the head clause situation and the nonactualization of the same kind of situation in a period leading up to the beginning of that future actual- ization. In (5aϪb) both clauses are positive, so that there is no sense of contrast between actualization and earlier nonactualization. Secondly, the tenses in (4aϪb) and (5aϪb) reveal a difference of ‘ temporal focus ’ (see 11.1.1). In both (4aϪb) and (5aϪb) the speaker makes a prediction and in doing so expresses his own point of view concerning the future. The fact that in (5aϪb) he focuses on (i. e. is primarily concerned with) the post- present time of the resultant state expressed by the present perfect form is in keeping with this: the time focused on is the same time as the time about which a prediction is made. The only point of view that is taken in these sentences is therefore that of the speaker. In (4aϪb), by contrast, the past perfect reveals a temporal focus on the pseudo-past orientation time to which the situation re- ferred to in the past perfect is anterior. This means that, apart from expressing his own point of view about the post-present (by making a prediction), the speaker also assumes the temporal standpoint, and hence the point of view (see 11.3.2), of the person(s) participating in the post-present situation. Thus, in (4a) [If you join our club, you will know a lot about people that you had never dreamed of meeting before] the speaker expresses not only his own point of view (in that he makes a prediction) but also the viewpoint of an imagined ‘having-joined-the-club addressee’ potentially saying I hadn’t dreamed of meet- ing these people before (ϭ before I met them after joining the club). (Of course, this does not mean that the speaker actually attributes such a thought or utter- ance to the club-joiner; it just means that the speaker predicts that this thought could be entertained in the world envisaged from the point of view that the club-joiner would have in the predicted post-present world.) 9.27.3 Let us now have a look at the following examples: (6a) In future he will never again speak about a subject that he {has /*had} not studied in detail. (6b) In future he will always speak about a subject that he {has /*had} studied in detail. (6c) In future he will (always) speak about a subject that he {has / had} never spoken about before. (6d) In future he will never again speak about a subject that he {has / ? had} never spoken about before. 512 9. Temporal subordination in the various time-zones In (6aϪb) the present perfect (has studied) has to be used because there is a resultative link to be communicated: the intended readings are as follows: ‘He will never again speak about a subject that he is not familiar with as a result of having studied it in detail.’ ‘He will always speak about a subject that he knows well as a result of having studied it in detail.’ In (6c) both the present perfect (has spoken) and the past perfect (had spoken) are in principle possible because there are two interpretations that make sense, viz. the following: (6Ј) ‘He will always speak about a subject that is new because it will (each time) be the case that he has not spoken about it yet.’ (6Љ) ‘He will take up the habit of speaking about a subject that he had not spoken about (before taking up the habit in question).’ The former interpretation requires the present perfect form has spoken in (6c) and implies that there are various subjects that will be treated. 14 Interpretation (6cЉ) is conveyed by the past perfect had spoken. On this reading, the situation time of the situation of not speaking about the subject is located before the beginning of the post-present habitual situation. The implication now is that it is the same subject that will be treated on the various future occasions of speaking. It follows that the resultative idea ‘Each instance of speaking will concern a new subject’ is absent here. In (6d) the former type of interpretation (viz. ‘He will never again speak about a subject that is new’) makes sense, but the latter kind of interpretation (‘He will never again take up the habit of speaking about a subject that he had never spoken about (before taking up the habit)’) is more complex and appar- ently more difficult to process and contextualize. Hence the lower acceptability of the past perfect. 9.27.4 One of the corner-stones of the above analysis is the observation that in order to relate a situation time to the central orientation time of a post- present domain we use the same tenses as we use to relate a situation time to t 0 . This means that the use of the present perfect vs the past perfect in the above examples should not be affected if we replace the future tense in the head clause by the present tense. This prediction appears to be borne out, as we see when we consider the examples in (7), which are quite similar to the 14. In this case the post-present situation is of the repetitive (or habitual) kind. It consists of a number of subsituations, each of which can be described in terms of ‘He will speak about a subject that is new because he has not spoken about it before’. (Semantically this is similar to what we observe in Each time he speaks about a subject in future, he will not have spoken about it before.) IV. T-relations in a post-present domain 513 examples given so far, except that the head clause refers to the present, and not to the post-present: (7a) Thanks to this club I now know a lot about people that I {had /*have} never dreamed of meeting before. (7b) [Our local pressure group is achieving results and the interest is gathering mo- mentum.] Individuals who {had /*have} never considered taking part in public debate are now being attracted to the success of certain ventures. (7c) Through this hole in the curtain you can see the audience that {have / *had} come to see the play. (The past perfect is unacceptable because there is to be a resultative link.) (7d) He is again telling that joke which he {has / *had} already told several times. (idem) (7e) He never speaks about a subject that he {has / *had} not studied in detail. (idem) (7f) He always speaks about a subject that he {has / *had} studied in detail. (7g) This year he (always) lectures on a subject that he {has / had} never spoken about before. (7h) This year he never lectures on a subject that he {has / ? had} never spoken about before. These sentences (and their interpretations) run completely parallel to what we have observed in connection with the examples in (2)Ϫ(6). For example, in (7g) (which runs parallel to (6c)), the present perfect yields reading (7gЈ), while the past perfect yields reading (7gЉ). These interpretations resemble (6cЈ) and (6cЉ) in that the former implies that the subjects treated are each time different, whereas the latter implies that the speaker each time deals with the same sub- ject. (7gЈ) ‘This year he always lectures on a subject that is new because it is (each time) the case that he has not lectured on it yet.’ (7gЉ) ‘This year he has taken up the habit of lecturing on a subject that he had not lectured on (before taking up the habit in question).’ Similarly, in (7h) the present perfect suggests the interpretation ‘This year he never lectures on a subject that is new’, whereas the past perfect suggests the (somewhat less accessible and less plausible) interpretation ‘This year he never takes up the habit of lecturing on a subject that he had never lectured on (before taking up the habit)’. The following are attested examples similar to the ones in (7) combining a past perfect with a present tense: (stage direction) The procession music, which had been allowed to fade out, is brought up by the opening of the study door. (JUMP) (This is to be read as ‘At this 514 9. Temporal subordination in the various time-zones point, the music which had, prior to the interval immediately preceding now, which was without music, been allowed to fade out, comes gradually back.’ This implies that it is not until the music comes back ‘up’ that we realize that there has been an interval with no music, precisely because the music faded out rather than being cut off in an intrusive way, and we have been absorbed in the drama and not noticed its absence.) Food for the party is now being cooked in the English style Ϫ after team manager Walter Winterbottom had gone into the hotel kitchen to instruct the chef. (TCIE) (This can only make sense if read as ‘Food for the party is now being cooked in the English style. They began doing so after team manager Walter Winterbottom had gone into the hotel kitchen to instruct the chef.’) 9.27.5 It should be clear, then, that the possibility of using a past perfect in a subclause depending on a head clause locating its situation time in the present or post-present depends on the possibility of treating the beginning of the pres- ent or post-present situation as a time that is past with respect to the rest of the situation. We have observed that this possibility is excluded if there is a resultative link between the two situations. This does not mean, however, that it is always available when there is not such a link. In fact, when there is no link of result (or, more generally, relevance) between the two situations we often have to use the past tense or present perfect to refer to the anterior situation because ‘anteriority to t 0 or to a pseudo-t 0 ’ is unmarked with respect to ‘anteriority to an unspecified orientation time that is anterior to t 0 or to a pseudo-t 0 ’. The latter option is only selected if there is some positive reason to do so. He is now reading the book that I {gave / have given /*had given} him. He will be reading the book that I {gave / have given /*had given} him. The clearest examples in which the past perfect is used are those in which the past tense will not be used because the conditions for using a perfect form are satisfied, and in which the perfect form in question cannot be a present perfect because the meaning of this tense is incompatible with the context. Compare: (8a) His popularity is so immense that some people who {had /*have} never been to the opera now go regularly, just to hear him sing. (8b) His popularity is so immense that I predict that some people who {had / have} never been to the opera will go regularly, just to hear him sing. In both cases a perfect form is called for because never is interpreted as ‘never in a time span leading up to [some orientation time]’. As noted in connection with the present perfect, it is typically one of the perfect tenses that is used to locate a situation time in such a time span. If we use the present perfect, the situation time is located in a time span that leads up to t 0 (as in I have never been to the opera). In (8a) this use of the present tense is unacceptable because IV. T-relations in a post-present domain 515 the meaning of have never been to the opera clashes with the statement that the people in question now go to listen to ‘him’ regularly in a short period, which implies that these people have already been to the opera. In (8b), on the other hand, the present perfect is not impossible because we can interpret never as ‘never up to t 0 ’, which does not clash with the idea of a future habit. How- ever, the present perfect is not possible if never is to be interpreted as ‘never up to then’. It follows that a past perfect of this kind will never receive a continuative interpretation: in this reading the situation continues into the relevant orienta- tion time rather than coming to an end at the (past) time when the situation holding at the relevant orientation time began to hold. Compare: People who have lived in London for many years will regularly attend these meet- ings. People who had lived in London for many years will regularly attend these meetings. In the former example, have lived receives a continuative interpretation: the people in question will still be living in London when they attend the meetings. In the second example, by contrast, had lived is interpreted as an indefinite past perfect: the people in question will no longer be living in London at the time when they attend the meetings. 9.27.6 In conclusion, we can say that an explanation has been offered for the observation that a subclause depending on a head clause in the present or future tense may sometimes use the past perfect instead of the present perfect. The explanation is that the past perfect functions as an instruction to look for a suitable past orientation time, to which the situation time can be interpreted as being anterior. If the head clause refers to the present or the post-present and there is no contextually given past orientation time, it is the beginning of the head-clause situation that is interpreted as being the past or pseudo-past orientation time in question. (Self-evidently this is only possible if the head clause situation has a certain duration, so that its beginning can be seen as past with respect to the rest of the situation. In many cases it is of the habitual kind.) 516 9. Temporal subordination in the various time-zones V. Direct and indirect binding 9.28 Definitions When a subclause is temporally subordinated to its own head clause, we speak of ‘direct binding’. When a subclause is not T-bound by its own head clause but by a syntactically higher clause which T-binds that head clause, we speak of ‘indirect bind- ing’. Indirect binding is subject to severe constraints. 9.28.1 In section 8.21.1 it was pointed out that, when two clauses follow each other, the situation time of the second clause may or may not be bound by (i. e. temporally subordinated to) the situation time of the first clause. If its situation time is not bound by it, it is related to t 0 , which means that the tense form used establishes a new temporal domain. The two possibilities (binding or shifting the domain) are illustrated by the following sentences: The woman has told her friends once or twice that she was afraid to go home because her husband would perhaps be drunk and knock her about. (All the sub- clause situation times are temporally subordinated.) John has been expelled from the club because he has behaved badly. (shift of do- main) When the situation time is T-bound in a past domain, there are sometimes two possibilities as to the choice of binding time. Compare the following, in which the past perfect forms in the head clauses are the past counterparts of the present perfects in the head clauses of the preceding examples: [The police knew that] the girl had told her friends once or twice that she was afraid to go home because her husband would perhaps be drunk and knock her about. [Mary knew that] John had been expelled from the club because he had behaved badly. The first of these examples illustrates what we will call direct binding: the situation time of each subclause is temporally subordinated to the situation time of its own head clause (ϭ syntactically superordinate clause). This means that the situation time of she was afraid is represented as T-simultaneous with the situation time of the first that-clause (whose verb is had told), which is itself represented as T-anterior to the situation time of the matrix clause (ϭ the highest clause in the syntactic tree structure, which in this case is the clause establishing the domain). The fact that the situation of the second that-clause (ϭ the being afraid) is also interpreted as W-anterior to that of the matrix clause is not expressed by its tense form (was afraid). In the second example, V. Direct and indirect binding 517 temporal subordination happens differently: here not only the situation time of the that-clause but also the situation time of the (more deeply embedded) because-clause is represented as T-anterior to the situation time of the matrix clause. There is therefore no expression of the T-relation between the situation times of the two subclauses. This means that only the that-clause is bound directly (i. e. bound by its own head clause). The because-clause is bound indirectly (i. e. its situation time is temporally subordinated to the situation time of a clause which is not its own head clause). This kind of tense structure is shown by Figure 9.16. (The wavy line represents the W-simultaneity relation that is not linguistically expressed.) Figure 9.16. The tense structure of Mary knew that John had been expelled from the club because he had behaved badly. 9.28.2 As appears from the following examples, there are constraints on both direct and indirect binding: (9a) We expected that Elsie would still be in bed when we {arrived /*would arrive}. (W-posterior reading; only direct binding is possible: the binding ori- entation time has to be the situation time of would be, not that of expected.) (9b) We hoped that the kidnappers would release the girl after the ransom {had been paid /*would have been paid}. (Only direct binding is allowed: the binding situation time has to be the situation time of would release, not the situation time of hoped.) 15 (10a) [She was determined to buy the house.] She had fallen in love with it the moment she saw it. (W-simultaneous reading; saw effects direct binding.) 15. Remember that the conditional tense expresses one T-relation, which is, however, ‘com- plex’ in that it combines the idea ‘The situation time is anterior to an orientation time’ and ‘That orientation time is posterior to another orientation time in a past domain’ (see 9.7). . T-anterior to the situation time of the matrix clause. There is therefore no expression of the T-relation between the situation times of the two subclauses. This means that only the that-clause. domain, there are sometimes two possibilities as to the choice of binding time. Compare the following, in which the past perfect forms in the head clauses are the past counterparts of the present. 511 The use of the past perfect in (4aϪb) versus the use of the present perfect in (5aϪb) is accompanied by further differences between the two types of sen- tences. To begin with, in (4aϪb) the