IV. Direct and indirect binding in when -clauses 665 Figure 13.13. The temporal structure of He said he had bought it when he had been going to get that salary increase. Figure 13.10 by using an absolute past tense form in the head clause instead of a past perfect. The following are some attested examples: [Sheila ( ) felt a cold shudder creeping along her spine.] She felt just as she did as a young girl when she had once answered the phone for her father. (LSW) [From a locked drawer she took out a large German revolver. Basil had given it to her ( ).] It was loaded when he had brought it to her [and was loaded now.] (FORG) [But today she was genuinely concerned.] John had been sick twice during the night and was lying shivering and sweating when she had called him at 7.00 a.m. (LBW) The same phenomenon can also be observed in restrictive relative clauses that form part of a time adverbial: [Peter Moran looked, if not dirty, scruffy.] On each occasion Charles had seen him his hair needed a wash. (TSM) It was on one of those evenings when Tim had expressed his envy of those who own their homes, that he suggested he too should buy a flat. (LOD) (The context makes it clear that the suggestion was made during the discussion in which Tim expressed his envy and not after it, in other words, that the two situations were W-simulta- neous.) What renders the use of an absolute past tense form in the head clause accept- able is the fact that for pragmatic reasons the situation time of the head clause can only be interpreted as W-simultaneous with the situation time of the when- clause. Since the tense form of the when-clause locates the situation time of the when-clause as T-anterior to a past orientation time, this means that the situation time of the head clause must also be interpreted as anterior to this 666 13. Adverbial when -clauses and the use of tenses orientation time, irrespective of whether the tense form of the head clause expresses that anteriority (using a past perfect) or not (using an absolute past tense). In the latter case the use of the past tense in the head clause does not preclude indirect binding in the when-clause because the basic condition for indirect binding of the situation time of the when-clause is satisfied: the time adverbial functions as a situation-time adverbial, i. e. it locates (contains) the situation time of the head clause and not an orientation time binding the situa- tion time of the head clause (see 2.24). 13.10.7 It should be noted, finally, that adverbial when-clauses normally al- low indirect binding only if they use a tense form expressing T-anteriority. They do not allow indirect binding by means of the conditional tense or was / were going to: He said he would help her when she {was /*would be} in trouble. (Would be would relate the situation time of the when-clause to the situation time of the matrix (said), but that is not allowed in English. It is allowed, though, in cognate languages like Dutch and German.) He was going to resign when he {was /*was going to be} sixty. The same is true if the posterior past subdomain is not established by a tense form expressing T-posteriority but by a context implying W-posteriority: He promised to repair my bike when he {came /*would come} back from work. However, in older English, indirect binding could be effected in when-clauses by means of the auxiliary should. Because the reference is to a posterior when- clause situation, i. e. to a situation whose actualization is still not factual at the time of the matrix situation, this should has a slight hypothetical connota- tion. Its use here therefore bears a certain similarity to its use in conditional clauses like If someone should ask for me, tell them I’m away (where the hypothetical meaning of should is much more pronounced). This does not alter the fact, though, that should effects indirect binding in the following examples. Behind them they left a trail that would break Mr. Harrison’s heart when he should see it. (AVON) [But I never considered it as other than a transitory life. There was always a pro- phetic instinct, a low whisper in my ear, that] within no long period, and whenever a new change of custom should be essential to my good, change would come. (SCRLT) [Hester (…) assured them, too, of her firm belief that,] at some brighter period, when the world should have grown ripe for it, in Heaven’s own time, a new truth would be revealed, [in order to establish the whole relation between man and woman on a surer ground of mutual happiness.] (SCRLT) V. Pseudo-sloppy simultaneity 667 V. Pseudo-sloppy simultaneity 13.11 Definition of pseudo-sloppy simultaneity On a pseudo-sloppy simultaneity interpretation, the when-clause uses a tense which represents the situation time of the when-clause as simultaneous with the contained orientation time of the when-clause, but the situation time of the when-clause is actu- ally interpreted as W-anterior or W-posterior to the situation time of the head clause. For example: The business closed when the owner was murdered by robbers; When I leave the house I will turn on the burglar alarm. 13.11.1 As noted in 13.3.6, when the tense form of a when-clause used as a situation-time adverbial expresses T-simultaneity, the situation time of the when-clause is normally interpreted as W-simultaneous with the situation time of the head clause because both situation times are ‘contained’ in the same common Adv-time. However, this W-simultaneity can be of the ‘ pseudo- sloppy ’ kind. As argued in 13.3.7, the possibility of a pseudo-sloppy simultane- ity interpretation is due to the temporal structure of when, which is ‘The con- tained orientation time of the head clause is contained in a common Adv-time which also contains the contained orientation time of the when-clause’. This temporal structure does not require that the contained orientation time of the head clause should be W-simultaneous with the contained orientation time of the when-clause. All that is required is that the two should be conceived of as falling within the same interval (common Adv-time). When the when-clause is used as a situation-time adverbial and uses a tense form expressing T-simulta- neity, the situation time of the when-clause coincides with the contained orien- tation time of the when-clause and the unmarked interpretation is for the com- mon Adv-time also to coincide with the situation time of the when-clause. Since in that case the common Adv-time contains the situation time of the head clause, the situation time of the head clause is interpreted as W-simultaneous with (because contained in) the situation time of the when-clause. A pseudo- sloppy simultaneity interpretation is a deviation from this. It is a marked read- ing in which the common Adv-time does not coincide with the situation time of the when-clause but is a longer interval in which the contained orientation time of the head clause may be W-posterior or W-anterior to the contained orientation time of the when-clause. 13.11.2 On a pseudo-sloppy simultaneity interpretation, the when-clause uses a tense which represents the situation time of the when-clause as simultaneous with the contained orientation time of the when-clause, but the situation time 668 13. Adverbial when -clauses and the use of tenses of the when-clause is actually interpreted as W-anterior or W-posterior to the situation time of the head clause: The business closed when the owner was murdered by robbers. (WSJ) When John left the house, he switched on the burglar alarm in the kitchen. [‘I used to play rugger,’ said Armstrong.] ‘I missed it when I gave it up.’ (LOB) Strictly speaking, it would seem to be more logical to use a verb form express- ing T-anteriority or T-posteriority in such examples: The business closed when the owner had been murdered by robbers. When John was going to leave the house, he switched on the burglar alarm in the kitchen. In most cases, however, the speaker will prefer to use the past tense, because T-simultaneity is the unmarked T-relation (see 3.5 and 8.34) and because the temporal relation between the situations is anyhow clear from the pragmatics of the sentence. 9 The explicit use of a more complex tense form (i. e. the past perfect or a form expressing posteriority to a past orientation time) is usually unnecessary, unless the speaker wishes to emphasize the precise nature of the temporal relation (which is then asserted rather than merely inferred). More- over, the use of was going to leave or had left adds an aspect of meaning. Whereas was murdered and left in the first pair of examples just represents their situations as past facts, had been murdered can also convey a resultative implicature, while was going to leave has ‘prospective’ meaning (see 10.7.2) and therefore actually fails to represent the situation as factual: in When John was going to leave the house, he put on his boots, the when-clause refers to the time when the when-clause situation was anticipated, but fails to represent the situation as actualizing. The past tense will therefore be preferred when the reference is to a situation that did actualize in the past. 13.12 Further remarks on pseudo-sloppy simultaneity If the head clause situation is homogeneous, a pseudo-sloppy simultaneity interpreta- tion comes down to a kind of inchoative reading of the head clause: When the house burnt down, we lived at my mother’s until we found a new house. 9. In some cases the sentence itself contains a word triggering a sequence interpretation: (i) When trading resumed yesterday, EBS shares immediately surged $ 4. (WSJ) (ii) When First Interstate balked, ( ) regulators responded by raising their recommenda- tion to $ 350 million. (WSJ) V. Pseudo-sloppy simultaneity 669 If the head clause situation is interpreted as W-posterior to the when-clause situation (in spite of the when-clause using a T-simultaneity form), this posteriority relation can sometimes be expressed by the tense of the head clause: When the war was over, few of the soldiers would return to find real peace. When-clauses that are interpreted in terms of pseudo-sloppy simultaneity often do not really specify an Adv-time but describe the occasion(s) on which the head clause situation actualizes: When she received the letter, she answered it as soon as she could. When the notion of ‘occasion(s)’ is stretched to that of ‘case(s)’, the when-clause be- comes ‘case-specifying’ and hence ‘atemporal’: Children are orphans when their parents are dead. 13.12.1 If the head clause situation is a state or another type of ‘homogen- eous’ (see 1.45) situation, a pseudo-sloppy simultaneity interpretation comes down to a kind of inchoative reading of the head clause: When John broke his leg, he used the same crutches that his wife had used. (ϭ ‘John used the same crutches as his wife had used, and he began doing so when / after he broke his leg.’) 10 She was penniless when her firm went bankrupt. (ϭ ‘At some time in the past she was penniless, and that situation came about when / after her firm went bankrupt.’) These examples show that if the head clause situation is interpreted as follow- ing the when-clause situation, it may be nonbounded to the right as long as it is (interpreted as) bounded to the left. This stands to reason: a succession interpretation requires that one situation terminates before the other begins, i. e. that one situation (the one that is interpreted as actualizing first) is right- bounded whereas the other is left-bounded. Whether the situations are bounded or nonbounded at the other end is irrelevant. 13.12.2 If the head clause situation is interpreted as W-posterior to the when- clause situation (in spite of the when-clause using a T-simultaneity form), this posteriority relation can sometimes be expressed by the tense of the head clause. Consider: (5a) When the war was over, few of the soldiers would return to find real peace. (5b) When his third term came to an end, FDR would be elected a fourth time. (www) 10. Note that this is the same kind of inchoative reading as we get in At five o’clock John did his homework, which means ‘John did his homework and started doing so at five’ rather than just ‘At five John started doing his homework’ (see 2.30.2). 670 13. Adverbial when -clauses and the use of tenses In these examples, the head clause situation is not primarily represented as anticipated but rather as factual, i. e. as a situation that actualized in the past. This means that the situation is represented as ‘future in the past’ (rather than ‘future from the past’) by an omniscient narrator. This use of would is the same as that observed in sentences like the following, which are typical of a narrative style (see 9.6.7): (6a) [In trenches up to their knees in mud for weeks on end they endured unending barrages of bombs, shells and artillery fire in places like Ypres, Paschendale and the Somme.] Few would return to find real peace. (www) (6b) [People didn’t know at the time, but] FDR would be elected a fourth time. (Matthiessen 1983: 392) The conditional tense form here represents its situation as factual, and could therefore be replaced with the past tense (albeit with loss of the posteriority sense). In (5aϪb) too, the past tense could be used in the head clause. Another alternative to would is was / were to: (7) [At 24, Costello was sentenced to a year in prison for carrying a gun.] He was not to return to prison for the next 37 years. (www) Examples like these are interesting because the head clause receives a factual interpretation in spite of the fact that the use of would or was to implies that the situation time of the head clause is not related to t 0 (by means of an abso- lute past tense) but is represented as T-posterior to some past orientation time. In (6)Ϫ(7), the binding orientation time is the situation time of the preceding clause. In (5aϪb), which involve a when-clause, the situation time of the head clause is represented as T-posterior to the implicit contained orientation time of the head clause, which is interpreted as W-simultaneous with the implicit contained orientation time of the when-clause to which the situation time of the when-clause is represented as T-simultaneous. This means that the tense forms in these examples express configuration 5 (see 13.7.5), in which the situation time of the when-clause is T-simultaneous with the implicit contained orientation time of the when-clause and the situation time of the head clause is T-posterior to the implicit contained orientation time of the head clause. However, these examples differ from the illustrations of configuration 5 given in 13.7.5 in that the head clause uses would rather than was going to. As noted in 13.8.2, the head clause has to use was going to rather than would if it expresses what is anticipated at the time of the contained orientation time of the head clause (i. e. if the head clause has ‘prospective’ meaning). But it is clear from (5aϪb) that the head clause has to use would (or was to)ifthe speaker wants to use a form expressing posteriority which is to be interpreted as having a factual rather than prospective meaning. 13.12.3 Another observation worth making is that when-clauses that are in- terpreted in terms of pseudo-sloppy simultaneity often do not really specify an V. Pseudo-sloppy simultaneity 671 Adv-time but describe the occasion(s) on which the head clause situation actu- alizes: He always switches off all the lights when he leaves his house. When she received the letter, she answered it as soon as she could. In such examples the ‘temporal’ when-clause describes the relevant occasion(s) rather than the precise time of the actualization of the head clause situation. The same thing is sometimes possible when the W-simultaneity relation which is taken to hold between the situation time of the head clause and the situation time of the when-clause is not of the ‘pseudo-sloppy’ kind: He always votes Conservative when there is a general election. In this country, when a man marries, the bride’s parents have to give him a dowry. I got this as a present when I graduated. That the primary function of the when-clauses is not to specify a time (Adv- time) not only answers our intuition but is also corroborated by the fact that in this case it is not irrelevant which situation is processed as head clause situation and which as when-clause situation. Compare: (a) Josephine Baker died when she was 68. (b) Josephine Baker was 68 when she died. (a) When she received the letter, she answered it as soon as she could. (b) *When she answered it as soon as she could, she received the letter. (a) He always votes Conservative when there is a general election. (b) When he (*always) votes Conservative, there is a general election. As noted in 13.3.9, there is no clear difference in interpretation between the (a) and (b) sentences of the first pair, in which the when-clauses are purely time-specifying. However, there is a clear difference of interpretation between the (a) and (b) sentences of the second and third pairs. This is because the when-clause is now occasion-specifying rather than purely time-specifying. 11 13.12.4 When the notion of ‘occasion(s)’ is stretched to that of ‘case(s)’, the when-clause becomes ‘ case-specifying’ and hence ‘atemporal’. Such when- 11. The same is true of focalizing when -clauses,i.e.when-clauses which do not specify the time of the head clause situation (or a time to which the time of the head clause situation is related) but express the speaker’s focus on a time of evaluation or observa- tion. In one subtype, the when-clause suggests the idea of a travelling observing con- sciousness (e. g. When you travel to Washington, Boston, Chicago or New York, the same problems exist), in another, the focalizing when-clause indicates the ‘epistemic time of evaluation’, i. e. the time when the conclusion is reached that the statement made in the head clause is true (e. g. When you look at the economics, this company needs a Japanese and a European partner to make it work). . is the fact that for pragmatic reasons the situation time of the head clause can only be interpreted as W-simultaneous with the situation time of the when- clause. Since the tense form of the. latter case the use of the past tense in the head clause does not preclude indirect binding in the when-clause because the basic condition for indirect binding of the situation time of the when-clause. interpretation, the when-clause uses a tense which represents the situation time of the when-clause as simultaneous with the contained orientation time of the when-clause, but the situation time of the when-clause