UNIVERSITATEA DE STAT DIN MOLDOVA

Facultatea de Limbi i Literaturi Strine

Catedra Filologie Englez

Dumitru MELENCIUC

COMPARATIVE GRAMMAR

Aprobat
de Consiliul metodicotiinific i editorial
al USM

CEP USM
Chiinu, 2008

CZU.:

Dumitru Melenciuc
Comparative Grammar. Moldova State University, 2008.

Suport de curs pentru masteranzi la cursul Gramatica comparativ. Chiinu: CEP USM,
2008. p. 87

Recomandat de Consiliul profesoral al Facultii de Limbi i Literaturi Strine.

Descrierea CIP a Camerei Naionale a Crii

Melenciuc, Dumitru
Comparative Grammar / Melenciuc Dumitru; univ. de Stat din Moldova. Facult. de Limbi i
Lit. Strine. Catedra Filologie Englez. Ch.: CEP USM, 2008. p.87
Bibliogr. p. (10 tit.)
ISBN ----50 ex.
CZU.:

USM, 2008
D. Melenciuc, 2008
ISBN ---------2

CONTENTS
Preface. .4
1.Confrontational Linguistics4
2.Comparative Analysis on the Emic and Etic Levels..5
2.1.Confrontation of Forms...5
2.2.Lexical, Lexical-Grammatical and Grammatical Categories..6
2.3.Morphological-Grammatical Categories7
3.The Lexical-Grammatical Categories and Tertium Comparationis...7
4.Metalanguage and Linguistic Confrontation of Verbal Categories...8
5.Polysemy, Homonymy, Synonymy, Redundancy and Transposition of Verbal
Categorial and Grammatical Forms..............................................................................11
6.The English Verbal Categories.16
7.The Category of Mood .17
8.The Category of Aspect20
9.Aspectual Categorization in Cognate Languages.26
10.Category of Anteriority or Taxis29
10.1.The Category of Taxis and the Semantic Evolution of the Term Perfect29
10.2. The English Present Indefinite and its equivalents in Romanian and French.37
10.3.The English Future Indefinite and its Equivalents in French and Romanian..38
10.4.The English Present Perfect and its Equivalents in French and Romanian.38
10.5.The Categorial Meaning of Past Perfect in the Confronted Languages..39
10.6.Hypercorrectness or Hypergrammaticality.42
10.7.Category of Anteriority as seen by A.I.Smirnitsky and E.Benveniste43
10.8.A Contrastive Analysis of Non-finite Forms of Taxis44
10.9.The Category of Taxis in Oblique Moods..47
11.The Semiotic and Metasemiotic Use of the Category of Voice48
12.The Category of Comparison in English and Romanian.56
13.The Category of Deixis in English and Romanian.60
14.The Category of Representation.64
15.Word Order and Its Metasemiosis..75
Conclusions.81
Bibliography85

Preface
Comparative Grammar is intended as a theoretical course for undergraduate and postgraduate
students in their scientific research and to supplement the theoretical course in Comparative
Linguistics, which forms part of the curriculum for the English Section of the Departments of
Foreign Languages and Literatures at Moldova State University. The present textbook can be
successfully used in teaching English grammar using the comparative method. It can also be used in
writing research works in the field of contrastive linguistics.
Morphological grammatical verbal categories of aspect, taxis, tense, voice, mood,
representation are dealt with. The English categories of comparison and deixis are also confronted
with their equivalents in Romanian with occasional examples taken from French and Russian
languages. Syntax is represented here with the Word Order and Its Metasemiosis
Most of the materials are taken from: O.Akhmanova and D.Melenciuc The Principles of
Linguistic Confrontation, Moscow, 1977, D. Melenciuc Confrontational Linguistics, Chiinu,
USM, 2000; D. Melenciuc Comparativistics, Chiinu, CEP USM, 2003, D. Melenciuc Practical
Modern English Grammar, Chiinu, CEP USM, 2003. A number of articles written and published
by D.Melenciuc in Analele tiinifice ale Universitii de Stat din Moldova (Seria tiine
filologice) and Studia Universitatis (tiine umanistice) have also been used in the present work.

1.Confrontational Linguistics
The metalanguage used in the field is described differently. There are quite a number of
terms used in linguistics depending on what kind of comparison the linguist wants to undertake.
Some linguists speak of contrastive analysis as part of a wider field denoted by the term linguistic
confrontation. The word contrast comes from the Latin contrastare and implies difference,
opposition. Before we turn to differences we should compare systematically and synchronically
objects which may be quite similar, or even the same in some respects. Sameness and similarity
have always been the cornerstone of linguistic confrontation.
The comparative-historical (diachronic) study of languages for many years was
considered to be the only scientific method in linguistics. Gradually it gave way to other methods
and approaches like linguistic synchrony and in the study of natural human languages as a special
kind of semiotic system. Nevertheless, the idea of comparing different languages remained as a
guiding principle. The synchronic comparison implies a quest for new sets of features and
peculiarities. For comparative philology these were always thought of as something that was
genetically common, something that gradually diverged under the pressure of a variety of structural
and extra-linguistic factors. Analytical comparison was, and is still, looking for something to serve
for the comparison of languages of totally different families, for some kind of abstract features and
peculiarities. To serve as tertium comparationis they must be regarded as similar or even identical
in spite of the fact that the languages, which are assumed to share these properties, have no genetic
ties at present, and have never had in the past. The confrontational comparison (or typology) has
the advantage over comparative philology of being able to suggest a method, which would be
applicable to all languages, irrespective of their history or possible genetic relationship.
We start with the analysis of the importance of confronting certain grammatical categories
on both the emic and etic levels. Confrontation should not be restricted to just forms, words or
texts. The categorial approach is very important but one should not neglect the concrete historical
changes and those functional peculiarities of the natural human languages, which are being realized
at a particular period. This means that the categorial approach should not be allowed to degenerate
4

into abstract typological theoretization as applied to a particular branch of linguistics. The system of
categories, which is established to serve as the starting point must always be complemented by
scrupulous analysis of their etic functioning as categorial forms. These are mutually opposed and
make categorization possible. Comparison, in the widest sense of the word, is ruled out unless those
carrying it out are convinced that there exists a certain fundamental similarity between the two or
more objects under investigation. If there were no underlying assumptions that all languages have
something in common, the problem of confrontation simply would not exist. The importance of
translations and bilingual dictionaries, most important and well-grounded forms of linguistic
confrontation and the existing problems, are discussed here as well.
Analyzing grammatical categories in English and Romanian on the emic and etic levels, we
have come to the conclusion that linguistic confrontation cannot be performed purely on one of the
morphological categories. Universal or conceptual categories should be used in comparative
studies. Thus, in the case of the category of taxis, we have observed, that in English and Romanian
contextual, lexical and grammatical means, or usually a combination of both lexical and
grammatical means, are used to express anteriority. The latter dominate in both languages, while in
Russian, the lexical element is on the first plane, and the grammatical means are scarcely
represented. A transitional process has been detected in the confronted languages, like in all the
European languages. A description of grammatical forms of categorial forms in the confronted
languages is supplemented by an analysis of other means of expression. The synchronic and
diachronic approaches should be used in order to observe that gender, aspect, mood, voice,
anteriority, etc. are historical categories: they appeared, developed up to a system and now have
already given away (gender) or have begun to give away (perfect forms) their positions as
grammatical categories, or are in a state of metasemiotic transposition (aspect).
Though contrastive analysis in the field of grammatical morphology has been considered as
part of confrontational linguistics for a long time, there is no clear cut distinction between the
confrontation of related and unrelated languages, using the results of comparative philology of
cognate languages in their confrontation with unrelated languages. The confrontation of languages
can be carried out by comparing: a) unrelated languages; b) closely related languages; c) distantly
related languages, and d) also by simultaneous confrontation of related and unrelated languages.
2.Comparative Analysis on the Emic and Etic Levels
2.1.Confrontation of Forms.
Objective reality does not depend on language or speakers. We reflect it in our
consciousness. Reality is biunique: 1) the reality of the world and 2) the reality of the native
language, the joint impression of the things around us and of our mother tongue. It is quite natural
for us to apprehend reality in a way, which is somehow affected by the categories and categorization
of our language. Categorization in grammar is much more complex than in lexicology: 1) it is
compulsory or obligatory, 2) it is much more abstract. The difference between lexicology and
grammar then is as follows: the speaker is free to choose words, to take them or leave them.
Grammatical forms are imposed on the speakers. These are laws, which the speaker is bound to
obey. For confrontation of forms in different languages to get under way, the first step is to try and
understand the specific grammatical categorizations of the languages under consideration. Thus, the
purely grammatical side of the English aspect has been investigated and it has been clear that
confusion of grammar and usage should be avoided. All English verbs including the putandi and
sentiendi ones can quite properly be used in the continuous aspect. On the other hand the lexical
element in expressing aspectual meaning prevails in Romanian. [39, 71-72]
Hyper-grammaticality (hypercorrectness). Abuse of grammar may be of two kinds:
5

1) The speaker turns to some very complex and artificial structures, because he thinks that they are
more literary and will enable him to appear as a highly educated man. This is a kind of hypergrammaticality or hypercorrectness, which we meet especially frequently in documents and in some
varieties of journalese, etc. 2) The formation of complex artificial grammatical forms and structures
may depend on metasemiotic factors, on a desire to achieve a specific stylistic effect. The
phenomenon of hyper-grammaticality first attracted linguists attention in connection with the
extremely interesting paper written by Marcel Cohen. [39, 72] This outstanding linguist had spent
very much time and effort on the normalization of Modern French Grammar. Among the
recommendations he was particularly interested in, the normalization of the forms of the
subjunctive mood stands out. M.Cohen had not only succeeded in formulating those
recommendations, but in also realizing his principles of selection of forms in his famous book
Histoire dun langue: le franais. A good example of hyper-grammatical teaching of grammar is
the case of future perfect forms, which are used very seldom in British English in colloquial speech
and practically not used at all in the American English in everyday speech. The same phenomenon
is observed in Romanian and other languages. Translators and speakers in general should always
pay attention to the changes in the given language and always check all possible rules in practice.
Categories are only the first stage in language learning. The results of scientific abstraction must be
verified by the actual functioning of the system, the researcher always bearing in mind that
language is in a state of constant change. The study of grammar, the attempts to normalize
grammatical usage, the study of the new tendencies and systematic confrontation of these with
those falling into disuse, requires a much more serious scientific generalization on the subject than
has been done so far. This is also important because research of this kind will help in doing away
with groundless abstractions of grammar. It follows then, that the two basic principles are to
understand the basic underlying system, and on this basis to go on with a profound analysis of
English authentic texts and their equivalents in the native language. The only way really to learn
grammar, to find out the real state of affairs concerning this or that morphological category, is to
observe how the different basic theoretical grammatical premises are realized in different languages
and different registers (styles).
2.2.Lexical, Lexical-Grammatical and Grammatical Categories.
Categories are reverberations in the human consciousness of objective reality, a step to the
cognition of the world. The categories of particular sciences are reverberations of certain specific
aspects of objective reality, which belong to the branch of science in question. They are the
broadest and the most general concepts within the scope, arrived at by rational scientific methods. It
is extremely important to understand that categories are secondary, that they are derived from the
facts of language. A theoretical course should not be separated from the normative one. Sometimes
theoretical courses are delivered to students in no way connected with what they are doing at their
lessons when they are studying the language. As a result categories come first as primary entities.
When we talk about categories, we always have to take into consideration the fact that the reality of
human communication is primary, the most important element. We can speak of a lexical category
only if we find identity of stem and the utter impossibility of a simultaneous realization of all
categorial forms of the given opposition. Otherwise stated, in actual enunciations, or utterances,
only one of the two or more categorial forms can be realized. We should also mention the fact that
morphological studies should be initiated with the marked member of any opposition. [39, 73]
2.3.Morphological-Grammatical Categories
The main rules or methods to apply in discovering and describing such categories: 1. A
morphological grammatical category is constituted by the opposition of no less than two categorial
6

forms. Thus, the category of taxis in English is constituted by the opposition of perfect and nonperfect forms, and the category of aspect is constituted by the opposition of continuous and noncontinuous forms, etc. 2.The opposition of no less than two categorial forms is the only possible
realization of a morphological-grammatical category, the only form of its existence. A grammatical
category exists in its categorial forms. 3.The morphological-grammatical categories are historical:
their number and characteristics change in the course of time. Thus, if the Saxon genitive ceased to
exist as an inflectional form, this would destroy not only the categorial form of the possessive case,
but also the grammatical category of case in Modern English as a whole. This would not be an
unexpected outcome of a devolution: the category of case in English has been steadily loosing
ground for about a thousand years. In contrast with the noun, the verb in English tends to become
categorially overdetermined, owing to the steady increase in the number and variety of its
categories. In the course of time it developed the category of aspect (the opposition of continuous/
non-continuous forms), the category of taxis (the opposition of perfect / non-perfect forms), etc. 4.A
morphological grammatical category is confined to the categorial forms by which it is constituted,
i.e. it cannot cover or include all the inflectional forms of a word. When certain properties are
manifested by all the inflectional forms of a word, they constitute a lexical-grammatical category.
This is the case of gender of nouns in Russian, as against gender of adjectives, which is a
grammatical category, constituted by the opposition of the categorial forms of masculine, feminine,
and neuter genders. 5. Every inflectional form expresses at least one categorial form, but it can also
comprise several and thus cater, on the expression plane, for several morphological-grammatical
categories. Morphological grammatical forms can be studied on two levels: 1) the semantic level,
where, for example, the present tense forms express actions which include the moment of speaking,
and 2) the metasemiotic level, where present tense forms are used to denote an action which clearly
does not include the moment of speaking. [39, 73-74]
3.The Lexical-Grammatical Categories and Tertium Comparationis
The concept of lexical-grammatical categories is closely connected with the parts-of-speech
classification, because as parts of speech, words are organized or divided into classes (parts of
speech), each of which combines in it certain lexical and grammatical characteristics. Thus, if we
take the verb, then it is a verb, because it functions syntactically in a certain way, it has a system of
morphological inflections, but it also has got a certain general categorial lexical meaning. A verb is
not only something that has got a set of grammatical categories, but it is also something that
expresses or denotes a certain object of extra-linguistic reality, as a phenomenon, as an action or
state in general. The parts of speech are determined to a greater or less degree. Thus the verb in
English is very well determined by a large number of grammatical categories The noun in its turn is
not so well determined, because the category of case in it depends on the existence of the possessive
case. [39, 75-78]
It was taken for granted that confrontation of two or more languages is always based on
something that is not actually given in the researchers immediate experience. In case of genetically
related languages we simply begin with the common stock of grammatical categories, which can be
regarded as the common heritage of all the languages under consideration. This is the natural
outcome of comparative historical studies (comparative philology) - which has assembled a very
large number of facts and has worked out a system of elaborate and reliable methods. As time went
on, comparative philology, and more widely comparative-historical study of languages, which was
distinct for many decades as the unique and absolute scientific method in linguistics, had gradually
to give way to other methods and approaches. A powerful factor was the growing interest in
linguistic synchrony and the study of natural human languages as a special kind of semiotic system.
The idea of comparing different languages remained as a guiding principle, but since the
7

comparison was now to be synchronic it implied a quest for altogether new sets of features and
peculiarities. For comparative philology these were always thought of as something that was
genetically common, something that gradually diverged under the pressure of a variety of structural
and extra-linguistic factors. Analytical comparison (typology) was, and is still looking for
something to serve for the comparison of languages of totally different families for some kind of
abstract features and peculiarities. To serve as tertium comparationis they must be regarded as
similar, or even identical, in spite of the fact that the languages, which are assumed to share these
properties, have no genetic ties at present and have never had them in the past. The confrontational
comparison has the advantage over comparative philology of being able to suggest a method which
would be applicable to all languages, irrespective of their history or of there being any genetic
relation between them. But analytical comparison, when the languages under consideration are
genetically related, can enable the researcher to understand them very deeply. The analytical
comparison in its original form takes up different component facts, synchronically, without thinking
of genetic community of its total absence. If we compare the category of taxis in English, Romanian
and an unrelated language, the common basis for comparison is the category of taxis (anteriority).
Gradually analytical comparison was performed not only on the etic level as observed in arbitrarily
selected texts, but by using the categorial approach. The categorial approach should not be allowed
to degenerate into abstract typological theoretization as applied to a particular branch of linguistics.
The system of categories, which is established to serve as the starting point must always be
complemented by a scrupulous analysis of their etic functioning as categorial forms. These are
mutually opposed and make categorization possible. [39, 75-78]
A very important factor in analytical comparison is the choice of an etalon language.
Comparing the category of anteriority in English and Romanian we prefer English as an etalon
language, because this category has been widely scientifically described and it can serve as an
excellent starting point for a contrastive analysis of the mentioned categories in both languages.
When we take a global view of linguistic confrontation we see what a variety of different aspects of
language are encompassed in it. It has already been stated that analytical comparison, and more
widely, linguistic confrontation is often assumed to disregard the factor of genetic community or
lack of it. This general principle should now be reconsidered at any rate contrastive studies should
be divided into two parts: on the one hand we have cognate languages (closely and distantly related
languages) and, on the other hand, languages which belong to completely different systems. [39, 78]
4.Metalanguage and Linguistic Confrontation of Verbal Categories
Before comparing grammatical categories, we should give an introduction to the
metalanguage used by different schools and scholars in English. The comparison in this case is
double: first we confront different terminological systems of the existing linguistic schools with an
etalon system in English (the same could be done in the other confronted languages taken
separately). This makes it easier for students to better understand the material on the subject given
by different schools and scholars. Then we should confront the terminological systems of the
analyzed languages. One of the main stumbling blocks in rational grammatical categorization is the
lack of a firmly established relationship between the actual phenomena and their names. The
metalanguage of morphological grammatical categories cannot be taken for granted and
metalinguistic work cannot be regarded as merely taking an inventory of terms. It is a question of
discovering whether there is any real difference in the various approaches and theories, or whether
it is purely metalinguistic difference, mere conventions on the metalinguistic level. Often the
researcher fails to keep clearly apart the object of analysis and the metalanguage - the words and
expressions used when people talk about the object language. We very often find a large number of
different metalinguistic expressions and are faced with a peculiar situation: we must compare those
8

different systems and try to understand why the different metalinguistic expressions were
introduced. Very often there is a discrepancy not only in the metalinguistic expressions used to
denote certain more specific or particular categories, but also in the naming or description of the
most general concepts themselves. If we compare A.I.Smirnitskys metalanguage, which was
further developed by O.Akhmanova in her Dictionary of Linguistic Terms, with the well known
metalinguistic system proposed by Martin Joos, we find that what Smirnitsky call morphological
grammatical category, Joos refers to as dimensions of categorization reserving the name
category for what Smirnitsky calls categorial form. [39, 80-81]
Interesting results from the
point of view of metalanguage can also be obtained by looking at the existing inventories of
metalinguistic expressions used to denote the same actual or objective facts. When we take the
categories of tense, aspect and anteriority, we find out that the same idea, or the same content, is
expressed by different metalinguistic means. A case in point is the term continuous aspect named by
some authors as durative, progressive, imperfective, imperfect, dynamic, etc. (11 other terms have
been registered). The terms continuous, durative, progressive aspect are so close to each other in
meaning that they may be regarded simply as triplets. Here are some more groups of doublets,
triplets, n-plets within the category of taxis or anteriority (more terms exist here as well): past
perfect: anterior past, antepreterite, antepreterit, before past tense, pluperfect, prepast tense;
present perfect: anterior present, before present tense, perfect, pre-present tense; future perfect:
ante-future tense, anterior future, before future(tense), pre-future tense. Every one of the
accumulation of terms is used to denote exactly the same thing. Very often it is not merely a
question of choosing between this or that particular term, but the question of approach or attitude to
categorization. Let us take the category of tense, which is constituted by the opposition of three
categorial forms: present, past and future. These terms are sometimes described by much longer and
much more ponderous terms. Thus, the term present (past and future) indefinite is sometimes
substituted by: simple present (past and future, ordinary present (past and future), static present
(past, future), present (past and future) of the common aspect, present (past and future) progressive
or non-perfect, etc. Each of the grammatical forms, which are in English used to denote or express
the respective categorial forms of tense, may also be viewed as negative or zero expressions of
categorial forms which constitute different grammatical categories. Thus, if the categorial forms of
present, past and future tense, expressed by the particular set of grammatical forms, are contrasted
with the grammatical forms, functioning in English as grammatical expression for aspect and
anteriority. There can be no objection, in principle, to stating every time that what we are dealing
with in the case of grammatical form like I work, I worked, I shall work are simple or ordinary
forms. They express the non-continuous or non-progressive aspect and are, besides, non-perfect (in
the sense that they express simultaneity, and not anteriority). [39, 81-82]
No categorization is attainable and no consistent metalanguage can be worked out, unless a
very clear distinction is made between grammatical forms and categorial forms as distinct form
categories. One and the same grammatical form may serve as an expression plane for different
categorial forms, the opposition of which constitutes the respective categories. Analyzing the great
mass of different metalinguistic expressions, such as: generic aspect, inclusive aspect, indefinite
aspect, non-durative aspect, non-progressive aspect or anterior present, anterior past, anterior
future, or before present tense, before past tense, before future tense, etc., we must find an answer to
the following question. Is this accumulation of terms used to denote the same object, or are all kinds
of names and words used to indicate the fact that one and the same grammatical form may carry
more than one or possibly even several categorial forms? Thus, the form of the word works is
present tense, non-continuous aspect, indicative mood, third person, non-perfect; or worked, which
again is a grammatical form which like all forms of the verb expresses the past or preterit tense, the
non-perfect or non-anteriority, the indicative mood and so on. The over complex metalinguistic
9

systems lead to an accumulation of terms and not to a clear and non-contradictory description of all
the categorial forms, carried by the given grammatical form. These terms are particularly
reprehensible when they seek to denote certain grammatical meanings, such as the notional category
of perfective, indefinite, generic, general, etc. aspect. At first sight there is no harm in replacing the
term continuous/non continuous aspect in English by perfective vs. imperfective. But perfective is
not so easy to distinguish from the lexeme perfect. It follows that if the term perfective is used to
indicate a categorial form of aspect, while perfect is retained to denote the categorial form of
anteriority, then obviously the system is much less convincing than the opposition of
continuous/non-continuous, which so clearly explains what is actually opposed. There is a
difference between the aspectual system of Russian and other Slavic languages, on the one hand,
and the aspectual system of English, on the other. The problem of plurality of names cannot be
simply dismissed as something that is purely conventional. It is important to decide whether we deal
with a purely metalinguistic fact, or whether the difference resides in deeper systemic relationships.
Thus, if we compare the terms continuous and durative aspect, we could regard this as a purely
metalinguistic question, because both terms are synonymous. We could assume that if the word
aspect is retained in both cases, then what we describe as the categorial form of the continuous
aspect is called the continuous tense. Here we shall have to explain that calling it a continuous tense
would involve an altogether different acceptation of the term tense. It would no longer be a question
of what is meant by the term continuous tense, it would be a matter of specifying what is
understood by tense. Let's take the opposition of perfect aspect vs. progressive aspect as used by
some linguists, based on the categorial meaning of finished vs. unfinished action. As soon as we
come to examples like He had been reading his book for two hours before I came back. We cannot
have two aspectual forms expressed simultaneously by the same form (had been reading - to
express a finished and an unfinished action simultaneously). Perfect here expresses grammatical
anteriority supported and intensified by the lexical anteriority marker before. Anteriority is the main
meaning of all the perfect forms. A finished action can be expressed both by some perfect and nonperfect forms: I have written a letter and I wrote a letter to him. In both these cases we have the
same result. Confronting terminological systems of languages we come across unusual discrepancies. We discover that the Romanian gerunziul does not correspond to the English gerund. It
regularly corresponds to the English present participle. The present participle in Romanian got out
of usage and its function was taken over by gerunziul. After analyzing different categorial systems
and interpretations in English and Romanian we choose the most widely used ones for
confrontation. When confronting the category of mood we usually choose a system of 6 categorial
forms in English to compare with an identical number of moods in Romanian: Indicative,
Imperative, Subjunctive I, Subjunctive II and Suppositional and in Romanian: Indicativul,
Imperativul, Conditionalual, Optativul (Subjunctivul II), conjunctivul, Prezumptivul (or
Suppositional). A closer inspection of these modal systems display considerable discrepancies.
Thus, in Romanian Conditionalul and Optativul (Subjuncitve II) are expressed by completely
homonymous forms and in the majority of grammar books and manuals they are given as one
categorial form: condiionalul or condiional-optative. n "Gramatica limbii romne" the conditional
and optative are analysed but still as part of one categorial form, the terms are used differently from
those in English: condionalul in this system corresponds to the English Subjunctive II and optativul
to the English Conditional. Most surprising is the fact that condiionalul and optativul may be
expressed in Romanian by several grammatical forms, which are polyfunctional and formally
belong to different moods. Thus for example, the sentence "If I had had time I would have come to
help you yesterday" - Dac aveam timp, veneam s te ajut ieri; (imperfectul modal in both cases);
Dac a fi avut timp a fi venit s te ajut ieri; (optative, conditional); S fi avut timp a fi venit (or
veneam) s te ajut ieri (conjunctivul in the secondary clause). We think the category of mood in
10

modern Romanian needs to be reinterpreted, because the present classifications are somewhat
confusing. Thus, for example, if we take conjunctivul - the criterion in singling it out as a separate
mood serves the verbal form with the particle "s". A plurality of meanings, registered by us,
demonstrate that this grammatical form is polyfunctional. Here are some meanings it can express:
1) Subjunctive I (also named Old Subjunctive) - Long live democracy! S traiasc democraia! I
insist that he come. Eu insist ca el s vin. It is necessary that he be (come) here in time. E necesar
ca el s vin aici la timp. 2) Subjunctive II -If I were you. S fiu n locul dumitale... If I had had
time yesterday... S fi avut timp ieri... 3) Regularly substituting the infinitive in Romanian: They
promised to take him home. Ei au promis s-l duc acas. 4) Used in different combinations like:
Let's sit and talk. Sa edem i s vorbim. He will come in time. El are s vin la timp (future tense
indicative mood); To believe me capable of something like that! S m cread capabil de aa ceva!
5) After modal verbs: Even a child could understand. i un copil putea s neleag. 6) Future tense
- What shall I do? Ce s fac? 7) To express supposition, including the meanings of suppositional
mood: (supposition, necessity, order, command, insistence ). Might he have been here? S fi fost el
aici? Could I have lost it on my way home? S-l fi pierdut n drum spre cas? I insist (order) that
he should be present. Eu insist (ordon) ca el s fie prezent. It is necessary that he should be here. E
necesar ca el s fie aici. [39, 82-85]
5. Polysemy, Synonymy, Homonymy, Redundancy
and Transposition of Verbal Categorial and Grammatical Forms
Grammatical and categorical forms can be polysemantic, synonymous, homonymous and
even antonymous. The categories of mood in modern Romanian and English could be reinterpreted,
because their present classifications are somewhat confusing. In the case of Romanian prezumtivul
we have almost a complete transposition of future continuous and future perfect (both forms are
extremely rarely used to express future actions in the indicative) into a relatively new mood
"prezumtivul". Thus for example: 1) Vei fi din ora! You should come from the city! Probably you
come from the city! 2) Vei fi venit cu trenul. You must have come by train. I suppose you have come
by train. 3) Ar fi fiind asta dorina prinesei? Could this be the wish (desire) of the princess?
Partially transposed are the forms of simple future, conjunctive continuous and non-continuous,
conditional, optative continuous and non-continuous forms.[6, 85-91] In case of the Romanian
conjunctive the criterion in singling it out, as a separate mood, serves the verbal form with the
particle "s". A multitude of contextual sub-meanings demonstrate that this grammatical form is
polyfunctional and can be used in the meanings of the English indicative, subjunctive 1, subjunctive
II, suppositional, infinitive in both perfect and non-perfect forms. Subjunctive I (Old Subjunctive)
in the first and second meanings usually corresponds to forms of conjunctivul in Romanian: Long
live democracy! S traiasc democraia! I insist that he come. Eu insist ca el s vin. It is
necessary that he be (come) here in time. E necesar ca el s fie (vin) aici la timp. Subjunctive I in
the second meaning has a stylistic synonym - Suppositional mood: I insist that everybody should
come in time! Insist ca toi s vin la timp! It is necessary that he should be (come) here in time. E
necesar ca el s fie (vin) aici la timp. In both cases the use of the corresponding categorical forms
is lexically conditioned by modal words accompanying the verbs. Thus, we can speak here of
lexical-grammatical categorial meanings of mood. Subjunctive II has three synonymous equivalents
in Romanian: If I had had time yesterday I should have come to help you yesterday. S fi avut
(=dac a fi avut/dac aveam) timp ieri a fi venit (veneam) s te ajut ieri. Thus, there are three
forms in Romanian corresponding to the English Subjunctive II or Optative Mood: optativul,
conjunctivul and imperfectul modal, which in this case are perfect synonyms. In the main clause

11

the Conditional mood corresponds in the confronted language to Condiionalul and imperfectul
modal. [39, 92-100] Here we should also mention the fact that in some grammar books the
Romanian Condiionalul and Optative are considered to form one categorical form of mood,
probably because their forms coincide. In reality here we have two different homonymous
categorical forms with their specific meanings.
Conjunctivul regularly substitutes the infinitive in the Romanian colloquial language: They
promised to take him home. Ei au promis s-l duc acas. He must have come in time. El trebuie
s fi venit la timp. Even a child could understand, i un copil putea s neleag. To believe me
capable of something like that! S m cread capabil de aa ceva! An interesting phenomenon has
been observed in this case. During the last 18 years most people improved their native literary
language and now we can observe the infinitive being used more often, to a certain extent, replacing
conjunctivul not only in the literary publications, official speeches, but also in everyday activity
conversations. Conjunctivul is used to express the future tense in colloquial speech: What shall I
do? Ce s fac? He will come in time. El are s vin la timp. In the second example we have a
future form used in colloquial speech, synonymous to El va veni la timp, corresponding to the
literary style. Conjunctivul is also used to express lexical and grammatical supposition, necessity,
order, command, insistence: Might he have been here? S fi fost el aici? He might have been there.
El ar fi putut s fi fost acolo. Have I lost it on my way home? S-l fi pierdut n drum spre cas? I
insist (order) that he should be present. Eu insist (ordon) ca el s fie prezent. It is necessary that he
should be here. E necesar ca el s fie aici. Conjunctivul can also be used to express the imperative
and present indefinite indicative forms: Leave the town immediately! S pleci (pleac) din ora
imediat! Dont you worry, mother! S nu te neliniteti, mam! Do not doubt! S nu te ndoieti!
Let's sit and talk. S edem i s vorbim. There is no doubt that conjunctivul should not be
considered to be a grammatical form expressing one categorial mood form. It is just a grammatical
form used to express quite a number of categorial forms.
Most surprising is the fact we have mentioned above, that condiionalul and optativul can be
expressed in Romanian by several synonymous grammatical forms, which are polyfunctional and
formally belong to different moods: If I had had time I (should) would have come to help you
yesterday - Dac aveam timp, veneam s te ajut ieri; (imperfectul modal in both cases); Dac a fi
avut timp a fi venit s te ajut ieri; (optative, conditional); S fi avut timp a fi venit (or veneam) s
te ajut ieri (conjunctivul in the secondary clause). Had had time here expresses an anterior unreal
action in the future, past and to a present moment, and in most cases is homonymous to a similar
form in the indicative mood, used to express anteriority in the past and future in the past (in clauses
of time and condition). [6, 92-100] Past conditional (perfect form) has several homonymous forms:
suppositional mood (in the first person), future perfect in the past indicative mood, the modals
should and would plus perfect infinitive. Thus, for example: He would have come, but he had
no time; I should have read the book but I could not find it; I should have come earlier; He
promised that he would have come before the beginning of the meeting.
Analyzing the perfect forms of the oblique mood forms we find out that in some cases they
do not really express an anterior action. Thus, if we take the example: He said he would have come
earlier yesterday if he had known; El a spus c ar fi venit (venea) mai devreme ieri, dac ar fi tiut
(s fi tiut, dac tia). In order to check this we transform the example into the indicative mood
changing the category of affirmation/negation; He did not come yesterday because he did not know.
Here we have an action in the past not connected with the present moment. As soon as the action is
related to the present moment it acquires an anteriority meaning: If she had worked hard at her
lessons this month she would have no problems at the exam. Dac ea ar fi lucrat (lucra, s fi

12

lucrat) la lecii pe parcursul lunii acestea n-ar avea probleme la examen. The perfect form in the
secondary clause expresses an anterior action to the present moment and corresponds to a present
perfect form in the indicative mood: She has not worked hard at her lessons this month and now
she has problems at the exams. In case of actions corresponding to future perfect, past perfect the
oblique moods forms express an anteriority meaning. The past perfect form in the indicative mood
is already polysemantic as it is used to express an anterior action to another action or moment on the
axis of time, and it also can express an anterior action in the future from a moment in the past in
clauses of time and condition. In the oblique mood forms the past perfect form can express
anteriority to moments in the past, present and future, including the future in the past. It becomes
homonymous in the case when it expresses and action in the past not connected with the present
moment and not anterior to any moment or action in a given context.
The forms of prezumtiv in Romanian represent an interesting case like that of conjunctivul.
At a closer inspection we discover that by the forms of present prezumtiv Continuous forms are
practically used, forms which were actively used in the indicative mood in earlier Romanian. Some
examples taken from the History of Moldovan Grammar, published by prof. V.Marin (Chisinau,
1970), quoting sources of XVII-XIX centuries [23] could prove the fact that in reality we have
various categorial forms of mood in the continuous aspect. Here are some examples in the
indicative continuous forms: Era ca oile rtcindu Au fost avndu prieteug mare cu Ptru Vod.
[23,36,123] tefan Vod Tocmai cnd prerea de ru l ajunsese... erau trecnd printr-o pdure
mare i deas.; Au fost dormind la bisearica lui svetin Benedict. [23, 83] i era mergndu i
apropiindu-m ctre Damascu, ntru ameadz... [23,90] martorului tu nsumi era stndu
[39,91] Analyzing these examples we have no hesitation in stating the fact that the constructions of
the auxiliary verb a fi + gerunziul express the grammatical continuous aspect meaning like in
English, Spanish, Portuguese and Italian. The durative action here produces a stronger metasemiotic
effect on the reader or listener than the imperfect. In Modern Romanian extended or periphrastic
forms are used only in the oblique moods in colloquial speech: Unde-i Petru? Va (o) fi lucrnd
n livad. -S fie el lucrnd n livad? De ar fi el lucrnd n livad! [39, 112] Metasemiotic
transposition is found in both English and Romanian. Thus, the category of aspect can be
metasemiotically used not in its usual way, but in a way that will provide additional overtones:
expressive, evaluative, emotional, modal, etc. For example: "He is leaving tomorrow". "Are you
coming on Sunday?" In these two forms the aspectual and tense categorial meanings are used to
express a stylistic connotation, the future action being expressed purely lexically (tomorrow, on
Sunday). In Romance languages aspectual meanings are most often expressed by the perfective and
imperfective opposition. But for metasemiotic purposes, for categorial intensification, most often
they use durative forms. The continuous forms and various constructions in Romanian, Spanish,
Italian and Portuguese are subservient to the lexical and lexical-grammatical aspectual means and
are usually used in emotional speech for expressivity and emphasis in an action developing in time,
intensified by the interaction with lexical and prosodic means. Thus, in the Spanish expressive
discourse the continuous forms are often preferred: Estoy hablando. Juan est comiendo. Mara est
escribiendo una carta. Los pasajeros estarn llegando a su destino. Ayer estuve repasando la
gramtica. Las gotas de agua estaban cayendo pausadamente. Hemos estado nadando tres horas.
Maana estar trabajando todo el da en la biblioteca. [54] Identical constructions exist in
Italian: Marcovaldo stava portando a spasso la famiglia. Pietro sta leggendo un libro. [20]
The continuous forms are usually accompanied by lexical supporters or intensifiers like todo el dia
the whole day through, toat ziua and interacting with the lexical durative meanings of the verbs.
In Romanian these examples are usually rendered by means of imperfectul, constructions with

13

gerunziu or contextual and lexical durative means. The Portuguese construction estar + gerundio
is also the equivalent of the English continuous form: Eu estou estudando na Universidade.
Ele estava lendo quando ela me chamou. Amanha estaremos preparando toda a
documentacao. [68] In Spanish, Italian and Portuguese there exist several constructions with gerundio
expressing aspectual duration. Thus, the Portuguese construction ficar + gerundio expresses a
progressive action and is translated into English by means of continuous aspect form s: Fico
olhando para retrato. The construction andar a + infinitive: A Teresa anda falando da
mudanca de casa. [68] What is important to mention is the fact that in Portugal the construction
estar + gerundio can be substituted by the construction estar a +infinitive preserving the durative
meaning: Pedro esta a ler novo livro. The same happens with the construction ficar +
gerundio, where gerundio is substituted by the infinitive: Fico estudar 3 horas. The
construction continuar (seguir, prosseguir) + gerundio express a continuous action as well: Ele
continua lendo o jornal. The construction continuar a + infinitive practically expresses the same
type of continuous action: Ele continua a ler jornal. [68] Exactly the same we have in
English: He continues reading the journal can be easily changed into He continues to read . The
construction with the non-continuous infinitive has a weaker aspectual grammatical meaning,
the lexical durative meaning of continue taking over the categorial function.
The imperfect forms may be also used stylistically in case suprasyntactic metasemiotic
means are used. The continuous/non-continuous binary opposition in English, Spanish, Portuguese,
Italian (and partially in Romanian) are in a process of transposition from a pure grammatical
aspectual category into a stylistic one. In English this grammatical opposition is well represented in
all the functional styles of the language and is regularly used for stylistic purposes in emotionally
coloured expressive and emphatic speech.
The categorial forms of present tense continuous or non-continuous aspect could also serve
as an example of metasemiotic transposition. In some text books we usually find an explanation that
the present tense can be used to express past and future actions. What we really have is a
metasemiotic use of present tense forms to describe a past or future action, for certain emotionalexpressive or evaluative purposes, to express vivacity and dynamism of an action, as if deployed in
the speaker's mind or in front of his eyes. In this case the categorial forms of past and future are
expressed purely lexically or contextually. Thus, for example: Yesterday I was reading in the
lounge. Suddenly Ann comes in, sits on the sofa and starts to cry. Next week I am leaving (leave) for
Paris. The verbs expressing mental perception and feeling can be metasemiotically used in the
continuous aspect; the same is true in the case of the usage of progressive forms with adverbs like
always, often, seldom, generally, constantly, permanently, etc. Another case of metasemiotic
transposition can serve the use of conditional mood forms to express: additionally to its main
meaning of an unreal action the fulfillment of which depends on an unreal condition, this categorial
is regularly used to express an action, which is not contrary to reality and expresses politeness,
interest, etc. For example: I should eat an apple if I had any. A mnca un mr, dac a avea.
(unreal condition); Look! You have apples! I should like to eat one! Privete! Avei mere! Eu a
mnca unul! (indirect polite request); Could I help You? Could you help me? A putea s v ajut?
(polite offer of help) Ai putea s m ajutai? (polite request).
One more interesting phenomenon is the gradual transition of some grammatical categories
into lexical-grammatical or purely lexical ones. The category of gender in English and the category
of anteriority (taxis) in Russian can serve as an example of a complete transition. Taxis in English,
Romanian and other European languages are in the process of a similar transition. Perfect forms in
modern English and Romanian are variously interpreted, as expressing anteriority, a complete

14

action, a result, as a tense form, time relation. But lately more and more linguists consider
anteriority to be the main categorlal meaning of finite and non-finite perfect forms (E.Benveniste,
A.Smirnitsky, R.Allen, H.Palmer, etc.). Thus, according to Smirnitsky, "perfectivity" is the
realization of a certain process before a certain moment or action in the movement of time, while
the meaning of the past is merely the realization of the process before the moment of speaking.[6,
145-161] This difference is most clearly observed when we compare the perfect future with the
usual past indefinite, as in the examples: He will have finished reading the book by 10 o'clock. El va
fi terminat (va termina) de citit cartea pe la ora zece and He finished to read the book. El a
terminat de citit cartea. The meaning of past is clearly expressed in both cases, but in the former
the past is referred to a certain moment, which is conceived with respect to future, while with past
indefinite it is simply the relationship between the action and the moment of speaking. Thus,
anteriority or perfectivity is the meaning of an action, which precedes another action or moment on
the time axis. The category of anteriority historically appeared in the result of transposition, when it
was necessary to intensify the existing lexical and contextual means by grammatical ones. Now we
have a reverse process but on a different level. At the moment the means of expressing future
anteriority in both languages slightly differ. English has preserved the Latin system of expressing
future actions as seen from a moment in the past. In Romanian it is very rarely used. Now let's take
some examples: 1.Future from the present moment: I shall have read the text by six o'clock (by the
time you come home. Eu voi fi citit textul ctre ora ase (pna cnd te vei ntoarce acas). In both
languages future anteriority is expressed here both grammatically and lexically. The usual tendency
in a language is to simplify redundant forms. Thus, the examples, given above, are naturally
simplified in both languages, and anteriority can be expressed only lexically or contextually: I shall
(will) finish reading the text by six o'clock (by the time you come home). Eu voi termina de citit
textul ctre ora ase (pn cnd te vei ntoarce acas). Present perfect is used to express future
anteriority in clauses of time and condition (substituting future perfect), while perfectul compus in
Romanian can be used to express future anteriority only in case of stylistic (metasemiotic)
transposition. Past perfect is used in clauses of time and condition to express future anteriority from
a moment in the past. In past perfect the category of taxis is not as clearly manifested as in future
perfect. But here, too, although past indefinite (or simple past) and past perfect are both past tense
forms, the difference between them is very clearly expressed. The past tense of the perfect form,
although refers to the past, differs clearly enough from past indefinite in having a second and
different meaning of past anteriority. In the American spoken English there is a tendency of
rapprochment of present perfect in the second meaning and past indefinite and the former is often
substituted by the latter: Did you ever go to Paris? Did he arrive yet? He never read this book. In
the British Standard English present perfect continues to differ regularly from past indefinite in all
the meanings. We would like to draw your attention to the fact that it is not enough to state the
existence of the category of anteriority or any other categorial system in English and Romanian.
Language is permanently changing and all abstract linguistic systems should be checked in practice
(texts, speech), otherwise we could find ourselves "abusing grammar". Confrontation of
metalanguistic systems and grammatical forms disclosed phenomena of polysemy, homonymy and
synonymy. Categorial transposition (stylistic and modal, etc.) is found in both languages. There is a
tendency of regulation and simplification of categorial and redundant grammatical forms. Thus,
grammatical anteriority can be regarded as a pedanticism, for in situations of ordinary everyday
speech it is very easy to do without it, and express the same categorial meaning lexically or
contextually. There is a clear-cut tendency of transition of some grammatical categories to lexicogrammatical or lexical categorial means of expression.

15

6.The English Verbal Categories

The verb is a part of speech expresses actions or states. The verb forms can fall under two
main divisions: finite and non-finite. The finite forms of the verb express a number of categorial
forms: tense, anteriority taxis, aspect, mood, number, person, voice, etc. These categories are
expressed both by analytically (I have written, I shall write) and synthetically (I write, I wrote). The
non-finite forms (infinitive, gerund, present participle and past participle) as part of the category of
representation express the categorial forms of anteriority, aspect and voice. The conjugation of the
English verb is based on the following forms: the infinitive (or the present tense stem), the past
indefinite form, past participle and present participle.
The verbs can be divided into notional, semi-auxiliary and auxiliary. A notional verb possesses an
independent meaning and is used as a verbal predicate, expresses an action or state of the doer of
the action denoted by the subject: I have written a letter. Ann is reading a book.
A semi-auxiliary verb has no independent function in a given sentence and is used as part of the
verbal or nominal predicate. Its lexical element is expressed by the second element of the predicate
(verb, noun, adjective), the grammatical categorial meaning of tense, mood, person, number is
expressed by the semi-auxiliary in a finite form. It may be used as a link verb in compound nominal
predicates (He was a very good teacher); as part of a compound verbal predicate expressing
modality (supposition, assurance, ability, obligation, necessity, etc.) and aspectual meanings (the
beginning, the end, duration, repetition of an action). I can type very well. You should come in time.
You must have lost the key on the way home. He began to work early in the morning. He continued
to think for a while. An auxiliary verb has only a purely grammatical meaning and is used to form
analytical structures. The following auxiliaries are singled out: Shall, will (should, would) to form
future (and future-in-the past) forms. I shall come later. He will arrive later. He said he would do
the work on Sunday. To have as an auxiliary is used in forms both finite and non-finite: How nice of
you to have come! Having read the book he returned it to me. He had lived in a village before
moving to London. To be is used in continuous and passive voice forms: He is writing a dictation.
The dictation is being written by him. The dictation has been written by him. The letter will be
written by Ann. Should, would. As an auxiliary should is used to form the suppositional (I insist
that he should come in time) and conditional in the first person (I should go to the country if the
weather were fine). Would is traditionally used in the second and third persons of conditional mood,
but it is not unusual to be found in the first person as well (He would have come if he had finished
his work earlier. I would have come if I had not been so busy. You would have met Bill yesterday if
you had come to see us.). To do is used in the negative and interrogative forms of present and past
indefinite, imperative and also in the emphatic forms with do (He does not work at the office. He
did not know where she was. Dont come too late! Do come in time!) I shall have done my work by
next Monday, Ill go away on holiday on Tuesday. [39, 101-102]
7.The Category of Mood
The category of mood is a grammatical morphological category, which expresses the
relationship between what is being said and reality. While confronting the category of mood in
English and Romanian we come across certain differences in its interpretation. A.I.Smirnitsky 56
explains this phenomenon by the fact that different linguists do not mean the same when they speak
of mood or modality. When they classify the forms of this category they often pay attention either
to the form or to content. They do not always take into consideration such phenomena as polysemy,
homonymy, synonymy; grammatical, lexical-grammatical , lexical, prosodic means of expressing
the corresponding categorial form of mood. That is why in various publications we come across a
16

multitude of terms to name the category of mood: mood, assertion, actual assertion, relative
assertion, aspect of mood, factual- theoretical-hypothetical mood, fact mood (indicative), the mood
of fact, declarative mood, thought-mood, imaginative mood, contrary-to-fact mood, inflectional
mood, etc. The number of categorial forms in different grammar books is from 2 to 16. As far as the
grammatical category of mood is concerned the most acceptable system is the one put forward by
A.Smirnitsky and his school and accepted by the majority of linguists: indicative, imperative,
subjunctive I, subjunctive II, conditional and suppositional. More complicated systems usually
include grammatical, lexical and lexical-grammatical modality. As a good example of the case
could serve Barbara Strangs system: mood of determination (will), mood of resolution (shall),
permissive (may), concessive (might), potential (can), compulsive (must), conditional (would),
determinative-conditional (could). Sometimes in the mood system such form as the infinitive, the
participle, the gerund, etc. are included. More compact systems of two or three categorial forms
(indicative, imperative, subjunctive) usually combine under one term several categorial and
grammatical meanings. Thus the term subjunctive in some grammar books embrace the forms of
subjunctive I (Long live the queen!), subjunctive II (If I were you; If I had had time yesterday I
would have come), suppositional (I insist that he should be present at the conference), which
express completely different modal meanings. In the majority of Romanian grammar books we find
a system of five categorial forms of mood: indicative, potential, imperative, conjunctive,
condiional-optative. In some manuals the infinitive, the gerunziul, the participle and supinul are
added. Difficulties appear when we analyze the forms of potential, conjunctive and condiionaloptative. Here grammatical polysemy grows into homonymy. Thus, the forms of present potential
(voi fi cntnd, s fi cntnd, ar fi cntnd, a fi cntnd, etc..) practically can express modal
meanings of subjunctive II, conditional, indicative, etc. Examples: 1) Se spune, c el ar fi avnd
multe lucruri interesante (They say that he is having /may have/ a lot of interesting things); 2)
Dac el ar fi avnd aceast carte, l-a ruga s mi-o dea (If he were having this book I should ask
him to give it to me); 3) Unde-i Petru? - Va (O) fi lucrnd n grdin. S fie el lucrnd? De ar fi el
lucrnd! (Where is Peter? He might be working in the garden. - Could he be working? If he were
working!
Only the forms of present conjunctive turned out to express about 17 meanings: the infinitive,
indicative, imperative, subjunctive I, subjunctive II, etc. Lets take some examples and compare
them with their translations in English: The form with se + the verb form is actively replacing the
infinitive in Romanian (especially in the spoken language): Furtuna se npustise cu atta furie,
nct prea c vrea s sfrme insula n ndri, s o mistuie n flcri, s inunde copacii, s o
mture de pe faa pmntului (The storm culminated in one matchless effort that seemed likely to
tear the island to pieces, burn it up, drown it to the treetops, blow it away, and deafen every
creature in it, all at on and the same moment). (M.Twain) The conjunctive -infinitive can be used
without the particle s like the English infinitive without the particle to. S + verb form can
be used to express a number of categorial form meanings: 1) Indicative and imperative meanings:
S nu ai nici o grij, mam! (Dont you worry, mother!) S nu te ndoieti! (Dont doubt it!) O s-l
ntrebm. (We shall ask him.) S-l ntrebm. (Lets ask him.) 2) Subjunctive I: S triasc pacea n
toat lumea! (Long live peace all over the world!); El a ordonat ca el s plece. (He ordered that he
go.) Subjunctive II: Noi am fi fost bucuroi s ne fi ntrebat. (We should have been glad if you had
asked us.) S ne fi spus am fi venit. (If you had told us we would have come.)
When we compare the English conditional and subjunctive II with the Romanian forms of
condiional-optative or better to say, with conditional and optative we find a complete categorial
coincidence. The two grammatical forms of the above mentioned categorial forms in Romanian are
homonymous, thats why in grammar books they are usually treated as one categorial form, in spite
of the fact that they really express different meanings. Lets give some examples: 1) If you had been
17

here you would had helped us. Dac ai fi fost aici ne-ai fi ajutat. 2) If you were here you would help
us. Dac ai fi aici ne-ai ajuta. 3. If I had started last week I sould have got there in time. Dac a fi
plecat sptmna trecut a fi ajuns acolo la timp.
Comparing the systems of moods in English and Romanian we come to the conclusion that
there is much in common between the two. The same conceptual categorial forms of mood in
English are expressed in Romanian by corresponding forms. Parallel forms sometimes are used to
express the same modal meaning, like in the case of conditional and subjunctive II, which
correspond to the Romanian condiional and optative, and may also correspond to imperfectul
modal, conjunctive and potential. Thus, the following English example can be rendered by means of
different forms, which possess in the given context the same categorial meaning: I should have
gone to the meeting if you had told me. Eu m-a fi dus la adunare dac mi-ai fi spus. Eu m duceam
la adunare dac mi-ai fi spus. Eu m-a fi dus la adunare dac -mi spuneai. Eu m duceam la
adunare dac -mi spuneai. Eu m duceam la adunare s-mi fi spus. Changing the category of
affirmation-negation we express the above given by means of indicative mood but some
metasemiotic content is lost: I did not go to the meeting because you did (had not told) not tell me,
Eu nu m-am dus la adunare pentru c nu mi-ai spus. The modal imperfect in Romanian is naturally
used to express aspectual and modal meanings because of the rare use of the periphrastic aspectual
forms in the language. The conditional mood forms both in English and Romanian are used to
express politeness (the utterance in this case is emotionally coloured): Would you like to help me?
N-ai vrea s m ajutai? I should like to ask you something. A vrea s v ntreb (rog) ceva. The
above- mentioned modal meanings are very rarely expressed purely grammatically. Lexical and
lexical-grammatical means of expressing modality are further discussed. A number of modal forms
considered to be purely grammatical, in fact are lexical or lexical-grammatical. Thus in such
examples like: I wish I were a student. I insist that he (should) be present. I demand that he (should)
come in time. I could do the work if I could come earlier - the grammatical meaning of oblique
mood is depending on modal words like wish, insist, demand, could in the above given example
expresses parallel modal meanings: 1) lexical, and 2) grammatical (conditional and subjunctive).
Modal verbs and modal words in general can express modal meanings purely lexically (see the
examples given above) or in combination with grammatical forms (lexical-grammatically). Thus in
the example I wish I were a student the modally colored word wish helps to intensify the
general grammatical modal meaning by using the form in the secondary clause in the subjunctive II
mood. Subjunctive II can express unreal condition, wish, supposition, desire, unreal preference or
comparison, etc. and is usually used after such lexical units: wish, suppose, if, as if, as though,
though, that, so that, lest, for fear, before, ere, however, whatever, till, until, save, saving, in case,
unless, even if, even though, whichever, whoever, it is time, it is high time, supposing, whether, etc.
For example: If I were you I should stay here; Oh, that the storm were over! He treats me as if (as
though) I were a little child. Here he lives happier than if he lived in the country. Even though he
had come in time he would not have managed to talk to him. Even if he were here you would not be
allowed to see him. It is (high) time you read this book. Supposing you had had enough time
yesterday would you have managed to finish the job? Most of the above mentioned modal words
influence the modality of verbs used in conditional as well as subjunctive II in complex sentences (I
should help you if I had time; I should have helped you if I had had time).
Subjunctive I and Suppositional are usually used after modal words and the modality meaning
corresponds to the given modal word. Subjunctive I (also named Old Subjunctive) is falling in
disuse. To a certain extent it is still used in American English. In British English Subjunctive I is
used in the formal written language in various types of official documents (law, press, parliamentary
activity, science and technology, etc,), in poetry and literary prose, in stable expressions (be it so, so
be it, if need be, be that as it may, be it said, etc. ), in protests, swearing, cursing, etc. Subjunctive I
18

has 2 meanings. In the first meaning it expresses an optative meaning (a wish, a desire) which is not
contrary to reality (May he live a hundred years! Let success attend you! Long live the queen!)
May, let express modality here and in combination with the main verb they express an optative
meaning. Prosodic elements are also important in intensifying the modal meaning, in the last
example it is prevailing. The second general meaning of Subjunctive I is synonymous with
Suppositional mood and is expressing a variety of submeanings in dependence of de modal word
accompanying the main verb (let, may, wish, to request, to be /im/possible, to be agreed, to order, to
suppose, to command, to be necessary, to fear, to be feared, to suggest, to insist, to propose, to
arrange, to demand, to pass a resolution, to give orders, request, suggestion, to grow terrified, to be
afraid, adverbial clauses of purpose introduced by lest, though, although, whatever, whoever,
however, etc.). For example: Should you care for a full explanation of the action, you may call any
day. Though he (should) make every effort, he cannot succeed. However hard it (should) rain, we
shall have to go. Whatever he (should) say, I will not change my mind. We shall start early lest we
(should) be late. They grew terrified lest some evil should have befallen on him. A resolution was
passed that everybody (should) take part in the work. Orders were given that we (should) start
work. We arranged that we (should) meet on Sunday. He proposed that they (should) start. I
demand that he (should) come at once. We insisted that he (should be present. It is requested that
all (should) be ready by tomorrow. The modal verbs can express modality purely lexically. In
grammar books in the group of modal or defective verbs are usually included: must, can, could,
may, might, to be, to have, should, would, shall, will, dare, need, used to, ought to, (they have also
the function of auxiliary verbs and in speech or used in texts they acquire a grammatical meaning as
well. In reality the number of modal verbs is much larger. Thus, verbs like: to insist, to demand, to
order, to request, to suppose, to command, to necessitate, etc. express lexical modality. Alongside
their lexical modality most of them could be used to express an additional grammatical modality.
The lexical modality is important in using the main verb in a given grammatical mood form (see
conditional, subjunctive I, suppositional, subjunctive II and imperative). The prosodic element is
also very important in expressing or intensifying a modal meaning. Examples of categorial
meanings, expressed by grammatical, lexical-grammatical, lexical and phonological means is
practically found in the majority of grammatical verbal categories. Thus, futurity in expressive
speech may be expressed lexically, the grammatical form is used stylistically: He comes tomorrow
(later, next week). I am leaving on Sunday. The category of aspect in English is considered to be a
purely grammatical one, the marked member of the opposition being expressed by continuous
forms. A closer inspection shows that the grammatical marked form, in many cases, is intensified by
lexical aspectual means, or only the lexical means are used. Thus in case of putandi and sentiendi
verbs or when we use words like always, often, seldom, occasionally, continuously, permanently,
usually, etc. the continuous forms are not used, because the meaning of these verbs, adverbs
expresses an extended action lexically and there is no need to use a continuous form in a neutral
situation. Only in case of intensification of the categorial meaning, for the sake of expressivity a
continuous form could be used in such cases. The prosodic element is changing here too to intensify
the aspectual-metasemiotic meaning. Thus, the following verbs can be used in the continuous form
only in case of intensification, expressive use: see, feel, taste, observe, agree, disagree, bear, know,
mean, notice, recall, recognize, believe, disbelieve, differ, doubt, find, foresee, recollect, remember,
suppose, think, trust, distrust, understand, smell, detest, forgive, hate, like, dislike, love, mind,
please, displease, prefer, want, wish, desire, hear, sound, look, appear, consider, expect, hope,
loathe, refuse, regret, be, belong to, contain, consist of, cost, depend on, deserve, have, hold, matter,
own, resemble, etc.
Here are some examples where both lexical and grammatical aspectual means are used for
expressivity or intensification of aspectual meaning. You are seeing this place for the last time. I am
19

hearing it better now. The dog was smelling the lamp post. She was feeling the sun extremely. She
must be a stranger whom I was observing. He is always doing things like this. She was all the time
smelling at him. They were occasionally visiting them.
Analyzing all the verbal categories we have observed a phenomenon of transition from
grammatical to lexical-grammatical and lexical means of expressing this or that categorial meaning.
A good example could serve the category of taxis (anteriority), which undergoes a process of
lexicalization in many languages: in Russian the perfect anteriority has practically disappeared and
the lexical anteriority has taken its place. The same is happening in English and Romanian, where
some perfect forms are not used any more or are used very rarely (future perfect, non-finite perfect
forms). The sentence I shall have finished my work by six oclock / before you come back is usually
substituted by I shall finish my work by six oclock/before you come back. Thus grammatical
anteriority is becoming redundant and native speakers are regularly omitting it. By six oclock,
before you come back express anteriority lexically or contextually and this is quite enough to omit
the redundant future perfect form. [39, 103-109]
8.The Category of Aspect
The category of aspect in various languages is expressed differently: grammatically, lexicogrammatically, lexically and prosodically. Aspect is the way an action is viewed. In English, aspect
is an extremely reliable and grammatically impeccable way of expressing the opposition in
question. In Romanian the category of aspect is expressed mainly lexically and in Russian lexicogrammatically, the purely lexical and phonological elements are used as alternative means or as
aspectual intensifiers. The Russian perfective underlines the fact that the action is finished and the
imperfective expresses an action that is not finished and developing in time, the term itself
(imperfective) stresses the fact that the action is not finished. In English the aspectual opposition
has very much in common with the Russian one. But there is no one to one correspondence. 59
The same event can be described by using either continuous or non-continuous forms. It much
depends on the speakers intention, whether he wants to describe the action in development,
extended or just to express an action as very short or habitual, without paying attention to the
aspectual marked categorial meaning. Thus, for example, the sentences Yesterday at five oclock I
met my friends/Yesterday at five oclock I was meeting my friends. In the first sentence the speaker
just mentions the fact of meeting his friends, in the second sentence this fact is intensified by
underlying the fact that the action developed during a certain period of time. The verbs possessing a
durative lexical meaning (interminative) can express continuous aspect both lexically and lexicogrammatically, the latter being emphatic or intensified aspectually. Thus, He sat at the table / He
was sitting at the table; He looked out of the window. A man stood at the door / I looked out of the
window. A man was standing at the door are confronted with imperfect forms both in Russian and
Romanian: ; El edea la mas; ; Un brbat sttea la
u (Am vzut un brbat stnd la u). In the case of He sat at the table and A man stood at the
door the lexical aspectual meaning of sat and stood is durative, and it is intensified by
superimposing a grammatical aspectual meaning on the lexical one in was sitting and was standing.
The Romanian and Russian equivalents belong to the imperfective aspect and express an unfinished
and extended action, the grammatical duration here is supplemented by the lexical one. Even
terminative or point-action verbs can be used in the continuous aspect if the action is repeated or the
speaker wants to show the action in development, or to stress the fact that the action lasted during a
certain period of time. For example: The boy jumped over the fence / The boy was jumping round
the tree. I began to read, but the teacher interrupted me / I was beginning to read when he came in .
In Romanian we have practically the same situation: Biatul a srit peste gard / Biatul srea n
jurul copacului; Eu am nceput s citesc, dar profesorul m-a ntrerupt / Eu ncepeam s citesc,
20

cnd el a intrat. There are various points of view concerning the category of aspect in English. One
of them is that aspect in English is formed by means of the opposition of perfect and continuous
forms, which is similar to the perfective and imperfective aspect in the Slavic languages. In this
case the sentence I had been working at my article for three hours before he came back would
express both forms: perfect and continuous (had been working). According to the rules of
categorization a grammatical form of the verb can not express both forms of the categorial
opposition simultaneously. This confusion may be connected with the fact that the term perfect or
perfective is practically ambivalent and may be used to express either a finished action or
anteriority. For example: I wrote a letter yesterday and I had written a letter yesterday by five
oclock. In both sentences the action is perfect(ive) in the sense that they are finished, but had
written expresses a different perfect meaning, that of anteriority. In Romanian there are no clear-cut
grammatical flexions (with the exception of imperfectul) to indicate the given categorial meaning.
In fact, there existed, and still partially exists, a system of forms similar to the English continuous
ones (and can be found in some other Romance languages), which consist of the auxiliary verb a fi
(to be) and gerunziul (coinciding in meaning with the English present participle). Now these forms
are rarely used in the indicative mood and are not very often confronted with the English continuous
aspectual forms. Here are some examples: 1) Indicative mood (found in old texts): will be writing va fi scriind, will have been writing - va fi fost scriind, is writing- este scriind, was writing - era
scriind, has been writing - a fost scriind, etc. The oblique moods: (are still being used and in most
grammar books are given as one mood under the name of prezumptivul or potenialul): conditional:
he would be writing - El ar fi scriind; subjunctive II (optativul): If he were writing dac el ar fi
scriind; conditional and subjunctive II anterior forms: El ar fi fost scriind - (if) he had been writing,
he would have been writing; conjunctivul (corresponding to the English subjunctive1, subjunctive
II; used in constructions where the infinitive used: with suppositional, modal verbs, etc.): s fi
scriind, s fi fost scriind - to be writing, to have been writing; had been writing, etc. Potential
mood: va fi scriind - might be writing, etc. The aspectual meaning of the above given forms is
combined with a metasemiotic one. Here are some examples taken from A History of Romanian
Grammar, published by V.Marin (Chisinau, 1970), quoting sources from XVII-XIX centuries: i
cnd va fi avnd vre-o treab... (When he will be having something to do...), Tocmai cnd prerea de
ru l ajunsese... erau trecnd printr-o pdure mare i deas (Just when he felt sorry for it, they
were passing through a large thick forest); Era ca oile rtcindu (Was wandering like sheep); i c
era mergndu i apropiindu-m ctre Damascu, ntru ameadz... (And I was walking and
approaching Damascus at noon...); i din zi n zi muli s-au fost adugnd (And every day many
have been adding...); A fost pltind i el cnd a fost de fa; (He had been paying when the had been
present). In Modern Romanian such indicative forms are used very rarely. Thus, here is an example
heard on the radio: El s-a accidentat i acum este suferind (,,,he is suffering now). In the oblique
moods these grammatical forms are still used, especially in the colloquial speech. All the
constructions of participle I in English usually have identical equivalents in Romanian. These
constructions in English and Romanian are used both aspectually and metasemiotically. This could
be seen in the following examples: I saw Andrew (him) crossing the street - Eu l-am vzut pe
Andrei trecnd strada; He heard someone coming along the path - El a auzit pe cineva venind
dealungul crrii; He said looking around - El a spus uitndu-se njur, He came running - El venea
fugind; Walking in the park he met Helen Plimbndu-se prin parc, el a ntlnit-o pe Elena; He
walked singing - El mergea cntnd. The constructions, regularly used and confronted in both
languages, are: Accusative with participle I in English and Accusative with gerunziul in Romanian.
Thus, for example: Young Francis was seeing the darkies working in the cotton fields - Tnrul
Francis i vedea pe negri muncind pe plantaiile de bumbac (J.Galsworthy); Dupin was moving
quickly to the door, when we again heard him coming up - Dupin se mica repede spre ua, cnd
21

peste o clip l auzirm pe necunoscut urcnd din nou (E.Po). The next construction is Nominative
with Participle I and Nominative with gerunziul: He was seen running to the river - El a fost vzut
fugind spre ru. Nominative absolute: The dinner being ready, he dished and served it up
Prnzul fiind gata, el a servit masa. The house door being open, she went in before Tom, requesting
him to follow her (M.Twain) - Ua casei fiind deschis, ea a intrat naintea lui Tom, cerndu-i s-o
urmeze. Absolute Participle construction and Absolute gerunziul construction: A lake with children
swimming in it, appeared and disappeared - Un lac, cu copii scldndu-se n el, apru i dispru.
Double predicate: The little maid came running down - Fetia venea fugind n jos. He walked
singing - El mergea cntnd. He looked smiling - El se uita zmbind. Such sentences could be
easily be transformed: He walked singing = He walked; He was singing - El mergea cntnd = El
mergea i cnta; El cnta (El era cntnd). Thus, in the case of the English Participle I and the
Romanian gerunziul we have practically a difference of terms and there is a complete coincidence
in their grammatical meanings. An aspectual form, which is common to Romance languages, is the
imperfect. Imperfectul in Romanian is regularly confronted with the English continuous aspect:
They were waiting for the judge and Mariette was thinking of all the money Don Cesare had spent
(Ei ateptau judectorul, Mariet se gndea la toi banii, pe care Don Cezare i cheltuise). More
than that, imperfectul possesses a wider meaning than the continuous form. It has already been
mentioned, that the latter has become so specifically continuous, and is very often used to express a
metasemiotic connotation. Simple past in English is often used to express not only point actions, but
also extended ones. In such cases imperfectly is also used as an equivalent of past indefinite in
English: He represented for her the reality of things (El reprezenta pentru ea ralitatea vietii);
Plainer people were in the ascendant (Oamenii mai simpli erau n ascensiune). Thus, it is important
to notice that some words in English lexically express an extended action (durative or interminative
verbs) and in neutral situations they substitute the grammatical continuous aspect. We have already
mentioned that in some grammar books one may find the statement that putandi and sentiendi verbs
are not and should not be used in the continuous aspect. A closer inspection of this phenomenon
shows that practically all the verbs in English, including the putandi and sentiendi ones can be used
in the continuous aspect. Verbs like believe, see, etc. express aspect lexically and they are rarely
used in the grammatical continuous form, usually when there is a necessity to intensify the
aspectual meaning, to make it more emphatic, more expressive: But I am seeing you, you are there
behind the tree! Am I really hearing what you are saying? Here follows a list of verbs, which
possess lexical aspectuality and are rarely used in the continuous form in neutral situations: see,
feel, taste, observe, agree, disagree, believe, disbelieve, differ, doubt, find, foresee, forget, imagine,
hear, know, mean, notice, recall, recognize, recollect, remember, suppose, think, trust, distrust,
understand, smell, detest, forgive, hate, like, dislike, love, mind, please, displease, prefer, want,
wish, desire, hear, sound, look, appear, consider, expect, hope, loathe, refuse, regret, be, belong to,
contain, consist of, cost, depend on, deserve, have, hold, matter, own, resemble, etc. Lets give
some examples taken from English authentic literature: God was witness to all their calamities. He
was seeing them robbed. He was seeing them famish hour by hour. He was seeing them die. I am
seeing a brown colour. You are seeing this place for the last time. I am hearing it better now. Am I
really hearing a voice at last! The dog was smelling the lamp post. She was smelling the fish to find
out whether it was fit to eat. She was tasting the sauce to find out whether it was salt or sugar she
had put into it. She was feeling the sun extremely. She was nothing like me, so she must be a
stranger whom I was observing, though in a most bewildering way, etc. The same could be said
about the habitual and repeated actions, usually accompanied by words possessing a certain durative
lexical and aspectual meaning: always, often, constantly, permanently, occasionally, seldom,
usually, etc. It has been observed that English people regularly use the grammatical continuous
aspect in their speech, to make it more expressive: He is always doing things like this. They were
22

always worrying. She was all the time smelling at him. He was always promising to come. They
were occasionally visiting them.
Thus, the choice of the continuous aspect depends only on the action being viewed as a process.
This is the universal grammatical meaning of the continuous aspect and this is the only criterion that
matters when this or that aspectual form is being chosen. In case of emphasis, when there is a
necessity to increase the categorial aspectual meaning English people can ignore the above
mentioned rule: Father, you don't see me. -Oh, I see you. -No, you dont. -But I am seeing you! You
are behind that bush! (seeing is used emphatically here). Lets take another example. He is always
doing things like that (emphatic usage). It is important to mention the fact that in the confronted
languages, and first of all in English, there is a process of metasemiotic transposition of continuous
(progressive, durative, imperfect) aspect into a metasemiotic category. These forms are often used
not only to express aspect, but also for stylistic purposes. The emphatic use of seeing and always is
accompanied by emphatic prosodic means: wide range, high fall, slow tempo, etc. In Romanian
(and in Russian in the present tense) the lexical means of expressing aspectual meanings, as we
mentioned above, prevail over the grammatical ones, i.e. the lexical aspectual category is much
more prominent than the grammatical one. Thus, the English sentences The farmer works in his
field, The farmer is working in his field now are confronted in Romanian and Russian with identical
grammatical forms of the verbs (simple present) in both cases: Fermierul lucreaz pe cmp.
Fermierul lucreaz pe cmp acum; ,
. Now in English intensifies the grammatical aspectual meaning, while in Romanian and
Russian acum, are the only aspectual (lexical) means and they can be intensified only
contextually and prosodically. We have already mentioned above the observation concerning the
translation of the English continuous passive forms into Romanian and Russian. Regular
confrontation of examples allows us to conclude that English continuous forms are regularly
translated by means of verbs with the particle se in Romanian and flexion - in Russian. In
both languages it is usually used to express lexical-grammatical reflexivity. But in this case they are
used purely grammatically to express a different meaning, that of a durative action in the passive
voice: The house is being built now, The house was being built when we arrived there, The house
will be built this time next year Casa se construiete acum (Casa este construit acum), Casa se
construia (era construit) cnd am sosit acolo, Casa se va construi (va fi construit) pe timpul
acesta anul viitor - . , ,
. The reflexive particle and flexion here get
completely homonymous meanings of passive voice of imperfective (durative) actions. In English
there is no continuous aspect in the passive voice in the future, because both categorial forms are
used with the verb to be and it is not acceptable in the literary English to say: The house will be
being built. Both in Romanian and Russian continuity is expressed: se va construi,
. Va fi construit usually represents a perfective action. The same opposition of finished
(perfective) and imperfective in the passive voice past indefinite is found in both Romanian and
Russian: Casa se construia Casa era construit Casa a fost construit (Casa era construit may
have the meaning of imperfectul pasiv and pluscvamperfectul activ). The Russian: represent the above- mentioned aspectual opposition. The category of negation
usually influences the realization of a categorial form. Thus, the continuous aspect used in the
negative forms may be considered as a failure to realize the marked aspectual meaning. Lets take
some examples: I am working in the garden/I am not working in the garden; I am reading a book/I
am not reading a book. The positive forms indicate that the actions (I am working; I am reading) are
being carried out at the moment. The negative forms, on the other hand, stress the fact that the given
actions are not being carried out. In fact the continuous aspect is realized in both cases. In the
negative forms we stress the fact, that we are not working in the garden or reading a book, but we
23

are doing something else. For example: I am not working in the garden, I am walking in the garden,
I am not reading a book, I am writing a letter. In both cases there is an aspectual meaning of actions
developing in time at the given moment. Analyzing the categories of aspect in the confronted
languages we can conclude that the English language possesses a clear-cut grammatical aspectual
system, prevailing over the lexical and prosodic aspectual means used as a rule to intensify the
general aspectual meaning. In Romanian the grammatical aspect is subservient, the lexical and
prosodic aspectual categorial means being prominent. In the contrasted languages one could
observe the tendency of metasemiotic (stylistic) transposition. If we compare a number of related
languages with an unrelated one we find that coincidences and differences vary in each case. Thus,
in Romanian and Arabic (and in Russian in the present tense) the lexical means of expressing
aspectual meanings, as we mentioned above, prevail over the grammatical ones, i.e. the lexical
aspectual category is much more prominent than the grammatical one. Thus, the English sentences
The farmer works in his field, The farmer is working in his field now are confronted in Arabic,
Romanian and Russian with identical grammatical form of the verbs in both cases: Yehmil el
mudaraha fi hak lihi, El mudara yehmil fi hak lihi elan; Fermierul lucreaz pe cmp. Fermierul
lucreaz pe cmp acum.; , . Now in
English intensifies the grammatical aspectual meaning, while in Arabic, Romanian and Russian the
lexical means elan, acum, are the only aspectual means and they may be intensified only
contextually and prosodically. In Arabic the imperfect is wider in meaning than in Romanian. The
non-finite forms are denoting an imperfective action taken at any time: Ayu kameisin la yaslahu
lehrianny. The present-future tense expresses an action that may simultaneously represent the
present and the future planes: Ini nazer ilamata faalahu - I am watching what you are going to do
(what you are doing). The present and the future planes are distinguished contextually or
phonetically. Thus the above given example may have two meanings depending on the context: two
simultaneous actions in the present and a correlation of a continuous action in the present and
future. The imperfect denotes an incomplete or durative action in the past, developing in time
simultaneously with other actions in the past: Inni naziron illamata faalabu. Seala an hum wa einie
yeshtamauun (He asked them where they were going to congregate). The interminative verbs,
compared with those terminative, express an unfinished or imperfect action and they are used in
Arabic with other verbs like, for instance, the verbs of existence and formation: kana (to be), sara
(to get, to grow), asmaha, amsa, atha, zala... (to become, to get)...: asbaha yafalu (he started
doing); amsa maridon (he became sick). The verb kan in the imperfect form with the particle ma
(durative) express a meaning of durative or continuous action: Ma minti haye (In the meantime as
he is still living); Madama yakumu or ma dama kaye man (In the meantime as he was still
standing). The combination of the imperfect of the main verb with the preceding verb kana creates
the meaning of past continuous: Kana yukullu (He was often speaking); Kana fi allahujuzu
tahdemany (The old woman was serving this). The imperfect expresses the future tense if the
sentence a lexical future marker or the particle sa: Lasafiru ghadan; Sa anfahu ileihi haza. Futurity
is more pronounced in the imperfect mood. The verb kana helps to express a continuous action
(imperfect) in the past: Lamma jeihtu ileihi kana yaktubu alrisaluta (When I came to him, he was
writing a letter). In this case the continuous action is simultaneous with the action in the secondary
clause. Without the verb kana the same sentence may express a simple sequence of actions: Lama
jeihtu e lechi katabu alrisulata (When I came to him/after I had come to him he wrote a letter.).
Analyzing the categories of aspect in the confronted languages we can conclude that the English
language possesses a clear-cut grammatical aspectual system, prevailing over the lexical aspectual
means used as a rule to intensify the general aspectual meaning. Besides the continuous noncontinuous aspectual opposition in English we can also single out a grammatical aspectual
opposition of finished unfinished (perfective-imperfective). The former is predominant and the
24

latter is subsidiary and is not usually singled out in grammar books. In Romanian and Arabic the
grammatical aspect is subservient, the lexical aspectual category being prominent. In all the
contrasted languages one could observe the tendency of metasemiotic (stylistic) transposition of
aspectual forms. Thus, in English the grammatical means prevail, supported by the lexical and
phonological ones, In Russian the category of aspect is expressed mainly lexico-grammatically, the
purely lexical and phonological elements are used as alternative means or as aspectual intensifiers.
Let us take the categories of aspect in English and Russian expressed correspondingly by the
oppositions of Continuous - non-Continuous and Perfective-Imperfective. The Russian perfective
underlines the fact that the action is finished and the Imperfective expresses an action that is not
finished and developing in time, the term itself (imperfective) stresses the fact that the action is not
finished. Though the English aspectual opposition is practically identical with the Russian one,
there is no one to one correspondence. Thus, for example, the sentences He sat at the table and He
was sitting at the table are confronted with only one equivalent in Russian . In
the case of He sat at the table the action itself is prominent, while in He was sitting at the table - the
process, the fact that the action is extended, developing in time is most important. Their Russian
equivalent belongs to the Imperfective aspect and expresses an unfinished and extended action.
Discrepancies of this case are observed in the verbs, possessing an interminative meaning. The verb
forms in the sentences He sat at the table and He was sitting at the table in English belong to
imperfective forms. There is a certain difference between the two forms. They are both, durative or
progressive in meaning, but sat expresses lexical duration, while in the was sitting the given lexical
duration is intensified by the grammatical one. But from the point of view of grammatical aspect the
two verb forms in He sat at the table and He was sitting at the table represent an aspectual
opposition of continuous non-continuous aspect. There have been attempts in English to create an
aspectual system like in the Slavonic languages. An opposition like Perfect - Continuous aspect was
put forward by some linguists. Terms like imperfective, imperfect could be found in grammar
books. Now when we turn to Arabic we can see practically the same problems: of systemic
approach and terminology. Thus, it is considered that the imperfect (also called non-finite) forms are
opposed to the finite forms and denote an action as not completed. From the point of view of taxis
these forms do not differ here. The aspectual meaning of the imperfect is considered as if divorced
from the temporal meaning, the action can take place at any time, the given action or state is not
referred to any specific moment, because it is extended. [39, 110-122]
9.Aspectual Categorization in Cognate Languages
Analyzing various aspectual examples we can conclude that in different languages there exist
various aspectual forms: continuous, non-continuous, perfect(ive) and imperfect(ive). In English the
continuous forms dominate over other aspectual means (lexical, lexical-grammatical). There is a
metalinguistic confusion in case of the terms perfect/perfective, which are treated from different
points of view by linguists. The original meaning of the term perfect was finished action and was
in opposition to imperfect (unfinished). Gradually it acquired the meaning of anteriority. This
metalinguistic ambiguity contributed to the appearance in the English text-books of several
aspectual
categorial
oppositions:
continuous/non-continuous,
perfect/continuous,
perfect/imperfect(ive). In the third case imperfective embraces both the continuous and noncontinuous grammatical and lexical durative forms. In English the grammatical category of
continuous/non-continuous aspect prevails. All the verbal forms can be subdivided into two large
groups of perfective and imperfect(ive) forms, which imply both lexical and grammatical meanings.
The perfect /continuous opposition is not acceptable because perfect forms can express a durative
action: I have lived here for many years (and I am not intending to move to any place). This
example is in aspectual opposition of perfect(ive)/imperfective to I have lived here for many years
(and now I move to a new place). At the same time both examples are part of the unmarked member
25

of the continuous/non-continuous aspectual opposition. The lexical durative meaning of the verb
to live contributes to the intensification of the general aspectual meaning, especially if it is used
in the continuous form, where its expressivity is strongly enhanced: I have been living here for
many years. A finished action can be expressed both by perfect and non-perfect forms: I have
written a letter and I wrote a letter to him. Both actions are finished or perfective. Imperfective
actions can also be expressed by both continuous and indefinite non-perfect forms: Yesterday I
worked in the garden. Yesterday I was working in the garden when Peter came to visit us. Worked
and was working express durative actions, but the latter form also means an action developing at a
given moment parallel to another action (when Peter came to visit us).
The perfective-imperfective opposition prevails in many European languages. It may be
expressed lexico-grammatically like in the Slavonic languages, while in some other languages the
imperfect forms express a durative unfinished meaning grammatically, combined in durative verbs
with the corresponding lexical aspectual meaning. Imperfective aspect has a wider meaning than the
continuous aspect, which expresses an action in development parallel to another action or moment.
In the English language the imperfective actions can be rendered both by non-continuous and
continuous forms. In the former ones the lexical duration of the given word permits to express an
unfinished or progressive action. Lexical durative elements may be found in both members of the
opposition. The same event can be described by using either continuous or non-continuous forms. It
much depends on the speakers intention, whether he wants to describe the action in development,
extended or just to express an action as very short or habitual, without paying attention to the
aspectually marked categorial meaning. Lets take the examples: Yesterday at five oclock I met my
friends. Yesterday at five oclock I was meeting my friends. In the first sentence the speaker just
mentions the fact of meeting his friends, the duration of the action is not so important here. In the
second variant the action is viewed as developing in time and is more expressive. A number of
lexemes, expressing durative actions lexically, are not used in the continuous forms in habitual
situations: see, feel, taste, observe, agree, disagree, believe, hear, know, mean, notice, think, etc. In
emphatic expressive speech all the putandi and sentiendi verbs can be used in the continuous form:
God was witnessing to all their calamities. He was seeing them robbed. He was seeing them die. I
am seeing a brown colour. I am hearing it better now. The dog was smelling the lamp post. Another
example: He looked out of the window. A man stood at the door/ I looked out of the window. A man
was standing at the door. Lexical duration interacts with the grammatical continuous meaning. The
general aspectual meaning increases and the utterance becomes more expressive.
Inchoative, terminative and point-action verbs can also be used in the continuous form if the
actions are repeated or seen by the speaker as developing in time: The boy jumped over the
fence/The boy was jumping round the tree. I began to read, but the teacher interrupted me / I was
beginning to read when he came in. In case of durative adverbs like always, constantly,
permanently, occasionally, seldom, usually, etc. in emphatic emotional speech the continuous forms
combined with emphatic prosody are used: He is always doing things like this. They were always
worrying. He was always helping me. Prosodic means are used for metasemiotic transposition: He
is \always doing things like this. Here the lexical and grammatical durative means are enhanced by
a high fall, lento tempo, wide range, increased loudness and paralinguistic means. [39, 110-115]
Continuous forms were actively used in the indicative mood in earlier Romanian. Here are
some examples taken from the History of Moldovan Grammar, published by prof. V.Marin
(Chisinau, 1970), quoting sources of XVII-XIX centuries [24]: Era ca oile rtcindu, Au fost
avndu prieteug mare cu Ptru Vod. [24,36,123] tefan Vod au fost eznd odat n divan cu
toiagul n gur. Ct au fost nvnd mai de mult vreame [24,37] Fostau prins doi nemi turcii i
i-au fost iind aproape de cortul vizirului legai. [24,39] Dece o seam de boieri s-au fost apucndu
s fac zapis. [24,53] Tocmai cnd prerea de ru l ajunsese... erau trecnd printr-o pdure mare i
26

deas.; Au fost dormind la bisearica lui svetin Benedict. [24, 83] i era mergndu i apropiindum ctre Damascu, ntru ameadz... [24,90] martorului tu nsumi era stndu[24,91] Am
audzit pre muli mrturisind s hie fost covrind pre Vasilie Vod. [24, 132] i din zi n zi muli sau fost adugnd i-au mai fost viind i un general al lui[24,139] A fost pltind i el cnd a
fost de fa. i arcul l-au fost trgnd cu vrtej. [24,155]
Analyzing these examples we have no hesitation in stating the fact that the constructions of
the auxiliary verb a fi + gerunziul express the grammatical continuous aspect like in English,
Spanish, Portuguese and Italian. The durative action here produces a stronger effect on the reader
or listener than the imperfect. In Modern Romanian extended forms are used only in the oblique
moods in colloquial speech: Unde-i Petru? - O fi lucrnd n livad. -S fie el lucrnd n livad?
De ar fi el lucrnd n livad! [39, 112]
Constructions with participle I in English usually have identical equivalents in Romanian and
other Romance languages and express continuous actions. 1.Accusative with Participle I: Young
Francis was seeing the darkies working in the cotton fields - Tnrul Francis i vedea pe negri
muncind pe plantaiile de bumbac (J.Galsworthy); 2.Nominative with Participle I and Nominative
with gerunziul: He was seen running to the river - El a fost vzut fugind spre ru. 3.Nominative
absolute: The house door being open, she went in before Tom, requesting him to follow her
(M.Twain) - Ua casei fiind deschis, ea a intrat naintea lui Tom, cerndu-i s-o urmeze.
4.Absolute Participle construction: A lake with children swimming in it, appeared and disappeared
- Un lac, cu copii scldndu-se n el, apru i dispru. Walking in the park he met Helen. 5.Double
predicate: He walked singing - El mergea cntnd. In this case we have two actions as if blended
together in a shorter unit: (El mergea. El cnta). All these constructions express a clear cut
grammatical continuous aspect combined with the lexical durative meaning of the verbs. [39, 112113]
The continuous forms in Romanian, Spanish, Italian and Portuguese are subservient to the
lexical and lexical-grammatical aspectual means and are usually used in emotional speech for
expressivity and emphasis in an action developing in time, intensified by the interaction with
lexical means and prosody. Thus, in the Spanish expressive discourse the continuous forms are often
preferred: Estoy hablando . Juan est comiendo. Mara est escribiendo una carta. Los pasajeros
estarn llegando a su destino. Ayer estuve repasando la gramtica. Las gotas de agua
estaban cayendo pausadamente. Hemos estado nadando tres horas. Maana estar trabajando todo
el da en la biblioteca. [54] Identical constructions exist in Italian: Marcovaldo stava
portando a spasso la famiglia. Pietro sta leggendo un libro. [20] The continuous forms are
usually accompanied by lexical supporters like todo el dia the whole day through, toat ziua and
interacting with the lexical durative meanings of the verbs. In Romanian these examples are
usually rendered by means of imperfectul, constructions with gerunziu or contextual and lexical
durative means. The Portuguese construction estar + gerundio is also the equivalent of the
English continuous form: Eu estou estudando na Universidade. Ele estava lendo quando
ela me chamou. Amanha estaremos preparando toda a documentacao. [68] In Spanish, Italian
and Portuguese there exist several constructions with gerundio expressing aspectual duration. Thus, the
Portuguese construction ficar + gerundio expresses a progressive action and is translated into
English by means of continuous aspect forms: Fico olhando para retrato. The construction
andar a + infinitive: A Teresa anda falando da mudanca de casa. [20] What is important to
mention is the fact that in Portugal the construction estar + gerundio can be substituted by the
construction estar a +infinitive preserving the durative meaning: Pedro esta a ler novo
livro. The same happens with the construction ficar + gerundio, where gerundio is substituted
by the infinitive: Fico estudar 3 horas. The construction continuar (seguir, prosseguir) +
gerundio express a continuous action as well: Ele continua lendo o jornal. The construction
27

continuar a + infinitive practically expresses the same type of continuous action: Ele continua a
ler jornal. [68] Exactly the same we have in English: He continues reading the journal can
be easily changed into He continues to read. The construction with the non-continuous
infinitive has a weaker aspectual grammatical meaning, the lexical durative meaning of
continue taking over the categorial function.
In Spanish like in Portuguese, besides estar, there exist durative constructions with verbs like: ir,
andar, venir, seguir, continuar, quedar(se), permanecer with gerundio having a pronounced durative
aspectual meaning: Los conferenciantes iban discutiendo algunos problemas de los vuelos csmicos.
Las muchachas continuan charlando. In all these examples the grammatical continuous aspectual
meaning is interacting with the lexical duration of the verbs, intensifying the categorial meaning and
making it more expressive. The most often used is the construction with ir + gerundio, which
expresses a consecutive action in development: El bote iba hacienda agua... La humedad sol iban
abriendo las maderas derritiendo la brea. Ya voy comprendiendo que mi vecino tena razn, etc.
[6]. The combination of seguir +gerundio express continuous actions in present past and future:
Seguimos trabajando en la Universidad. Seguiremos tomando parte en los debates.[3] In most
examples the grammatical continuous meaning interact with the lexical duration of the verbs and
adverbs, intensifying the final aspectual expressivity.
Lexical and grammatical duration in French and German is expressed by imperfect forms,
constructions with present participle, grondif and lexical means: He represented (imperfect
meaning) for her the reality of things. Ils reprsentaient pour elle la ralit de la vie. El reprezenta
pentru ea realitatea vieii. His conscious was echoing Fleurs comment on Anna Bergfelds letter. Sa
conscience rptait lcho des commentaires de Fleur la lettre de Annie Bergfeld. Contiina i
repeta ecoul comentariilor lui Fleur la scrisoarea Anei Bergfeld. Galsworthy J. The French
imparfait is rendered regularly into English by continuous forms and by past indefinite with lexical
duration, though the former are more expressive than the latter. Er kam lachend die Treppe
herunter. He came laughing down the staircase. El venea rznd njos pe scar. Sie trat lchelnd
ins Zimmer. He entered the room laughing. Ich hre ihn kommen. I hear him coming. II aud venind.
Ich hrte ihn kommen. I heard him coming. L-am auzit venind. Wir sahen den spielenden Kindern
zu. We looked at the children who were playing. Ne uitam la copiii care se jucau. Das Kind kam
weinend nach Haus. The child came home crying. Copilul a venit plngnd acas. Er erreichte
schwimmend das andere Ufer. He reached the other bank swimming. A ajuns inotnd la cellalt
mal. [52] In German, like in French, the absence of the continuous forms is compensated by
Imperfect and constructions with Partizip Prsens (Partizip I), which normally express a durative
aspectual meaning. The imperfect forms may be also used stylistically in case suprasyntactic
metasemiotic means are used. Thus, the continuous/non-continuous binary opposition in English,
Spanish, Portuguese, Italian (and partially in Romanian) are in a process of transition from a pure
grammatical aspectual category into a stylistic one. In English this grammatical opposition is well
represented in all the functional styles of the language and is regularly used for stylistic purposes in
emotionally coloured expressive and emphatic speech.
10.Category of Anteriority or Taxis
10.1.The Category of Taxis and the Semantic Evolution of the Term Perfect
Taxis as a historical linguistic category developed various means of expressing anteriority in
the Indo-European languages. In English, beginning with the Old Period, the grammatical
categorical forms started to develop to support the already existing lexical and contextual means. At
present the English category of taxis is one of the basic grammatical morphological categories
which comprises the whole system of the finite and non-finite verb forms. Thus, the opposition of
28

anteriority - simultaneity can be expressed in English in a purely grammatically. At the same time, it
can be also expressed lexically, by contextual markers, like adverbial modifiers, etc. We should
carefully keep apart the conceptual category of anteriority and the grammatical one as constituted
by the oppositions of the relevant categorial forms. Thus, the function of anteriority is universal in
the sense that in all languages we are supposed to be able to express the anteriority of an action to
another action or moment on the axis of time. The fact that the category of taxis is interconnected
with other grammatical categories (aspect, voice, mood, etc.) and expressed by certain grammatical
forms results in different interpretations and various metalinguistic term systems (as aspect, tense,
etc.). In the previous publications we have analyzed mainly the finite perfect and partially the nonfinite ones. In the present article we make an attempt to speak on taxis and the evolution of the term
perfect.
The simplification of the system of perfect forms is compensated by lexical and contextual
means getting a more important function in expressing anteriority within the universal category of
taxis. Different meanings can be expressed by one and the same form in different contexts or by
changing the lexical character of the verb. Synchronic relationship studies linguistic categories
which are state of permanent change. Change is the main category of natural human languages, for
they are historical categories, they develop or die out. By so doing, they follow the fate of the
speaking community, which has created them as the principal means of communication. [39,122143].
Anteriority or taxis is grammatically expressed by perfect forms, which are variously
interpreted as expressing anteriority, a complete action, result, tense categorical meaning, time
correlation. But more and more linguists (E.Benveniste, A.Smirnitsky, R.Allen, H.Palmer,
O.Akhmanova) consider anteriority to be the main categorial meaning of finite and non-finite
perfect grammatical forms. [39,122-143].
Anteriority in the purest way is expressed by lexical means and by finite forms of the verb.
The anteriority expressed by the marked grammatical forms has much in common in many
European languages, as their systems go back to the same source. The grammatical taxis forms
appeared in the old times, developed into a system, and then at present they are in a process of
weakening their position and ceding it to lexical and contextual means, which up till now played a
secondary part in the conceptual category of anteriority. That does not mean that the category of
anteriority is not present in languages where most grammatical forms of anteriority have practically
disappeared or they do not exist at all. In such cases, the grammatical forms lose their weight and
are substituted by much simpler forms of the verbs, anteriority being expressed by non-grammatical
means. Any linguistic category should never be studied in isolation only as facts of a single
language. A diachronic investigation should be undertaken, in order to find out everything
concerning the evolution of the perfect forms, the tendency in their historical development. If we
confront related languages, we expect fewer differences and more coinci-dences in the result of
confrontation of various categorial forms. [39,122-143].
Having analyzed the category of
anteriority in English and Romanian, we can state that it can be expressed grammatically and
lexically, contextually, and it may be prosodically intensified. In the majority of cases taxis is
expressed by at least two of the existing categorial means (lexical and grammatical means occur
more frequently). Lexical means are now in the process of gaining more ground than the
grammatical ones. In case of the category of taxis (simultaneity-anteriority, correlation, anteriority,
perfectivity, time relationship, perfect aspect, etc.) we observe a process of transition from pure
grammatical categories in both languages to lexical and grammatical ones, and, finally, to pure
lexical means. In the English and Romanian languages, lexical, contextual and grammatical means,
or the combination of grammatical and lexical means are used to express anteriority. At present the
category of taxis is studied in different functional styles. It has been observed that the non-finite
29

perfect forms are practically not used in journalese, either in British or American newspapers. As far
as finite perfect forms are concerned, preference is given to present perfect, because this is the form
that is best suited to establishing a correlation between past and present, on the one hand, and the
connection between the performer and the undergoer of the speech event, on the other.
There is a metalinguistic confusion in case of the terms perfect and perfective, which are
treated differently by various linguists and this leads to confusion in the process of categorization.
The original meaning of the Latin term perfect was a finished action and formed an aspectual
opposition with imperfect forms (unfinished actions). This aspectual category still exists in most
European languages and is expressed grammatically, lexico-grammatically and lexically. In the
English language it is expressed lexically and lexico-grammatically. Gradually the metalinguistic
unit perfect acquired an additional homonymous meaning of anteriority. That is why now it would
be more convenient to use the term perfective in the meaning of finished action and the term perfect
to express the meaning of anteriority. A perfect form English, depending on the context, may
express either a finished or an unfinished action and, thus, it may be realized in both members of the
aspectual opposition of perfective/imperfective (or finished/unfinished).
Thus, the approach to categorization may be untenable in the sense that the researcher fails
to keep clearly apart the object of analysis (the facts of the language in question) and the
metalanguage - the words and expressions used when people talk about the object language. But
even if this is not the case, we very often find a large number of different metalinguistic expressions
and we have a peculiar situation: we must compare those different systems and try to understand
why the different metalinguistic units were introduced. Very often there is a discrepancy not only
in the terms used to denote certain more specific or particular categories, but also in the naming
or description of the most general concepts themselves [39, 104-114]. The inclusive perfect forms
usually express an imperfective (unfinished) anterior action, which includes the present moment
and continues in the future: I have lived here for many years and I am not intending to move to any
other place. This example would be in aspectual opposition of perfective/imperfective to I have
lived here for many years and now I move to a new place (finished anterior action). At the same
time both examples could be part of the marked member of the opposition of Continuous/noncontinuous aspect (found in English and some Romance languages). Here we should take into
consideration the lexical durative aspectual lexical meaning of the verb 'to live", which will
contribute to the intensification of the general aspectual durative meaning combined with the
continuous form, where its expressivity is considerably enhanced: I have been living here for many
years. In the examples like "He had been reading his book for two hours before I came back" we
observe that the prevailing aspectual meaning is that of a continuous action (unfinished action) in
development during a certain period of time before another action in the past (past anteriority).
The secondary aspectual lexical/contextual meaning may be a finished or unfinished action
depending on the given context. The term perfect" here is not used in the meaning of "finished"
(perfective or perfect), here it expresses grammatical anteriority supported and intensified by the
lexical anteriority marker "before". A finished action can be expressed both by perfect and nonperfect forms: "I have written a letter", I had written the letter before he returned to the office, I
will have written the letter before they return to the office and "Yesterday I wrote a letter to my
friend". In all these cases we have the same result. On the other hand, as we have seen from the
examples given above, all the perfect forms in English, like in other languages, can easily be
divided into several groups, expressing the grammatical, lexical and lexical-grammatical
oppositions of continuous/non-continuous, perfective/imperfective or finished/unfinished, expressing
various lexical aspectual meanings (durative, inceptive, terminative, point action, etc.). That means
that there are many possibilities to express various aspectual meanings even in the English language.
30

One of the most important elements of all the perfect grammatical forms of the verbs in
English is past participle or participle II (Romanian - participiul trecut), expressing anteriority in
the purest way. It may be used separately and can synthetically express anteriority and voice, serve
to form a number of perfect and passive voice analytical forms. Thus, we can form oppositions of
participle I and participle II forms like in the following examples: reading read, citind citit;
writing written, scriind - scris; seeing seen, vznd vzut; creating - created, crend creat we observe three distinct categorical oppositions, that of simultaneity vs. anteriority (category of
taxis), active vs. passive (category of voice) and continuous vs. non-continuous (category of
aspect). Not all the participles possess all the three categorial forms. Thus, the intransitive verbs do
not possess the passive meaning: going gone, plecnd plecat. Thus, the category of transitivityintransitivity should also be taken into consideration in the analysis of participles. Some
intransitive verbs gradually acquire submeanings, which are transitive in character: Running a
factory is not easy. The factory is run well. was laughed at El a fost luat n rs. Past
participles can be used independently. They are usually found in analytical combinations of perfect
and passive voice forms. The intransitive verbs are used in perfect forms, but are not found in
passive analytical structures, with the exception of the verbs go and come found in some word
combinations: he is come, he is gone.
The verbs can also be classified according to their lexical meanings: terminative, inceptive,
iterative, durative, etc. The expression of both anteriority and passive voice is usually found in
terminative verbs, while in the durative ones only the passive meaning is clearly seen. Thus,
A.Smirnitsky thinks that loved as a past participle loses its perfectivity, which is clearly seen in
participles like broken. But sometimes this division is not clear-cut. Thus, in case of repeated
actions of terminative verbs perfectivity may weaken or get lost and a durative meaning is taking
over. The categorial function of a given past participle depends on the contextual meaning and on
its semantic feature. There is a multitude of combinations of the verb to be with the past
participle. There are cases of homonymy in this case. Combinations of the verb to be + past
participle like in The letter is written by Peter. Soon he will finish writing it, or The door is
closed by Peter (as a process) should be distinguished from The door is closed as a state, where
is closed is not a passive construction, but just defines the state of the door, that it is not open,
there is no meaning of perfectivity in the latter case [70, 268-278]. It is known that the perfect nonfinite forms of the verb express anteriority in a much more pure way in comparison with the finite
forms. The past participle expresses anteriority in the purest way.
Lets take some examples of participle II used in the function of an attribute: The house
built a hundred years ago is still in a very good state. Casa construit o sut de ani n urm s-a
pstrat n condiii foarte bune. Unfortunately it is not possible to present in this book all the
information obtained. Din pcate nu este posibil de a prezentan cartea aceasta toat informaia
obinut. In both languages a complete coincidence has been attested of past participles in
attributive functions. But in many cases this coincidence is not always possible because of some
structural and semantic differences, and also because of certain linguistic and sociolinguistic
traditions in the confronted languages, combinability of words, homonymy, etc. A.Smirnitsky takes
as an example the past participle gone. Is gone may be identical to the combination have
gone in a transferred meaning he died like in the sentence Poor Mr. Brown is (has) gone. He has
left us. He has joined the great majority. Srmanul dl.Brown a murit (a plecat). El a murit (ne-a
prsit). El a plecat (e dus) n lumea strbunilor. Is gone can also be used in the direct sense of
the word to express anterioriity in colloquial speech as in Where is Mr. Brown? He is gone (=has
gone). He will be back in an hour. Unde e dl Brown? El e plecat (=a plecat). Se va ntoarce peste o
or. In case of transitive verbs the past participle has a passive meaning closely connected with
perfectivity (finished action) (The letter written yesterday was sent in time.). But when used in
31

analytical non-perfect fiorms the past participle gets devoid of anteriority meaning and preserves
only the passive categorial function (The letter was written and sent in time). [70, 278-288]
The past participle is regularly confronted the Romanian with participiul trecut: The
methodology tested in the Indo-European field set the pattern. Metoda experimentat n domeniul
indo-european a devenit exemplar. All these observations bring out the essential difference
between the method of communication discovered among bees and our human language. Toate
observaiile acestea scot la iveal diferena esenial dintre metoda de comunicare descoperit la
albini i limba uman. (E.Benveniste) The English participle II can sometimes correspond to the
Romanian mai mult ca perfectul: On the staircase Charny met only some officers, friends of his,
informed beforehand. Pe scri, Charny ntlni numai civa ofieri, prieteni de ai si, care fusese
anunai (= anunai) din timp. The anteriority meaning in English is expressed only lexically, while
in Romanian both lexical and grammatical anteriority means are used for the sake of expressivity.
Lets consider some of the syntactic functions fulfilled by past participle:
a) attributive - The data obtained are being carefully analyzed and studied. Datele obinute sunt
analizate i studiate atent; In both languages the participles have the function of attributes.
b) adverbial modifier of time - Asked (being asked) to comment about the U.N. resolution tabled by
the Afro-Asian countries, the Prime Minister replied... ntrebat (find ntrebat, cnd a fost ntrebat)
s comenteze rezoluia ONU propus de rile Afro-Asiatice, Primul Ministru a rspuns...;
(J.Galsworthy) In this case the English participle asked has the function of adverbial modifier of
time and could be substituted by the passive voice form of the present participle being asked. The
form tabled has the function an attribute;
c) adverbial modifier of condition - If given the opportunity, this industry will rapidly develop.
Aceast industrie se va dezvolta rapid, dac vor vi create posibiliti favorabile (=Posibiliti fiind
date, aceast industrie se va dezvolta rapid ); (J.Galsworthy) The past participle in the function of
an adverbial modifier corresponds in Romanian to future indefinite passive voice and this shows the
fact that the forms are different in the main variant, though it is possible to render it into Romanian
using gerunziul pasiv, the grammatical categorial voice meaning is the same passive voice;
d) adverbial modifier of concession- But the Right-wing Labour leaders, though forced to give way
on some questions, will stick to their policies. Liderii laburiti de dreapta, dei forai s cedeze n
unele probleme, vor susine politica lor; (J.Galsworthy)
e) complex object with past participle - We hope to see this issue raised in all trades councils, in
every union. Noi sperm s vedem aceast problem ridicat n fiecare sindicat.
The construction of complex object with past participle in English corresponds to a
construction of complex object with subjunctive in the meaning of future and in the second complex
object with past participle. [39, 152-164].
Thus, we can state that past participle express anteriority when the action is precedeing the
moment of speech. There are quite a number of cases where the forms under research express both
anteriority and passive voice (in case of transitive verbs) meanings, or only the latter one.
As to the term perfect it is still considered by different linguists as part of various
categorical oppositions: of anteriority, aspect, tense, result. In Romanian perfect in the
grammatical form of perfectul simplu is now expressing an action finished in the past, and thus, it
has preserved the old meaning going back to Latin. The term perfect in the European linguistics is
used in several meanings: of finished action (perfective), expressing result, time correlation, but
more and more linguists state the fact that the main meaning expressed by perfect forms is that of
anteriority.
Anteriority in the purest way is expressed by lexical means and by predicative verbal forms.
As it was expected the anteriority marked grammatical forms have much in common in English,
French and Romanian, as their systems go back to the same source. That does not mean that the
32

category of anteriority is not present in languages where the grammatical forms of anteriority have
practically disappeared. Thus, in Russian the grammatical elements of anteriority are scarcely used.
The lexical and lexical-grammatical means are used to express the marked categorial taxis meaning.
The grammatical forms analyzed by us express two or more grammatical categorial meanings,
interconnected with those of taxis. Tense and aspect are especially closely connected with them and
in this case they are confronted as a system. Cases of sameness and differences are analyzed and
furnished with examples taken from translations. An interesting difference is observed between
present perfect in English and perfectul compus and pass compos in Romanian and French
(formally coincide: to have + past participle). In connection with the absence of a simple past form
in Romanian and French, perfectul compus and pass compos here are taking an additional
function and thus, express, depending on the context, the marked categorial form in one case (the
action is connected with the present moment) and the unmarked one (the action is separated from
the present moment) in another. Thus, the English past indefinite can correspond to the Romanian
perfectul compus and French and pass compos in the spoken language, perfectul simplu and
pass simple in fiction, imparfait and imperfectul, when the lexical meanings of the verbs
lexically express an extended action, and thus it becomes aspectually marked.
As we have mentioned above, when we confront two distantly related languages (English
and Romanian) synchronically we shall use, where possible, the results of comparative-historical
analysis. What is the difference between comparative-historical philology and confrontational
linguistics (analytical comparison)? For comparative-historical philology the starting point is the
form, the morphological structure of the grammatical phenomena in question. In the case of
analytical confrontation the starting point is the grammatical content (when we confront
grammatical categories of different languages), the semantics, the underlying concepts of the
grammatical categories under investigation. The concepts are expressed by means of a system of
grammatical forms through the intermediary of categorial forms. It is well known that in the natural
human languages content and form are actually inseparable. We cannot abstract ourselves from
form in analytical comparison and from content in comparative philology. What is the actual
connection between confrontational linguistics and comparative philology? In what way are we
supposed to avail ourselves of the results of comparative-historical investigation when confronting
cognate and even unrelated languages? In order that this problem may be presented as clearly as
possible, we shall turn to the category of anteriority in English and Romanian (sometimes
accompanied by French translation of the given examples). Confronting the category of taxis in
English and Romanian we came to the conclusion that there is a common tendency in both
languages: the perfect forms in both languages tend to be replaced by simple non-perfect forms and
the categorial meaning of anteriority is expressed lexically or contextually. This process is more
advanced in Romanian, where some analytical perfect forms are now very rarely used. Our view is
that the researcher should not shut his eyes and ignore the historical associations. There is no doubt
that diachrony must be taken into consideration: confronting languages, which have no genetic
connections whatsoever is something which, generally speaking, belongs to typology, while
confrontation of cognate languages should never be willfully and artificially be reduced to the
stricter forms of abstract typological confrontation and contrast. As we mentioned above the
confronted languages belong to the same (Indo-European) family of languages. They are genetically
related, but different in the sense that Romanian is part of the Romance languages, while English
belongs to the Germanic languages.
In contrasting languages we usually begin with the etic level, then we go on to the emic
level (categories) and then return to the texts to make sure that this or that category actually exists in
speech at a given period of time. In this case we will begin by examining the category of anteriority
in English and Romanian (in some cases French is included in the confrontation) on the systemic
33

level and then try to adduce some examples of their realization on the etic level. On the systemic
level English and Romanian have a fully developed system of grammatical forms expressing the
categorial meaning of anteriority. The category of anteriority embraces the entire system of verb
including both finite and non-finite forms. There is now a general tendency for the perfect forms to
be replaced by non-perfect ones, especially in the spoken language. Thus, in English, we can also
observe a rapprochement of present perfect and past indefinite, especially in the American English,
where the process is more advanced. E.Benveniste, 64 too, is fully aware of the instability of the
system. (See below an extended explanation on the theme). In this connection we can observe, that
the perfect - non-perfect opposition (especially present perfect - past indefinite in English, pass
compos - pass simple in French and perfectul compus - perfectul simplu in Romanian) is
developing in a direction where there is a transition of a grammatical category in a stylistic one, i.e.
a new category is raising its head, the category of stylistics. Thus, in Romanian perfectul simplu is
very rarely used in the spoken language, where it is completely replaced by perfectul compus.
Perfectul simplu is used in fiction literature and is never used in scientific literature. Thus, this
grammatical opposition is gradually coming to express something different, a metasemiotic or
stylistic opposition. Another important point should be mentioned here, the simplification of a
system does not imply loss of ability of expressing different meanings. In an involved
morphological system various meanings are expressed by the opposition of different forms, while in
a system with a small number of forms, various meanings can be expressed by one and the same
form in different contexts or by changing the lexical character of the verb. Synchronic relationship
must be regarded as something that is in a state of flux. Change is the main category of natural
human languages, for they are historical categories, they develop or die out. By so doing, they
follow the fate of the speaking community, which has created them as the principal means of
communication. In order to verify the tendency in Modern English to substitute perfect forms in the
spoken language by simple ones, a number of examples were taken and given to students to be
translated from Romanian into English. The majority of examples had lexical or contextual markers
of anteriority. Those students, who were not familiar with the fact that future perfect is rarely used
in Modern English, regularly used grammatical perfect forms in nearly all the given examples. In a
second test the students were asked to translate a number of sentences with future perfect into
Romanian. Here we had two groups. In the first group the teacher stressed the fact that similar
forms exist in Romanian as well (viitorul anterior). A number of students did not hesitate to use
grammatical future anteriority in Romanian (in spite of the fact that it is very rarely used). In the
second group nothing was said about viitorul anterior. Here the students in the majority of cases
used simple grammatical forms, substituting grammatical anteriority with the lexical one. As far as
past perfect is concerned, it is still often used in both languages under consideration. But there is an
interesting observation to be made in this connection. In English, past perfect is an analytical form,
while in Romanian past anteriority is expressed by synthetic forms. In Romanian there are some
analytical forms used in colloquial speech to express past anterioity, but they are used very rarely.
For example: Mai mult ca perfectul analitic/perifrastic (aveam scris, era plecat), perfectul compus
perifrastic (am fost plecat, am fost zis). It goes without saying that if the confrontation of cognate
languages had been reduced to statements of complete formal identity, there would be no need in
working out a separate methodology, for contrastive linguistics, comparative-historical linguistics
would be adequate. Even confrontation of cognate languages becomes necessary because in a very
large number of cases they diverge widely for no synchronically obvious reason. When we confront
unrelated languages, we regard the complete non-coincidence of forms as quite natural and regular.
More than that, the complete coincidence even on the expression plane would be regarded as a
curious case, as a peculiar phenomenon. But when we are dealing with cognate languages we
cannot help asking: why is perfectul simplu not used regularly, is it so functionally limited as to be
34

replaced in speech and non-fiction texts by a stylistically more natural form - perfectul compus? It is
not always easy to explain this difference only by stylistic factors. It follows naturally that when we
compare English original texts with their translations into French and Romanian we always find
great similarity. Thus, for example: He entered the shop below; Il entra dans le magazine qui se
trouvait au rez-de-chausse; Intr n prvlia de la parter. Soames followed another method;
Soames adopta une autre mthode; Soames adopt o alt metod. (J.Galsworthy) Tom hailed the
romantic outcast. Tom appela le vagabond romantique. Tom l strig pe vagabondul romantic.
(M.Twain) The examples adduced here show the positive result of this confrontation: past indefinite
pass simple perfectul simplu are practically identical, both from the point of view of
synchronic functional confrontation and the historical community of morphological systems. When
confronting English, French and Romanian, we begin by concentrating on the original identity and
approach confrontation with preconceived ideas of potential correspondences already formed in
advance. We have an altogether different picture when we confront completely different languages
like English and Arabic or Chinese. In this case all the background knowledge we possess is a
certain abstract supposition. All we have as a background knowledge is that Arabic and Chinese
typologically are able to express actions coinciding with the moment of speech, preceding it, or
following it. We cannot have any previous assumptions what forms these oppositions may have,
because there is no comparative-historical basis whatsoever for us to go by. But when we are
dealing with cognate languages we cannot help asking: why not perfectul simplu, but perfectul
compus? Probably we should apply to Romanian what some specialists is the reason of a
comparatively low frequency of pass simple in French, the ousting of it by the form of pass
compos. Perfectul simplu is also functionally limited and is replaced in speech by perfectul
compus. There is every reason to believe that to try and explain this difference only by stylistic
factors would not be easy. This will be possible only if the non-coincidences were confined to
colloquial style: When did they go over? Cnd au emigrat? Quand ont-ils migr?; You were
absolutely right; Ai avut perfect dreptate; Tu a eu raison. For this register pass compos and
perfectul compus are better suited, because these forms here do not express an anterior action to the
present moment and the actions are not connected with the present moment of speech and, thus,
here they express actions completely identical with those expressed by past indefinite. In Romanian
and French there do not exist forms similar to the English past indefinite, that is why pass
compos and perfectul compus become polyfunctional. The context would help us find out whether
the action expressed is anterior or not anterior to the present moment. Past indefinite may
correspond to the form of imperfectul in Romanian. The past continuous has become so specifically
continuous, it is very often found to have a net semiotic connotation and past indefinite is
increasingly used in cse of lexical durative units to denote not merely point actions, but also those
which require serious attention to the way it progressed - hence the tendency to equate past
indefinite with imparfait and imperfectul: He represented for her the reality of things; El
reprezenta pentru ea realitatea vieii; Il reprsentait pour elle la ralit de la vie. It reminded me
too much; Dar ea mi-l reamintea; Mais elles me le rappelait. Every time the lexical meaning of the
verb is not punctual past indefinite and imperfect are quite comparable and can readily take each
others place. It is essential that this question should always be considered from the point of view of
dual meaning of the English past indefinite. The fact that the imperfect has a wider meaning in
Romanian than the English continuous aspect forms may be explained by the fact that the latter
appeared much later and its meaning is based not on aspectual opposition proper, but on a specific
continuous aspect as a form which in most cases is emphatically loaded. Of particular interest are
those cases when past indefinite is confronted with past anteriority forms in the confronted
languages. Only a study of the collocational situations can account for this: All through the house it
was a wakeful night; Casa ntreag petrecuse o noapte de veghe; Toute la maison avait pass un
35

nuit blanche. He was an actor on the English stage; Fusese actor pe scena englez; Il avait t un
comdien sur la scne anglaise. If we base our conclusions on the context, then what has been said
here in the past indefinite form is in the relationship of anteriority with the preceding and the
subsequent situations. The category of anteriority and the content of precedence in the case of two
events, following one another, are in a very complex relationship. The fact is that real anteriority
may both, find expression, or remain unexpressed, in the way the appropriate forms are used.
Everything depends on the purport of the utterance. It is interesting to note that anteriority is closely
connected, in the above given examples, with different predications of being. There are different
ways of saying or expressing it but the less natural ones would be metasemiotically colored. One
and the same actual situation may be categorially interpreted in completely different ways. The
choice of this or that interpretation will depend on the idiomatic character of this or that language as
well as the intention of the speaker. The real anteriority meaning may be grammatically expressed
or it may be not. Other anteriority means (lexical, contextual or both) take over the function.
Besides it also depends on the intention of the speaker. Thus, if we take the example: 1.There were
no mushrooms; Les champignons navaient pas pouss; Ciuperci nu se fcuser. It is very
important to take into consideration the fact that the category of anteriority is in close connection
with various sociolinguistic situations. Thus, we can say in Russian: or
. Let us consider the sentence There were no mushrooms, which was translated into French
and Romanian as: Ciuperci nu se fcuser; and Les champignons navaient pas pouss. If we
approach this translation from the point of extra-linguistic reality, then all the variants are identical.
More than that, it would be much more natural to translate There were no mushrooms into Russian
as . or . Or; for example: ? - . -
? - . There are various ways of expressing this idea, but,
of course, less natural of them gets a metasemiotic coloring. What has been said above is confirmed
by examples, where the English past indefinite is confronted with present in Romanian and French:
Linguistics was worked out within the framework of comparative grammar; Lingvistica se
elaboreaz n cadrul gramaticii comparative; La linguistique slabore dans le cadres de la
grammaire compare. (E.Benveniste) Why is it that the English version does not say Linguistics is
worked out within the framework of comparative grammar? In this case probably the English
translator is not using present tense because simply he would not consider this as an idiomatically
acceptable way of saying it or because he considers the action as being true in al the times; present,
future and past. It is also probable that in Romanian and French in such a case historical present
may be used without expressing any connotation. In English historical present would invariably
carry different semiotic overtones. Thus, for example, It is not always to be recognized in the
different stages, sometimes tentative, in which Saussures thought was engaged, Il nest pas
toujours facile de la reconnatre dans les dmarches diverses, parfois ttonnantes, ou sengage la
rflexion de Saussure, Nu este ntotdeauna uor de a recunoate la diferite etape, uneori tentative,
unde se angajeaz gndirea lui Saussure. (E.Benveniste) In contrast with French and Romanian, in
English present tense would be unacceptable, probably because it is fraught with emotional coloring
and vivacity, which in the present context would be out of place. In Russian, in such cases, present
tense is also used: A new phase developed at the beginning of nineteen century with the discovery of
Sanskrit, One phase nouvelle souvre au dbut du XIXe sicle avec la dcouverte du sanscrit, O
faz nou se ncepe la nceputul secolului XIX odat cu descoperirea limbii sanscrit,
XIX . (E.Benveniste) [39, 122-152]
10.2. The English Present Indefinite and its equivalents in Romanian and French
The English present indefinite should correspond to the French present and Romanian prezentul.
This is really confirmed by numerous examples: Tell me all about your sister and Jon. Parlez-moi
36

de votre soeur et Jon. Povestete-mi despre sora dumitale i despre Jon. Tell him that Im awfully
glad, and that I wish him luck, Dis-lui que je nen rjouis et que je lui souhaite beaucoup de
chance. Spune-i c m bucur foarte mult i c-i doresc noroc. I never bet, said Soames, and I dont
smoke. Je ne parie jamais, dit Soames, et je ne fume pas. Eu nu fac pariuri, zise Soames, i nu
fumez. (J.Galsworthy) Cases when present indefinite are confronted with pass compos and
perfectul compus have been described above. The differences are usually explained by the fact
whether the action is inclusive or exclusive. [39, 131]
10.3.The English Future Indefinite and its Equivalents in French and Romanian.
First of all we should mention the fact that the Romanian simple future possesses two synonymous
grammatical forms: a) the auxiliary a voi, a vrea ( Cf. Latin voleo/volere) plus the infinitive; b)
a avea plus the form of conjunctivul ( used here in the function of infinitive). The first form is
considered to be more formal, the second belongs to the colloquial style. Let us start with cases of
coincidence: Four rooms will be ready when you come back. Youll have a bathroom to yourself, of
course. Quand vous rentrerez, votre chambre sera prte. Vous aurez bien sur, votre sale de bain.
Cnd te ntorci, camera dumitale va fi gata. Vei avea, firete, baia dumitale. I will sell it at my
bazaar, Soames. It will do for some good man who can read English. Je le vendrai au march de
notre socit, Soames. Ca sera utile un homme qui sait lire en anglaise. Am s-o vnd la bazarul
societii noastre de binefacere, Soames. O s fie (are s fie) de folos vreunui om cumsecade, care
tie s citeasc englezete. (J.Galsworthy)
There are examples where the English future indefinite is confronted in French and
Romanian with present tense: We shall give below the total number of usable Persian examples.
Nous donnons ci-dessous la totalit des exemples perses utilisables. Noi dm mai jos totalitatea
exemplelor utilizabile n limba persan. We shall attempt to restore the facts to their true light.
Nous tentons de remettre les faits dans leur vritable lumire. Noi ncercm (vom ncerca) s
reconstituim faptele n lumina lor adevrat. (E.Benveniste) Suppose we use future tense in in
French and Romanian sentences. Present tense probably in this context has a wider meaning, than in
English. While translating E.Benvenistes book from French into English the translator chose future
indefinite, probably, he had reasons to choose this grammatical tense, taking into consideration the
characteristic features of the scientific information in both languages. The use of present tense in
English in the above given examples would make them stylistically colored. In French and
Romanian the use of present tense here corresponds to the style of such registers. [39, 132]
10.4.The English Present Perfect and its Equivalents in French and Romanian
As far as present perfect is concerned it is included in the category of taxis but in this case we do
not find a clear-cut opposition as in the case of future perfect and past perfect. Comparing past
indefinite and present perfect we see that in both cases the actions are in the past. The main
difference between them is that past indefinite is an action separated by the speaker from the present
moment: (I visited London in January; Am vizitat Londra n ianuarie; I saw him ten seconds ago;
L-am vzut zece secunde n urm), and present perfect expresses an anterior action connected with
the present moment: 1) directly connected: (I have lived in London for 10 years; Am locuit n
Londra de zece ani/Locuiesc n Londra de zece ani; I have been waiting you for an hour; Te atept
de o or) and 2) indirectly by means of a period of time connected with the present moment: (I
have visited London this year; Am vizitat Londra anul acesta; I have seen him this week; L-am
vzut anul acesta). If there is no time marker and no context we usually use present perfect (I have
read all the books written by this author; Am citit toate crile scrise de acest autor). What I mean
is that I began to read them somewhere in the past and continued to read them during my life up till
now. In case I want to tell you exactly when I finished reading them I could say: I read all these
books written by this author last year. Present perfect may also be used to express future anteriority
37

in clauses of time and condition (As soon as I have read the book I shall return it to you. And if I
have read it by five oclock, Ill give it to you today). At first sight it seems that there is complete
coincidence between present perfect in English and perfectul compus in Romanian. But the actual
functioning is quite different. Perfectul compus has one more function, that of expressing actions
not connected with the present moment and in this case it is regularly confronted with past
indefinite in English: 1) Anteriority directly connected with the present moment equivalent to
present perfect exclusive actions (I have read the book up till now/ I have been reading the book up
till now; Am citit cartea pn acum). In case of present perfect inclusive, it is regularly rendered into
Romanian by means of present (I have lived in this town for 20 years; I have been living in this
town for 20 years; Locuiesc n acest orel de 20 de ani); 2) Anteriority indirectly connected with
the present moment by means of a period of time (I have seen him this year; L-am vzut anul
acesta; I have vizited London three times this century; Am vizitat Londra de trei ori n secolul
acesta); 3) An action not connected with the present moment (Am citit o carte ieri; I read a book
yesterday); 4) Future anteriority used stylistically in colloquial speech (Cum numai am citit cartea
i-o intorc; As soon as I have read the book I shall return it to you; Cum am ajuns acas m apuc
de lucru; As soon as I have got home I shall start working). It should be mentioned here that in
English present perfect is used to express future anteriority only in clauses of time and condition
expressing an anterior action in the future, while in Romanian perfectul compus is used stilistically
and is limited to the colloquial language.
If we compare the examples adduced below it would appear that present perfect, pass compose and
perfectul compus could be regarded as identical (when they express an anterior action connected
with the present moment), and taking into consideration the complete formal correspondence we
arrive at a tripartite identity. Thus, for example: It was rather funny - theres never been a Forsyte,
you know, anywhere near Parliament, Ctait une conversation assez drle car tu sais quaucun
Forsyte ne sest mme pas approch du parlement, A fost o convorbire destul de caraghioas, doar
tii c nici un Forsyte nu s-a apropiat mcar de parlament. (J.Galsworthy) At first sight it seems
that there is complete coincidence between present perfect in English, on the one side, and pass
compos in French and perfectul compus in Romanian, on the other hand. In the actual functioning
there is a great difference. Thus, if we say in English So, Jons married your sister? and in
Romanian Jon s-a cstorit cu sora dumitale? Then we shall find that in English we can refer to the
fact of Jon marrying somebodys sister by using both present perfect and past indefinite: both Jon
has married your sister and Jon married your sister or Jon married your sister, didnt he? are
grammatically faultless and would fully correspond to the English grammar rules. The difference
between has married (expressing an anterior action connected with the present moment) and
married (an action not connected with the present moment) will consist in connotations connected
with the idea of expression and non-expression of the grammatical meaning of anteriority. Now if
we were to translate exactly Jon married your sister into French and Romanian Jon maria votre
soeur and Jon se cstori cu sora dumitale, then we would be faced with a stylistic difference.[39,
133-142
10.5.The Categorial Meaning of Past Perfect in the Confronted Languages
Past perfect is used to express anteriority to an action or moment in the past. Coincidence: past
perfect plus-que-parfait pluscvamperfectul: He had bought the meadows on the far side of the
river. Il avait achet les pturages de lautre bord de la rivire. Cumprase punile de pe cellalt
mal al Tamisei. (J.Galsworthy) It should be mentioned the fact that pluscvamperfectul in Romanian
has practically lost its analytical forms gradually substituted by a synthetic form (going back to an
analytical form of past participle plus the verb a fi). Let us adduce some example of analytical
perfect forms still found in literature. Examples:.i cum ajunge la fntn, scoate mai nti furca,
de unde o avea strns, i apoi se pune jos s se odihneasc. And when he reached the well, first of
38

all he took the fork out of the place he had put it, and then he sat down to rest. Un om, suindu-se pe
o ur, unde avea aruncat nite fn, trgea din rsputeri de funie. A man climbing on a shed, who
he had piled some hay, was pulling the rope up with might and main. The perfect forms in the
sentences given above are formed by means of the auxiliary a avea plus past participle. In what
follows we shall give examples of analytical past perfect forms with the auxiliary a fi plus
participleII: Nu l-am auzit revenind i dimineaa am constatat c tot plecat era. I did not hear him
return and in the morning I found that he had been away. Pe cnd eram ajuns aici cu scrisul fusei
ntrerupt de fetia mea. My daughter interrupted me when I had reached this point of my writing.
Era o csu singuratic, pe care era crescut nite muchi pletos. It was a lonely house, on which
some shaggy moss had grown. In Romanian we could find forms identical to the French pass
surcompos usually translated by means of past perfect: i mai ales c i-au fost nchis din urm.
And especially that they had locked them inside. Noi am fost zis c snt muli We had said that
there were many. N-a dus lips de nimic ct timp ai fost plecat. He had everything he needed during
the time you had been away.
Non-coincidence: we find past perfect confronted with French pass simple, pass compos and
even imparfait; and Romanian perfectul simplu, perfectul compus and imperfectul (used instead of
plus-que-parfait and pluscvamperfectul). For example: 1) past perfect pass compose perfectul
compus:.I replied unwittingly, and not at first observing the extraordinary manner in which the
speaker had chimed in with my meditation; Comme jtais plong dans mes panses, je nai pas
mme remarqu des le commencement que les paroles de Dupin ont concid avec mes panses;
ngndurat cum eram, la nceput nici nu mi-am dat seama c vorbele lui Dupin au coincis ntocmai
cu gndurile mele. The grammatical anteriority used in the French and Romanian sentences are
expressed contextually. Besides, there is a tendency in Romanian and American English for present
anteriority forms to be substituted by past anteriority units in colloquial speech..
2) past perfect pass simple perfectul simplu: On the evening of twenty second birthday
Michael had come home; Le soir de 22-me anniversaire de Fleur Michel vint la maison; n
seara celei de-a douzeci i dou aniversri a lui Fleur, Mihail veni acas. (J.Galsworthy) In
French and Romanian a stylistically charged form is used, anteriority being expressed contextually.
3) past perfect imparfait imperfectul: For one hour at least we had maintained a profound
silence; Il avait dj un heur que nous gardions le plus complet silence; De o or noi pstram
amndoi cea mai deplin tcere. In this case the French and Romanian imperfect forms express
anteriority lexically and contextually and the main grammatical meaning is that of durative aspect,
which in its turn is lexically expressed in the English variant.
4) past perfect pass antrieur perfectul compus: When the king had disappeared the princes
and princesses grouped themselves around the queen. Aussitt que le roi eut disparu, tout ce quil y
avait dans la sale de princes et de princesses vint se grouper autour de la reine. ndat ce regele
dispru prinii i prinesele din sal se grupar n jurul reginei.(A.Dumas) Past perfect in English
and pass antrieur in French are very close in meaning, both expressing past anteriority. Perfectul
compus in its turn expresses here a simple past action, anteriority here being expressed contextually.
The anteriority forms are becoming now peripheral and even facultative. In situations of
ordinary, everyday speech it is very easy to do without them as in Romanian colloquial speech,
where pluscuamperfectul is regularly substituted by perfectul compus and sometimes by imperfect
(for a durative anterior action). The category of taxis does not need to be expressed by elaborate
morphological means. It would be faultlessly correct to say: First I went to the University and then
(later) I went to the library. The confrontation of the English present perfect and the French prsent
and prezentul in Romanian is comparatively simple because of the very close affinity between
present perfect and what is actually happening at the moment of speaking. A direct confrontation of
present perfect with prsent and prezentul must be justified in general, for the action which is
39

denoted by this form immediately affects the state of things which are found at the moment of
speaking. Thus, for example: It has been been observed, indeed, that these are not equaly subject to
change; On observe, en effet, que ceux-ci ne sont pa galement soumis au changement; ntr-adevr,
se observ, c acestea nu sunt supuse unor schimbri. Thus, any inclusive anterior action to the
present moment is usually expressed in Romanian and French by means of present tense forms. The
form of past perfect is used to express unreal anteriority actions in the past, present and future in
clauses of unreal condition (subjunctive II), Speaking of past perfect form we should mention that it
can express the following meanings in English: 1) In the indicative mood: a) past anteriority (an
action anterior to another action or moment in the past): When I came home he had (already) gone;
Cnd am venit acas el (deja) plecase;
b) future anteriority in the past: He promised to return the book as soon as he had read it; El a
promis s ntoarc cartea cum numai va citi-o (va fi citit-o); It is used to express an unreal optative
meaning or condition, or both in the past subjunctive II. In this case the form of past perfect is not
limited to anterior actions in the past, or anterior actions in the future from a moment in the past (in
clauses of time and condition). It is used to express any anterior action to the moment of speech in
the past, present or future. Lets adduce some examples: a) past perfect indicative mood: He said
she had come in time; El a zis c ea venise la timp; b) subjunctive II, anteriority to a past action: He
said he would have come earlier if he had known; El a spus c ar fi venit (venea) mai devreme dac
ar fi avut (s fi avut, dac avea) timp; c) subjunctive II, a past action, non-anterior: If she had come
in time yesterday you would have seen her; Dac ea ar fi venit (s fi venit, dac venea) la timp ieri
ai fi vzut-o (o vedeai); d) subjunctive II, future anteriority in the past: I knew he would say that he
would have come if he had known; Eu tiam c el va spune c ar fi venit (venea) dac ar fi tiut (s
fi tiut); e) subjunctive II, anteriority to a moment or action in the future: She thinks he will say that
he would have come if he had known; Ea crede c el va spune c ar fi venit (venea) dac ar fi tiut
(s fi tiut, dac tia). There is a tendency in English (especially in the American variant)
sometimes to use a present perfect form instead of past perfect in colloquial speech, anteriority in
such cases is expressed lexically or contextually. This tendency is much more advanced in the
Romanian language. In the spoken non-literary language people would regularly substitute
pluscvamperfectul with perfectul compus (in the meaning of past indefinite), anteriority again is
supported lexically and phonetically: Cnd am venit ea deja a plecat instead of Cnd am venit ea
deja plecase. Comparing English and Romainian texts very often we find non-coincidences like: 1)
past perfect - perfectul compus: I replied unwittingly, and not at first observing the extraordinary
manner in which the speaker had chimed in with my meditation. ngndurat cum eram, la inceput
nici nu mi-am dat seama ca vorbele lui au coincis ntocmai cu gndurile mele. This discrepancy
may be also explained with the tendency in Romanian to substitute pluscvamperfectul by perfectul
compus.
2) past perfect - perfectul simplu: On the evening of her twenty-second (Fleurs) birthday Michael
had come home. In seara celei de-a douazeci si doua aniversari a lui Fleur, Mihai veni acasa.
Again, simple perfect is used here. Simple perfect is used only in fiction in the written form, with
the exception of some dialects. Here it may have been used by the translator to express an anterior
action in combination with contextual means) and this may be considered as a tendency of
pluscvamperfectul in Romanian to gradually get out of usage. As we have already mentioned the
anteriority plane can now be regarded as a supercilious pedanticism. The anteriority form is
becoming peripheral and even facultative, for in situations of ordinary, everyday dialogue it is very
easy to do without it. Thus, the simultaneity-anteriority category (taxis) need not necessarily be
expressed by elaborate morphological means. It would be faultlessly correct to say, for example, He
first went to London, and then he came to Paris or He was in London and came to Paris much later.
We would like to conclude by mentioning some important points of linguistic confrontation to be
40

taken into consideration. First of all, we have to stress the fact, that one could not compare two or
more languages, unless one had a very clear idea of a certain underlying tertium comparationis. In
our case it is English and its category of taxis, which is well developed and has been linguistically
well investigated), some third member on the basis of which the confrontation is effected. Our
previous knowledge of the confronted languages also helps us to secure a firm stand, a reliable basis
for our analysis and there is no doubt that synchronic confrontation of any two systems cannot be
really scientific unless account is carefully taken of their previous development.
The perfect forms in both languages tend to be replaced by simple non-perfect forms and the
categorial meaning of anteriority is expressed lexically or contextually. This process is more
advanced in Romanian, where some analytical perfect forms are now very rarely used. Our view is
that the researcher should not shut his eyes and ignore the historical associations. Another important
point should be mentioned here, the simplification of a system does not imply loss of ability of
expressing different meanings. In an involved morphological system various meanings are
expressed by the opposition of different forms, while in a system with a small number of different
forms, various meanings can be expressed by one and the same form in different contexts or by
changing the lexical character of the verb. Synchronic relationship must be regarded as something
that is in a state of flux. [39, 122-164]
10.6.Hypercorrectness or Hypergrammaticality
As a good example here we can take future perfect forms in English, French and Romanian. When
we investigate the material under investigation we still come across examples of Future perfect in
all the confronted languages. Thus, for example: future perfect future antrieur viitorul anterior:
Youll arrive next day after we shall have prepared the way. Vous arriverez le lendemain, quand
nous aurons dj prpar les voies. Voi vei ajunge a doua zi, dup ce noi vom fi pregtit calea. You
will have refused once again. Vous aurez encore une fois refus. Vei fi refuzat nc o dat. In these
examples we have complete coincidence. In order to verify the tendency in Modern English to
substitute perfect forms in the spoken language by using simple forms a number of examples were
taken and given to students to be translated from Russian into Romanian. The majority of examples
had lexical or contextual markers of anteriority. Most of the students translated the examples using
simple non-perfect future forms: ;
Spre sfritul anului noi vom studia multe cuvinte i expresii noi;
; Noi vom termina lucrul acesta spre sfrit de sptmn; The Romanian equivalents
were given to a different group of students to translate them into English. Those students, who were
not familiar with the fact that future perfect is rarely used in Modern English, regularly used
grammatical perfect forms in nearly all the given examples: We shall have learned many new words
and expressions by the end of the year; We shall have finished this work by the end of the week; She
will have forgotten everything by that time; We shall have finished this text-book by the end of the
year; He will have written this article before he leaves. In a third group the students were asked to
translate the above given English examples with future perfect into Romanian. Here we had two
subgroups. In the first subgroup the teacher stressed the fact that similar forms existed in Romanian
as well (viitorul anterior). A number of students did not hesitate to use grammatical future
anteriority in Romanian (in spite of the fact that it is very rarely used): Spre sfritul anului noi vom
fi studiat multe cuvinte i expresii noi. Noi vom fi terminat lucrul acesta spre sfrit de sptmn.
Ea va fi uitat totul pn atunci. Noi vom fi terminat acest manual spre sfrit de an. El va fi scris
articolul acesta nainte de a pleca. In the second subgroup nothing was said about viitorul anterior.
Here the students in the majority of cases used simple grammatical future forms, substituting
grammatical anteriority with the lexical one. [39, 72]
41

10.7.Category of Anteriority as seen by A.I.Smirnitsky and E.Benveniste.

Historical linguistics in general, comparative philology in particular, has accumulated a
great body of material, especially for the Romance languages. But as a rule, manuals on the history
of these languages are mainly oriented towards the development of different frms the change of
which has taken place in Morphology and Morphonology. This does not mean that the meanings of
these forms and the peculiarities of their function, as well as the change in their content, which
accompany the formal overhauling of the systems, did not attract any attention at all. Attention has
been attracted to them all. Until comparatively recently the content and even the existence itself of
the category of taxis could not be regarded as sufficiently clarified. More than that, however
paradoxical it may seem, the discovery of this category and its development in detail were
independently undertaken, completed and put into effect by two great linguists of our time. In what
follows we would like to underline the importance of two well known scientists that separately
came to the conclusion that the opposition of perfect/non I perfect forms constitutes the category of
anteriority: A.Smirnitsky for English and E.Benveniste for French. According to Smirnitsky
perfectivity is anteriority, it is the meaning of an action which precedes another action or
moment of speech. [39, 145]
E.Benveniste is fully aware of the instability of the system. He takes into consideration the
fact that, for example, the relationship between the forms il fit and il a fait is always in a state of
flux. Benveniste comes to the conclusion that jai fait, may either function as an aorist or express
anteriority (being a perfect form) and as a grammatical form it carries two different categorial forms
(in different contexts) of the same category. Benveniste in his book Problmes de linguistique [39,
145]succeeds in giving a convincing explanation of the reason why in French there gradually
evolved the so-called temps surcomposes. Thus, jai eu fait, for example, becomes a new perfect,
for jai fait, which in its turn becomes functionally indistinguishable from an aorist. The system is
thus reconstituted, and the, opposition becomes symmetric again: To the present je mange is
opposed a perfect jai mang, which furnishes discourse with (1) a present perfective (e.g. jai
mange, je nai plus faim); (2) a present anterior (e.g. quand jai mang ; je sors , me promener).
When jai mang becomes the aorist, it recreates for itself a new perfect, jai eu mang. Which
similarly gives (1) an aorist perfective (e.g. jai eu mang mon repas en dix minutes); (2) an aorist
anterior (e.g. quand jai eu mange, je suis sorti). Moreover, the temporal parallelism is
reestablished between the two planes of utterance: the pair il mangea (aorist): il eut mang
(perfect) of historical narration now corresponds to il a mang (the new aorist): il a eu mang
(the new perfect) in discourse. The systematic comparison of the two morphological studies is
necessary because of the importance attached to relationship between synchronic states, and
diachronic drifts and tendencies. It has also helped to clarify some methodological aspects of
linguistic research. As far as the theory of morphological relationships is concerned, the concept of
anteriority versus simultaneity or taxis has been vindicated independently by A.Smirnitsky and
E.Benveniste for both English and French. In this connection we can conclude that the perfect/nonperfect opposition (especially present perfect/past indefinite in English, pass compos/ pass
simple in French and perfectul compus/ perfectul simplu in Romanian) is developing in a direction
where there is a transition of a grammatical category in a stylistic one, i.e. a new category is raising
its head, the category of stylistics. Thus, this grammatical opposition is gradually coming to express
something different, a met semiotic or stylistic opposition. Another important point should be
mentioned here, the simplification of a system does not imply loss of ability of expressing different
meanings. In an involved morphological system different meanings are expressed by the opposition
of different forms while in a system with a small number of different forms, different meanings can
be expressed by one and the same form in different contexts or by changing the lexical character of
the verb. Synchronic relationship must be regarded as something that is in a state of flux. Change is
42

the main category of natural human languages, for they are historical categories, they develop or die
out. By so doing, they follow the fate of the speech community; which has created them as the
principal means of communication. [39, 145-151]
10.8.A Contrastive Analysis of Non-finite Forms of Taxis
If we take the category of taxis in the predicative forms, we observe that the categorial forms of
anteriority are mixed with those of tense, voice and aspect. In the nominal forms taxis is usually
expressed in a pure way. The non-predicative forms in English are: past participle, present
participle, the gerund and the infinitive.
Non-perfect infinitive (the unmarked form of taxis).
When we compare related languages we always expect to find more coincidences than
differences. Lets take some examples from English and Romanian and confront them and in some
cases do the same with examples taken from English and Arabic [39, 240-254]: Smaller boys than
himself flocked at his heels proud to be seen with him. (M.Twain) Les petits garons couraient
aprs lui, fiers detre vu avec lui. Bieii mici alergau buluc n urma lui, mndri de a fi vz]i
mpreun cu el. We find many examples of complete coincidence. But there is a great number of
them classified as non-coincidences. Very often the English and French infinitive forms are
translated into Romanian by conjunctivul, a polysemantic form which has been gradually taking
over the functions of the infinitive especially in colloquial style: The storm culminated in one
matchless effort that seemed likely to tear the island to pieces, burn it up, drown it to the treetops,
blow it away, and deafen every creature in it, all at one and the same moment. (M.Twain) Lorage
se jeta avec une telle fureur quil semblait quelle voulait mettre lile en pices, la brler avec ses
flames, inonder les arbres, la rduire a nant et exterminer toute creature vivante. Furtuna se
npusti cu atta furie, nct prea c vrea s sfrme insula n ndri, s-o mistue n flcri, s
inunde copacii, s-o mistuie depe faa pmntului i s strpeasc orice fiin vie. (M.Twain) Al
asifa Ratabat Al akes Haiso Bada masmuhan fi Al gazera , yatawazali, yaratab yakser, yaheb,
yadfah kulshaif fi Al hal. The non-perfect infinitive in Arabic (Al Hader Basit -present infinitive) is
corresponding to the English simple infinitive. In Romanian the English infinitive is very often
confronted with conjunctivul. In the example above we find two infinitives that have been
translated into Arabic by means of past indefinite (Al Madi Basit): Al asifa, Bada, Al hal and
stresses on t and n in Ratabat and masmuhan. Here is an example where the infinitive is
translated into Arabic by means of the present indefinite without a stress (Al hader Basit): To take
from a civilian to give to a civilian. An Yahuz min Al Madania.
Next we are going to give examples with perfect infinitive forms in English, French, Arabic and
Romanian: Yes, and fortunately enough to have found the carriage,- answered the queen
(A.Dumas). Oui, et trop heureuse encore davoir trouv ce fiacre. Da, i prea fericit chiar de a fi
gsit (s fi gsit) trsura - replica regina. (A.Dumas) Naham La sah Al haz gedan an naged Al
Araba. In Romanian the form of perfect infinitive is found in formal speech, while in the colloquial
speech conjunctivul perfect is preferred. Now lets take some examples of non-coincidence: Oh,
isnt that so? cried Oliva, delighted to have been caught in the fact of putting up resistance. Oh!
Nest-ce pas? scria Oliva enchante de avoir t prise en flagrant dlit de rsistance. Ah, nu-i
aa? strig Oliva, ncntat c fusese prins (de a fi fost prins) n flagrant delict de rezisten.
(A.Dumas). In the official translation we find complete coincidence in English and French. In
Romanian in all the examples past perfect (pluscvamperfectul) was used ihn case of anteriority in
the past. Past perfect here can be easily substituted in formal language by perfect infinitive in
Romanian. There are examples where the French plus-que-parfait is also confronted with perfect
infinitive in English: A sun, that he did not seem to have seen since he came over here. Un soleil,
comme il lui semblait, quil navait pas vu depuis le jour quand il avait travers locan. Un soare
43

pe care, dup cte i se prea, nu-l mai zrise de cnd trecuse oceanul. But in both cases the
anteriority meaning is the same. Perfect infinitive in English and infintif pass can be confronted in
Romanian with perfectul compus, expressing anteriority to the present moment: I am sure only to
have heard what I have heard, to have seen what my eyes have seen! Suis-je bien sur de avoir
entendu ce que jai entendu, davoir vu ce que mes yeux ont vu ! Snt sigur numai c am auzit (de a
vi auzit) ceea ce am auzit, c am vzut (de a fi vzut) ceea ce am vzut! This fact is easily explained
by the fact that in different languages in certain situations various types of taxis means are used to
express anteriority. The French pass compos can also be confronted with the English perfect
infinitive: Sorry to have bothered you. Cest dommage que je vous ai ennuy. mi pare ru c v-am
plictisit. In Arabic in the examples below we have Al hader tam regularly used, accompanied by
some lexical forms with a logical stress on them to identify the given form (an+ stress; Bahda + wa
+ stress; Ahiran + an +wa + stress). After having looked at the rat again they separated horrified to
have said so many things misterious and delicate. (M.Twain) Privind la obolan din nou ei s-au
desprit ngrozii de a fi spus att de multe lucruri misterioase i delicate. Bahda Al nazar alaiha
saniatan ham tafaraku Li yakulu Ashiah kasira wa wagiha. At last Ill obtain the favour from you
not to leave behind the regret to have seen the poor queen perish and to have not fought for her.
(A.Dumas) Voi obine nsfrit de la Dumneavoastr favoarea de a nu lsa n urma mea regretul
de a fi vzut cum piere biata regin i de a nu m fi luptat pentru ea. Ahiran anna saufa Atahis
minka an Agader halfa Al malik Al fakir wa an Aharibaha. Confronting the material we come to
the conclusion that the perfect infinitive forms are widely used in English and French, and relatively
not so often in Romanian, especially in the spoken language. Cases of perfectul infinitiv in
translations can be easily replaced by the conjunctivul perfect, which are preferable in usual less
bookish speech. [39, 240-254]
There are cases where the English Perfect infinitive is translated into Romanian by past perfect
and present perfect. While analyzing the non-finite forms we shall sometimes name participle I and
gerund as -ing forms. The difference between them is that the gerund is closer to the noun in its
functions, and the participle is closer to the adjective. In their perfect forms they have some
common functions (of adverbial modifier) and both forms express anteriority. Thus, for example:
Having registered all the letters, the secretary sent them down to be posted. Having won the first
match by only one point, the players realized that they must train much harder to win the
championship. If the actions follow one after the other, a simple form (non-perfect) is used,
anteriority being expressed simply lexically or contextually, there is no need to intensify it by
grammatical anteriority: Not finding my friend at home, I left a note for him. On entering the room
he introduced himself to all those present. After looking through the morning mail the manager,
called in his secretary and dictated a few letters. The perfect -ing forms are usually used in the
formal bookish language. Their passive voice forms are used much more rarely even in the literary
language. The perfect infinitive in English is still regularly used both in the literary and colloquial
styles (in the former it is much more often used). For example: Yes, and fortunately enough to have
found the carriage. At last Ill obtain the favour from you not to leave behind the regret to have
seen the poor queen perish, and to not have fought for her. Confronting the nominal perfect forms
it was observed that they are relatively more often used in English and French than in Romanian,
where predicative forms are preferred.
Participle I non-perfect form: a) participle I participe prsent gerunziul: Tom lay
watching the two intently. Tom tait couch les fixant des yeux tous le deux. Tom sttea culcat,
scurtndu-i lung pe amndoi. The boys went off grieving that there were no outlaws any more, and
wondering... Les garons se plaignant quil ny avait plus des voleurs dans le monde et
sefforant Bieii pornit spre cas, cinndu-se c pe lume nu mai sunt vestii tlhari,
44

frmntndu-i mintea...(M.Twain) The Romanian gerunziul is naturally confronted with the

English participle I.
b) Participle I grondif gerunziul: So he got into the shoes snarling. Tom, en marmottant, mit ses
souliers. Tom, bodognind, ncl pantofii. I went to sleep reading. Hier soir je me suis endormi
en lisant. Asar am adormit citind. (M.Twain)
c) Participle I imparfait imperfectul (or gerunziul): Tom lay thinking. Tom tait couch et
pensait. Tom sta culcat i se gndea (gndindu-se). (M.Twain) A durative action expressed by
participle I in a context in the past can easily be rendered into French and Romanian by means of
imperfect forms, which express a durative and unfinished action in the past.
Gerund non-perfect form: a) Gerund grondif gerunziul: In getting out, he looked
back. En sortant, le jeune homme tourna la tte. Ieind, tnrul ntoarse capul. Upon leaving the
hut I rapped as was my custom, and getting no reply, sought for the key. Arrivant a la hute jai
frapp la porte comme dhabitude et ne recevant aucune rponse, jai cherch la cl. Ajungnd la
colib, am btut la u ca de obicei i, neprimind rspuns, am dibuit cheia.The English gerund and
the French grondif in the function of adverbial modifier of time are regularly confronted with
gerunziul.
b) Gerund plus-que-parfait mai mult ca perfectul. After destroying some further portions of his
lawn, he joined the nearest Golf Club. Quand il avait dtruit quelques autres portions de son
pturage, il sinscrivit dans le club de golf le plus proche. Dup ce distrusese (distrugnd) alte
cteva poriuni de pe pajitea sa, se nscrise n cel mai apropiat club de golf. (J.Galsworthy) French
and Romanian prefer past perfect forms when the English gerund is accompanied by lexical
anteriority means.
c) Gerund pass compos perfectul compus (or gerunziul): Upon reaching the wharf, I
noticed a scythe and three spades,,, Quand nous sommes arrives sur la quai, jai remarqu une faux
et bches. Cnd am ajuns (ajungnd) la chei, am observat... o coas i dou hrlee. In all the
confronted sentences here we have consecutive actions. Thus, anteriority grammatical forms are not
used here. The French pass compos and the Romanian perfectul compus in the given context
express an action separated from the present moment, and, thus, they do not express grammatical
anteriority in this case and we have simultaneity in the confronted examples.
d) Gerund infinitif infinitivul: Instead of considering each element by itself and seeking for the
cause Au lieu de considrer chaque lment en soi et den chercher la cause n loc de a
considera fiecare element n sine i de a cuta cauza.... (E.Benveniste) In the French and
Romanian examples in the given context the infinitive is possible, taking into consideration the fact
that the verb equivalents of the verb to consider lexically preserve the durative meaning expressed
by the English gerund.
c) Gerund imparfait imperfectul: Soames made a point of eating one every year. Soames goutait
une fraise chaque anne. Soames gusta n fiecare an cte o mur. The grammatical duration
expressed by the English gerund is expressed by imperfect forms in the confronted sentences (see
the same in the case of participle I and imperfect forms).
Participle I perfect forms. a) Perfect participle participe pass compos gerunziul
perfect: Having arrived the first, you have the primarity. Vous avez le pas, tant arriv le premier.
Avei ntietate fiind venit primul. Here we have complete coincidence in all the three languages,
though gerunziul perfect in Romanian is rarely used and is usually substituted by forms given
below. The only difference that the auxiliaries in the target languages are the verbs tant, fiind.
b) Perfect participle infinitif pass perfectul compus : The courtiers, having entered, brought
furnaces and massy hammers and welded the bolts. Les courtesans ont apport des forges et aprs
avoir entr, il ont clou la porte de lintrieur. Curtenii aduseser cu ei forje i ilie grele i, dup
45

ce au intrat, au intuit poarta pe dinuntru. In spite of the fact that there are different forms in the
confronted languages the grammatical meaning of anteriority is preserved in all of them.
c) Perfect participle plus-que-parfait mai mult ca perfectul: Soames, having prolonged his weekend visit had been spending the afternoon at the Zoological Gardens. Soames avait continu son
week-end Londres et avait pass laprs-midi dans le jardin zoologique. Soames i prelungise
week-endul la Londra i i petrecuse dup ameaza n grdina zoologic. (J.Galsworthy) Perfect
participle is readily translated into French and Romanian by means of past perfect forms, expressing
the grammatical meaning of past anteriority. It could be substituted by a past perfect form in
English as well.
Past Participle. The past participle is regularly confronted with the French participe pass and the
Romanian participial trecut: The methodology tested in the Indo-European field set the pattern. La
mthode prouve sur le domaine indo-europen est devenue exemplaire. Metoda experimentat n
domeniul indo-european a devenit exemplar. The English participle II can sometimes correspond
to the Romanian mai mult ca perfectul: On the staircase Charny met only some officers, friends of
his, informed beforehand. Charny ne rencontra sur les degres que plusieurs officiers, ses amis,
prvenus assez temps. Pe scri, Charny ntlni numai civa ofieri, prieteni de ai si, care fusese
anunai (anunai) din timp. The anteriority meaning in the confronted languages is practically the
same. The category of taxis expressed by the category of representation is expressed in a most
pure way.
10.9. The Category of Taxis in Oblique Moods
Anteriority is expressed in the purest way by lexical means and by non-finite forms of the
verb. The taxis marked grammatical forms have much in common in many European languages, as
their systems go back to the same source. The grammatical perfect forms historically appeared in
the ancient times, developed into a complex system, and they started to lose their position to some
other linguistic means, like lexical and contextual ones, which up till now played a secondary part
in the conceptual category of anteriority. The grammatical forms gradually lose their weight and are
substituted by much simpler forms of the verbs, anteriority being expressed by non-grammatical
means. Thus, the category of taxis can be expressed grammatically, lexically, lexico-grammatically,
contextually, and it may be prosodically intensified. In the majority of cases taxis is expressed by at
least two of the existing categorial linguistic means (lexical and grammatical means occur much
more frequently). Even in the English language the lexical means are nowadays in the process of
gaining more ground than the grammatical ones. In many European languages the category of taxis
(simultaneity-anteriority, correlation, anteriority, perfectivity, time relationship, perfect aspect, etc.)
is in constant process of transition from pure grammatical categories to lexical and grammatical
ones, or just to pure lexical means. It has been observed that the non-finite perfect forms are
practically not used in journalese, either in British or American newspapers. As far as finite perfect
forms are concerned, preference is given to present perfect, because this is the form that is best
suited to establishing a correlation between past and present, on the one hand, and the connection
between the performer and the undergoer of the speech event, on the other.
We are going to analyze examples concerning the category of taxis expressed by perfect
forms of oblique moods in English, French and Romanian, in order to find out the degree of the
realization of the anteriority categorial meaning. This problem has not been studied properly yet.
Oblique Moods and the Category of Anteriority.
b) subjunctive II and conditional mood, anteriority to a past action: He said he would have come
earlier if he had known; El a spus c ar fi venit (venea) mai devreme dac ar fi avut (s fi avut,
dac avea) timp;
46

c) subjunctive II, anteriority to the present moment of speech: If she had come in time yesterday you
would have seen her; Dac ea ar fi venit (s fi venit, dac venea) la timp ieri ai fi vzut-o (o
vedeai);
d) subjunctive II, future anteriority in the past: I knew he would say that he would have come if he
had known; Eu tiam c el va spune c ar fi venit (venea) dac ar fi tiut (s fi tiut);
e) subjunctive II, anteriority to a moment or action in the future: She thinks he will say that he
would have come if he had known; Ea crede c el va spune c ar fi venit (venea) dac ar fi tiut (s
fi tiut, dac tia).
It is well known that in the natural human languages content and form are actually
inseparable. We cannot abstract ourselves from form in analytical comparison and from content in
comparative philology. What is the actual connection between confrontational linguistics and
comparative philology? In what way are we supposed to avail ourselves of the results of
comparative-historical investigation when confronting cognate and unrelated languages? In order
that this problem may be presented as clearly as possible, we shall turn to the category of anteriority
in English and Romanian. By confronting, for example, the category of taxis in English and
Romanian, we came to the conclusion, that there is a common tendency in both languages. The
perfect forms in both languages tend to be replaced by simple non-perfect forms and the categorical
meaning of anteriority is expressed lexically or contextually. This process is more advanced in
Romanian, where some analytical perfect forms are now very rarely used.
11.The Semiotic and Metasemiotic Use of the Category of Voice
The morphological-grammatical forms can be studied on two levels 1) the semantic level,
where, for example, the present tense forms express actions which include the moment of speaking,
and 2) the metasemiotic level, where present tense forms are used to denote an action which clearly
does not include the moment of speaking. The process of transition of some grammatical categories
into lexical ones is being observed in many languages. It has been observed that the marked
members of the opposition are metasemiotically charged and are often used for expressivity and
emphasis. In the grammatical category of voice the marked form is the passive voice categorical
form. N. Raievscaia considers that the analysis of the category of voice is not limited only to the
definition of verbal relations of the subject and object. The relation of more levels are involved in
the development of various means of expressing voice, the characteristic feature of which cannot be
demonstrated without taking into consideration the correlation between the grammatical and lexical
(both the denotational and connotational) meanings. That is why it is important that the analysis of
the category of voice should include all the linguistic and extra-linguistic phenomena. At a closer
inspection we observe that the passive voice, for instance, is preferred in specific functional styles,
where the message is more impersonal, the doer of the action is not made prominent. Thus, J.
Stanley writes that the passive categorial form is regularly used in governmental documents, in
scientific registers and fiction. He thinks that the passive voice permits to abstract ourselves from
the author and concentrate our attention on other elements of the utterance. Some authors think that
the passive voice is mostly used in extreme situation, especially to express notions of violence,
misfortune, etc. For instance L. Payne considers that in the sentence She was hit by a car (ea a fost
lovit de o main) the passive voice expresses an atmosphere of misfortune and the author wants to
make it prominent to influence the reader, this task would be impossible in case of active voice.
Positive information may also be expressed in the passive voice: The famous scientists were
awarded the Nobel Prize. The hard working student was always highly appreciated. In these two
examples the emphatic use of the categorical form of the passive voice is further intensified by
lexical means. To increase the evaluative, expressive and emotional overtones in oral speech
47

people use elements of suprasyntactic prosody. If the utterances given above are said by persons
being in a strong emotional state, the most important part of the message would be characterized by
specific metasemiotic prosody: slowed down tempo, increased loudness/ or decreased loudness
(with the same effect), high fall on the most important lexical unit, the range of the voice is
widened. Also here the corresponding to the given situation body language, voice qualifications and
voce qualifiers are used to make a stronger impact on the listener. Thus, in the examples: She
was \hit by a car the whole utterance may be pronounced with an emphatic emotional prosody,
and was hit can be further singled out by a high fall on it. Medvedeva L. mentions the fact that
quite a number of proverbs are used in the passive voice for the sake of expressivity and emphatic
use: No sooner said than done; Soon learnt, soon forgotten; Rome was not built in a day, etc. The
omission of the auxiliaries and the use only of the past participles in the first two examples
intensifies the metasemiotic connotation.
In texts the authors would usually use various means of passive forms and alternating them
with active voice forms in order to avoid monotony. Turner G. says that sometimes we forget that
the utterance Caesar conquered Gaul varies not only with Gaul was conquered by Caesar, but
also with Caesars conquest of Gaul, The Conquest of Gaul by Caesar and The Conquest of
Gaul, Caesars Conquest. In all these examples we have difference of emphasis and various
connotations to be expressed by this or that utterance.
The metasemiotic use of passive voice and other categorical forms like aspect, mood and taxis
are usually combined in the same utterance to produce a stronger stylistic effect not only in English.
Thus, translating passive continuous forms from English into continuous Romanian and Russian
we observe that they are regularly rendered by means of verbs with the particle se in Romanian
and flexion - in Russian. Se and- (cf. the English self) in both languages are usually
used to express lexical-grammatical reflexivity. But in the examples bellow they are used purely
grammatically to express a different meaning, that of a durative action in the passive voice: The
house is being built now, The house was being built when we arrived there, The house will be built
this time next year Casa se construiete acum (Casa este construit acum), Casa se construia
(era construit) cnd am sosit acolo, Casa se va construi (va fi construit) pe timpul acesta anul
viitor - . , ,
. The reflexive particle and flexion here have the
meanings of passive voice of imperfective (durative) actions with metasemiotic connotations,
expressed by both the aspectual and voice categorical means. In English there is no continuous
aspect in the passive voice in the future, while in Romanian and Russian continuity is expressed by
forms like se va construi, . Va fi construit. usually represent
perfective actions. The same opposition of finished (perfective) and imperfective in the passive
voice past indefinite is found in both Romanian and Russian: Casa se construia Casa era
construit Casa a fost construit (Casa era construit may have the meaning of imperfectul pasiv
and pluscvamperfectul activ). The Russian: - represent the
above-mentioned aspectual opposition. The Romanian examples in this case are different from the
Russian ones because they belong to the colloquial style. The grammatical categorial forms of
passive both in English and Romanian mean an action or process directed towards the subject from
outside and is usually expressed by the grammatical form of the verb to be + past participle. In
Romanian the difference between the following two types of sentences is a stylistic one. A lexical
shift in the meaning is observed both in English and Romanian, there is a contradiction between the
lexical and grammatical meanings of passive and pseudo-active voice: They sell the book The
book sells well (The book is sold/bing sold well) Ei vnd cartea Cartea se vinde bine; The shop
opens now ( The shop is being opened now) - Magazinul se deschide acum Magazinul este
deschis acum (este deschis may be used in the meanings of in the process of being opened and
48

is open); The book reads well The book is read well (The book is being read well) Cartea se
citete bine Cartea este citit bine. In the second example the passive meaning is combined with
the durative one enhancing the metasemiotic connotation. The following sentences The house is
built by this firm; The house is being built by this firm; The house has been built by this firm; The
house was built by this firm; The house was being built by this firm; The house had been built by
this this firm; The house will be built by this firm can be rendered into Romanian by the following
equivalents: Casa este construit de ctre firma aceasta; Casa se construiete de ctre firma
aceasta; Casa a fost construit de ctre firma aceasta; Casa s-a construit de ctre firma aceasta;
Casa era construit de ctre firma aceasta; Casa se construia de ctre firma aceasta; Casa fu
construit de ctre firma aceasta; Casa se construi de ctre firma aceasta; Casa fusese construit
de ctre firma aceasta; Casa se construise de ctre firma aceasta. As we see in Romanian each
example there are two forms of the passive voice. The difference between the two variants of
utterances in the passive voice is one of aspect in the second variant we have two marked
categorical forms: passive voice and durative or imperfective aspect and that means that the stylistic
connotation is much stronger than in the first variant, where we have only one marked categorical
form, that of the passive voice.
Aanalysing a great number of examples we observe that the passive construction of the
auxiliary to be + past participle is prevailing in English and relatively less often used in Romanian
and especially in Russian. The passive forms in the following sentences We were told to come at
five, The soldiers were ordered to guard the airport are preferrable in English to the active forms
They told us to come at five, They ordered the soldiers to guard the airport. Passive constructions
like in the examples given above are usually rendered into Romanian by means of pronominal verb
constructions expressing passive voice, characteristic of coloquial speech: (Nou) ni s-a spus s
venim la ora cinci, Soldailor li s-a ordonat s vin la ora cinci. In some cases it is unacceptable in
Romanian to use the construction with the verb to be plus past participle. Soldaii au fost
ordonai s vin la ora cinci would express a completely different connotational meaning. In
Russian the sentence , sounds to be too strict, official
and pedantic. What we usually find in translations is: ()
, i.e. the active voice is preferred here and it is metasemiotically less charged, it is a milder
and more polite form of expressing an order or emphatic request.
Prof. A.Smirnitsky put forward the idea that there are lexical units expressing pure lexical
passive or active meanings and they form a pure lexical opposition. Thus, the relation between the
verbs to act (a aciona) and to suffer (a suferi) resembles the relation between the active
and passive voices: Toms bosom friend sat next to him, suffering, just as Tom had been from the
same mortal boring Alturi de Tom edea prietenul lui la cataram, care suferea de aceeai
ucigtoare plictiseal, de care suferise nu demult Tom (M.Twain). The verb to suffer (a suferi)
in the above given example expresses a logical passive meaning and comes into contradiction with
their active form. According to A.Smirnitsky the word noise (zgomot) in the sentence A noise
was heard (Un zgomot a fost auzit or Un zgomot s-a auzit) is grammatically influenced by the
subject, but lexically it is really directed to the object. The two variants in Romanian express the
same categorial form of passive voice and are only stylistically different. In translations often we
have non-coincidences while comparing the source and the target language variants, because of
cases when the passive is preferable in the source language or vice versa: But they discovered the
danger in time- ns primejdia fu observat la timp (M.Twain). In this example the translator used
the passive voice by changing the place of the subject and object and achieving an additional
expressivity and putting the stress on the danger while in the source language they is made
prominent. Besides, the speaker can pronounce fu observat with suprasyntactic prosodic means
mentioned above: slowed down tempo, increased loudness, high fall on the most important lexical
49

unit observat, the range of the voice is widened. By this we will have quite a different
interpretation of they discovered in Romanian, absolutely different form the point of view of
stylistics connotations. The active form could be quite acceptable in Romanian as well: Dar ei au
observat primejdia la timp.
Non-finite passive forms of the verb are also regularly used metasemiotically. Thus, past
participle of transitive verbs may be used instead of finite perfect forms to express both anteriority
and passive categorical meanings. Lets take two examples with past participle in English, participe
pass in French and participial trecut in Romanian: The methodology tested in the Indo-European
field set the pattern. La mthode prouve sur le domaine indo-europen est devenue exemplaire.
Metoda experimentat n domeniul indo-european a devenit exemplar. All these observations
bring out the essential difference between the method of communication discovered among bees
and our human language. Lensemble de ces observations fait apparaitre la diffrence essentielle
entre les procdes de communication dcouverts chez les abeilles et notre langage. Toate
observaiile acestea scot la iveal diferena esenial dintre metoda de comunicare descoperit la
albini i limba uman. The anteriority and passive categorical meanings of the past participles in the
confronted languages are clearly expressive. Structurally the sentences are shorter, the past
participle usually substituting a whole secondary clause. The use of past participle in the function of
attributes expresses a stronger metasemiotic connotation: Hydrogen is the lightest substance
known. Hidrogenul este cea mai uoar substan cunoscut. Unfortunately it is not possible to
present in this book all the information obtained. Din pcate nu este posibil de a prezentan cartea
aceasta toat informaia obinut. In both languages a complete coincidence is attested as to the
semiotic and metasemiotic meanings of past participles in attributive functions. Past participle as an
adverbial modifier of concession: But the Right-wing Labour leaders, though forced to give way on
some questions, will stick to their policies. Liderii laburiti de dreapta, dei forai s cedeze n
unele probleme, vor susine politica lor. Complex object with past participle: We hope to see this
issue raised in all trades councils, in every union. Noi sperm vedem aceast problem ridicat n
fiecare sindicat. Thus, the past participle in some constructions is also used to express anteriority
and passive categorical meanings.[39, 165-172]
Lets take an example given by A.Smirnitsky where the past participle gone in the
combination is gone, is used in a transferred meaning of he died: Poor Mr. Brown is (has)
gone. He was taken from us. He has left us. He has joined the great majority Srmanul dl.Brown a
murit (a plecat). El a murit (ne-a prsit). El a plecat/a fost dus n lumea strbunilor. Is gone in
this example possess a strong inherent stylistic connotation with a sociolinguistic motivation. The
same combination can be used in the direct sense of the word in colloquial speech as in Where is
Mr. Brown? He is gone. He will be back in an hour. Unde e dl Brown? El e plecat. Se va ntoarce
peste o or. Is gone in this example is used in the colloquial style.
Having analysed a considerable number of examples we can state that past participle of
transitive verbs can be used to express anteriority and passive categorical meanings not only in
constructions to be+participle II. It may be used independently to express the same categorical
meanings. Both anteriority and passive voice marked categorial meanings possess a certain
metasemiotic connotation which is usually intensified by lexical an suprasyntactic prosodic means
depending on the context. Various points of view concerning the category of voice could be
explained by the fact that there is not a clear-cut distinction of lexical and grammatical means of
expressing the categorial forms of voice. The lexical and grammatical voice means are often very
close and they both interact. The number of categorial forms in various linguistic interpretations
ranges from two up to six in most grammar books: active voice, passive voice, mediopassive,
reflexive voice, reciprocal voice, dynamic voice, etc. Most linguists consider that as pure
grammatical categorial forms we could single out only the active and passive voice. The rest of the
50

above stated categorial forms express the given meanings of voice lexically or lexicallygrammatically. In Romanian the system of categorial forms of voice resembles the one in English,
but in most grammar books a system of three forms is usually put forward: active, passive and
reflexive. The reflexive voice in English is considered to be a purely lexical categorial form. But
even here we have a combination of lexical and grammatical meanings. The reflexive pronouns
express lexical reflexivity. The verb combined with such a pronoun usually expresses an active
grammatical voice action reflected back on the subject. Thus, for example: I see somebody there in
the mirror structurally is the same as I see myself there in the mirror, i.e. subject + predicate +
object, with the only difference that myself lexically expresses the reflection of the given action
on the subject. In Romanian the reflexive is also a lexical-grammatical categorial form (the lexical
meaning still prevailing over the grammatical one). Depending on different meanings of the verbs
with the pronouns se and i, in Romanian there are six pronominal voices: reciprocal, passive,
dynamic, impersonal, objective and inventive. The pronouns se and i, in the first and second
person singular and plural, have the forms of personal pronoun objects. The Romanian reciprocal
and reflexive pronouns form stable combinations with verbs and are the markers of the
corresponding lexical-grammatical categorial forms of voice. The English reflexive pronouns are
more independent but they also form similar stable combinations with verbs to express reflexivity.
The same can be said of the reciprocal pronouns (each other, one another). In some clear-cut
contexts the reflexive pronoun may be omitted in English because of redundant information: In the
morning I wash and shave at six oclock. The reflexive pronoun myself is dropped because
reflexivity here is expressed contextually. It is quite clear from the context that I wash and shave
myself not something or somebody else. Let us confront some categorial forms of voice in English
and Romanian. The active voice in the confronted languages express an action carried out by the
subject and not reflected back on the doer of the action: The widows servant kept him clean and
neat, combed and brushed, and they bedded him nightly. Servitoarea vduvei l spla, l mbrca,
l pieptna i l culca n fiecare sear (M.Twain). Sometimes the original text does not coincide
with the translation, because in such cases the passive is preferrable in the target language (or vice
versa): But they discovered the danger in time- ns primejdia fu observat la timp (M.Twain). In
this example the translator used the passive voice by changing the place of the subject and object
and achieving an additional expressivity. The active form could be quite acceptable here: Dar ei au
observat primejdia la timp. After a detailed analysis of the material we can conclude, that
pronominal verbs in Romanian form a large lexico-grammatical system, and they are very often
used in speech. Thus, the English active voice forms are regularly rendered into Romanian by
means of pronominal verbs in the reflexive or reciprocal voices: Ill never marry anybody but you
and you aint to ever marry anybody but me N-am s m mrit cu altul, dar i tu s nu te nsori
cu nimeni afar de mine (M.Twain). But Sid snatched his clothes and gone Dar Sid i nfc
hainele i dispru (M.Twain). Dar Sid a nfcat hainele sale i a disprut is stylistically different
from the official translation. The English reciprocal voice is usually translated into Romanian by
means of reciprocal pronouns and a reflexive pronoun plus the given verb: They loved each other
Ei se iubeau unul pe altul. Now we shall adduce examples in which the English reflexive and
reciprocal pronouns in the function of objects and verbs in the active voice correspond in Romanian
to pronominal verbs. To intensify the meanings of reflexivity and reciprocality we sometimes use
synonymous pronouns: unul pe altul, unii pe alii, una pe alta, unele pe altele, pe sine, etc.: A deep
peel of thunder went rolling and tumbling down the heavens and lost itself in sullen rumblings in
the distance Un tunet surd rsun, rostogolindu-se pe bolta cerului i se pierdu undeva n
deprtare, bodognind suprat; The boys dressed themselves, hid their accoutrements, and went
off, grieving that there were no outlaws any more, and wondering what civilization could claim to
have to compensate their loss (M.Twain) Bieii se mbrcar, ascunser armele i pornir spre
51

cas, cinndu-se c pe lume nu mai sunt tlhari vestii, frmntndu-i minile cu ce ar putea
nlocui astzi aceast pierdere (M.Twain). As we see se and its variants in Romanian form
analytical forms with the corresponding verbs, and sometimes it may be added to a word in
colloquial speech: rostogolindu-se, cinndu-se, frmntndu-i, duc-se. In Russian the
reflexive - has become a flexion and is used only as a flexion, which still preserves its original
lexical meaning of reflexivity. Thus, compare: = . C in has
become part of the given word and is much stronger connected with the corresponding verb than
himself in English. The grammatical categorial form of passive both in English and Romanian
means an action or process directed towards the subject from outside and is usually expressed by
the grammatical form of the verb to be + past participle.
Let us compare some examples of passive categorial form in both languages on the etic level
and see which forms are preferable in official translations: Smaller boys than himself flocked at his
heels, as proud to be seen with him, and tolerated by him Bieii mai mici alergau buluc n urma
lui, mndri de a fi vzui mpreun cu el, i c el nu-i alung Tom was therefore elevated to a place
with the judge and the other elect, and the great news was announced. - Tom fu poftit s se sue n
stran, unde edea judectorul i celelalte persoane simandicoase, iar marea noutate fu adus la
cunotin. The passive voice forms here structurally coincide in both languages. Of interest is the
case when the English passive voice is translated into colloquial Romanian by means of pronominal
verbs, which are reflexive in their structure and meaning: Oh! Michael! You will be bored to death!
O, Mihail! Ai s te plictiseti de moarte! The translation in the target language may be interpreted
in two ways: 1.Michael will be bored by what will be taking place there, i.e, the effect will come
from outside, there will be nothing interesting there, and in this case this sentence could be easily
translated by means of passive form expressed by to be + past participle as well: O, Mihail! Ai s
fii plictisit de moarte! (the action is coming from the object not from the subject and between the
two varaiants there is a stylistic and aspectual difference). The latter example belongs to the literary
style, while the former belongs to the coloquial one. After a closer investigation of similar examples
we have come to the conclusion that examples like O, Mihail! Ai s te plictiseti de moarte! can
also be treated as forms expressing a durative passive voice action. 2.The second situational
interpretation of the sentence O, Mihail! Ai s te plictiseti de moarte! is that Michael will do
something boring, i.e. he will be the doer of the action reflected on him and in this case the
translation can be interpreted as a form of the reflexive voice. This observation concerning the
multifunctional status of the Romanian particle se turned out to coincide with that of the Russian
flexion -. In both Russian and Romanian the given reflexive pronouns have developed
homonymous meanings, which like in the case of the English myself, yourself, himself, herself,
itself, ourselves, yourselves, themselves have turned out to express not only reflexive meanings.
They are also used to express passive continuous actions. Regular confrontation of examples allows
us to conclude, that the English continuous forms are regularly translated by means of verbs with
the particle se into Romanian and flexion - in Russian, The reflexive particle and flexion are
usually used to express a reflexive action but in this case they are homonyms and express
unfinished (continuous or durative) actions in the passive voice. For example: The problem is being
discussed at the meeting now, The problem was being discussed at the meeting this time last week,
The problem will be discussed (dialectal: The problem will be being discussed) this time next week
Problema se discut (este discutat) la adunare acum, Problema se discuta (era discutat, a fost
discutat) pe timpul acesta sptmna trecut, Problema se va discuta (va fi discutat) pe timpul
acesta sptmna viitoare ,
,
. We should note the fact that in Romanian we have two forms to render
imperfective actions in the past: se discuta (colloquial) and era discutat (imperfectul). The
52

reflexive particle and flexion are completely synonymous with the meanings of passive voice of
imperfective (durative) action. In English there is no continuous aspect in the passive voice in the
future, because both categorial forms are used with the verb to be and it is not acceptable in the
literary English to say: The house will be being built, which can be found only in dialects. Both in
Romanian and Russian future continuity is expressed: se va construi, . Va fi
construit usually represents a perfective action, but in combination with lexical aspectual
durative means it expresses a continuous action: Casa va fi construit n curs de un an. The same
opposition of finished (perfective) and imperfective in the passive voice past indefinite is found in
both Romanian and Russian: Casa se construia Casa era construit Casa a fost construit
(Casa era construit) may have the meaning of imperfectul pasiv and pluscvamperfectul activ). The
Russian: - also represent the abovementioned aspectual
opposition. We should mention here that the particle -se and the flexion - in the reflexive
meaning combined with a verb are used lexico-grammatically, while in the passive continuous
(imperfective) they become purely grammatical forms. In the result of the analysis we can also
conclude that the traditional passive construction of the auxiliary to be + past participle is
prevailing in English and less often used in Romanian and especially in Russian. The passive forms
in the following sentences We were told to come at five, We are told to come at five, We will be told
to come at five; The soldiers were ordered to guard the airport, The soldiers are ordered to come at
five, The soldiers will be ordered to come at five are preferrable to the active forms used in They
told us to come at five, They ordered the soldiers to guard the airport. The passive constructions
are usually rendered into Romanian by means of pronominal verb constructions expressing passive
voice, characteristic of coloquial speech: (Nou) ni s-a spus s venim la ora cinci, (Nou) ni se
spune s venim la ora cinci, (Nou) ni se va spune s venim la ora cinci; Soldailor li s-a ordonat
s vin la ora cinci, Soldailor li se ordon s vin la ora cinci, Soldailor li se va ordona s vin la
ora cinci. In some cases it is unacceptable to use in Romanian the construction with the verb to
be plus past participle. Soldaii au fost ordonai s vin la ora cinci would express a completely
different connotational meaning. In the Russian the sentences
, sound to be too official and pedantic
and what we usually find in translations is: () , ()
, () , i.e. the
active voice is preferred here and it is metasemiotically less charged. A lexical shift in the meaning
can be observed both in English and Romanian. A well known feature is the contradiction between
the lexical and grammatical meanings of passive and active voice: They sell the book The book
sells well Ei vnd cartea Cartea se vinde bine; The shop is being opened now The shop opens
now- Magazinul se deschide acum Magazinul este deschis acum. Este deschis may be used in the
meanings of in the process of being opened and is open; The book reads well The book is read
well Cartea se citete bine Cartea este citit bine. Both in English and Romanian there are
verbs, the lexical meanings of which can be either passive or active and they form a pure lexical
opposition. Thus, A.I.Smirnitsky writes that the relation between the verbs to act (a aciona) and
to suffer (a suferi) resembles the relation between the active and passive voices: Toms bosom
friend sat next to him, suffering, just as Tom had been (suffering) from the same mortal boring
Alturi de Tom edea prietenul lui la cataram, care suferea (suferind) de aceeai ucigtoare
plictiseal, de care suferise nu demult Tom (M.Twain). The verb to suffer (a suferi) in the above
given example has in both languages a logical passive meaning, in spite of the active form of the
verbs. There are many lexical passive verbs, which come into contradiction with their active form in
the sentence: to hear a auzi, to observe a observa, to see a vedea, etc.: I have heard about this
Eu am auzit de aceasta; I heard her cry - Am auzit-o plngnd. Thus, in thesxe examples the
verbs are used in the active voice forms, but the action is really directed towards the subject from
53

outside, like in the case of passive voice actions. According to A.Smirnitsky the word noise
(zgomot) in the sentence A noise was heard (Un zgomot a fost auzit or Un zgomot s-a auzit) is
grammatically influenced by the subject, but lexically it is really directed to the object. The two
variants in Romanian express the same categorial form of passive voice and are only stylistically
different. We can conclude that English and Romanian possess well developed systems of
grammatical categorial forms of passive and active voice. In Romanian the lexico-grammatical
categorial form of reflexive voice is represented by the stable combination of a verb and pronouns
se and i(and their variants). In English the reflexive voice is not purely lexical as it is usually
stated: the reflexive pronouns express reflexivity lexically but in speech they can not be separated
from the grammatical meanings of the verbs, that is, here we have the same combination of
grammatical and lexical voice meanings and the given categorial form should be considered to be
lexical-grammatical. Both in English and Romanian the reflexive pronouns have developed nonreflexive homonymous meanings: in Romanian they may be used to express the categorial form of
passive voice and in English they may be used as emphatic pronouns. [39, 165-172]
12.The Category of Comparsion in English and Romanian
The category of comparison has historically changed in both languages. The reduction of the
morphological paradigm in English led to the obliteration of the grammatical categories of gender,
number and case. In Romanian grammatical gender and number have been preserved. The marked
and unmarked categorial forms of positive, comparative and superlative degrees are expressed in
English synthetically, analytically and suppletively. Historically the synthetic forms were used in
Old English and the analytical ones appeared as a system in the Middle English, when the
periphrastic comparative forms, only occasionally used in Old English, began to be substituted
(under French influence) by analytical forms with ma, mo. mare, more, mast, most, which were used
both with English and French adjectives, with monosyllables and disyllables, as well as with
polysyllables. The preference of these over synthetic forms may in some cases be stylistic.
The absolute superlative (most + positive form) may have appeared under the influence of Latin
(You are most kind). It is known that in Latin the degrees of comparison were formed synthetically.
But even in the classic Latin a number of adjectives existed which formed the degrees of
comparisons analytically. In the V and VI centuries the analytical forms started to substitute the
synthetic ones. Magis and plus were used to form the comparative degrees, and maxime, super,
valde, bene were used to form the superlative. In Old Latin the comparison of the adjective by
means of magis became a grammatical way in Iberia, the South of Galia and the Danube basin. The
adverb plus was also used in forming the comparative degree, but it was not widely spread being
used only in the Northern part of Galia. The superlative was formed by means of maxime and
multum. In the Oriental Romance languages the forms magis dulce turned into mai dulce cel mai
dulce. Besides that other comparative constructions appeared: tot att de bun, mai puin bun, prea
bun, foarte bun, extrem de bun, etc.. Some linguists affirm that the positive degree should not be
considered as part of the category of comparison. Here we should say that there exists an opposition
of marked (superlative and comparative degrees) and the unmarked (the positive degree) categorial
forms. Even within the positive degree we can compare lexically and contextually: This apple is
sweet and that one is sour (Compare: This apple is sweeter than that one. That apple is less sweet
than this one. That apple is not as sweet as this one. That apple is sourer than this one.) That
means that we taste the two apples and compare them on the same level. While when we say that
the apple is sweater/sourer or the sweetest we compare in the limits of the same adjective and
quality. Some linguists affirm that the positive degree should not be considered as part of the
category of comparison, but it is one of the three categorial forms of comparison, the unmarked one.
54

The degrees of comparisons of adjectives and adverbs are usually considered to be part of the
corresponding grammatical categories. The synthetic forms express comparison purely
grammatically. When we turn to the analytical forms the picture is different. More and most
which regularly are used to form the analytical degrees of comparison, being elements of the given
analytical forms, have partially preserved their original lexical meaning. The same can be seen in
Romanian: mai, cel mai practically express the same meanings. Besides there are a number of
words used as lexical intensifiers in both languages, which are used with both analytical and
synthetic forms. Degrees of comparison express equality and difference of degree within the same
quality. Only those adjectives, which denote properties, can have degrees of comparison. Usually
grammar books say that qualitative adjectives can form the degrees of comparison and the relative
ones do not. This is not always the case. Thus: adjectives with the suffix ish (reddish), with a
negative meaning (like impossible), a number of adjectives, which mainly belong to a superlative
meaning (exclusive, absolute, extreme, principal, chief, unique, superior, inferior, complete, etc.)
But even these adjective can be used with intensifiers to express a certain inequality: far superior,
much more superior, very much superior, less superior, much less superior, least superior. Even
those adjectives that do not form the degrees of comparison, belong to the positive degree and can
in some cases be used for stylistic purposes to form a comparative degree: You cannot be deader
than dead. He was the deadest of them all. You are not less dead than he is. (E.Hemingway)
Relative adjectives do not form degrees of comparison (woolen, wooden, economic, etc. and some
of them can express relative quality of objects or phenomena (wooden door, glass door, a monthly
magazine, daily program, European country, political life, capitalist society, socialist ideology). In
some cases relative adjectives acquire an additional meaning and can form the degrees of
comparison: The life there had been more English than in England. (Aldridge) John is more English
than the English. John is very English. (Swan) He is English to the backbone. He has very little
English in him and you have even less. A grammatical topic a less (least) grammatical topic a
purely grammatical topic a more grammatical topic - the most grammatical of the suggested
topics. In all these examples we really detect a difference or variation of quality within the same
adjective. Qualitative adjectives express various qualities within the same adjective defining a
certain object or phenomenon. Thus, varying and static quality could be considered as an
opposition. In this respect we should mention Blokhs division of adjectives into evaluative and
specific. One and the same adjective can be used either in the evaluative or in the specificative
function. As an example he gives the adjective good, which is basically qualitative (good-better-the
best), but when used as part of a marking scale together with the grading terms bad, satisfactory,
excellent it acquires a static or specificative function. On the other hand, the whole grading
system here (bad-satisfactory-good-excellent) could be considered as a paradigm of lexical degrees
of comparison. All the adjectives, which can form degrees of comparison either lexically or
grammatically (the synthetic forms) can vary their quality or be evaluative. The comparative
degree in English and Romanian help to establish a correlation of superiority, inferiority and
equality of a variable quality or property, possessed by objects or phenomena, which are compared
or contrasted. The comparative degree of equality compares objects or phenomena on the same
level, i.e. expresses equality or an equivalence of qualities or properties of two or more objects:
This mountain is as high as that one. = This mountain is not less high than that one. This mountain
is not higher than that one. Acest munte este tot att de nalt ca i cellalt = Acest munte nu este
mai puin nalt dect cellalt. Acest munte nu este mai nalt dect cellalt. In this example we
practically have different forms (comparative of equality and inequality) expressing the same
meaning. Thus, if negation is added here then inequality comparison is used: This flower is
beautiful. This flower is as beautiful as that one. This flower is not so beautiful as that one = This
flower is less beautiful than that one = That flower is more beautiful than this one. Aceast floare
55

este frumoas. Aceast floare e tot att de frumoas ca i aceea. Aceast floare nu este tot att de
frumoas ca aceea. = Aceast floare este mai puin frumoas ca aceea = Floarea aceea este mai
frumoas dect aceasta. Here the comparison of equality is followed by that of inferiority and
superiority inequality. In Romanian the degree of comparison of equality and inequality is formed
by the help of the following constructions: tot aa de, tot att de, la fel de, deopotriv de, ntocmai
ca, la fel ca, mai puin, mult mai puin, etc. Examples: O foame tot aa de trist ca i acele
gnduri. Un osta tot aa de viteaz ca Ion. Aceast greeal nu este tot att de grav ca aceea (This
mistake is not as grave as that one). There are quite a number of idioms, where the comparative of
equality is used (though in many cases the meaning of superlative is implied): as busy as a bee
(very busy) harnic ca albina (foarte harnic). The comparative degree of superiority shows that the
object or phenomenon has a higher degree of quality in comparison with those, which are
compared. In English the comparative of superiority is expressed by the comparative degree
(synthetic, analytical or suppletive forms) of the adjective and is followed by the conjunction
than: You are more interested in my dresses than my dressmaker. He looked younger than his
friend. Intensifiers are often used to increase the variation on the comparative degree level: This is
much better (Aceasta e mult mai bine); This is much more better (Aceasta e cu mult mai bine); This
is far better; This is better by far; This is considerably better. The performance became more and
more thrilling; The water was deieper and deieper (repetitions). Ever greater success have been
achieved (Apa era/devenea tot mai adnc i mai adnc). The more leasure he has, the happier
hie is. Cu ct mai mult se odihnete, cu att mai fericit el este). Nimic pe lume nu e mai scump i
mai slvit dect libertatea. Very often the usual intensifiers are further intensified by other
contextual lexical means: nimic n lume = nothing in the world. Very often the second element of
the comparison of superiority or inferiority is omitted because of contextual redundancy: Rmnea
o sarcin mai grea i mai primejdioas. A more difficult and dangerous task remained. You wont
find better examples. Nu vei gsi exemple mai bune. Fata se fcea din ce n ce mai frumoas. The
girl was getting more and more beautiful. Thus comparing English and Romanian here we could
say that we observe a very close coincidence on the semantic level, on the formal level the synthetic
forms are not used in Romanian. The comparative degree of inferiority both in English and
Romanian shows that objects or phenomena have a lower degree of quality in comparison with
other ones: The number of people is less numerous than it was last time. Numrul de oameni este
mai puin numeros dect data trecut. John is less happy than his brother. John este mai puin
fericit dect fratele su. If we combine less and mai puin with not (nu) we get an equivalent
of comparative of equality: The number of people is not less numerous than it was last time.
Numrul de oameni nu e mai puin numeros dect data trecut. It is not less important = It is not
more important = It is as important. Nu este mai piin important = nu este mai important = E tot
att de important. We can see from the last example that the three variants practically express an
equal quality of the compared objects. By using intensifiers of various degree, we can have a
gradual transition on the level of the same categorial form: Tom was taller than Peter Tom was
far taller than Peter Tom was much taller than Peter Tom was much more taller than Peter
Tom was considerably taller than Peter Tom was by all means taller than Peter Tom was
undoubtfully taller than Peter, etc. Tom era mai nalt dect Peter Tom era cu mult mai nalt dect
Peter Tom era mult mai nalt dect Peter Tom era incomparabil, considerabil, infinit,
incomensurabil mai nalt dect Peter, etc.
The superlative degree establishes that an object or phenomenon possesses a quality or a
property in the highest or in the lowest degree The English relative superlative has two forms
(analytical and synthetic) while in Romanian only the analytical forms are used. The superlative
degree may be absolute and relative, the latter also being divided into superlative of superiority and
superlative of inferiority. The absolute superlative shows a quality in its highest degree without a
56

comparison with other objects in the given context. Intensifiers are often used here: You are a very
good child You are an extremely good child You are a very good child indeed You look too
good. Addy and Ellie look beautiful enough to please the most fastidious man. (Shaw) He said of
him that he was too serious. (Dreiser) Be quick or it may be too late. (Dickens) He is awfully nice.
She is extraordinarily (extremely, terribly, etc.) clever. We should mention here that most of the
intensifiers are not only used to intensify the degree of variation of the equality but they are also
used metasemiotically, to produce a stylistic effect. In this case grammatical and especially the
lexical means are widely supported by prosodic means: Oh, she is glorious! In addition to the
lexical superlative expressed by glorious the prosodic elements that should be used here
considerably intensify the degree of absolute superlative both semiotically and metasemiotically:
the adjective glorious is pronounced in a loud voice (increased loudness), slowed down tempo,
wide range, high falling tone all these prosodic elements are characteristic of highly emotional,
emphatic speech.
There are quite a number of adjectives which become absolute superlatives by using such lexical
means like: a) affixes: -less, ultra-, super-, over-, etc. matchless, peerless, oversensitive, overgreedy, overgenerous, over-busy, overambitious, overactive, superfine, supereminent,
superabundant, ultrashort, ultramodern, etc.; b) analytical genitives: A mountain of a man a very
tall man. A devil of a child a very naughty child. A monster of a dog a monstruous dog. A
mountain of happiness extremely happy, etc. c) Some other combinations: beyond belief, without
compare (equal) -too good (great) to be compared to anybody else). d) repetitions: A red, red rose!
e) hyperboles: scared to death = very frightened; immensely obliged = very much obliged; full to
the brim quite full; g) Simile: (as) black as coal = quite black; (as) dry as a bone = very dry;
h) metaphor: blowing hot and cold = very hesitating; he is a fox = he is very sly; i) litotes: no
coward = very brave. Practically all these means, which help express an absolute superlative are
metasemiotically charged and posses inherent stylistic connotations. It should also be mentioned
here that the absolute superlative is not used with a definite article, while the relative superlative is
regularly used with a definite article or other deictic means: The girl put on the best clothes to go to
the theatre = The girl put on her best clothes to go to the theatre.
Sometimes the article may be omitted for the sake of expressivity and is emotionally coloured,
intensified here by prosody: Oh, most faithful of friends! When a noun is defined by a number of
superlatives the definite noun may be repeated only in case of emphasis: He is the cleverest,
sweetest and most affectionate of children. He is the cleverest, the sweetest and the most
affectionate of children (emphasized). Sometimes the use of superlative degree with an indefinite
article is explained by stating that it is just an adjective used to express a high degree of the quality
possessed by the noun. This probably is not the case in the following examples: Yesterday I have
read a most interesting book, I have seen a most interesting film. In this case it is not just an
absolute superlative (a very interesting book or film), in each example we have an adjective
defining a noun belonging to a class of object possessing a superlative quality, one of the class (a
most interesting book, belonging to the class of the most interesting books). When a noun is
preceded by most, the zero articles usually used, the meaning of most in many cases is most,
but not all of them, the majority of: Most leaves are green. He finds most pleasure in reading.
Most of his mistakes are made through carelessness. In case the second element of comparison is
omitted the definite article may be dropped: The book is most interesting; He is happiest when
everybody is at home.
Most intensifiers, including double superlative, are used for the sake of intensification or to
produce a stylistic effect, or both, belong to colloquial or dialectal style. Thus, such forms as most
noblest was accepted in Shakespeares times, but now it is not acceptable in the literary language.
But other intensifying elements are found quite often: I hope you will have the finest weather
57

possible. (Sper c vei avea cel mai minunat timp posibil.) I have read the worst novel imaginable.
It is by far the most interesting play I have ever seen. They are the very best friends.
In Romanian we have the same division of the superlative degree as in English: relativesuperlative of superiority and that of inferiority, and absolute superlative: El este cel mai
srguincios dintre toi studenii. El este cel mai puin activ dintre toi studenii. De cte ori am
trecut de la treptele cele mai nalte la cele de mai jos. A number of lexical units are used in this
case: foarte, tare, prea, adnc, profund, amarnic de, mult, mult prea, grozav de, nemaipomenit de,
stranic de, minunat de, ngrozitor de, teribil de, dureros de, negrit de, neobinuit de, nespus de,
peste seam de, infinit de, peste msur de, etc.: ,,,O prea frumoas fat (A most beautiful girl).
(M.Eminescu) M nelinitete gndul prea puin modest c s-ar fi putut s nu fie nimeni.
Generaia lui e mult prea scutit de grijile zilnice Here we should stress the fact again that the
superlative forms, especially those used with intensifiers, are emphatic and, thus, belong to a
stylistic category as well. [39, 173-180]
13.The Category of Deixis in English and Romanian
The category of deixis in English and Romanian is expressed grammatically, lexically and lexicogrammatically. The linguistic and extra-linguistic contexts and prosodic means are also important in
the realisation of this category. The deictic means identify the objects to both the speakers and the
listeners and they have the function of differentiation, defining, singling out, of a special type of
identification by correlating persons and objects, being in this or that relation to the speaker. The
main deictic means are: articles, pronouns, numerals, prepositions, adjectives, adverbs, particles,
etc. Deixis is a category consisting of three categorial forms: definite, indefinite and general
identification, and is expressed best of all by the definite, indefinite and zero articles.
The Definite Deictic Identification (Indication). In the case of the definite article the object is
viewed upon as known and concrete, and singled out from a class of similar objects 81; the
indefinite article is used when the noun belongs to a certain class of objects, and the zero article
(meaningful absence of the article) represents the given object in a general meaning denoting all the
members of the given class. Both in English and Romanian the definite and indefinite articles
correspondingly go back to demonstrative and indefinite pronouns (the latter in their turn were
formed from the numeral), which gradually lost their original meaning. But in some contexts they
have still preserved the original meaning: (At the time he was engaged = At that time he was
engaged; A man entered the room, not two). Now we are going to confront the categorial form of
the definite deictic identification (DDI) on the etic level. The definite article is mostly used in this
case to single out an object or a group of objects from a class: The lads came gaily back.. .
(M.Twain) - Beii se ntorseser pe insul veseli..; The young man felt suddenly quite homesick.
(J.Galsworthy) - Deodat tnrului i s-a fcut dor de cas. .Upon leaving him on the night of our
adventure, he solicitated me, in what I thought an urgent manner, to call upon him very early the
next morning. - n noaptea aceea lundu-i rmas bun de la mine, m-a rugat, i pe ct mi s-a prut,
foarte struitor, s vin la el a soua zi dimineaa ct mai devreme. But as we see from the above
given examples the definite article is not the only means to distinguish an object. Thus, if in the first
and second examples the DDI is expressed by articles and context, then in the third sentence it is
intensified by other identifiers - limiting attributes of the nouns ( of our adventure). In Romanian in
a doua zi dimineaa three identifiers are being used: the possessive article a (which loses its
meaning of possessiveness before a numeral), a synthetic article a, and the numeral in an
attributive function. In the phrase n noaptea aceea we have: the synthetic definite article, the
demonstrative (adjectival pronoun and the preposition n. The limiting attribute may be expressed
by a noun with a preposition (the of phrase is often used ins such cases), by a subordinate attributive
58

clause, a participle phrase, an adjective, when contrast and choice is implied: I became used to
seeing the gentleman with the whiskers - M-am deprins s vd gentlemenul cu bachenbarzi. The
room where we sat was small - Camera, unde edeam, era mic; It was the very thing he liked - Era
chiar acel (lucru) ce i placea.
Some prepositions, especially in Romanian, contribute to the realisation of the categorial
form of DDI. Thus, for example: Peter sprang a couple of yards in the air, and then delivered a
war-whoop and set off round and round the room, banging against furniture... - Peter sri n aer,
scoase un urlet slbatic i ncepu o goan turbat prin odaie, izbindu-se cu capul de mobil... A
deiep peel of thunder went rolling and thumbling down the heavens and lost itself in sullen
rumblings in the distance. - Un tunet surd rsun rostogolindu-se pe bolta cerului i se pierdu
undeva n deprtare, bodognind suprat. He was near the river. - El era lng ru. From these
examples we can see that the prepositions (with articles and without them), combined with the
linguistic and extra-linguistic contexts can intensify the deictic function till its possible realisation
as a definite deictic form. You can observe many examples where in Romanian only the preposition
is used to express the definite deixis: (in the distance - in deprtare; near the river lnga ru,
etc.).
The demonstrative article in Romanian has, to a certain extent, preserved the meaning of a
demonstrative pronoun. In its purest meaning it expresses the definite deixis in the grammatical
form of the superlative degree, where it is regularly confronted with the English definite article: He
is the best student in our class. - El e cel mai bun student n clasa noastr. She was the most
beautiful girl in the village. - Ea era cea mai frumoas fat n sat. Demonstrative and possessive
pronouns, the possessive case (in English) and the possessive article (in Romanian) are used to
regularly express definite deixis: A frightened look in Beckys face brought Tom to his senses and he
saw that he made a blunder. - Faa speriat a Bechei i art c a dat gre. But Toms energy did
not last. - Dar zelul lui Tom nu inu mult. Ill tell my big brother on you, and he can trash you with
his little finger. - Am s te spun fratelui meu mai mare, care numai cu degetul cel mic i-a trage o
mam de btaie! Tom was suffering in reality now, so handsomely was his imagination working,
and his groans had gathered quite a genuine tone. - Tom suferea acum cu adevrat, att de viu
lucra puterea sa de imaginaie, iar vaietele lui sunau firesc. This boy was well dressed. Biatul
acesta era bine mbrcat. This functionary grasped it in a perfect agony of joy. - Poliistul o
nh n culmea fericirii. (M.Twain) Analyzing these examples we can conclude that
possessiveness (both grammatical and lexical) is an effective means of expressing definite deictic
identification. In the first sentence The English possessive case corresponds to the Romanian
genitive and in faa speriat a Bechei we have two deictic means: the efinite a and the
possessive a. Two definite articles are used in zelul lui Tom. The synthetic article is dropped,
when the attribute is in preposition (A Bechei fa speriat), and in this case the possessive article is
used before the noun. In the fifth example the demonstrative pronoun in postposition requires the
use of a noun with a definite article. In preposition acesta (like other attributes) is used
emphatically, intensifying the deictic identification. There are many cases, when the demonstrative
pronoun is not translated into Romanian, but its deictic meaning is rendered by a definite article.
Such examples could be easily translated by using a demonstrative pronoun like in the sentence six:
Poliistul acesta o nh or Acest poliist a nhat-o.. Depending on the degree of identification of
the noun by the attribute and by macro- and microcontexts, the category of the definite deixis could
be realized without articles and pronouns: Poor Huck stood abashed and uncomfortable not
knowing exactly what to do or where to hide from so many unwelcoming eyes. - Srmanul Huck,
fstcit, nu se simea n apele lui, netiind ce s fac i unde s se ascund de privirile
dusmnoase. In Romanian the synthetic article is shifted within the substantival group depending
on the position of the attribute. Thus, the sentence Tom hailed the romantic outcast could be
59

translated as Tom l strig pe vagabondul romantic, and Tom l strig pe romanticul vagabond, the
latter example being stylistically coloured. Extra-linguistic reality also plays an important role in
realizing de definite deixis: Peter switched off the TV set, went to the kitchen and opened the
refrigerator looking for something to eat. - Peter a deconectat televizorul, s-a dus la buctrie, a
deschis frigiderul, cutnd ceva de mncare. The dining room was large enough. Sufrageria era
ndeajuns de ncptoare. Anything that is considered typical, something that should, for example,
be expected to be found in our flats, is used with a definite deixis. The number of such objects is
constantly growing with the progress of civilization.
The Indefinite Deictic Identification (IDI). In the singular the indefinite article is one of the main
means of expressing IDI. A closer analysis of examples helps us to conclude that in both languages
we have a developed system of means to express IDI in both singular and plural: pronouns,
numerals, adjectives, and other markers. Lets take some examples where the indefinite article is
used: I had written a letter by five oclock. - Eu scrisesem o scrisoare ctre ora cinci. He took a
letter out of his pocket to read a second time. - El scoase o scrisoare din buzunar, pentru a o citi a
doua oar. The villagers began to gather, loitering a moment in the vestibule. (M.Twain). Orenii
ncepur s se adune n biseric, oprindu-se pe o clip n vestibul (M.Twain). In these examples we
have complete coincidence in the use of indefinite article. The indefinite article is used here in the
singular. In the plural in English there is no indefinite article. In this case other means are used. In
Romanian grammar books the indefinite pronoun nite (corresponding to the English some) is
considered to be an indefinite article: Give me books - Give me some books; D-mi cari. D-mi
nite cri. In both sentences indefiniteness is expressed in both languages, but in the first sentences
the indefinite meaning is more general, in the latter case a certain limited indefinite number of
books is meant. The categorial meaning of deixis is different in dependence of a number of factors:
context, intensifiers, defining identifiers, etc. The decrease of the categorial meaning of IDI as a
result of using defining elements. There are cases when the definite deixis the is used very closely
to an indefinite meaning, especially in idiomatic expressions, stable combinations, used
metaphorically, etc.: They went to hunt the fox. Ei s-au dus s vneze vulpi. We shall show him the
door. Noi i vom arta ua. It is still in the egg. E nc n ou. He saw him with the naked eye. El l-a
vzut cu ochiul nenarmat. In the first sentence the noun (fox) is used in the singular, though many
indefinite objects are meant. This sentence is translated into Romanian by a free word combination
and the noun is used in the plural with a zero article. Examples 2-3 in both languages are used
metaphorically. The definite deictic identification is preserved in Romanian as well: the definite
article in number 2 (ua) and the identifying preposition in the third sentence. The general deictic
meaning here is really indefinite. The same can be observed in examples where musical instruments
are used: He plays the violin. El cnta la vioara, the English definite deixis is translated into
Romanian by means of a zero article. The same is seen in such expressions like: to go to the
theatre, to go to the cinema - a se duce la teatru, a merge la cinema. It is quite possible that in
English the definite article goes back to those times, when in a town or city there used to be only a
theatre or only a cinema, and the definite article is traditionally used now, when there are many
theatres or cinemas in large cities or even in towns. We have also observed that in all the
metaphorically used idiomatic or stable English expressions the definite deixis is preserved if in
Romanian a similar metaphorical usage is realized, like in We shall show him the door - Noi i vom
arta ua. In the confronted languages there are many other indefinite deictic means. The indefinite
article expresses the given categorial form in the purest way. The indefinite pronouns, numerals,
adjectives, negative pronouns, etc. function as indefinite markers alongside their main lexicogrammatical functions: some, somebody, someone, something, any, anyone, anybody, anything,
many, more, most, few, several, a little, lots, hundreds, any of them, certain, indefinite, one, etc;
60

unul, unii, altul, cineva, ceva, careva, altcineva, fiecare, puin, oleac, oriicare, oriicine, oriict,
oricare, cutare, att, vreunul, civa, toi, muli, niscaiva, niscai, alde, nimeni. nici unul, nici un,
nici o, pe nimic, pentru nimic, intru nimic, de nimic, vre-o, unu-doi, trei-patru, cu sutele, etc. Thus,
for example: I cannot identify anyone. Pe nimeni nu pot s-l identific. But I could testify that a
woman came out of the shop. Dar eu pot s fiu martor, c o oricare femeie a ieit din magazin.
Several people went out. Civa (nite) oameni au ieit. One of them was ready to help us. Unul
din ei era gata s ne ajute. Some people knew it. Unii oameni tiau aceasta. Hundreds of people
were on the square. Sute de oameni erau pe pia. The indefinite deictic markers under
consideration can be used with both singular and plural nouns. They can be used even with
pronouns or eliptically: Have you got any books? I have got some. Give me a book. Take one. Avei
ceva cri? Da, am cteva. Dai-mi o carte. Luai una. Numerals can often be used to express
indefinite deixis with a meaning of approximation.
The General Deictic Identification (Indication)
The zero deixis , traditionally named zero article, represents an object as a general
denotation of all the objects of the given class, when there is no classification, no singling out of a
class. What is meant is the essential, the content of the object abstracted from its volume, number
and boarder of the form. The zero deixis is used, first of all, with nouns denoting matter and abstract
categories and in this case it has the widest generalizing meaning. Class objects can also be used in
a generalised meaning, and in such cases they are used without definite or indefinite deixis. Here we
prefer the term zero deixis to zero article, because besides articles there are many other deictic
means to express the deictic categorial forms of definite and indefinite identification. Thus, the zero
deixis expresses a meaningful absence of definite and indefinite deictic means, when there is no
classification and individualization, when the nouns have a generalizing meaning. Thus, quite a
number of deictic means limit the categorial form of general deictic identification (GDI): Ill make
it my business. O s-i art eu c-i treaba mea; Because I heard you call your hostess a snob.
Pentru c v-am auzit spunnd despre gazda dumneavoastr c este o snoab. After destroying some
further portions of his lawn, he joined the nearest Golf Club.. Dup ce distrusese alte cteva
poriuni de pe pajitea sa, se nscrise n cel mai apropiat club de golf. Analyzing examples we
come to the conclusion that the absence of marked articles does not mean that we have a zero
generalizing marker. Various markers are used: possessive case, possessive pronouns, demonstrative
pronouns, limiting prepositions. The fact that all these means belong to the marked categorial forms
is evident when we compare the translation with the original. Thus, in Romanian in most cases a
definite article is used (treaba mea, gazda dumneavoastr), and other deictic means are usually
used to intensify the categorial meaning. In English as well it is observed, that the function of the
definite article before some nouns is taken over by other deixis, which are used with nouns like
parliament, Senate, Congress, market, college, school, breakfast, dinner, supper, etc, which are
rarely used or not used at all with a definite article (legislative bodies, names of seasons, days,
months, holidays and so on). We can also conclude that some objects and phenomena are
interpreted differently in the confronted languages from the point of view of the category of deixis.
Thus, some nouns like man, Time, eternity can be used in a broad general meaning, while in
Romanian they are viewed as words representing the class as a whole, in comparison with other
classes. Here are some examples: When man was still abed and the land lived its own life, how full
and sweet and wild that life seemed. Cnd omul era n durerile naterii i pmntul -i tria
propria sa via, ct de plin i dulce i slbatic acea via era! (omul - used with a definite
article); At last he was satisfied that time had ceased and eternity began; he began to doze, in spite
of himself. Era adnc ncredinat c timpul se oprise i ncepuse venicia i fr a-i da seama
ncepu s moie (timpul, venicia).
61

The category of general deictic identification is regularly realized in both languages with
countable, uncountable and abstract nouns: He put up a good deal of glass too, and was laying
down melons. -i fcuse destul de multe sere i cultiva pepeni (zmoi). Tell him that Im awfully
glad, and hat I wish him luck.) Spune-i c m bucur foarte mult i c-i doresc noroc. The names of
diseases, as a rule, are used with a zero deixis: He has influenza (but: He has the flu). El are grip.
The geographical names are used differently in the confronted languages. Some geographical names
are used with a definite article in English as a result of French influence (names of rivers, seas,
mountain chains, etc.). In Romanian the majority of geographic names are used with an article. For
example: I have visited Paris this year. Am vizitat Parisul anul acesta. In addressing someone, in
exclamation and commands the definite article is usually used in Romanian, and in English we have
a zero deixis: Uncle, come here quickly! Unchiule, vino aici repede! In Romanian the article can be
expressed by or added to an attribute: Domnule preedinte! (It can change places depending on the
metasemiotic usage: Cerul albastru - Albastrul cer). Some more examples: Hands up! Hand off! Mnile sus! Mnile jos! Daddy comes! - Tticul vine! The absence of definite and indefinite deictic
means does not mean that the category of general deictic identification is being realised. In some
cases the markers are dropped for the sake of economy of space, for brevity (newspaper headlines,
dictionary articles, etc.), in metasemiotic usage, especially in colloquial speech, where the speaker
can drop the articles to attract attention, to make it more expressive. [39, 181-190]
14.The Category of Representation
The category of representation (CR) is based on the opposition of predicative and nonpredicative forms. A.Smirnitsky in his book The Morphology of the English Language put
forward the idea that the finite and non-finite forms have much in common as categorial forms of
representation, characterizing the verb as a whole. The main difference between the members of the
given opposition is in the degree of representation of the verbal process. In some cases the verbal
form is represented as a pure process in time, in some other cases additional meanings are imposed
on the process (nominal forms). [70] A. Smirnitsky suggested that the category of representation
should consist of three categorial forms: verbal predicative representation (VPR), substantival
representation (SR) (gerund and infinitive) and adjectival representation (AR) (participle). The
substantival representation is further subdivided into: maximum SR (the gerund, which combines
features of both noun and verb), and minimum SR (the infinitive, which combines features of both
noun and verb). The difference consists in the degree of substantival representation. In SR and AR
the verbal signification of a process is primary and the substantival and adjectival representation of
a process as an object is secondary. Identical representation relations can be observed in cases of
other lexico-grammatical categories. A.Smirnitsky thinks that the difference between various
pronouns, like for example, my and mine, your and yours, is like the one between the SR and AR. A
similar point of view was put forward by M. Blokh: Non- finite forms of the verb are intermediary
in many of their lexico-grammatical features between the verb and the non-processual parts of
speech. Their mixed features are revealed in the principal spheres of the part-of-speech
characterization, i.e. in their meaning, structural marking, combinability, and syntactic functions.
The processual meaning is exposed by them in a substantive or adjectival-adverbial interpretation:
they render processes as peculiar kinds of substances and properties. They do not express either
grammatical time or mood as in the case of finite verb categories). They can be combined with
verbs like non-processual lexemes (performing non-verbal functions in the sentence), and they can
be combined with non-processual lexemes like verbs (performing verbal functions in the sentence).[6] M.Blokh, like A.Smirnisky thinks that the non-finite forms possess features of nouns,
adjectives and adverbial modifiers, but their fundamental grammatical meaning is that of expressing
62

process. M.Blokh has come to the conclusion that the non-finites are part of the verb system and
form a specific verbal subclass (a category, constituted by the opposition of both finite and nonfinite forms). The functions of the two members of the opposition are strictly differentiated: while
the finite forms serve in the sentence only one syntactic function, namely, that of the finite
predicate, the non-finite forms serve various syntactic functions other than that of the finite
predicate and the opposition between the finite and non-finite forms of the verb creates a special
grammatical category. The opposition expresses verbal time and mood: while the time-mood
grammatical signification characterizes the finite verb in a way that it underlies its finite predicative
function, the verbid has no immediate means of expressing time-mood categorial semantics and
therefore presents the weak member of the opposition. Blokh agrees with B. Strang and other
linguists in the fact that the category, expressed by this opposition, can be called the category of
"finitude", the syntactic content of which is the expression of predication Also like A. Smirnitsky,
M. Blokh expresses practically the same point of view as to the difference between the gerund and
the infinitive: Observations of the actual uses of the gerund and the infinitive in texts do show the
clear-cut semantic difference between the forms, which consists in the gerund being, on the one
hand, of a more substantive nature than the infinitive, i.e. of a nature nearer to the thingnesssignification type; on the other hand, of a more abstract nature in the logical sense proper. Hence,
the forms do not repeat, but complement each other, being both of them inalienable components of
the English verbal system. Blokh also singles out a special lexico-grammatical category of
processual representation: The three stages of this category represent the referential processual
entity of the lexemic series, respectively, as dynamic (the infinitive and its phrase), semi-dynamic
(the gerund and its phrase), and static (the verbal noun and its phrase). The category of processual
representation underlies the predicative differences between various situation-naming constructions
in the sphere of syntactic nominalization. He also identifies another category within the framework
of substantival verbids and relevant for syntactic analysis - the category of modal representation,
quoting L. S. Barkhudarov, who marks the infinitive in contrast to the gerund, the infinitive having
a modal force, in particular, in its attributive. [6]
Concerning the gerund and participle categorial forms, they are differently interpreted by
various linguists: some linguistic schools think that all the verbal forms ending in ing should
belong to ing forms. Thus, Blokh mentions the fact that in the American linguistic tradition which
can be traced back to the school of Descriptive Linguistics the two forms are recognized as one
integral V-ing. To this point of view many other linguists have adhered. Other scholars think that
present participle and gerund represent different homonymous non-finite categorial, each of which
is fulfilling quite specific functions. Among the second group of linguists discrepancies have
appeared as to how to differentiate between the functions of the gerund and participle and their
depending on their formal combination with certain syncategorematic lexical units. The first
subgroup of scholars think that the formal factor is very important in case of gerund: the use of
preposition in any function (even in the function of adverbial modifiers), also the functions of
subject and predicate. Lets take some examples: Reading (subject) is to the mind what exercise is
to the body. In spite of myself I could not help smiling (object). On hearing (adverbial modifier) the
tragic news, she fell at once into an alarming state of agitation. The independent particle model has
the advantage of having (attribute) a high degree of physical visuality. Modelul particulei
independente are avantajul de a poseda un grad nalt de visualitate fizic. In the third example the
adverbial modifier on hearing and the attribute of having are classified as gerunds, because of
the prepositions used in font of them. The second group of scholars think that any ing-form in the
function of an adverbial modifier or attribute, with a preposition or without, should be considered as
a present participle. Thus, for example: Turning round, he stared at me, but I perceived he did not
see me. I kept silence for a little while, thinking of what Stroeve had told me. He looked... like a
63

man, who has fallen into the water with all his clothes on, and, being rescued from death,
frightened still, feels that he only looks a fool. When Ashendon, having warmly shaken their hands,
closed the door behind the pair he heaved a great sigh of relief. . ...having tried various topics of
conversation... I asked her to tell me who all the people at table were. Ganshina, M A., Vasileskaya
N. M. also consider that the characteristic traits of the non-finite forms consist in the fact that they
have a double nature, nominal and verbal. Their tense distinctions are not absolute, but relative;
the form of a verbal does not show whether the action it denotes refers to the present, past or
future; it shows only whether the action expressed by the verbal' is simultaneous with the action
expressed by the finite verb or prior to it. All the non-finite forms can form predicative
constructions, i.e. constructions consisting of two elements, a nominal (noun or pronoun) and a
verbal (participle, gerund or infinitive); the verbal element stands in predicate relation to the
nominal element, i. e. in a relation similar to that between the subject and the predicate of the
sentence. In most cases, predicative constructions form syntactic units, serving as one part of the
sentence. [39, 191-197]
Analyzing the non-finite forms in Romanian we have come to the conclusion that the
category of representation exists here as well and it is represented by infinitivul, participiul,
gerunziul and supinul, and in some cases conjunctivul, when it is taking over the functions of the
infinitive. In Russian there are three non-finite forms of the verb, but they do not fully coincide with
those in the English language (, , ). Infinitivul as a verb in the
corresponding functions in a sentence is connected with a doer of an action, the subject being
common with that of the regent verb or it may when it it is not related to the subject of the sentence
and have a separate subject. The short infinitive has some substantival functions, and can be used
after verbs (modal, inceptive, terminative verbs) nouns, adjectives, adverbs and prepositions.
Infinitivul is considered to be used in several meanings: of the indicative (combined with the main
verb) (el ncepu a cnta); that of imperative (A nu cnta aici!). Very often the infinitive is
substituted by conjunctivul and vice versa, depending on the language style used in the text or
speech. The extended infinitive in Modern Romanian has practically been substantivized and can
get an article or an attribute and may corresponds to the English gerund, half-gerund or gerundial
participle in translations. This means that the Romanian extended or long infinitive has still
preserved a considerable processual or verbal meaning: She stopped reading the text. Ea a ncetat
citirea textului (s citeasc textul). My entering the room surprised him. ntrarea mea n odaie l-a
surprins. He was suspected of keeping (possessing) a large sum of mone. El a fost suspectat de
pstrarea (posedarea) a unei sume mari de bani. I felt surprised at his falling into the water. M-am
simit surprins la cderea lui n ap. We need more time for learning (to learn) the material. Avem
nevoie de mai mult timp pentru (a studia) studierea materialului. As we see the Romanian long or
extended infinitive, which is considered to have undergone complete substantivization, in many
cases has preserved its verbal function and may correspond to the English verbal forms of gerund
and infinitive (in same cases to present participle or half gerund), and, in some cases to the
Romanian short infinitive like in the sentence Avem nevoie de mai mult timp pentru (a studia)
studierea materialului. Some linguists both in English and Romanian consider that all the
categorial forms of the category of representation (the infinitive, the gerund, the participle in
English, and infinitivul, participial, gerunziul and supinul (partially conjunctivul ) in Romanian) are
part of the category of mood. Practically the infinitive in both languages, conjunctivul and supinul
in Romanian may be used to express modal meanings. Examples: I have a letter to write. Am o
scrisoare de scris, De pedepsit el nu l-a pedepsit, pentru c era un om bun. We have enough food
to eat. Avem ndeajuns hran de mncat. You are not good even for fishing. Nici de pescuit nu eti
bun. I could not finish writing the essay in time. N-am putut termina de scris eseul la timp. What
else is there to be done? Ce mai este de fcut? They discussed what they had to discuss. Ei au
64

discutate ceea ce au avut de discutat. The Romanian supinul possesses a meaning close to a long
infinitive, having various functions like those of an attribute, indirect object, adverbial modifier.
The kind of modality, expressed by the above mentioned verbal forms, is closer to that of some
modal verbs. [39, 191-221]
The Infinitive. The category of representation in Romanian is represented by infinitivul, participiul,
gerunziul and supinul, while in English we have the infinitive, the gerund, the present participle and
the past participle. In some cases the Romanian conjunctivul is taking over the functions of the
infinitive. The infinitive as a verb functioning in the sentence is connected with a doer of an action,
the subject being common with that of the main verb or it may have a separate subject. The short
Romanian infinitive has some substantival functions like the English equivalent, and can be used
after all kinds of verbs, nouns, adjectives, adverbes and prepositions. The infinitive can contextually
express the meanings of indicative and imperative. Very often the infinitive is substituted by
conjunctivul and vice versa. The extended infinitive in Modern Romanian has practically been
substantivized and can get an article or an atribute. But in some cases the long infinitive has still
preserved the verbal meaning: Dup terminarea lucrului am plecat acas. After having finished
(after finishing) work he went home. The extended or substantivized infinitive in Romanian in the
function of an adverbial modifier may be substituted by the gerunziu: Terminnd lucrul am plecat
acas. Both sentences correspond to the English sentence: (After) having finished work I went home
(the English present participle). It may also correspond to forms of simple infinitive: We need more
time for leraning (to learn) the material. Avem nevoie de mai mult timp pentru (a studia) studierea
materialului. The extended infinitive in other functions (subject, object) usually correspond in
English translations to substantivized participles: citirea crii the reading of the book; scrierea
scrisorii the writing of the letter, lansarea navei spaciale the launching of the spaceship. The
English infinitive has much in common with the gerund, but the latter possess a more distinct
substantival character than the former. The English gerund can be used with a preposition, and this
is not possible with the infinitive. When we compare English, French and Romanian we always
expect great similarity, because they are related languages. If we take closely related languages the
degree of similarity should increase. In case of English, French and Romanian, we begin
concentrating on the original identity and approach confrontation with preconceived ideas of
potential correspondences already formed in advance.
Non-perfect infinitive. When we analyze the material on the categorial level, we have to
take into consideration the specific system of nominal (non-predicative forms). If we take the
category of taxis in the predicative forms, we observe that the categorial forms of anteriority are
mixed with those of tense and aspect, etc. In the nominal forms taxis is usually expressed in a
pure way. The non-predicative forms in English are: the present participle and the gerund with
their perfect and non-perfect forms, past participle and the infinitive (both perfect and non-perfect
forms). Comparing related languages we always expect to find more coincidences than differences.
In what follows we are going to analyse a number of examples with infinitive forms in English,
taken from fiction, with their translations in Romanian and French. Lets start with sentences, where
non perfect forms, active and passive voice of the infinitive, are used: Smaller boys than himself
flocked at his heels proud to be seen with him. (M.Twain) Les petits garons couraient aprs lui,
fiers detre vu avec lui. Bieii mici alergau buluc n urma lui, mndri de a fi vzui (s fie vzui)
mpreun cu el. In the example given above we have complete coincidence. In spite of the
coincidence, the Romanian infinitive here belongs to the formal literary style and can be easily
substituted in some contexts by conjunctivul in a less formal style. Analyzing a larger number of
examples we come to the conclusion that the great majority of them are classified as noncoincidences, because the translator often preferred the Romanian conjunctivul instead of
infinitive, depending on the style used by the author: The storm culminated in one matchless effort
65

that seemed likely to tear the island to pieces, burn it up, drown it to the treetops, blow it away, and
deafen every creature in it, all at one and the same moment. (M.Twain) Lorage se jeta avec une
telle fureur quil semblait quelle voulait mettre lile en pieces, la bruler avec ses flames, inonder
les arbres, la rduire a neant et exterminer toute creature vivante. Furtuna se npusti cu atta furie,
nct prea c vrea s sfrme insula n ndri, s-o mistue n flcri, s inunde copacii, s-o
mistue depe faa pmntului i s strpeasc orice fiin vie. (M.Twain) The English non-perfect
infinitive can be translated into Romanian and French by means of present tense form: But what
has Cahrlie Ferar done not to be spoken to for six years! Mais quest-ce quil a fait ce Charlie
Ferrar quils ne se parlent pas depuis 6 ans? Dar ce a fcut Charlie Ferar de nu-i vorbesc de ase
ani! In Romanian after some verbs the conjunctive is preferable in both the formal literary language
and in the colloquial informal language. Thus, in the sentence Furtuna se npustise cu atta furie,
nct prea c vrea s sfrme insula n ndri, s-o mistuie n flcri, s inunde copacii, s-o
mture de pe faa pmntului i s strpeasc orice fiin vie, if we change or substitute the verb
like vrea with a avea/are intenia de (with the preposition de) then the infinitive is readily
used: Furtuna se npustise cu atta furie, nct prea c a avea/are intenia de a sfrma insula n
ndri, de a o mistui n flcri, de a o inunda copacii, de a o mtura de pe faa pmntului i de a
strpi orice fiin vie. Thus, the preposition de is repeated in front of each infinitive used after the
dominant modal word. Here we should add an interesting observation concerning the use of the
infinitive in Romanian. In Republic of Moldova the use of the infinitive has gradually increased
since the beginning of the 1990th. More people learn the literary formal and literary colloquial
language, and they now prefer in many cases the form of the infinitive to the form of conjunctivul.
Another form to be found in Romanian informal language, corresponding to the English infinitive,
is supinul: It is necessary to do the job today. E necesar de fcut (de a face, s se fac) lucrul
astzi. I have to write three letters. Am de scris trei scrisori. I have a difficult exercise to do. Am un
exerciiu dificil de fcut. The underlined forms in the three sentences in both languages are modally
charged and these forms are stylistically expressive. Supinul is formed by means of particle de
plus past participle of the main verb and it is usually used after a modal word, especially in informal
language, and expresses an action with a goal to be fulfilled. In such cases it is regularly
corresponding to the English infinitive having the same semantic function. In brackets the
alternative forms are given, which can be used depending on the style.
Next come examples with perfect infinitive forms in English, French, and Romanian in
both active and passive forms: He seemed to have forgotten that he had talked with the king. Il
semblait avoir oubli quil eut un roi auquel il avait parl. El prea a fi uitat (s fi uitat) c i
vorbise un rege. What a joy not to have been discovered. Quelle chose est un bonheur? Navoir t
dcouvert. Ce bucurie de a nu fi fost descoperii. (A.Dumas) In Romanian the form of perfect
infinitive is found in formal speech, while in the colocquial speech pluscvamperfectul or
conjunctivul perfect may be often used. After the preposition de infinitivul perfect should be used.
In all the confronted languages we have the same categorial form of taxis, the marked form of
anteriority. An example of non-coincidence: She pretended to have never seen or known this
monsieur Rtau de Villette. Elle prtendit navoir jamais vu, ni connu, ce monsieur Rtau de
Villette. Pretinse c nu-l vzuse, i nu-l cunoscuse (de a nu-l fi vzut, i de a nu-l fi cunoscut) nici o
dat pe acest domn Rtau de Villette. (A.Dumas). In the official translation we find out that in
English and French we have a complete coincidence. In Romanian in all the examples past perfect
(pluscvamperfectul) was used when we have anteriority in the past, which in this case belongs to
colloquial non-formal register. Past perfect here can be easily substituted in the formal language by
perfect infinitive, which is less often used in Romanian and, thus, the difference between the two
forms will be one of style. The English perfect gerund may sometimes correspond in French and
Romanian to perfect infinitives: I don believe in having given (to have given) you the opportunity to
66

Your Majesty to suspect my frankness. Je crois navoir jamais donn lieu Votre Majest de
suspecter ma frqnchise. Nu cred s fi dat (de a fi dat) vreodat prilej maiestii voastre ca s se
ndoiasc de sinceritatea mea.. The English perfect gerund is often found to correspond to the
Frencch perfect infinitive and Romanian conjunctivul and infintivul perfect in cases when the action
is aspectually extended. There are examples where the French plus-que-parfait is also confronted
with perfect infinitive in English: A sun, that he did not seem to have seen since he came over here.
Un soleil, comme il lui semblait, quil navait pas vu depuis le jour quand il avait travers locan.
Un soare pe care, dup cte i se prea (s nu-l fi vzut, de a nu-l fi vzut), c nu-l mai zrise de
cnd trecuse oceanul. The perfect infinitive forms in English are rendered into both Romanian and
French by means of past perfect (preferable in colloquial informal speech), but they could be easily
translated by means of perfect infinitive into both languages, besides in Romanian the form of
perfect conjunctive is possible. All these forms coincide in their categorial meaning anteriority.
The perfect infinitive in English and infintif pass can be confronted with the Romanian
perfectul compus, expressing anteriority to the present moment: I am sure only to have heard what I
have heard, to have seen what my eyes have seen! Suis-je bien sur de avoir entendu ce que jai
entendu, davoir vu ce que mes yeux ont vu ! Snt sigur numai c am auzit (de a fi auzit) ceea ce
am auzit, c am vzut (de a fi vzut) ceea ce am vzut. This fact is easily explained by the fact that
in different languages in certain situations various types of taxis means are used to express
anteriority. Perfectul compus in Romanian belongs here to the informal style; in the formal
language the infinitive would be acceptable. There are cases where French pass compos is also
confronted with the English perfect infinitive: Sorry to have bothered you. Cest dommage que je
vous ai ennuy. mi pare ru c v-am plictisit. Confronting the material we come to the conclusion
that the perfect infinitive forms are widely used in English and French, and relatively not so often
used in Romanian informal style of the language. Even in those cases where we do have perfect
infinitive forms in translations, they can be easily replaced by the conjunctivul perfect, which is
preferable in less bookish speech.
Perfect Infinitive in English after modal auxiliaries and after modal verbs in general is
regularly corresponding to the Romanian conjunctivul: Some mistakes must have been made in
assembling the parts of the machine. Nite erori trebuie s fi fost fcute la asamblarea pieselor
mainii. The structures proposed may not have been established with complete certainty. Structurile
propuse puteau s nu fi fost stabilite cu o certitudine complet. Coal was formed millions of years
ago from the enormous quantities of vegetation and trees. The process of their decay must have
been very gradual but constant. Crbunele s-a format milioane de ani n urm din cantiti enorme
de vegetaie i copaci. Procesul de descompunere trebuie s fi fost treptat dar constant. In the
Romanian examples here conjunctivul is used in both formal and informal styles. In such structures,
like in the above given examples, infinitivul perfect cannot be used. Having analyzed the material
on the categorial level we have taken into consideration the specific system of nominal (nonpredicativce forms). The category of taxis expressed by the category of representation expressed in
a most pure way. In spite of the fact that there are quite a number of formal discrepancies, we
still can state that on the categorial meaning of anteriority we have complete coincidence in most
cases. [39, 197-221]
The Present Participle. The categorial forms of gerund and participle are differently
interpreted in various grammar books: some linguistic schools think that all the verbal forms ending
in ing should be named as ing forms. Blokh mentions the fact that in the American linguistic
tradition which can be traced back to the school of Descriptive Linguistics the two forms are recognized as one integral V-ing. Other grammar text books consider present participle and gerund
represent as different homonymous non-finite categorial forms, each of which is fulfilling specific
functions. Among linguists there are discrepancies as to how to differentiate between the functions
67

of the gerund and participle, and their dependence on their formal combination with certain
syncategorematic lexemes. There are two main points of view. The first group of scholars think, that
the formal factor is very important in case of gerund: the use of preposition in any function (even in
the function of adverbial modifiers), also the functions of subject and predicate. Lets take some
examples: After having finished (adverbial modifier of time) the work he went home. Terminnd
(dup ce terminase, dup ce a terminat, dup terminarea lucrului) lucrul el a plecat acas. Without
being subjected to a special treatment, raw rubber cannot be used for manufacturing things... Fr
a fi supus unui tratament special, cauciucul neprelucrat nu poate fi folosit pentru a produce
obiecteThe independent particle model has the advantage of having (attribute) a high degree of
physical visuality. Modelul particulei independente are avantajul de a poseda un grad nalt de
visualitate fizic. The second group of grammarians thinks that any ing-form in the function of an
adverbial modifier or attribute, with a preposition or without, should be considered to be a present
participle. The ing forms have the function of adverbial modifier of time, usually carriead out by
present participle forms. Besides, here they can be translated into Romanian by means of gerunziul,
which regularly corresponds to the English present participle (some othe grammatical forms are
possible to be used in Romanian: mai mult ca perfectul, long infinitive, perfectul compus).The
categorial meaning of anteriority is expressed both grammatically, lexico-grammatically and
lexically. Gerunziul historically took over the meanings and functions of participiul present, when it
got out of usage. Thus, the difference between gerund and participle is that the gerund is closer to
the noun in its functions (subject and object), and the participle is closer to the adjective, and may
have the functions of an attribute or adverbial modifier. In their perfect forms they both express
anteriority. If the actions follow one after the other, a simple form (non-perfect) is used, anteriority
being expressed simply lexically or contextually, because there is no need to intensify it by
grammatical anteriority. Thus for example: Having registered (grammatical anteriority) all the
letters, the secretary sent them down to be posted. On entering (contextual anteriority) the room he
introduced himself to all those present. After looking through (lexical anteriority) the morning mail
the manager, called in his secretary and dictated a few letters. The perfect -ing forms are usually
used in the formal bookish language and their passive voice forms are used much more rarely.
Confronting the participle and gerund, perfect forms in English and Romanian it was
observed that they are relatively more often used in English and French than in Romanian, where
predicative forms are preferred. Non-perfect form:
a) participle I participe prsent gerunziul: Tom lay watching the two intently. Tom tait
couch les fixant des yeux tous le deux. Tom sttea culcat, scurtndu-i lung pe amndoi. The
Romanian gerunziul is naturally confronted with the English participle I and does not correspond to
the English gerund.
b) Participle I grondif gerunziul: So he got into the shoes snarling. Tom, en mormotant, mit ses
souliers. Tom, bodognind, ncl pantofii.
c) Participle I imparfait imperfectul (or gerunziul): Tom lay thinking. Tom tait couch et
pensait. Tom sta culcat i se gndea (gndindu-se). A durative action expressed by participle I in a
context in the past can easily be rendered into French and Romanian by means of imperfect forms,
which express a continuous and unfinished action in the past. The translator preferred in the
Romanian variant the expressive forms of imperfectul, but the form of gerunziul would be much
more expressive if used here. The regular equivalents or the English present participle in French and
Romanian translation are grondif and gerunziul, which are regularly confronted: In getting out,
he looked back. En sortant, le jeune homme tourna la tte. Ieind, tnrul ntoarse capul. Upon
leaving him on the night of our adventure, he solicitated me... Cette nuit-la en faisant ses adieux il
ma prie... n noaptea aceea, lundu-i rmas bun de la mine, ma rugat... Similar English perfect
forms are confronted in French and Romanian with plus-que-parfait and mai mult ca perfectul:
68

After destroying some further portions of his lawn, he joined the nearest Golg Club. Quand il avait
dtruit quelques autres portions de son paturage, il sinscrivit dans le club de golf le plus proche.
Dup ce distrusese (distrugnd, dup destrugerea) alte cteva poriuni de pe pajitea sa, se nscrise
n cel mai apropiat club de golf. French and Romanian prefer past perfect forms when the English
gerund is accompanied by lexical anteriority means (after). In Romanian the forms of gerunziul or
long infinitive and contextual anteriority may be used the above given examples. Pass compos
perfectul compus (or gerunziul) can also be used to correspond to the English present participle
with lexical anteriority: Upon reaching the wharf, I noticed a scythe and three spades,,, Quand
nous sommes arrives sur la quai, jai remarqu une faux et bches. Cnd am ajuns (ajungnd) la
chei, am observat... o coas i dou hrlee. In all the confronted sentences here we have
consecutive actions. Thus anteriority grammatical forms are not used here. The French pass
compos and the Romanian perfectul compus in the given context express an action separated from
the present moment, and, thus, they do not express grammatical anteriority in this case and we have
simultaneity in the confronted examples. [39, 204-209]
Perfect participle participe pass compos gerunziul perfect: Having arrived the first,
you have the primarity. Vous avez le pas, tant arriv le premier. Avei ntietate fiind venit (venind)
primul. In thish case we have complete coincidence in all the three languages, though gerunziul
perfect in Romanian is rarely used and is usually substituted by forms given below.
Perfect participle infinitif pass perfectul compus: The courtiers, having entered,
brought furnaces and massy hammers and welded the bolts. Les courtesans ont apport des forges
et aprs avoir entr, il ont clou la porte de lintrieur. Curtenii aduseser cu ei forje i ilie grele
i, dup ce au intrat, au intuit poarta pe dinuntru. In spite of the fact that there are different forms
in the confronted languages the grammatical meaning of anteriority is preserved in all of them.
Perfect participle plus-que-parfait mai mult ca perfectul: Soames, having prolonged his
week-end visit had been spending the afternoon at the Zoological Gardens. Soames avait continu
son week-end Londres et avait pass laprs-midi dans le jardin zoologique. Soames i
prelungise week-endul la Londra i i petrecuse dup ameaza n grdina zoologic. Perfect
participle is readily translated into French and Romanian by means of past perfect forms, expressing
the same grammatical meaning of past anteriority. It could be substituted by a past perfect form in
English as well. Thus, for example: He had never been outside Europe, and had a somewhat
sketchy idea of places like South Africa, Australia, Canada and New Zealand. The difference we
find in the given examples is one of stylistics. Thus, both in English and Romanian the adjectival
and adverbial features of Participle I and gerunziul are manifested in their syntactic functions as
attributes and and adverbial modifiers. [39, 204-209]
Aspect Expressed by the Present Participle.
The category of aspect in various languages is expressed differently: grammatically, lexicogrammatically, lexically and prosodically. In English, aspect is an extremely reliable and
grammatically impeccable way of expressing the opposition in question. In Romanian the category
of aspect is expressed mainly lexically and partially grammatically. Both the participle I and
gerunziul (and also the English ing-forms) express a durative action grammatically. The verbs
possessing a durative lexical meaning can express continuous aspect both lexically and lexicogrammatically, the latter being emphatic or intensified aspectually. Thus, He sat at the table/ He
was sitting at the table are confronted with imperfect forms both in Russian and Romanian:
; El edea la mas; (L-am vzut eznd la mas. In the case of He sat at the table
the lexical aspectual meaning of sat is durative, and it is intensified by superimposing a
grammatical aspectual meaning on the lexical one in was sitting. The Romanian and Russian
equivalents belong to the imperfective aspect and express an imperfect action; the grammatical
duration here is supplemented by the lexical one. Even terminative or point-action verbs can be
69

used in the continuous aspect if the action is repeated or the speaker wants to show the action in
development, or to stress the fact that the action lasted during a certain period of time. For example:
The boy jumped over the fence/The boy was jumping round the tree. I began to read, but the teacher
interrupted me /I was beginning to read when he came in. In Romanian we have practically the
same situation: Biatul a srit peste gard/ Biatul srea n jurul copacului; Eu am nceput s citesc,
dar profesorul m-a ntrerupt/ Eu ncepeam s citesc, cnd el a intrat. In Romanian there are no
clear-cut grammatical flexions (with the exception of imperfectul) to indicate the given categorial
meaning. As to the constructions with ing+forms we have already mentioned them above in
discussing the category of aspect. We should just mention some examples:
- Accusative with participle I in English and Accusative with gerunziul in Romanian: Dupin
was moving quickly to the door, when we again heard him coming up - Dupin se mica repede spre
ua, cnd peste o clip l auzirm pe necunoscut urcnd din nou (E.Po).
- Nominative with Participle I and Nominative with gerunziul: He was seen running to the river
- El a fost vzut fugind spre ru.
- Nominative absolute: The dinner being ready, he dished and served it up Prnzul fiind gata, el
a servit masa. The house door being open, she went in before Tom, requesting him to follow her
(M.Twain) - Ua casei fiind deschis, ea a intrat naintea lui Tom, cerndu-i s-o urmeze.
- Absolute Participle construction and Absolute gerunziul construction: A lake with children
swimming in it, appeared and disappeared - Un lac, cu copii scldndu-se n el, apru i dispru.
Double predicate: The little maid came running down - Fetia venea fugind n jos. He walked
singing - El mergea cntnd.
- Independent participle constructions: The northern shores of the Caspian Sea are frozen every
winter, ice remaining for some hundred days in the colder parts. rmurile de nord ale Mrii
Caspice sunt ngeate n fiecare iarn, ghiaa rmnnd pentru vre-o sut de zile n prile mai
reci. The independent participle constructions with present participles include in their structure a
secondary subject and a secondary predicate (ice remaining- ghiaa rmnnd; the motion becoming- micarea devenind). The present participle here has a distinct marked aspectual
connotation, expressing an equivalent durative meaning like that of the continuous forms: ice
remaining - the ice is remaining for some hundred days in the colder parts. [39, 2011-2016]
Anteriority and Voice Expressed by the Past Participle.
Past participle and participiul (trecut) in English and Romanian can synthetically express
anteriority and voice and they also serve to form a number of perfect and passive voice analytical
forms. Thus, if we take several examples of verbal forms like: reading read, citind citit; writing
written, scriind - scris; seeing seen, vznd vzut; creating - created, crend creat - we
observe three distinct categorial oppositions, that of simultaneity vs. anteriority (category of taxis),
active vs. passive (category of voice) and continuous vs. non-continuous (category of aspect). Not
all the participles posses all the three categorial forms. The intransitive verbs do not posses the
passive meaning: going gone, plecnd plecat. The category of transitivity-intransitivity should
also be taken into consideration in the analysis participles. Some intransitive verbs gradually
acquire submeanings, which are transitive in character. For example: Running a factory is not easy.
The factory is run well. was laughed at El a fost luat n rs. Past participles are practically
rarely used independently, they are usually found in analytical combinations of perfect and passive
voice forms. The intransitive verbs are used in perfect forms, but are not found in passive analytical
structures, with the exception of the verbs go and come found in some word combinations: he is
come, he is gone. The verbs can also be classified according to their lexical meanings: terminative,
inceptive, iterative, durative, etc. The expression of both anteriority and passive voice is usually
found in terminative verbs, while in the durative ones only the passive meaning is clearly seen.
70

Thus, A.Smirnitsky thinks that loved as a past participle loses its perfectivity, which is clearly
seen in participles like broken. But sometimes this division is not clear-cut. Thus, in case of
repeated actions of terminative verbs perfectivity may weaken or get lost a durative meaning is
taking over. The categorial function of a given past participle depends considerably on the
contextual meaning it is used in the given text, and on its semantic feature. There is a multitude of
combinations of the verb to be the past participle. We should pay attention to cases of
homonymy. Combinations of the verb to be + past participle like in The letter is written by
Peter. Soon he will finish writing it, or The door is closed by Peter (as a process) should be
distinguished from The door is closed as state, where is closed is not a passive construction, but just
defines the state of the door, that it is not open, there is no meaning of perfectivity in the latter
case. It is known that the perfect non-finite forms of the verb express anteriority in a much more
pure way in comparison with the finite forms. The past participle expresses anteriority in the most
pure way. Lets take some examples of participle used in the function of attributes: Hydrogen is the
lightest substance known. Hidrogenul este cea mai uoar substan cunoscut. Unfortunately it is
not possible to present in this book all the information obtained. Din pcate nu este posibil de a
prezentan cartea aceasta toat informaia obinut. In both languages a complete coincidence has
been attested in the result of confrontational analysis of past participles in attributive functions in
English with their correspondents in the Romanian language. But in many cases this coincidence is
not always possible because of some structural and semantic differences, and also because of certain
linguistic and sociolinguistic traditions in the confronted languages, combinability of words,
homonymy, etc. A.Smirnitsky takes as an example the past participle gone. Is gone may be
identical to the combination have gone in a transferred meaning he died like in the sentence
Poor Mr. Brown is (has) gone. He has left us. He has joined the great majority Srmanul dl.Brown
a murit (a plecat). El a murit (ne-a prsit). El a plecat n lumea strbunilor. Is gone can also be
used in the direct sense of the word to express perfectivity in colloquial speech as in Where is Mr.
Brown? He is gone. He will be back in an hour Unde e dl Brown? El e plecat. Se va ntoarce peste
o or. In case of transitive verbs the past participle has a passive meaning closely connected with
perfectivity (The letter written yesterday was sent in time). But when used in analytical nonperfect fiorms the past participle gets devoid of anteriority meaning and preserves only the passive
categorial function (The letter was written and sent in time). The same thing is observed in
Romanian: Scrisoarea scris ieri a fost trimis la timp./ Scrisoarea a fost scris i trimis la timp.
The past participle is regularly confronted with the French participe pass and the Romanian
participial trecut: The methodology tested in the Indo-European field set the pattern. La mthode
prouve sur le domaine indo-europen est devenue exemplaire. Metoda experimentat n domeniul
indo-european a devenit exemplar. The paradigms in grammars lead one to believe that all the
verbal forms taken from the name stem belong to the same conjugation. Les paradigmes des
grammaires donnent croire que toutes les formes verbales tires dun mme theme appartiennent
la mme conjugaison. Paradigmele date n crile de gramatic ne fac s credem, c toate
formele verbale luate din aceea tem aparin la aceea conjugare. All these observations bring out
the essential difference between the method of communication discovered among bees and our
human language. Lensemble de ces observations fait apparatre la diffrence essentielle entre les
procdes de communication dcouverts chez les abeilles et notre langage. Toate observaiile
acestea scot la iveal diferena esenial dintre metoda de comunicare descoperit la albini i
limba uman. The English participle II can sometimes correspond to the Romanian mai mult ca
perfectul: On the staircase Charny met only some officers, friends of his, informed beforehand.
Charny ne rencontra sur les degrs que plusieurs officiers, ses amis, prvenus assez temps. Pe
scri, Charny ntlni numai civa ofieri, prieteni de ai si, care fusese anunai (or anunai) din
timp. The anteriority meaning in English and French is expressed only lexically, while in Romanian
71

both lexical and grammatical anteriority means are used for the sake of expressivity. Lets some of
the syntactic functions fulfilled by past participle :
a) attributive - The data obtained are being carefully analyzed and studied. Datele obinute
sunt analizate i studiate atent; In both languages the participles have the function of atributes. b)
adverbial modifier of time Asked (being asked) to comment about the U.N. resolution tabled by the
Afro-Asian countries, the Prime Minister replied... ntrebat (find ntrebat, cnd a fost ntrebat) s
comenteze rezoluia ONU propus de rile Afro-Asiatice, Primul Ministru a rspuns... ; In this case
the English participle asked has the function of adverbial modifier of time and ir could be
substituted by the passive voice form of the present participle being asked. The form tabled has
the function an attribute;
c) adverbial modifier of condition - If given the opportunity, this industry will rapidly
develop. Aceast industrie se va dezvolta rapid, dac vor vi create (condiii) posibiliti favorabile;
The past participle in the function of an adverbial modifier corresponds in Romanian to future
indefinite passive voice and this shows the fact that the forms are different, but the grammatical
categorial voice meaning is the same passive voice;
d) adverbial modifier of concession- But the Right-wing Labour leaders, though forced to
give way on some questions, will stick to their policies. Liderii laburiti de dreapta, dei forai s
cedeze n unele probleme, vor susine politica lor; e) complex object with past participle - The
British people want hydrogen and atomic weapons outlawed. Poporul britanic vrea ca armele
nucleare i cu hidrogen s fie puse n afara legii. We hope to see this issue raised in all trades
councils, in every union. Noi sperm vedem aceast problem ridicat n fiecare sindicat. The
construction of complex object with past participle in English corresponds to a construction of
complex object with subjunctivul with meaning of future and in the second complex object with
participiul trecut. Thus, having analyzed a considerable number of examples we can state that past
participle express anteriority in cases when the action is preceding to the moment of speech. There
are quite a number of cases where the forms under research express both anteriority and passive
voice (in case of transitive verbs) meanings, or only the latter one. [39, 216-221]
15.Word Order and Its Metasemiosis.
Much work has been done by language typologists on diachronic change, following up the work of
J. Greenberg's set of implicational universals, R. Hawkins' extensive investigation of universals.[39,
255] Translating these universals into claims about diachrony, analysts have sought to develop
hierarchies of change specifying that if a certain change takes place, something else will follow,
which in turn will cause a further change, and, so on. This turns out to be related to Sapir's notion of
drift. Sapir E.[39, 255] explains certain past and present morphological, syntactic, and lexical
changes of English by revealing that they are consequences of certain major psychological
tendencies of speakers of this language - which he calls drifts. Since such tendencies remain alive
over long periods of time, he predicts certain further, similar changes for the future of English and
points out that these predictions are already in part becoming true in the English of lower-class
speakers. He shows, furthermore, that the three major drifts - loss of case marking, stabilization of
word order, and the drift toward the invariable -word - are, at least to a large extent, related to each
other and are, ultimately, consequences of yet another drift of English, the phonetic drift of the
Germanic languages toward reduction and loss of final syllables, itself a consequence of the wordinitial stress accent of these languages. This seems to us a considerable achievement in the
development of a theory of grammar change because it is generally stated that every morphological
system is destroyed by phonological change. In our case, as a substantive Subject-Object marking
system is eroded by phonological change, English word order syntax must react to compensate for
the ambiguities and perceptual complexities. In spite of these explanations, one should also note
72

how much Sapir has either not seen or kept for himself. From our present viewpoint more than half
a century later, the omissions look large and surprising. Sapir limits his discussion to English. Yet
similar changes occur in many other languages. He also does not note that the stabilized word is a
particular one, the SVO (subject-verb predicate-object) order, while the dominant word order of
older period of the language, some five thousand years ago, had been SOV, as Sapir must have
known from the writings of earlier authors. What is more important is the fact that English has been
subject to another major drift, the gradual change from an SOV to an SVO language and the
question arises whether this drift is language specific or somehow universal. So that Sapir's picture
of the major tendencies in the development of English syntax remains incomplete in a rather
conspicuous way. Lakoff R. continues the investigation of drift by relating it to comparative and
typological linguistic studies. Lakoff begins by presenting "a list of some changes... that occur in
many or all of the Indo-European languages, clearly not as a result of one being influenced by
another".[39, 256] The common feature of Lakoff's six drifts is that they "go from synthetic to
analytic".[39, 256] This trend is also called by Lakoff a "meta-condition on the way the grammar of
a language as a whole can change" (idem). Lakoff's paper is valuable and goes beyond Sapir's
discussion in that it points out that certain drifts may be shared by several languages at least of a
given family. This is a great step towards the development of word order change from a universal
point of view. In recent years J. Greenberg's word order typologies have achieved certain popularity.
Greenberg does not employ the term drift or make reference to Sapir. Yet the phenomena he
investigates are closely related to drift, and the work he has done has contributed so much to the
explanation of drift as a universal phenomenon. In his work Greenberg developing ideas of R.
Jakobson [39, 256] postulated a set of implicational universals based on predominant surface word
order patterns. On the basis of his implications, there emerged a notion of a typologically consistent
language. Thus a consistent SOV language would have post-positions, the orders V-Aux, Adj-N,
Genitive-N, Det-N, IO-DO and it will tend to be heavily inflected. A consistent SVO language
would have prepositions and the reverse order, namely Aux-V, N-Adj, N-Gen, N-Det, DO-IO, and it
will tend not to be heavily inflected. Therefore, if a consistent SOV language were to develop into a
consistent SVO type, it would undergo a large number of harmonic changes. In a powerful critique,
Hawkins R. [39, 255] has identified further problems with the "typological approach" and the
diachronic theory based on it. Hawkins identifies three shortcomings in the thirty implicational
universals of J. Greenberg [39, 255]: first, the correlations across syntactic domains are not very
good and the order of verb and object seems to bear no relation to the order of noun and adjective;
second, some language types have no exemplifications; and third, no distinction is drawn between
language types which have very many exponents and those which have a mere handful. Being taken
as theories, Hawkins calls them trigger-chain theories: some property changes and sets off a chain
reaction, which is defined by Greenberg as type implications. Hawkins R. considers that this trigger
may be grammatical, pragmatic or perceptual. Theo Vennemann [39, 255] offers a grammatical
trigger: phonological changes reduce morphological distinctions and the order shifts from SOV to
SVO to prevent widespread ambiguity whereby NP NPV might be interpreted as SOV or OSV.
Hyman's after - thought is an example of a pragmatic trigger, provoking various elements to occur
post-verbally by analogy to the after-thought constructions and thereby getting the chain started.
Antinucci, Duranti and Gebart. provide a perceptual trigger: they claim that in a SOV language the
first relation to change is that of a noun and its relative clause. The prenominal relatives of SOV
languages are alleged to pose perceptual problems and therefore shift to postnominal position and
this triggers off a chain reaction. Hawkins goes on to show that trigger-chain theories as proposed
make false predictions about the hierarchy of changes in a general typological shift. In order to shed
light on the correct theory of grammar the simultaneous changes should be related where possible.
Koch W. [39, 257] took a similar approach to parallel changes in several Indo-European languages,
73

claiming that they can be viewed as the symptoms of a more general SOV to SVO typological
change. He argued that it is the rising predominance of SVO order in OE that makes the breakdown
of the inflectional system possible; this was based on the assumption, derived from Greenberg's
work, that SVO languages characteristically do not have rich post-positional inflectional systems.
Koch views the Germanic, Romance and Slavic languages, Greek and Lithuanian as evolving
gradually from SOV to typologically consistent SVO languages. Koch argues that they are evolving
at different rates, but they are all on the same slope, steadily acquiring more and more properties,
which are characteristic of the SVO type. She also states, for example, that Proto-Germanic was in
transition from SOV to SVO and that its daughter languages have steadily acquired more SVO
properties. One should therefore be attentive about attempts to develop theories of change on the
basis of such "generalisations". There is no reason to suppose that in this respect the changes
affecting Romance, Germanic, Slavic, Greek, Chinese, and the few other languages with a long
documented history, represent the total range of possibilities. However, if the claims are to be made
about the underlying order of elements in the initial structure in a language, the order of these
changes is often difficult to establish. Linguists have tried to establish the order of some basic
changes for English but without much success. Furthermore, this is done for a wide range of
languages and there are no grounds to suppose that there is a universally determined hierarchy of
changes, a prescribed rule, which all languages must slide down at varying rates. From the stated
explanations in the study of diachronic change the essential problem is that languages vary in their
structure to a great extent and this variation makes it difficult if not impossible to use structural
criteria, to identify grammatical categories across languages. It seems to us that in this respect word
order has a privilege over other grammatical categories. Word order changes appear to be one of the
easiest for cross-linguistic comparability, since they are clearly based on a physical property of the
clause, the sequence of units, which can be directly observed. Having dealt with such considerations
about changes in general, it has been seen that in developing from SOV to SVO syntax, languages
seem to follow similar pathways. For instance, Modern German, which developed from the same
Germanic SOV source as English, shares two of Old English's distinguishing characteristics. First,
the verb is typically placed in the second position of the sentence in main clauses, preceded by the
subject or some other element (such as an adverb). Secondly the SOV order is employed for
embedded clauses. Since linguists are still not sure why languages change from one syntactic type
to another, the causes of word order change will undoubtedly remain an important area of
investigation, especially since the relative order of Verb and Object has been closely linked with
other word order patterns. A second kind of extra-grammatical cause of syntactic change is what
one might term expressivity. This would include the introduction of novel forms for stylistic effect,
such as the topicalized clauses, which are common in certain English dialects, where a NP occurs
in a marked position and with heavy stress: Pete, she heard, but not Mike. Pete, 1 heard him and he
played football, Mike. These forms are still regarded as novel in English and as having distinct
stylistic force; they are met and considered common in Yorkshire dialects and with British football
commentators. In spite of the fact that English is a subject-prominent language, in which all clauses
must have a subject even if there is nothing to refer to as in It is raining, it accepted such novel
clauses. This process, in which instead of the subject you may make another element more
important, by moving it to the front of the sentence, gives the element a kind of psychological
prominence. The speaker says the most important thing in his mind first: Rch, I may be, but this
doesn't mean I'm happy. J.London
Let us take some examples of cases of stylistic inversion after conjunction, adverbs, etc. in
English and Romanian: Never before have I been in this forest. Nici odat pn acum n-am fost
eu n aceast pdure. Not only does water function as a catalyst, but it also may be a significant
rock-building constituent. Nu numai c apa are funcia de catalizator, ci ea poate fi un constituent
74

important n formarea stncelor. Nowhere can we see such rapid progress as in computing
technique. Nicieri nu putem noi vedea aa un progres rapid ca n domeniul tehnologiilor
informaionale. So bright is Venus that even in the daytime it is sometimes visible. Aa de luminoas
este planeta Venus c chiar n timpul zilei ea este uneori vizibil. Not only do the tides advance and
retreat in their eternal rhythms, but the level of the sea itself is never at rest. If we take the first
sentence and compare it with its direct order variant we find out a considerable metasemiotic
difference between them: I have never been in this forest before. Eu nici odat pn acum n-am fost
n aceast pdure. Eu n-am fost n aceast pdure nici odat pn acum. The stylistically
inverted variants in both languages make stylistically prominent the adverbs, the auxiliary in
English, and even the whole predicate in Romanian. The prominence of the inverted words can be
further intensified by means of prosody: slowed down tempo, widened range of the voice, increased
loudness, high note, etc. The traditional word order developed a specific intonation pattern and
Galperin I. mentions the fact that there is a clash between semantically less important syntactic
elements and the prominent ones and prosody can considerably intensify or diminish the
metasemiotic connotation of the sentence. Thus, in the sentence: Talent Mr. Micawber has; capital
Mr. Micawber has not. Here the first and the last positions being prominent, the verb has and the
negative not get a fuller volume of stress than they would in direct word order. In this example, the
effect of the inverted word order is backed up by two other stylistic devices: antithesis and parallel
construction. Unlike grammatical inversion stylistic inversion does not change the structural
meaning of the sentence, that is, the change in the juxtaposition of the members of the sentence
does not indicate structural meaning but has some superstructural function. Stylistic inversion aims
at attaching logical stress or additional emotional colouring to the surface meaning of the utterance.
Having analysed a large number of examples we can conclude that in a topicalized structure, the
fronted element often evokes a presuppositional set recoverable from the earlier portion of the text.
The final element is strongly rhematic, carrying new information and often linking up with
something coming later in the text, and, thus, in syntax, new constructions are introduced, which by
their unusual shape have a novelty value and are used for metasemiotic purposes. The special
stylistic effect slowly becomes bleached out and the constructions lose their marked force becoming
hackneyed, speakers regularly reproduce such ready made metasemiotic structures to achieve a
certain stylistic effect. At the same time other metasemiotic structures are regularly being produced
in speech to produce a genuine metasemiotic effect. We consider this process an important kind of
historical change in syntax, which has been given very little attention in the literature, perhaps as a
consequence of the lack of a real analogue in phonological change.
Intensified Stylistic Syntactic Structures. Another kind of extra-grammatical cause of
syntactic change, considered as a special case of expressivity, is called by Hyman after-thought. We
could name it by using the term intensified stylistic inversion. This plays a role in the development
of SOV word order to SVO. This means that in addition to the usual SOV patterns one would get
intensified stylistic structures SOVO, for instance: Ann biscuits liked ... and chocolate. (Would you
like biscuits or chocolate? Biscuits I like, and chocolate, and cake, too.) Thus in a OV
language, intensified stylistic inversion permits certain surface occurrences of VO. Stockwell and
McKnight G. sustain this position and develop such an account of the word order change in English.
McKnight had attributed the rise of post-verbal complementation in large measure intensified
stylistic structures, where to the apparently finished sentence a number of explanatory details are
added, afterthoughts; or some element by reason of close connection with the following clause, may
be put after the verb. To motives like these the analytic order probably owes its origin. Stockwell
is less concerned with such psychological motivation, but notes that there are a number of
structural motivations within the syntax of OE that considerably strengthen the tendency to
exbraciate, where exbraciation is the rightward movement eliminating nominal and adverbial
75

elements. Stockwell proceeds to identify various processes which gave rise to surface sequences
SV(O), so that eventually a language learner had sufficient basis to generalize that sentences end
with complements, not with verbs. Nowadays this psychological motivation causes some problems.
[39, 260] Since consistent OV languages such as Japanese make very sparing use of intensified
stylistic syntactic structures, how may it be explained that in some OV languages intensified
stylistic syntactic structures become so important that it changes the type of the language to VO?
Some linguists, among them Sapir, attribute this change to the familiar tendency to level the
distinction between case marking. Sapir had in my opinion the correct view of such a situation
when he said that throughout the history of English the case system... has been steadily weakening
in psychological respects [39, 260]. Surely learners and speakers of a language do not wait until the
last trace of a case marking is lost before they realize that something is going wrong in their
language. Perhaps they will avoid constructions most or all of the time if they run them into
difficulties some of the time, and rely on constructions that guarantee success. Therefore, insofar as
the intensified stylistic syntactic structure phenomenon is a psychological motivation for VO
sequences, it contributes to the opacity of the underlying OV order and therefore may be said to
play a causal role in the development of a new VO order. Much work has been done by language
typologists on diachronic change, following up the work of Greenberg's set of implicational
universals, Hawkins' extensive investigation of universals [39, 261]. Translating these universals
into claims about diachrony, analysts have sought to develop hierarchies of change specifying that if
a certain change takes place, something else will follow, which in turn will cause a further change,
and, so on. This turns out to be related to Sapir's notion of drift. Sapir explains certain past and
present morphological, syntactic, and lexical changes of English by revealing that they are
consequences of certain major psychological tendencies of speakers of this language - which he
calls drifts. Since such tendencies remain alive over long periods of time, he predicts certain further,
similar changes for the future of English and points out that these predictions are already in part
becoming true in the English of lower-class speakers. He shows, furthermore, that the three major
drifts - cases of marking, stabilization of word order, and the drift toward the invariable word - are,
at least to a large extent, related to each other and are, ultimately, consequences of yet another drift
of English, the phonetic drift of the Germanic languages toward reduction and loss of final
syllables, itself a consequence of the word-initial stress accent of these languages. This seems to us
a considerable achievement in the development of a theory of grammar change because it is
generally stated that every morphological system is destroyed by phonological change. In our case,
as a substantive Subject-Object marking system is eroded by phonological change, English word
order syntax must react to compensate for the ambiguities and perceptual complexities. [39, 261]
In spite of these explanations, one should also note how much Sapir has either not seen or kept for
himself. From our present viewpoint more than half a century later, the omissions look large and
surprising. Sapir limits his discussion to English. Yet similar changes occur in many other
languages. He also does not note that the stabilized word is a particular one, the SVO order, while
the dominant word order of older period of the language, some five thousand years ago, had been
SOV, as Sapir must have known from the writings of earlier authors. What is more important is the
fact that English has been subject to another major drift, the gradual change from an SOV to an
SVO language and the question arises whether this drift is language specific or somehow universal.
So that Sapir's picture of the major tendencies in the development of English syntax remains
incomplete in a rather conspicuous way, Lakoff continues the investigation of drift by relating it to
comparative and typological linguistic studies. Lakoff begins by presenting "a list of some
changes... that occur in many or all of the Indo-European languages, clearly not as a result of one
being influenced by another. [39, 262] The common feature of Lakoff's six drifts is that they "go
from synthetic to analytic". This trend is also called by Lakoff a "meta-condition on the way the
76

grammar of a language as a whole can change" (idem). Lakoff's paper is valuable and goes beyond
Sapir's discussion in that it points out that certain drifts may be shared by several languages at least
of a given family. This is a great step towards the development of word order change from a
universalist point of view. In recent years Greenberg's word order typologies have achieved a
certain popularity. Greenberg does not employ the term drift or make reference to Sapir. Yet the
phenomena he investigates are closely related to drift, and the work he has done has contributed so
much to the explanation of drift as a universal phenomenon. In his work Greenberg developing
ideas of R. Jakobson postulated a set of implicational universals based on predominant surface word
order patterns. On the basis of his implications, there emerged a notion of a typologically consistent
language. Thus a consistent SOV language would have post-positions, the orders V-Aux, Adj-N,
Genitive-N, Det-N, IO-DO and it will tend to be heavily inflected. A consistent SVO language
would have prepositions and the reverse order, namely Aux-V, N-Adj, N-Gen, N-Det, DO-IO, and it
will tend not to be heavily inflected. Therefore, if a consistent SOV language were to develop into a
consistent SVO type, it would undergo a large number of harmonic changes. [39, 262] In a
powerful critique, Hawkins has identified further problems with the "typological approach" and the
diachronic theory based on it . Hawkins identifies three shortcomings in the thirty implicational
universals of Greenberg [39, 262]: first, the correlations across syntactic domains are not very good
and the order of verb and object seems to bear no relation to the order of noun and adjective;
second, some language types have no exemplifications; and third, no distinction is drawn between
language types which have very many exponents and those which have a mere handful. Being taken
as theories, Hawkins calls them trigger-chain theories: some property changes and sets off a chain
reaction, which is defined by Greenberg as type implications. Hawkins considers that this trigger
may be grammatical, pragmatic or perceptual. Theo Vennemann [39, 263] offers a grammatical
trigger: phonological changes reduce morphological distinctions and the order shifts from SOV to
SVO to prevent widespread ambiguity whereby NP NPV might be interpreted as SOV or OSV.
Hyman's after - thought is an example of a pragmatic trigger, provoking various elements to occur
post-verbally by analogy to the after-thought constructions and thereby getting the chain started.
Antinucci, Duranti and Gebart [39, 263] provide a perceptual trigger: they claim that in a SOV
language the first relation to change is that of a noun and its relative clause. The prenominal
relatives of SOV languages are alleged to pose perceptual problems and therefore shift to postnominal position and this triggers off a chain reaction. Hawkins goes on to show that trigger-chain
theories as proposed make false predictions about the hierarchy of changes in a general typological
shift. In order to shed light on the correct theory of grammar the simultaneous changes should be
related where possible. Koch [39, 262] took a similar approach to parallel changes in several IndoEuropean languages, claiming that they can be viewed as the symptoms of a more general SOV to
SVO typological change. He argued that it is the rising predominance of SVO order in OE that
makes the breakdown of the inflectional system possible; this was based on the assumption, derived
from Greenberg's work, that SVO languages characteristically do not have rich post-positional
inflectional systems. Koch views the Germanic, Romance and Slavic languages, Greek and
Lithuanian as evolving gradually from SOV to typologically consistent SVO languages. Koch
argues that they are evolving at different rates, but they are all on the same slope, steadily acquiring
more and more properties, which are characteristic of the SVO type. She also states, for example,
that Proto-Germanic was in transition from SOV to SVO and that its daughter languages have
steadily acquired more SVO properties. I think that one should therefore be attentive about attempts
to develop theories of change on the basis of such "generalisations". There is no reason to suppose
that in this respect the changes affecting Romance, Germanic, Slavic, Greek, Chinese, and the few
other languages with a long documented history, represent the total range of possibilities. However,
if the claims are to be made about the underlying order of elements in the initial structure in a
77

language, the order of these changes is often difficult to establish. Linguists have tried to establish
the order of some basic changes for English but without much success. Furthermore, this is done for
a wide range of languages and there are no grounds to suppose that there is a universally determined
hierarchy of changes, a prescribed rule, which all languages must slide down at varying rates. From
the stated explanations in the study of diachronic change the essential problem is that languages
vary in their structure to a great extent and this variation makes it difficult if not impossible to use
structural criteria, to identify grammatical categories across languages. It seems to us that in this
respect word order has a privilege over other grammatical categories. Word order changes appear to
be one of the easiest for cross-linguistic comparability, since they are clearly based on a physical
property ofthe clause, the sequence of units, which can be directly observed. Having dealt with such
considerations about changes in general, it has been seen that in developing from SOV to SVO
syntax, languages seem to follow similar pathways. For instance, Modern German, which
developed from the same Germanic SOV source as English, shares two of Old English's
distinguishing characteristics. First, the verb is typically placed in the second position of the
sentence in main clauses, preceded by the subject or some other element (such as an adverb).
Secondly the SOV order is employed for embedded clauses. Since linguists are still not sure why
languages change from one syntactic type to another, the causes of word order change will
undoubtedly remain an important area of investigation, especially since the relative order of Verb
and Object has been closely linked with other word order patterns. [39, 255-264]
Word Order and Other Metasemiotic Syntactic Means and Devices. In order to prove the fact
that syntactic units are in constant state of flux prof. Galperin I. quotes prof. G. Vinokur who
maintains that in syntax it is no new material that is coined, but new relations, because the
syntactical aspect of speech is nothing more than a definite combination of grammatical forms, and
in this sense the actual words used are essentially immaterial. Therefore syntactical relations,
particularly in poetic language, are that aspect of speech in which everything presents itself as
actualization of the potential and not merely the repetition of the ready-made. It follows therefore,
that in order to establish the permissible fluctuations of the syntactical norm, it is necessary to
ascertain what is meant by the syntactical norm itself. In English syntax the concept of norm is
rather loose. In fact any change in the relative positions of the members of the sentence may be
regarded as a variant of the received standard, provided that the relation between them will not
hinder the understanding of the utterance. [39, 264] According to Galperin I. word order is a crucial
syntactical problem in many languages and in English it has peculiarities caused by the concrete
and specific sociolinguistic feature of the language developed by the given speaking community. He
quotes O.Jespersen who said that the English language "...has developed tolerably fixed word orders
which in the great majority of cases shows without fail what is the Subject of the sentence."This
"tolerably fixed word order" is Subject-Verb (Predicate) - Object (S - P - O). Jespersen also
mentions a statistical investigation of word order made on the basis of a series of representative
19th century writers demonstrating that 82%-97% of all the analyzed sentences contained all three
members (S - P - O), while the percentage for Beowulf was only 16 and for King Alfred's prose 40.
[39, 265] Any change of the word order structure of the sentence changes the prosodic pattern and
metasemiotic structure of the given syntactic unit. If the syntactic unit is brought forward in the
sentence, it is made prominent both by the changed structure and by the specific prosody. The one
moved to the end of the sentence may be intensified most of all prosodically. There are several
kinds of stylistic inversion, most frequently used in both English prose and English poetry: the
object is placed at the beginning of the sentence; the attribute is placed in postposition, especially
when there is more than one attribute. [39, 265]
A good man he was. Un om bun el era (un om
bun el a fost; un om bun era el); With his face beaming he came up to me. Cu faa radiind el s-a
78

apropiat de mine. The nominal part of the predicate may be used in front of the subject: A hard
working student she was. O foarte srguincioas student a fost ea. The predicative stands before
the link verb and both are placed before the subject as in Rude am I in my speech... Grosolan sunt
eu n vorbirea mea[39, 265] The adverbial modifier (in some cases combined with the auxiliary
verb of the predicate) is placed before the subject group, creating a strong metasemiotic
connotation: Hardly ever is light observed directly from its source. Puin probabil ca lumina s fie
vre-o dat observat direct din sursa ei. Never before has there been any device so efficient. Nici
odat pn acum n-a existat un aparat att de efficient. Not only does water function as a
catalyst, but it also may be a significant rock-building constituent. Nu numai c apa funcioneaz
ca un catalizator, dar ea poate de asemeni fi o parte component important n formarea stncilor.
Only gradually, in recent years, has the chemistry of polymers become separated and become an
independent branch of science. Numai treptat, n anii receni, a devenit industria polimerilor o
ramur independent a tiinei. Nowhere can we see such rapid progress as in computing
technique. Nicieri nu putem vedea noi aa un progres rapid ca n tehnologiile informaionale.
Unfortunately records of evaporation are not very numerous. Din nefericire, cazuri nregistrate de
evaporare nu sunt numeroase. In most of the examples given above the adverbial modifier is made
prominent its expressivity is considerably intensified by the change of usual word order. At the
same time, in each case, a prosodic pattern specific to emotionally charged text is detected even in
scientific technical texts. In some examples, the metasemiotic connotation is further increased by
the use of the auxiliary verbs before the subject of the sentence: Hardly ever is; Puin probabil - in
the Romanian translation the auxiliary is used after the subject, because traditionally in such cases it
is not accepted in this position. But in the next example there is a complete coincidence in both
languages: Never before has there been - Nici odat pn acum n-a existat. Of course, there are
many other cases of syntactic stylistic change. Thus, both modifier and predicate stand before the
subject, as in "In went Mr. Pickwick." (n odaie a intrat dl Pickwick); Down dropped the breeze...
S-a atenuat vntul lin);[39, 266] Out went the customer (Afar a ieit clientul). As we see
from the examples given above the same degree of stylistic inversion is used in both languages. In
the following examples the nominal part of the predicate is used in front of the subject making it
stylistically prominent, intensifying the expressivity of the dislocated lexeme. Important as his
discoveries were in themselves their significance is further magnified by the impetus they gave to
the development of the comparative and evolutionary trend in physiology. Importante fiind
descoperirile lui n sine, semnificaia lor crete mai departe prin imboldul , care l-au dat ele
dezvoltrii tendinei comparative i evoluioniste n fiziologie. Strange as it may seem, the theory of
numbers, being the purest kind of mathematics, can be called, from a certain aspect, an empirical
or even an experimental science. Straniu cum se pare, teoria numerelor, fiind cea mai pur
matematic, poate fi numit, dintr-un anumit aspect, o tiin empiric sau chiar experimental.
However useful the ore may be, it cannot be employed to advantage unless it can be obtained in
adequate quantities and at an acceptable price. Orict de folositor poate fi minereul, el nu poate fi
folosit cu avantaj dac nu poate fi obinut n cantiti adecvate i la un pre acceptabil. It is
important to observe the fact that in both languages we a complete affinity concerning the structures
and their metasemiotic charge, Besides, we should add that the grammatical metasemiosis here gets
a powerful support by being combined with the lexical inherent stylistic connotation (in sentences 1
and 2: strange and important importante, straniu) and the prosodic emotional pattern
imposed on them, too. In sentence three the lexeme however orict intensifies the general
stylistic connotation.
As prof. Galperin I. says, practically any change in the direct order results in a change or
intensification of metasemiosis: , the English affirmative sentence is regarded as neutral if it
maintains the regular word order, i.e., subject - predicate - object (or other secondary members of
79

the sentence, as they are called). Any other order of the parts of the sentence may also carry the
necessary information, but the impact on the reader will be different. Even a slight change in the
word order of a sentence or in the order of the sentences in a more complicated syntactical unit will
inevitably cause a definite modification of the meaning of the whole. An almost imperceptible
rhythmical design introduced into a prose sentence, or a sudden break in the sequence of the parts of
the sentence, or any other change will add something to the volume of information contained in the
original sentence. It follows that the very concept of inversion has appeared as a counterpart to the
regular word order, the latter being a relatively unemotional, unemphatic, neutral mode of
expression. [39, 267]
Thus, in the following examples the constructions themselves possess a
strong degree of expressivity and by placing them in front of the sentence we get it further
intensified. It goes without saying that if a spark should fall into containers with inflammable
liquids, quick and dangerous fires would result. Should there be no rain crops will be spoiled. Nici
nu poate fi vorb, c dac o scnteie ar cdea ntr-un container cu lichid inflamabil, un incendiu
momentan i primejdios ar urma. Should the lubricant supply stop, even momentarily, serious
damage might result. S se opreasc furnizarea lubrifiantului, chiar pentru un moment, pagube
serioase ar putea rezulta. It is but natural that collisions between atoms should be frequent. E i
natural c coliziunea dintre atomi trebuie s fie frecvent. Since water contains hydrogen and is too
abundant and inexpensive, it is but natural that we should try to ob tain an element from this source.
Aa cum apa conine hidrogen i el este foarte abundent i ieftin, e i natural ca noi s ncercm de
a obine un element din aceast surs. The constructions It goes without saying- Nici nu poate
fi vorb get here an additional expressive-emotional overtone being placed first in the sentence.
The next construction it is but natural is combined with the syntactic structure that we should try
to obtain, in which the emotional should is used and it contributes to the intensification of the
metasemiotic content. The emphatic constructions with It is (was)...that (which, who) are also
actively ised in the stylistic syntactic change, where an emphatic pronoun is used, the auxiliary is
usually brought in front of the subject like in the examples: It is the gravitation that makes the
satellites move round the earth. Anume gravitaia (este aceea care) face ca sateliii s se mite n
jurul pmntului. It is among the naturally occuring minerals that we find the most beautiful
examples of crystals. It was from the detection of otherwise unexplained lines in the solar spectrum
that helium was discovered. It was not until the industrial revolution that metals began to assume
the importance they now possess. Only recently has a theory which accounts reasonably well for all
the experimental evidence been proposed. Constructions like no sooner than, not only does
but (than), etc., usually used in an emphatic position can also be included in the class of syntactic
stylistic intensifiers. Thus, for example: No sooner had electronic computers become available for
non-military uses, after the end of world war II, than astronomers began to use this new tool. Cum
numai (ncurnd dup) calculatoarele electronice au devenit disponibile pentru scopuri militare,
dup al doilea rzboi mondial, atunci astronomii ndat au nceput s foloseasc acest aparat nou.
Not only do men fly in the upper layers of the atmosphere, but the time is not too far off when they
will leave the Earth and explore other planets. Nu numai c oamenii zboar n straturile de mare
altitudine ale atmosferei, dar timpul se apropie cnd ei vor prsi Pmntul i vor explora alte
planete. In spite of the fact that the English emphatic constructions do not exactly correspond to the
ones available in the Romanian Language, the metasemiotic syntactic connotation created is
practically identical. The initial part of the structure is made prominent by position, by prosodic and
lexico-grammatical means. The second part of the structure, used at beginning of the next clause
creates a sustained stylistic connotation.
The models given above comprise the well-known patterns of stylistic syntactic change. Prof.
Galperin I. Writes that the position of a word in the sentence may be changed within the recognized
variants and the above models are the materialization of these variants. Inversion as a stylistic
80

device is always sense-motivated, and there is a tendency to account for inversion in poetry by
rhythmical considerations. In the majority of cases inversion in poetry is called forth by
considerations of metasemiotic content rather than rhythm. Inversion is one of the forms of what are
known as emphatic constructions. The traditional word order is a non-emphatic construction.
Emphatic constructions are usually considered as violations of the regular word order in the
sentence. In practice these structures are as common as the fixed word order structures. Therefore
inversion must be regarded as a strong syntactic stylistic means of the language. [39, 268] All the
variants of stylistic syntactic change structures are used to create metasemiotic expressiveevaluative overtones, which are further intensified by morphological, lexical, lexico-grammatical,
and especially by prosodic emphatic patterns.

CONCLUSIONS
In the present work we have undertaken a confrontation of some morphological grammatical
categories, both on the emic and etic levels. Our previous knowledge of the confronted languages
helps us to secure a firm stand, a reliable basis for our investigation not only in case of comparing
related languages, but also in case of comparing one or two cognate languages with unrelated
languages. In case of synchrony in contrastive linguistics the object of our research is usually
different. We no longer think of the genetic identities. We concentrate on the differences and try to
understand why it is that the functions of the forms should have diverged so widely? What we have
been trying to explain all along is scientific confrontation. In our case we are bound to discuss the
possibility of applying methods of scientific research, which imply explaining the difference
between synchronic systems and their diachronic development, the systems at work in living texts the different methods of analysis, the confrontation both on the level of text and on the level of
system. Subsequent research has shown that confrontation must involve a profound study of the
systems. Synchronic confrontation of any two language systems cannot be really scientific, unless
account is carefully taken of their previous development. Linguistic systems are not uniform. The
hierarchy of different elements in the systems, the relation between centre and periphery, has also to
be taken into account. The last stage is returning to the etic level. We should always start with
identities and similarities and gradually work our way to contrasts and non-coincidences. In case of
unrelated languages we would have to join the quest for universals, which are supposed to be easy
to be discovered. As a result of systematic confrontational analysis of the categorial forms of taxis,
tense, aspect, mood, deixis, comparison, etc. we have come to the some general conclusions:
The category of taxis in English, French and Romanian, related languages, is embracing the
entire grammatical system of the verb. The English system is relatively young (created on the
basis of the Latin model), while in Romanian and French it is an old system going back to Latin.
But in all the confronted languages we observe a similar trend: categorial transition from purely
grammatical categories into lexical-grammatical and even purely lexical. The analysis demonstrated
that this process is found in other languages, both related and unrelated, where in spoken languages
simpler forms are used and grammatical forms being substituted by purely lexical ones. The term
perfect denotes not only anteriority, it also may be used to express a perfective or finished action.
That is the meaning used by some linguists to put forward a category of aspect in English (the
opposition of Perfect vs. Continuous forms), which is characteristic to some European languages.
Compare for example with the Russian perfective and imperfective aspect (
). It is quite natural for a number of languages to have the oppositions of
Continuous vs. Non-continuous and Perfective vs. Imperfective (in the meaning of Finished vs.
Unfinished). In English most of the verbal forms can be subdivided into an opposition of perfective81

imperfective aspect, but the existing Continuous vs. non-continuous aspect is prevailing. The
category of aspect in English is in a state of transition from a purely grammatical category into a
grammatical-stylistic and sometimes even purely stylistic one. Confronting the non-finite forms in
English and Romanian we discover identical systems on the emic level, with some slight
differences, especially in the formal expression: The English forms to have written, to have been
written, having written correspond in Romanian to structures formed by means of the auxiliary to
be and not to have. That results in homonymy of grammatical forms. There is also a difference in
usage: the perfect nominal forms in Romanian are rarely used and are usually substituted by finite
perfect forms: mai mult ca perfectul, perfectul simplu and especially perfectul compus. The English
present participle is regularly translated into Romanian by means of gerunziul, which historically
took over the meaning of participiul prezent, which was ousted from the language. The English
perfect nominal forms have also been displaying a tendency to gradually get out of usage. Thus,
perfect gerund, perfect participle and, to a certain extent perfect infinitive, are practically used in
formal bookish language. In the colloquial speech the finite perfect forms are usually preferred.
At the first sight we can conclude that the finite system in English is much richer in forms
than in Romanian. Thus, when we compare the English, French and Romanian systems we find
very much in common with occasional natural differences connected with the development of the
language in different speaking communities of the given related languages. It occurs that in
Romanian and French there are no corresponding forms to the English past indefinite, its function
being carried out by perfectul compus and pass compos, both coinciding in form and partially in
function with the English present perfect. In the confronted languages under consideration we find
cases of grammatical homonymy. Examples of homonymy in English could be exemplified by the
forms of gerund and participle I (in case of nominal forms), should plus infinitive (as modal verb
plus infinitive, conditional mood, suppositional mood, future in the past), would plus infinitive (as
modal verb plus infinitive, conditional, future in the past), the form of past perfect ( as expressing
an anteriority in the past, anteriority in the future from a moment in the past in sentences of time
and condition expressing future from a moment in the past, and expressing an unreal condition,
desire or wish in the past in the Subjunctive II (in this case it does not always express anteriority),
present perfect (anteriority expressed to an action or moment in the present by an action or a period
of time including an action; anteriority in the future, where it substitutes the future perfect in the
clauses of time and condition expressing a future action from a present moment. In spite of the fact
that the systems of categorial, grammatical and lexical-grammatical forms are different in the
given language, the categorial meaning of the category of taxis, as well as those of tense and aspect,
could be easily expressed in each of the confronted languages using all possible linguistic means:
grammatical, lexical-grammatical, lexical, contextual. A common tendency has been observed in all
the confronted languages that the category of taxis is gradually undergoing a change. It is in a
process of transition from a mainly grammatical category into a lexical-grammatical or even lexical
one. In Russian, a similar process of transition is practically over. Examples of finite perfect forms
can be found only in dialectal speech. Examples of nominal perfect forms are still in usage: past
gerund and past participle. The lexical category of taxis is dominant now in this language. In
English (as in many other European languages) the same process is rapidly advancing. The
grammatical categorial form of the future anteriority is practically not used in the spoken language
and is successfully substituted by simple forms, anteriority being expressed in such cases by lexical
means and context. Past perfect is practically in the same position, especially in the American
variant of English where it is often substituted by simple forms in the spoken language. As far as
Romanian is concerned, the future perfect here (viitorul anterior) is rarely used even in the bookish
and formal language. The analytical past perfect is out of usage and the synthetic one is also in a
82

process of change (in the informal spoken language very often it is substituted by perfectul compus
in its second simple past meaning, past anteriority being expressed lexically or contextually).
Hypergrammaticality or abuse of grammar should be paid attention to while confronting
grammatical systems of different languages. Abuse of grammar may be of two kinds:
a) The speaker turns to some very complex and artificial complex structures, because he
thinks that they are more literary and will enable him to appear as a highly educated man. This is a
kind of hypergrammaticality, which we meet especially frequently in documents and in some
varieties of journalese, etc.
b) The formation of complex artificial grammatical forms and structures may depend on
metasemiotic factors, on a desire to achieve a specific stylistic effect. The results of scientific
abstraction must be verified by the actual functioning of the system, the researcher always bearing
in mind that language is in a state of constant change. This is especially important when we
confront related and unrelated languages. The study of grammar, the attempts to normalize
grammatical usage, the study of the new tendencies and systematic confrontation of these with
those falling into disuse, requires a much more serious scientific generalization on the subject than
has been done so far. We should keep in mind that categories come first as primary entities. Talking
about categories we always have to take into consideration the fact that the reality of human
communication is primary, the most important element. We can speak of a lexical category only if
we find identity of stem and the utter impossibility of a simultaneous realization of all categorial
forms of the given opposition. In actual enunciations or utterances only one of the two or more
categorial forms can be realized. Morphological studies should be initiated with the marked member
of any opposition. In case of the category of taxis we should start with the perfect forms. The
morphological-grammatical forms can be studied on two levels 1) the semantic level, where, for
example, the present tense forms express actions which include the moment of speaking, and 2) the
metasemiotic level, where present tense forms are used to denote an action which clearly does not
include the moment of speaking. The process of transition of some grammatical categories into
lexical ones is being observed in the confronted languages. Thus, the grammatical category of
gender has practically become a lexical category in Modern English. The same phenomenon could
be seen in the case of other grammatical categories. Thus, the category of taxis in Russian has
practically become a lexical category. The same categories in English, Romanian and French (and
other languages) are in a process of transition, where the lexical element is gaining ground. A very
important factor in analytical comparison is the choice of an etalon language. Thus, comparing the
category of anteriority in English and Romanian we can choose English or French as an etalon
language, because this category has been widely scientifically described in these languages and it
can serve as an excellent starting point for a contrastive analysis. The general principle of linguistic
confrontation should be reconsidered, as any contrastive studies should be divided into two parts:
we have cognate languages (closely and distantly related languages) and unrelated ones.
In Romanian there are not clear-cut affixes to indicate the grammatical category of aspect.
We have mentioned above that there existed and still exist some forms similar to the English
aspectual ones (and such forms exist in Italian, Spanish, Portuguese.), but they are rarely used.
Analyzing the categories of aspect in English, and Romanian we can conclude that in English the
grammatical aspect is prevailing, while in Romanian the lexical means are prominent.
It has been found out that one of the main difficulties in grammatical categorization is the
lack of a firmly established relationship between the actual phenomenon and their names. The
metalanguage of morphological grammatical categories cannot be taken for granted and
metalinguistic work cannot be regarded as merely taking an inventory of terms. It is mainly a
question of discovering whether it is a purely metalinguistic difference, mere convention on the
metalinguistic level. Often the approach to categorization may be untenable in the sense that the
83

researcher fails to keep clearly apart the object of analysis, the facts of the language in question, and
the metalanguage - the words and expressions used when people talk about the object language.
Very often there is a discrepancy not only in the metalinguistic expression used to denote certain
more specific or particular categories, but also in the naming or description of the most general
concepts themselves or it is a question of approach or attitude to categorization.

Bbiliography
1.Akhmanova O. Dictionary of Linguistic Terms. M., 1966.
84

2. Akhmanova O., L.Delieva, R.Nepesova, N.Slonimskaya.

Approaches to Contrastive Linguistics, Moscow, MSU, 1972.
3. Akhmanova O and Melenciuc D. The Principles of Linguistic Confrontation. Moscow, MSU,
1977.
4.Benveniste E. Problmes de linguistique gnrale: Paris, 1966.
5. Benveniste E. Problems in General Linguistics. University of Miami Press, Florida, 1971.
6.Blokh M. A Course in Theoretical English Grammar. M., 1983.
7.Carrol J.B Contrastive Linguistics and Interference Theory. Georgetown Monograph, No 21,
1968.
8.Chioran D. Contrastive Studies in the Syntax and Semantics of English and Romanian. Bucharest
University Press, 1974.
9. Chioran D. Further Developments in Contrastive Studies. Bucharest University Press, 1974.
10.Cohen M. Histoire dune langue: le franais. Paris, 1967.
11.Coseriu E. Uber Leistung und Grenzen der kontrastiven Grammatik. Dsseldorf, 1970.
12.Delinschi (aganean) G. Word Order in English and Romanian (Doctorate thesis), Iai, 1998.
13.Graur Al.Gramatica limbii romne, V.i-II. Bucureti, 1966.
14.Hadlich R. Lexical Contrastive Analysis. Modern Language. Journal XLIX,7., 1965.
15.Halle M. Morphology in a Contrastive Grammar. Bologna, 1972.
16.Jakobson R. Shifters, Verbal Categories and the Russian Verb. Harvard University, 1957.
17.James C. Deieper Contrastive Study. IRAL VII, 2., 1969.
18.Jespersen O. A Modern English Grammar on Historical Principles. Hedelberg, 1927.
19.Jespersen O. Essentials of English Grammar. London, 1933.
20. Karulin Iu., Cerdantseva T.A Course of the Italian Language. - Moscow, 1981.
20. Lado R. Contrastive Linguistics in a Mentalistic Theory of Language Learning // Georgetown
Monograph. - No21. -1968.
21.Lado R. Meine Perspective der kontrastiven Linguistik (in Reader zur kontrastiven Linguistik,
Gerald Nickel, Herausgegeben von; Frankfurt am Main, 1972.
22.Lee W. Thoughts on Contrastive Linguistics in the Context of Language Teaching. Georgetown
Monograph, No 21.,1968.
23.Marin V.Z. Gramatica istoric a limbii moldoveneti. Lumina. Chiinu, 1970.
24.Melenciuc D.The Category of Tense (in: The Morphology of the English Verb, edited by
O.Akhmanova and V.Belenkaya, MSU, Moscow, 1975);
25. Melenciuc D.The Metalanguage of Morphological Categorization (in: The Morphology of the
English Verb, edited by O.Akhmanova and V.Belenkaya, MSU, Moscow,1975);
26. Melenciuc D. Contrastive Analysis in the Field of Romance-Germanic Linguistics (in: The
Morphology of the English Verb, edited by O.Akhmanova and V.Belenkaya, MSU, Moscow,1975);
27. Melenciuc D. A Contrastive Study of Tense and Taxis in English, French and Romanian (in:
The Morphology of the English Verb, edited by O.Akhmanova and V.Belenkaya, MSU,
Moscow,1975);
28.Melenciuc D. The Contrastive Analysis of Languages in its Relation with Comparative Philology
(in: The Morphology of the English Verb, MSU, Moscow,1975);
29. Melenciuc D. and O.Akhmanova The Comparative-Historic Background of Linguistic
Confrontation (II-th International Conference on English Polish Contrastive Linguistics. Bialoveza.
Dec.16-18. 1976).

85

30. Melenciuc D. Linguistic Confrontation of Distantly Related Languages (in: The Collected
papers of the Niagara Colloquium on Linguistics and Language Teaching, New York SU at
Buffalo, 1979).
31. Melenciuc D. A Contrastive Study of Distantly Related Languages. Part 1. Chiinu State
University, 1984.
32. Melenciuc D. A Contrastive Study of Distantly Related languages. Part II, Chiinu State
University, 1984.
33. Melenciuc D. A Confrontation of Some Verbal Categories in English and Romanian (in: The 9th
Biennial Conference on Balkan and South Slavic Linguistics, Literature, and Folklore. Indiana
University. Bloomington. 1994).
34. Melenciuc and R. Feldstein. The Category of Taxis in English and Romanian. (in: The 9th
Biennial Conference on Balkan and South Slavic Linguistics, Literature, and Folklore. Indiana
University. Bloomington. 1994).
35.M Melenciuc D. and R.Feldstein The State of Transition of some Verbal Categorial forms in
English and Romanian. (in: The 9th Biennial Conference on Balkan and South Slavic Linguistics,
Literature, and Folklore. Indiana University. Bloomington. 1994).
36. Melenciuc D., E.Onofreiciuc and R.Sulaiman. The Category of Anteriority in English,
Romanian and Arabic. East West Nr3, 1996.
37. Melenciuc D., E.Onofreiciuc and R.Sulaiman. A Confrontational Analysis of Taxis in English,
Romanian and Arabic on the Etic Level. East West, Nr 3. Chiinu, 1996.
38. Melenciuc D., R.Sulaiman. Aspectual Means in English and Arabic. East West, Nr 1, 1997.
39.Melenciuc D. Comparativistics. CE USM. - Chiinu, 2003.
40. Nickel G. Contrastive Linguistics and Some Pedagogical Implications. (Contact, 15. Revue
officielle de la Fdration Internationale de Professeurs de Langues Vivantes), 1970.
41.Nickel G. Contrastive Linguistics and Foreign Language Teaching (in Papers in Contrastive
Linguistics). Cambridge University Press, 1971.
42.Nickel G. and Wagner K. Contrastive Linguistics and Language Learning. IRAL VI, No 3, 6,
18., 1968.
43.Nida E. Analysis of Meaning and Dictionary Making. IJAL, vol.42., No 4., 1958.
44.Nida E. Language Structure and Translation. Essays. Stanford University Press, 1975.
45.Rodriges Danilevscaia E., Patrushev A., Stepanina I. The Spanish Language. - Moscow, 1988.
46.Rossetti AL. Istoria limbii romne. Vol. I. Bucuresti,1965.
47.Rossetti AL. Istoria limbii romne. Vol II. Bucureti, 1969.
48.Saussure F. Course de linguistique gnrale. Lausanne-Paris, 1916.
49.Smirnisky A. Essentials of Russian Grammar. Moscow, 1970.
50.Snook R. A Stratificational Approach to Contrastive Analysis (in Papers in Contrastive
Linguistics, edited by Nickel Gerald). Cambridge University Press, 1971.
51. Sapir.E. Language. London: Harcourt, Brace and Wald, Inc. 1921.
52. Savin E. Gramatica limbii germane. Editura Maina de scris. Bucureti, 1996.
53.Velicopoliscaia N., Rodriges Danilevscaia E. The Spanish Language. - Moscow, 1963
54.Vinogradov V.S. A Practical Course of the Spanish Grammar. - Moscow 1990.
*
*
*
1. . . M., 1966.
2. . " ". Slavica Slovaca. Ronic 5, 1970.
3.. . ..
, . . 1961
4.. H. -
.." ." No 6, 1962.
86

5. . .. M., 1974.
6. P. -c
. , No 3, 1565.
7. P.
. . No. 4,1958.
8. P. - . M., MSU, 1963.
9. P. , . M., MSU, 1971.
10. P. . M., MSU, 1976.
11. . - , (
." - ") .
., 1966.
12. . - .
. . 1970. - .
. . 1972.
13. . - . ., 1963.
14. ., . . - : , 1984.
15. . - . ., , Nr 1,
1972.
16. . . ., 1959.
17. . . ., 1969.
18. . -
. ( " . 3, ., 1969.
19. . . , 1, 1960.
20. .
. . "" , ., 1969.
*
*
*
Aldington R. Death of a Hero. M., 1958.
Aldridge J. The Hunter. M.,1958.
Austen J. Pride and Prejudice. M.,1961
Bronte, Ch. Jane Eyre. M., 1952.
Bronte, Ch. Jane Eyre. Bucureti, 1970.
Bronte E. Wuthering Heights. M., 1963.
Bronte E. La rscruce de vnturi. Bucureti., 1969.
Dumas, A. Le collier de la reine, v.I-III, Gallimard, Paris, 1969.
Dumas A. Colierul reginei. (Bucureti). 1974
Galsworthy J. A Modern Comedy, v.I-III. M., 1956.
Galsworthy J. End of the Chapter, v.1-111. M., 1960.
Galsworthy J. Comedia modern. v.I-III. Bucureti, 1971.
Galsworthy J. Sfrit de capitol, v. I-III. Bucureti,1972.
Galsworthy J.The Forsyte Saga. v. I-III. M.,1975.
Twain M. The Adventures of Tom Sawyer. The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn. M.,1956.

87