The future in the second and third persons, formed by the indiscriminate auxiliary will does not express this category, which is dependent on the semantics of the persons: normally it would be irrelevant to indicate in an obligatory way the aspect of futurity option otherwise than with first person, i.e. the person of self.
This category is neutralized in the contracted form –‘ll, which is of necessity indifferent to the expression of the futurity opposition. As is known, the traditional analysis of the contracted future states that –‘ll stands for will, not for shall. However, this view is not supported by textual data. Indeed, bearing in mind the results of our study, it is easy to demonstrate that the contracted forms of the future may be traced both to will and to shall.
Form the evidence afforted by the historical studies of the language we know that the English contracted form of the future –ll has actually originated from the auxiliary will. So, in Modern English an interesting process of redistribution of the forms ha staken place, based apparently on the contamination will –‘ll –shall. As a result, the form –‘ll in the first person expresses not the same "pure" future as it the expresses by the indiscriminate will in the second and third persons.
The described system of the British future is by for more complicated than the expression of the future tense in the other notional variants of English in particular, in American English where the future form of the first person is functionally equal with the other persons. In British English a possible tendency to a similar leveled expression of the future is actively counteractions of the future auxiliarities in the negative form, i.e. shan’t and survival of shall in the first person against the leveled positive contraction –ll’. The second is the use of the future tense in interrogative sentences where the first person only shall is normally used. Indeed it is quite natural that a genuine question directed by the speaker to himself, i.e. a question directed by the speaker to himself, i.e. a question showing doubt or speculation, is to be asked about an action of non-wilful, involuntary order, and not otherwise. Cf.: what shall we be shown next? Shall I be able to master shorthand professionally? The question was, should I see Beatrice again before her departure.
The semantics of the first person futurity question is such that even the infinitives of essentially volution governed actions are transferred here to the plane of non-volution, subordinating themselves to the general implication of doubt, hesitation, and uncertainty.
Apart from shall/will+Infinitive construction, there is another construction in English which the framework of the general problem of the future tense. This is the combination of the predicator be going with the infinitive. Indeed, the high frequency occurrence of this construction in contexts conveying the idea of an immediate future action can’t but draw a vey close attention on the part of a linguistic observer.
The combination may denote a sheer intention to perform the action expressed by the infinitive thus entering into the vast set of "classical" modal constructions.
I’m going to ask you a few more questions about the mysterious disappearance of the document. Mr.Greff. he looked across at my desk and I thought for a moment he was going to give me the treatment too.
But these simple modal uses of be going are countered by cases the direct meaning of intention rendered by the predicator stands in contradiction with its environmental implications and is subdued by them. Cf.: You are trying to frighten me. But are not going to frighten me any more (L.Helman). I did not know now I was going to get out of the room (D.du.Mawren).
Moreover, the construction dispute its primary meaning of intention presupposing a human subject is not infrequently used with non-human subjects is not infrequently asked used with non0human subjects and even in impersonal sentences. Cf.: She knew what she was doing and she was sure going to be the worth doing (W.Sarayan). There is going to be a contest over Ezra Grolley’s estate (E.Gardener).
Because of these properties it would appear tempting to class the construction in question as a specific tense form, namely, the tense form of "immediate future", analogous to the French future immadiat (Le spectacle va carn mencer).
Still, on closer consideration, we notice that non-intention cases of the predicator be going are not indifferent stylistically. Far from being neutral, they more often than not display emotional coloring mixed with semantic connotations of oblique modality.
For instance, when the girl from the first of the above examples appreciates something as "going to be worth doing; she is expressing her assurance of its being so. When one labels the rain as "never going to stop" one clearly expresses one’s annoyance at the bad state of the weather. When a future event is introduced by the formula "there to be going to be", as is the case in the second of the cited examples, the speaker clearly implies his foresight of a like nature. Thus, on the whole, the non-intention uses of the construction be going+Infinitive cannot be rationally divided into modal and non-modal, on the analogy of the construction shall/will+Infinitive. It broader combinability is based on semantic transposition and can be likened to broader uses of the modal collocation be about, also of basically intention semantics.
The oppositional basis of the category of perspective time is neutralized in certain uses, in keeping with the general regularities of oppositional reductions. The process of neutralization is connected with the shifting of the forms of primary time (present and past) from the sphere of absolute tenses into the sphere of relative tenses.
One of the typical cases of the neutralization in question consists in using a non-future temporal form to express a future action which is to take place according to some plan or arrangement. Cf.: The government meets in emergency session today over the question of continued violations of the cease-fire. I hear your sister is soon arriving from Paris? Naturally I would like to know when he’s coming, etc.
This case of oppositional reduction is oppositional; the equivalent reconstruction of the correlated member of the opposition is nearly always possible. Cf.: The government will meet in emergency session…® Your sister will soon arrive from Paris? ® When will he be coming?
Another type of neutralization of the prospective time opposition is observed in modal verbs and modal word combinations. The basic peculiarity of these units bearing on the expression of time is, that the prospective implication is inherently in-built in their semantics, which reflects not the action expressed by the infinitive. For that reason, the present verb-form of these units actually renders the idea of the future. Cf.: There is no saying what may happen next. At any rate, the woman was sure to come later in the day. But do you have to present the report before Sunday, there’s no alternative.
Sometimes the explicit expression of the future is necessary even with modal collocations. To make up for the lacking categorical forms, special modal substitutes have been developed in language, some of which have received the status of suppletive units. Cf.: But do not make plans with David. You will not be able to carry them out. Things will have to go one way or the other.
Alongside of the above and very different from them, there is still another typical case of neutralization of the analyzed categorical opposition, which is strictly obligatory. It occurs in clauses of time and condition. Whose verb-predicate expresses a future action? Cf.: If things turn out as has been arranged, the triumph will be all ours. I repeated my request to notify me at once whenever the messenger arrived.
The latter type of neutralization is syntactically conditioned. In point of fact, the neutralization consists here in the primary tenses shifting from the sphere of absolutive time into the sphere of relative time, since they become dependent not on their immediate orientation towards the moment of speech, but on the relation to another time level, namely, the time level presented in the governing clause of corresponding complex sentence.
This kind of neutralizing relative use of absolutive tense forms occupies a restricted position in the integral tense system of English. In Russian, the syntactic relative use of tenses is, on the contrary, widely spread. In particular, this refers to the presentation of reported speech in the plane of past, where the Russian present tense is changed into the tense of similarity, the past tense is changed into the tense of priority, and the future tense is changed in the tense of prospected posteriority. Cf.: 1) Он сказал, что изучает немецкий язык. 2) Он сказал, что изучал немецкий язык. 3) Онсказал, чтобудетизучатьнемецкийязык.
In English, the primary tenses in similar syntactic condition retain their absolutive nature and are used in keeping with their direct, unchangeable meanings. Compare the respective translations of the examples cited above: 1) He said that he was learning German. 2) He said that he had learned German. 3) he said that he would learn German.
It doesn’t follow from this that rule of sequence of tenses in English complex sentences formulated by traditional grammar should be rejected as false. Sequence of tenses is an important feature of all narration, for, depending in the continual consecutive course of actual events in reality; they are presented in the text in definite successions ordered against a common general background. However, what should be stressed here is that the tense-shift involved in the translation of the present-plane reported information into the present0plane reported information is not a formal, but essentially a meaningful procedure.
1.3 General notion of the problem of voice in English Grammar
The verbal category of voice shows the direction of the process as regards the participants of the situation reflected in the syntactic construction.
The voice of the English verb is expressed by the opposition of the passive form of the verb to the active form of is the combination of the auxiliary be with the past participle of the conjugated verb. The passive form as the strong member of the opposition expresses reception of the action by the subject of the syntactic construction; the active form as the weak member of opposition leaves this meaning unspecified, i.e. it expresses "non-passivity".
In colloquial speech the role of the passive auxiliary can occasionally be performed by the verb get and probably, become. Sam got licked for a good reason.
The category of voice has a much broader representation in the system of the English verb that in the system of the Russian verb, since in English not only transitive, but also intransitive objective verbs including prepositional ones can be used in the passive. Besides, verbs taking not one but two objects, as a rule, can feature both of them in the position of the passive subject. E.g.: I’ve just been rung up by the police. The diplomat was refused transit facilities through London. She was undistributed by the frown on his face. Have you ever been told that you’re very good looking? He was said to have been very wild in his youth. The dress has never been tried on. The child will be looked after all right. I won’t be talked to like this, etc.
Still, not all the capable of taking an object are actually used in the passive. In particular, the passive form is alien to many verbs of the statal subclass, such as have, belong, cost, resemble, fail, and misgive, etc. thus, in accord with their relation to the passive voice all the verbs can be divided into two large sets: the set of passivised verbs and the set of non-passivised verbs.
A question then should be posed whether; the category of voice is a full-representative verbal category, i.e. represented in the system of the verb as a whole, or a partial representative category, confined only to the passivised verbal set. Considerations of both form and function tend to interpret voice rather as a full-representative category, the same as person, number, tense and aspect. Three reasons can be given to back this appraisal.
First, the integral categorical presentation of non-passivised verbs fully coincides with that of passivised verbs used in the active voice; second, the active voice as the weak member of the categorical opposition is characterized in general not by the "active" meaning as such, but by the extensive non-passive meaning of a very wide range of actual significations, some of them approaching by their process-direction characteristics those of non-passivised verbs. Third, the demarcation line between the passivised and non-passivised set is by no means rigid, and the verbs of the non-passivised order may migrate into passivised order in various contextual conditions.
Thus, the category of voice should be interpreted as being reflected in the whole system of verbs, the active voice form if not directly, then indirectly.
As a regular categorical form of the verb the passive voice is combined in the same lexeme with other oppositionally strong forms of the verbal categories of the tense-aspect system, i.e. the past, the future, the continuous, the perfect. But it has a neutralizing effect on the category of development in the forms where the auxiliary be must be doubly employed as a verbid, so that the future continuous passive, as well as the prefect continuous passive are partically not used in speech. As a result, the future continuous active has as its regular counterpart by the voice opposition the future indefinite passive; the perfect continuous active in all the tense-forms has as its regular counterpart the perfect indefinite passive. Cf.: The police will be keeping an army of reports at bay. ® An army reporter will be kept at bay the police. We have been expecting the decision for a long time. ® The decision has been expected for a long time.
The category of voice differs radically from all the other hitherto considered categories from the point of view of its referential qualities. Indeed, all the previously described categories reflect various characteristics of process, both direct and oblique, as certain facts of reality existing irrespective of the speaker’s perception. For instance, the verbal category of person expresses the personal relation of the process. The category of prospect expresses the timing of the process from the point of view of its relation to the plane of posteriority. Finally, the analyzed aspects characterize the respective inner qualities of the process. So each these category does disclose some actual property of the process denoted by the verb, adding more and more particulars to the depicted processual situation. But we cannot say the same about the category of voice.
As a matter of fact, the situation reflected by the passive construction does not differ in the least from the situation reflected by the active construction – the nature of the process is preserved intact, the situational participants remain in their places unchanged quality. It is clearly seen when comparing any pour of constructions one of which is passive counterpart of the other. Cf.: The guards dispersed the crowd in font of the Presential Palace. – The crowd in font of the Presential Palace was dispersed by the guards.
In the two constructions, the guards as the doer of the action are the same; the same also is the place of action, i.e. the space in front of the Place. The Presentation planes, though are quite different with the respective constructions, they are in fact mutually reverse. Namely, the first sentence, by its functional destination, features the act of the guards, whereas the second sentence, in accord with its meaningful purpose, features the experience of the crowd.
All the functional distinctions of the passive, both categorical and contextual connotative are substained in its use with verbids.
The gerundial phrase that is given below conveying the principal categorical meaning of the passive, suppresses the exposition of the indefinite subject of the process: After being wrongly delivered, the letter found its address at last.
The following passive participial construction: when the enemy batteries had been put out of action, our troops continued to push on the offensive. Cf.: the clausal equivalent of the construction: When the enemy batteries had been put out of action, our troops continued to push on the offensive.
The past participle of the objective verb is passive in meaning and phrases built up by it display all the cited characteristics. E.g.: Seen from the valley, the castle on the cliff presented a fantastic sight. Cf.: the clausal equivalent of the past participle range of the unmarked member of the voice opposition. Let us consider the following examples: I will shave and wash and be ready for breakfast in half an hour. I’m afraid Mary hasn’t dressed up yet. Now I see your son is thoroughly preparing for the entrance examination.