泰语

Journal of Hokkaido Linguistics, Vol. 2 (2002), 1-17. TEMPORAL PROXIMITY: AN ORGANIZING FACTOR OF FOUR MAJOR ASPECTS IN THAI* KIYOKO TAKAHASHI Obirin University 1. Introduction Aspect involves reference to one of the temporally distinct phases in the evolution of an event or situation (including agentive activity, non-agentive process and state) through time. That is, aspect relates event time to reference time that is strictly earlier or later than that event time (Johnson 1981: 125, 152). The Thai language has a number of lexical items which function as aspectual devices to relate a given situation to a “proximately” preceding or subsequent situation in the discourse time. Examples include , ,  and , as below.1 (1)     PRONOUN2 *** turn:back come ‘S/he has just got back.’ (2)   *** hungry ‘I am beginning feeling hungry.’ (3)   *** cry * An earlier version of this paper was presented at the 5th International Cognitive Linguistics Conference, Amsterdam, July 14-19, 1997. I am very grateful to Katsunobu Izutsu for his insightful comments on the ideas discussed in the present study. I would like to thank the three anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments and suggestions. Thanks are also due to Paul Knighton for his stylistic suggestions. Needless to say, all the remaining flaws and errors in this paper are entirely my own. 1 I collected the data for this study mainly from the Thai language corpora which belongs to the National Electronics and Computer Technology Center (NECTEC) of the National Science, Technology Development Agency (NSTDA), the Ministry of Science, Technology and Environment, Thailand, and the Institute of the Study of Languages and Cultures of Asia and Africa (LICAA), the Tokyo University of Foreign Studies, Japan. I wish to thank these organizations for permission to use the corpora. 2 The third person pronoun  in Thai specifies neither its referent’s gender and number nor any grammatical relations. Therefore,  can be translated multiply into English unless the context is clear. To avoid unnecessary elaboration, in this paper I give all of Thai pronouns, except relative pronouns, the same plain gloss, i.e. PRONOUN, and translate each of them in a default-like manner. This paper examines an aspectual notion “temporal proximity” (conceptualized closeness between the realization of a reference situation and a certain current time in any time frame) expressed in the Thai language. It is argued that Thai distinguishes four major aspects that are organized in terms of temporal proximity: “recent retrospective,” “beginning,” “imminent prospective” and “reaching” aspects. Based on their modal implication, these aspects are divided into two main types: “actual” and “fictive” types. The actual type, including recent retrospective and beginning aspects, relates a current situation to an experienced realization of a reference situation; the fictive type, including imminent prospective and reaching aspects, relates a current situation to an imagined realization of a reference situation. Each type is further classified into two categories according to different perspectives taken in viewing an evolutional situation, namely “global” and “internal” perspectives. The recent retrospective and imminent prospective aspects view a static situation from a global perspective. The beginning and reaching aspects, on the other hand, view a dynamic situation in an internal perspective. Thus, the concept of temporal proximity subsumes symmetrically related notions that constitute a well-composed structure. Journal of Hokkaido Linguistics, Vol. 2 (2002), 1-17. ‘I almost cry.’ (4)     PRONOUN *** gain consciousness ‘S/he is becoming conscious.’ The lexical items (so-called aspectual auxiliaries) that represent “temporal proximity” are not only considerably large in number but also quite frequently used in Thai discourses. In this study I call those lexical items temporal proximity aspect markers. 3 By the term “temporal proximity,” I mean conceptualized closeness between the realization of a reference situation and a given current time in any time frame.4 The current time is a certain point within the span of a current situation that the speaker wants to characterize in relation to the realization of a reference situation. In (1), for example, the reference situation is a person’s getting back and the current time is the time shortly after the realization of that reference situation. The current situation, which is the speaker’s concern, is the situation as a result of the realization of that reference situation. It should be noted that the main verb phrase in temporal proximity expressions denotes a reference event, relative to which a current state is situated. Examples (1) to (4) above respectively illustrate Thai temporal proximity aspect of four types. The “recent retrospective” aspect, as in (1), relates a current static situation to a shortly prior realization of a reference situation (getting back). The “beginning” aspect, as in (2), relates a current dynamic situation to a shortly prior realization of a reference situation (feeling hungry). The “imminent prospective” aspect, as in (3), relates a current static situation to a shortly posterior realization of a reference situation (crying). And the “reaching” aspect, as in (4), relates a current dynamic situation to a shortly posterior realization of a reference situation (becoming conscious). The recent retrospective and beginning aspects require a shortly prior “actual” or experienced realization of a reference situation, while the imminent prospective and reaching aspects require a shortly posterior “fictive” or imagined realization of a reference situation. Concurrently, the recent retrospective and imminent prospective aspects involve a current “static” situation holistically viewed, while the beginning and reaching aspects involve a current “dynamic” situation 3 Apart from temporal proximity aspect markers, Thai has a number of other particular aspect markers, such as the progressive marker  and the perfect marker  (cf. Scovel 1970; Boonyapatipark 1983; Sookgasem 1990). Moreover, motion verbs (e.g.  ‘ascend,’  ‘go,’  ‘arrive’) and other verbs (e.g.  ‘take,’  ‘store,’  ‘lose, waste’) are often used as a subsidiary verb indicating aspectual notions (cf. Thepkanjana 1986). Opinions vary as to how far those verbs have proceeded along the path of grammaticalization, however. Take  for example. This lexical item is used to mean ‘be or do something continuously’ (e.g.  ‘S/he is sitting on the bed’) as well as ‘be located’ (e.g.  ‘S/he is in the boat’). The former usage can be regarded as exclusively marking imperfective aspect or as carrying both of the original spatial sense of location and the derived aspectual sense of continuation. As such, it is difficult to identify Thai aspect markers proper. In this study I will not explore the whole aspect system in Thai, but focus on four major, albeit unfairly neglected, aspects involving temporal proximity in Thai. Highly grammaticalized temporal proximity aspect markers are dealt with in this paper. 4 Temporal proximity is a less familiar aspectual notion. Only the imminent prospective subtype, which is roughly equated with what Heine (1992) named ALMOST-aspect and Heine (1994) called proximative, is rather widely known. It seems to me, however, that Heine’s studies on proximative overlook the overall systematic configuration of temporal proximity. Journal of Hokkaido Linguistics, Vol. 2 (2002), 1-17. successively viewed. Table 1 below summarizes these four aspects’ compositional entailments. TABLE 1: FOUR TYPES OF TEMPORAL PROXIMITY IN THAI Actual (experienced) Fictive (imagined) Static (holistic) (1) Recent Retrospective Actual reference situation Static current situation (3) Imminent Prospective Fictive reference situation Static current situation Dynamic (successive) (2) Beginning Actual reference situation Dynamic current situation (4) Reaching Fictive reference situation Dynamic current situation The notion of temporal proximity has been given little attention in previous studies on aspect in Thai. This paper, therefore, aims at giving an in-depth analysis of the neglected four major aspects involving temporal proximity in Thai. I claim that they reflect a conceptual structure organized in terms of temporal proximity. The concept of temporal proximity in Thai has a well-structured construct. This conceptual structure, I assume, is motivated by psychological reality or mental images that involve such notions as boundedness in time, perspective, salience, certainty, and so forth. This paper is organized in the following way. Section 2 first explicates key concepts relevant to my analysis of Thai temporal proximity aspect of four types, and then examines in detail the nature of the four aspects. Section 3 discusses differences among the four aspects. Section 4 suggests possible paths of semantic extension of the concept “proximity” in Thai, which are observable in synchronic linguistic data, and in Section 5, I will give concluding remarks. 2. Types of temporal proximity in Thai As stated in the preceding section, Thai temporal proximity can be classified into two main types based on the existential status of a reference situation, namely “actual” and “fictive” temporal proximity.5 Actual temporal proximity refers to conceptualized closeness to a point of reference in actual or experienced preceding time; fictive temporal proximity refers to conceptualized closeness to a point of reference in fictive or imagined subsequence time. Actual and fictive time, respectively, is time before and after a certain current time in any time frame. A current time is the dividing point between actual preceding time and fictive subsequent time, and a given current situation entails this dividing point. The temporal span of a current situation is graphically represented in Figure 1 below. In this image schema, the horizontal long arrow stands 5 My terms “actual” and “fictive” are similar to Johnson’s (1981) terms “manifest” and “imminent,” respectively. Johnson (1981: 146-147) states that existential status of an event may be either manifest, i.e. at least one complete instance of the event is a historical fact, or imminent, i.e. no complete instance of the event is a historical fact. Journal of Hokkaido Linguistics, Vol. 2 (2002), 1-17. for time axis, and the vertical short line on it indicates the position of a certain current time, to the left and right of which are actual and fictive time, respectively. The dotted thick line parallel with the time axis arrow stands for the span of a current situation, which indefinitely extends over both actual preceding time and fictive subsequent time. FIGURE 1: TEMPORAL SPAN OF CURRENT SITUATION The span of a current situation may be bounded at some point in actual preceding time or fictive subsequent time, as respectively illustrated in Figures 2 and 3. FIGURE 2: ACTUALLY BOUNDED CURRENT SITUATION Figure 2 shows a current situation bounded in actual preceding time. A previous situation is represented by another dotted thick line, whose endpoint meets with the starting point of the current situation. FIGURE 3: FICTIVELY BOUNDED CURRENT SITUATION Figure 3 shows a current situation bounded in fictive subsequent time. An imagined following situation is represented by another dotted thick line. In this schema, the endpoint of the current situation meets with the starting point of the following situation. It is our common metaphor that TIME IS MOTION (cf. Lakoff & Johnson 1999: 52). This is one of the primary metaphors that pair subjective experience and judgment with sensory motor experience. In this metaphor, abstract situation is mapped onto a concrete spatial motion model. My claim is that temporal proximity can be understood as temporal motion, that is, actual temporal proximity is analogous to a little motion from a point of reference in actual preceding time and fictive temporal proximity is current situation time axis current time current situation time axis current time current situation time axis current time Journal of Hokkaido Linguistics, Vol. 2 (2002), 1-17. analogous to a little motion toward a point of reference in fictive subsequent time. Put differently, the former motion is experienced to have just begun, while the latter motion is imagined to nearly terminate.6 Figure 4 below represents an image schema for actual temporal proximity. In this schema, the two dotted thick lines stand for previous and current situations, and the two opposite triangles stand for the termination of the previous situation and the beginning of the current situation. The series of asterisk under the current situation line stands for the marked short period immediately after the beginning of the current situation. FIGURE 4: ACTUAL TEMPORAL PROXIMITY The fictive temporal proximity aspect, on the other hand, marks a short period preceding a fictive result of a current situation. Figure 5 below represents an image schema for fictive temporal proximity. Here, the current situation has the endpoint in fictive subsequent time, which corresponds to the starting point of a following situation. The marked short period right before that endpoint is indicated by the series of asterisk. FIGURE 5: FICTIVE TEMPORAL PROXIMITY I would like to emphasize that the import of Thai temporal proximity expressions like those in (1) to (4) is not simply the realization of a situation overtly expressed by the main verb phrase. The speakers’ motive for uttering the expressions is the need to express how a given current situation is. The function of the expressions is to 6 Langacker (1991b: 330-333) mentions two types of motion: spatial and temporal motion. According to him, the moving entity of spatial motion is a certain object that traverses a spatial path while that of temporal motion is the speaker or conceptualizer who mentally scans the motion through time. It is obvious that in conceptualizing temporal proximity, an instantiation of temporal motion, there is no longer ‘objective’ basis for the conceptualizer’s mental scanning. The basis for it entirely resides in the conceptualizer’s activity, that is, the process of conceptualization itself. Therefore I consider temporal proximity to involve the final stage of subjectification in Langacker’s sense (cf. Langacker 1999, Ch.10). In terms of Traugott’s broader notion of subjectification (cf. Traugott 1995), temporal proximity should be regarded as greatly subjective, too, because it is grounded in the speaker’s world of reasoning and belief. In other words, conceptualization of temporal proximity is completely speaker-based. current situation *** time axis current time current situation *** time axis current time Journal of Hokkaido Linguistics, Vol. 2 (2002), 1-17. characterize a current situation in question as temporally near from/to the realization of a situation denoted by the main verb phrase, but not to straightforwardly state that a situation denoted by the main verb phrase happened in the immediate past or will happen in the immediate future. The current situation, which is the speaker’s concern, is characterized relevant to the realization of some event in the immediate past or future. For example, the import of (1) is not the realization of a person’s getting back a short while ago but a certain current situation as a result of her/his getting back; the import of (3) is not the realization of a person’s crying in the imminent future but a certain current situation in which her/his crying is about to occur. The speaker conceives of some cause-effect relationship between the given current situation and the reference event in the immediate past or future. A current situation in question and a reference situation denoted by the main verb phrase may be apparently different, as in (1), (3) and (4), or may seem to be the same, as in (2). For example, a current situation the speaker of (1) wants to describe is a state resulting from someone’s return. The event of someone’s return, which is denoted by the main verb phrase, is not identical with the current situation. On the other hand, a current situation the speaker of (2) wants to describe is a state of feeling hungry which seems to be identical with a situation denoted by the main verb phrase. However, they are not totally identical. The current situation is not simply a state of feeling hungry, but a state of being gradually feeling hungry that has just started. The realization of feeling hungry denoted by the main verb phrase is the starting point of the current situation. The distinction between realis and irrealis assertion bears on demarcation between actual and fictive temporal proximity in that actual temporal proximity typically appears in realis predication with logical truth whereas fictive temporal proximity typically appears in irrealis predication with epistemic uncertainty. Taking it for granted that the systems of aspect and modality in a language are interrelated and there is no absolute boundary between them, I consider that temporal proximity is primarily an aspectual notion but it is capable of involving such an epistemic sense. Both actual and fictive types, in turn, are categorized into two subtypes according to different perspectives taken in viewing the event evolution, namely “global perspective” 7 and “internal perspective.” Langacker (1991b: 12; 1999: 207-208) regards perspective as a dimension of ‘imagery’ (viz. the human capacity to construe a situation and organize it by means of alternative images). It subsumes several specific factors such as orientation, assumed vantage point (viewpoint), directionality, and how objectively an entity is construed. Our visual or mental scanning through a scene entails these construal factors. Talmy (1983: 255-256; 1988: 183-184, 188-189, 194) also considers the ‘perspectival mode’ (viz. the deployment of perspective) as a principal imaging system of language. This system specifies how one places one’s ‘mental eyes’ or co