Imperfective verbs mean:

actions in progress, just ongoing states and activities, with significant course (in opinion of the speaker);

activities posing the background for other (perfective) activities, ex. czytałem książkę, gdy zadzwonił telefon 'I was reading the book when the telephone rang';

simultaneous activities, ex. będę czytać książkę, podczas gdy brat będzie pisać list 'I will be reading the book while brother will be writing the letter';

durative activities, lasting through some time, e.g. krzyczał 'he was shouting', będzie drgać 'it will be vibrating';

motions without a strict aim, ex. chodzę 'I am walking here and there';

multiple (iterative) activities, ex. dopisywać 'to insert many times to the text', będziemy wychodziły 'we will go out (many times)';

non-resultative activities, only heading towards some purpose: będę pisał list 'I will be writing the letter';

continuous states, ex. będę stać 'I will be standing'.

Perfective verbs mean past or future, but not present activities – an activity which is happening now cannot be ended, so it cannot be perfective. Perfective verbs mean:

states and activities which were ended (even if a second ago) or which will be ended, with insignificant course, short or treated as a whole by the speaker, ex. krzyknął 'he shouted', drgnie 'it will stir';

single-time activities, ex. dopisać 'to insert to the text', wyszedł 'he has gone out';

actions whose goals have already been achieved, even if with difficulty, ex. przeczytałem 'I have read', doczytała się 'she finished reading and found what she had sought';

reasons for the state, ex. pokochała 'she came to love', zrozumiesz 'you (sg.) will understand', poznamy 'we will get to know';

the beginning of the activity or the state, ex. wstanę 'I will stand up' (and I will stand), zaczerwienił się 'he reddened';

the end of the activity or the state, ex. dośpiewaj 'sing until the end';

activities executed in many places, on many objects or by many subjects at the same time, ex. powynosił 'he carried out (many things)', popękają 'they will break out in many places', poucinać 'to cut off many items';

actions or states which last some time, ex. postoję 'I will stand for a little time', pobył 'he was (there) for some time'.

Most simple Polish verbs are imperfective (the same in other Slavic languages), ex. iść 'to walk, to go', nieść 'to carry', pisać 'to write'. But there are also few simple perfective verbs, ex. dać 'to give', siąść 'to sit down'. There exist many perfective verbs with suffixes and without prefixes, ex. krzyknąć 'to shout', kupić 'to buy' (cf. the imperfective kupować with a different suffix).

Numerous perfective verbs are formed from simple imperfectives by prefixation. To create the perfective counterpart, verbs use various prefixes without any clear rules. The actual prefix can even depend on a dialect or special meaning, ex. the perfective counterpart to malować is pomalować when it means 'to paint a wall; to fill with a color', or namalować when it means 'to paint a picture; to depict sth/sb'.

Besides the strict perfective equivalent, a number of other prefixed verbs may be formed from a given simple imperfective verb. They all have similar but distinct meaning. And they form, as a rule, their own imperfective equivalents by means of suffixation (attaching suffixes) or stem alternation. Example:

prać 'to wash / clean clothes with water and soap / washing powder' is a simple imperfective verb;

uprać is its perfective counterpart while doprać, przeprać, oprać are other derived perfective verbs with a little different meanings;

dopierać, przepierać, opierać are secondary imperfective verbs which are counterparts for doprać, przeprać, oprać respectively; *upierać does not exist because the basic verb prać is the imperfective counterpart of uprać.

There is a number of verbs which form their aspectual counterparts by simultaneous prefixation and suffixation or by suppletion, ex. (the first one is imperfective) stawiać - postawić 'to set up', brać - wziąć 'to take', widzieć - zobaczyć 'to see'.

Special imperfective verbs are those which express aimless motions. They are mono-aspectual, i.e. they have no perfective equivalents. They are formed from other imperfective verbs by stem alternations or suppletion, ex. nosić 'to carry around' (from nieść), chodzić 'to walk around, to go around' (from iść 'to go, to walk'). However, when such a verb gets an aim anyway, it becomes iterative: chodzić do szkoły 'to go to school'.

Other iteratives build another group of mono-aspectual imperfective verbs. They are formed from other imperfective verbs, including the previous group: chadzać 'to walk around usually (from chodzić), jadać 'to eat usually' (from jeść 'to eat'). Both groups are not too numerous: most Polish verbs cannot form iterative counterparts.

Perfective verbs which express activities executed in many places, on many objects or by many subjects at the same time, and those which express actions or states which last some time, have no imperfective counterparts. They are formed with the prefix po- (which can have other functions as well).

States and activities which last for some time can be expressed by means of both imperfective and perfective verbs: cały dzień leżał w łóżku 'he was in bed all day long' (literally: 'he lay in bed') means nearly the same as cały dzień przeleżał w łóżku. The difference is mainly stylistic: imperfective is neutral here, while using perfective causes stronger tone of the statement.

Aspect in Slavic is a superior category in relation to tense or mood. Particularly, some verbal forms (like infinitive) cannot distinguish tense but they still distinguish aspect. Here is the list of Polish verb forms which can be formed by both imperfective and perfective verbs (such a list is similar in other Slavic languages). The example is an imperfective and a perfective Polish verb with the meaning 'to write'. All personal forms are given in third person, masculine singular:

infinitive: pisać - napisać;

passive participle: pisany - napisany;

gerund: pisanie - napisanie;

past impersonal form: pisano - napisano;

past impersonal form in subjunctive: pisano by - napisano by;

past tense: pisał - napisał;

future tense: będzie pisać / będzie pisał - napisze;

conditional, first form: pisałby - napisałby;

conditional, second form: byłby pisał - byłby napisał;

imperative: pisz - napisz.

The following may be formed only if the verb is imperfective:

contemporary adverbial participle – pisząc;

active participle – piszący;

present tense – pisze.

One form may be created only if the verb is perfective, namely:

anterior adverbial participle – napisawszy.

[edit]

Finnic languages

Finnish and Estonian, among others, have a grammatical aspect contrast of telicity between telic and atelic. Telic sentences signal that the intended goal of an action is achieved. Atelic sentences do not signal whether any such goal has been achieved. The aspect is indicated by the case of the object: accusative is telic and partitive is atelic. For example, the (implicit) purpose of shooting is to kill, such that:

Ammuin karhun -- "I shot the bear (succeeded; it is done)"; i.e., "I shot the bear dead".

Ammuin karhua -- "I shot at the bear"; i.e., "I shot the bear (and I am not telling if it died)".

Sometimes, corresponding telic and atelic forms have as little to do with each other semantically as "take" has with "take off". For example, naida means "to marry" when telic, but "to have sex with" when atelic.

Also, derivational suffixes exist for various aspects. Examples:

-ahta- "do suddenly by itself" as in ammahtaa "to shoot up" from ampua "to shoot"

-ele- "repeatedly" as in ammuskella "to go shooting around"

There are derivational suffixes for verbs, which carry frequentative, momentane, causative, and inchoative aspect meanings; also, pairs of verbs differing only in transitivity exist.

[edit]

Italian

Italian grammar doesn't recognise explicitly verbal aspects, and focuses more on moods and tenses. Still, most mood/tense combinations (such as indicative/future) feature two aspects, called in italian grammar books tempi semplici (simple tenses) and tempi composti (compound tenses). The compound tenses are called so because they're formed by the appropriated auxiliary verb conjugated in the correspondent simple tense, and the main verb conjugated in the past participle. Simple tenses render the imperfective (sometime aorist) aspect, and compound tenses render the perfective aspect. This is a direct derivation of the way the latin language used to render both aspects and consecutio temporum. The compound tenses are generally used in subordinate clauses, with the sole exception of passato prossimo, used by most speakers in northern Italy as substitute for passato remoto.

Example (verb mangiare, to eat)

Mood: indicativo (indicative)

Presente (present): io mangio (I eat)

Passato prossimo (recent past): io ho mangiato (I have eaten)

Imperfetto (imperfect): io mangiavo (I was eating)

Trapassato prossimo (recent pluperfect): io avevo mangiato (I had eaten)

Passato remoto (far past): io mangiai (I ate)

Trapassato remoto (far pluperfect): io ebbi mangiato (I had eaten)

Futuro semplice (simple future): io mangerò (I shall eat)

Futuro anteriore (future perfect): io avrò mangiato (I shall have eaten)

The difference between the imperfetto/trapassato prossimo and the passato remoto/trapassato remoto is that imperfetto renders an imperfective (continuous) past; passato remoto renders an aorist (punctual/historical) past.

Other aspects in italian are rendered with other periphrases, like inchoative (io sto per mangiare I'm about to eat, io starò per mangiare I shall be about to eat), or continuative/progressive (io sto mangiando I'm eating, io starò mangiando I shall be eating).

[edit]

Confusing terminology: perfective vs. perfect This article is in need of attention from an expert on the subject. WikiProject Linguistics or the Linguistics Portal may be able to help recruit one. (November 2008)

The terms perfective and perfect are used in an unfortunate and highly confusing fashion in different writings about linguistics. Traditional Greek grammar uses the term "perfect" to refer to a grammatical tense encoding what is variously described as a past action with present relevance or a present state resulting from a past action. (For example, "I have come to the cinema" implies both that I went to the cinema and that I am now in the cinema.) The perfect is opposed to the aorist, describing a simple past action, and the imperfect, describing an ongoing past action. From this, the aspectual nature of the perfect tense was generalized into the perfect aspect, describing a previously completed action with relevance to a particular time. Accordingly, English grammar speaks of the present perfect ("I have gone"), the past perfect or pluperfect ("I had gone"), and the future perfect ("I will have gone").

Latin, however, lacks a distinction between aorist and perfect, and for morphological reasons the single tense representing the combination of both meanings is called the "perfect". The two-way distinction here between imperfect and perfect is carried over into the terminology of various modern languages, such as the Slavic languages and the Romance languages, where a distinction between "imperfective" and "perfective" aspect corresponds to a distinction between an event viewed as ongoing or with internal structure and an event viewed as a simple whole. That is, what is called "perfective" is similar to the aspectual nature of the original Greek aorist, not the Greek perfect.

Many linguists have tried to maintain this terminology. The web site of SIL International, for example, describes the "perfective aspect" as "an aspect that expresses a temporal view of an event or state as a simple whole, apart from the consideration of the internal structure of the time in which it occurs".[6] This has led other linguists to categorize the three-way aspectual distinction visible in Greek, English, Spanish and various other languages as a distinction between "imperfective", "perfective" and "perfect". Not surprisingly, the latter two are constantly confused, and "perfective" is often taken to be synonymous with "perfect".

[edit]

Examples of various aspects rendered in English

Perfective (aorist, simple; see above): 'I struck the bell.' (single action)

Perfect (sometimes confusingly called "perfective"; see above): 'I have arrived at the cinema.' (hence, I am now in the cinema)

Progressive (continuous): 'I am eating.' (action is in progress)

Habitual: 'I walk home from work.' (every day)

'I would walk [OR: used to walk] home from work.' (past habit)

Imperfective (either progressive or habitual): 'I am walking to work' (progressive) or 'I walk to work every day' (habitual).

Prospective: 'I am about to eat' OR: 'I am going to eat."

Recent Perfect or After Perfect: 'I just ate' OR: 'I am after eating." (Hiberno-English)

Inceptive: 'I am beginning to eat.'

Inchoative (not clearly distinguished from prospective): 'The apples are about to ripen.'

Continuative: 'I am still eating.'

Terminative: 'I am finishing my meal.'

Conative: 'I am trying to eat.'

Cessative: 'I am quitting smoking.'

Defective : 'I almost fell.'

Pausative: 'I stopped working for a while.'

Resumptive: 'I resumed sleeping.'

Punctual: 'I slept.'

Durative: 'I slept for an hour.'

Delimitative: 'I slept for a while.'

Protractive: 'The argument went on and on.'

Iterative: 'I read the same books again and again.'

Frequentative: 'It sparkled', contrasted with 'It sparked'. Or, 'I run around', vs. 'I run'.

Experiential: 'I have gone to school many times.'

Intentional: 'I listened carefully.'

Accidental: 'I knocked over the chair.'

Generic: 'Mangoes grow on trees.'

Intensive: 'It glared.'

Moderative: 'It shone.'

Attenuative: 'It glimmered.'

Semelfactive (momentane): 'The mouse squeaked once.' (contrasted to 'The mouse squeaked/was squeaking.')

Predicative Constructions with the

Non-Finite Forms of the Verb

The Non-Finite forms of the Verb are more simple and economical expressive means of thought.

Combinations of non-finite forms of the verb with a noun or pronoun standing a front of them form various grammatical constructions.

In English there are three non-finite forms of the verb: Participle, Gerund, and Infinitive. Therefore, there are three groups of predicative constructions. These are the constructions with Participle, Gerund, and Infinitive.

Participial, Gerundial and Infinitive constructions are highly varied. The structure of some of them is foreign to the Russian language, although their meaning can be fully conveyed in Russian with the help of forms, characteristic of Russian. The constructions are translated into Russian by objective, attributive, adverbial or other subordinate clauses.

eg. 1) My son having lost the key, we could not enter the house. – Поскольку мой цын потерял ключ, мы не могли войти в дом. (Participle)

Here Participle is translated into Russian as the predicate of a subordinate clause.

2) There is no mistake about his being a genius. – Не может быть никакого сомнения в том, что он – гений. (Gerund)

3) She heard him open the door and go out into the garden. – Она слышала, как он открыл дверь и вышел во двор. (Infinitive)

My course paper aims at analyzing the Predicative Constructions with the Infinitive, the ways of translating them into Russian.

BODY

Predicative Infinitive Constructions

In Modern English we distinguish the following predicative constructions with the infinitive:

The Objective-with-the-Infinitive Construction

The Subjective-with-the-Infinitive Construction

The For-to-Infinitive Construction

The Absolute Infinitive.

I. The Objective-with-the-Infinitive Construction

The Objective-with-the-Infinitive Construction is a construction in which the Infinitive is in predicate relation to a noun in the common case or a pronoun in the objective case. In the sentence this construction has the function of a Complex Object. In translating the Objective-with-the-Infinitive Construction into Russian there is always used a subordinate clause.

Eg. She is a wonderful teacher and I’ve never seen her lose her temper or get angry about anything. – Она замечательная учительница, и я никогда не видела, чтобы она вышла из себя или рассердилась из-за чего-нибудь.

I believe him to know this subject well. – Я пологаю, что он хорошо знает этот предмет.

I consider this question to be very important. – Я считаю, что этот вопрос очень важен.

Although, sometimes a sentence containing The Objective-with-the-Infinitive Construction may be translated by a simple sentence.

Eg. The dread of the unknown made me recede (step back). – Страх перед неизвестностью заставил меня отступить.

He won’t allow himself do otherwise. – Он не позволит себе поступить иначе.

One’s gaze made me turn round. – Чей-то пристальный взгляд заставил меня обернуться.

His parents let him go to country excursion. – Его родители позволили ему поехать на загородную экскурсию.

She will never let him leave. – Она никогда не позволит ему уйти.

The Use of the Objective Infinitive Construction

The Objective-with-the-Infinitive Construction is used:

After verbs denoting sense perception, such as: “to hear”, “to see”, “to watch”, “to feel”, “to observe”, “to notice”, etc.

Eg. I haven’t heard anyone call me. – Я не слышал, чтобы

кто-нибудь меня звал.

I saw David enter the room. – И видел, как Девид вошел в комнату.

After verbs of sense perception only the Indefinite Infinitive Active is used. If the meaning is passive Participle II is used.

Eg. I saw the fire slowly faded. – Я видел, как пожар постепенно потух.

If a process is expressed, Participle I Indefinite Active is used.

Eg. He saw Wendy coming – Он увидел, как Венди идет.

It should be noted that the verb “to see” should be followed by a clause and not by the Objective-with-the-Infinitive Construction, when it is used in the meaning of “to understand”.

Eg. I saw that he did not realize the danger. – Я видел (понимал), что он не осознает опасность.

After the verbs “to see” and “to notice” the Objective-with-the-Infinitive Construction is not used with the verb “to be”. In such cases Subordinate Clause is used.

Eg. I saw, that he was pale. – Я видел, что он побледнел.

When the verb “to hear” is not a verb of sense perception and is used in the meaning “to learn”, “to be told”, a clause or a gerund is used, but not the Objective-with-the-Infinitive Construction.

Eg. I heard that he had left for France. – Мне сказали (Я слышал), что он уехал во Францию.

We have heard that she has found a job. — Мы узнали, что она нашла работу.

After verbs denoting mental activity, such as: “to know”, “to think”, “to consider”, “to believe”, “to suppose”, “to expect”, “to imagine”, “to find”, “to feel”, “to trust”, and etc.

After verbs of mental activity in the Objective-with-the-Infinitive Construction the verb “to be” is generally used. But this restriction does not apply to the verb “to expect”. The use of this construction after most verbs of mental activity is more characteristic of literary than of colloquial style.

Eg. I know you to be the most honest, spotless creature that ever lived. – Я знаю, что Вы самое честное и безупречное существо из всех, когда-либо живших на свете.

If you suppose that boy to be friendless, you deceive yourself. – Если вы предполагаете, что у этого мальчика нет друзей, вы ошибаетесь.

Everybody expected her to marry Pete. – Все ожидали, что она выйдет замуж за Пита.

After verbs of mental activity the Perfect Infinitive is used, but seldom.

Eg. The doctor found his heart to have stopped two hours before. – Доктор установил, что его сердце перестало биться два часа тому назад.

In the Objective-with-the-Infinitive Construction after verbs “to think”, “to consider”, “to find”, the verb “to be” is left out.

For instance, instead of “I consider him to be a good specialist” we can say “I consider him a good specialist” and translate into Russian literally “Я считаю его хорошим специалистом”. (This sentence is translated by simple sentence.)

After verbs of declaring: “to pronounce”, “to declare”, “to report”.

Eg. The surgeon pronounced the wound to be a slight one. – Врач сказал, что рана легкая.

She declared him to be the most disobedient child in existence. – Она заявила, что это самый непослушный ребенок на свете.

After verbs denoting wish and intention: “to want”, “to wish”, “to desire”, “to mean”, “to intend”, “to choose” (in the meaning “хотеть”) and also after the construction “I would like” (Я хотел бы).

Eg. He intended me to go with him to India. – Он хотел, чтобы я поехала с ним в Индию.

I want you to come and dine with me. – Я хочу, чтобы вы пришли со мной пообедать.

I don’t choose you to go by yourself to a hotel. – Я не хочу, чтобы вы жили в госитнице одна.

I would like her look to through my report. – Я бы хотел, чтобы она посмотрела мой доклад.

After verbs and expressions denoting feeling and emotion: “to like”, “to dislike”, “to love”, “to hate”, “cannot bear”, etc.

Eg. I dislike you to talk like that. – Я не люблю, когда ты так говоришь.

I hate him to be flogged. – Я терпеть не могу, когда его бьют.

I cannot bear you to speak of that. – Я не могу выносить, когда вы

говорите об этом.

After verbs denoting order and permission: “to order”, “to allow”, “to suffer”, “to have”, etc.

Here we find the Objective-with-the-Infinitive only if the object is expressed by a noun or pronoun, denoting lifeless thing or when the Infinitive is passive. This restriction does not apply to the verbs “to suffer” and “to have”.

Eg. Mr. Sinclair ordered his carriage to be ready early in the morning. – Мистер Синклер распорядился, чтобы экипаж был готов рано утром.

She had never allowed the name to John Gordon to pass her lips. – Она никогда не позволяла себе произносить имя Джона Гордона. (This sentence is translated by simple sentence.)

He ordered the wounded to be carried away from the field of battle. – Он приказал, чтобы раненного унесли с поля боя.

However, if the noun or pronoun denotes a person and it is followed by an inactive form as a rule the Infinitive is not a part of the Complex Object and has the function of second Direct Object, immediately subordinated to the Verb.

Eg. He ordered the prisoners to go away. – Он приказал пленным (закл-ченным) уйти. (This sentence is translated by simple sentence.)

The Objective-with-the-Infinitive Construction is used after verbs denoting compulsion: “to make” (in the meaning “заставить”), “to cause” (“заставить”, “распорядиться”), “to get” (“добиться”), “to have” (“заставить”,”сказать чтобы”).

Eg. Light steps in the gravel made him turn his head. – Легкие шаги по гравию заставили его повернуть голову. (This sentence is translated by simple sentence.)

She caused a telegram to be sent to him. – Она распорядилась, чтобы ему послали телеграмму.

The noise caused her to awake. – От шума она проснулась. (This sentence is translated by simple sentence.)