As Martin Haase points out, the term ‘tense’ in any given language can hardly be isolated. In a broader context, it usually consists of an interwoven system, the so-called Tense-Aspect-Modality (TAM). English and Romanian are no exception. Haase states that “it is far from simple to attribute TAM-categories clearly to either tense, aspect or mood, since most categories contain a temporal as well as an aspectual or modal meaning.” (Haase, 1994:135).
In order not to go beyond the intended scope of this analysis, I will thus straightforwardly compare English and Romanian past tenses, thereby avoiding a detailed discussion on the inner TAM workings of each language, as this could easily fill entire books on its own. Nonetheless, when absolutely necessary, I will include mood and aspect since both of them cannot be entirely ignored in an analysis about time-related utterances.
My main concern, however, is to illustrate the general differences of the tense systems rather than to consider all the exceptions that follow in their wake. Thus, before explaining the construction of the main past tenses, I will provide a short overview and definition of the terms tense, aspect and mood in the English and Romanian language.
Table of Contents
- 1. Introduction
- 2. General overview
- 2.1 Modality/Mood
- 2.2 Tense
- 2.3 Aspect
- 3. Comparison of tenses
- 3.1 Simple present/Present
- 3.1.1 Formation
- 3.1.2 Use
- 3.1.2.1 Similarities
- 3.1.2.2 Differences
- 3.1.3 Summary
- 3.2 Present perfect/Perfectul compus
- 3.2.1 Formation
- 3.2.2 Use
- 3.2.2.1 Similarities
- 3.2.2.2 Differences
- 3.2.3 Summary
- 3.3 Simple past/Perfectul simplu & Imperfectul
- 3.3.1 Formation
- 3.3.2 Use
- 3.3.3 Summary
- 3.4 Pluperfect/Mai mult ca perfect
- 3.4.1 Formation
- 3.4.2 Use
- 3.4.3 Summary
- 4. Conclusion
- 5. Bibliography
Objectives and Key Themes
This paper aims to provide a contrastive analysis of the past tense systems in English and Romanian. It seeks to illustrate the general differences between the two systems, focusing on the main past tenses while acknowledging the interconnectedness of tense, aspect, and mood. The analysis avoids a deep dive into every exception, prioritizing a clear overview of the core differences.
- Comparison of English and Romanian past tense formations.
- Analysis of the usage of past tenses in both languages, highlighting similarities and differences.
- Examination of the influence of aspect and mood on the expression of past time.
- Exploration of the morphological richness of Romanian compared to the relative morphological poverty of English.
- Contrast of the flexibility in English tense usage with the relative rigidity in Romanian tense usage.
Chapter Summaries
1. Introduction: This chapter sets the stage for the contrastive analysis by establishing the inherent complexity of analyzing tense systems, especially within the broader context of Tense-Aspect-Modality (TAM). It introduces the limitations of the study, focusing on a straightforward comparison of past tenses in English and Romanian rather than a comprehensive exploration of TAM intricacies. The author explicitly states the intention to avoid getting bogged down in exceptions, prioritizing a clear illustration of general differences. The introduction emphasizes the limitations of the study, focusing on the main past tenses in English and Romanian, thereby simplifying a very complex linguistic phenomenon.
2. General overview: This chapter provides essential background information on English and Romanian, highlighting their linguistic families and the evolution of their verb systems. It contrasts the morphological richness of Romanian, stemming from its Latin roots and influences from Slavic languages, with the relative morphological poverty of English, resulting from the simplification of its verb system over time. The chapter establishes a framework for understanding the differences in the flexibility of tense usage between the two languages, foreshadowing a more rigid application in Romanian and a more flexible one in English. The differences in the morphological complexity and the flexibility of tense usage are highlighted.
3. Comparison of tenses: This chapter forms the core of the analysis. It presents a detailed comparison of several past tenses in English and Romanian, including their formations and uses. For each tense, similarities and differences between the two languages are discussed, building on the framework established in the previous chapter. The chapter systematically analyzes different tenses, providing detailed comparisons in terms of both form and function.
Keywords
English, Romanian, past tense, contrastive analysis, tense, aspect, mood, morphology, syntax, TAM (Tense-Aspect-Modality), linguistic typology, grammaticalization.
Frequently Asked Questions: A Contrastive Analysis of English and Romanian Past Tenses
What is the main focus of this paper?
This paper provides a contrastive analysis of the past tense systems in English and Romanian. It focuses on illustrating the general differences between the two systems, concentrating on the main past tenses while acknowledging the interconnectedness of tense, aspect, and mood. The analysis prioritizes a clear overview of core differences, rather than delving into every exception.
What aspects of the past tenses are compared?
The comparison covers the formation and usage of several key past tenses in both English and Romanian. Similarities and differences are highlighted, considering the influence of aspect and mood on the expression of past time.
Which specific tenses are compared?
The analysis includes a detailed comparison of the following tenses: Simple Present/Present, Present Perfect/Perfectul compus, Simple Past/Perfectul simplu & Imperfectul, and Pluperfect/Mai mult ca perfect. For each tense, the formation and usage are examined, along with similarities and differences between the two languages.
How does the paper approach the complexity of tense systems?
The paper acknowledges the inherent complexity of analyzing tense systems within the broader context of Tense-Aspect-Modality (TAM). However, it strategically simplifies the analysis by focusing on a straightforward comparison of the main past tenses, avoiding a deep dive into every exception to prioritize clarity.
What are the key differences highlighted between English and Romanian past tenses?
The analysis highlights the morphological richness of Romanian (due to its Latin roots and Slavic influences) compared to the relative morphological poverty of English. It also contrasts the flexibility in English tense usage with the relative rigidity in Romanian tense usage.
What is the structure of the paper?
The paper is structured as follows: Introduction, General Overview (including Modality/Mood, Tense, and Aspect), Comparison of Tenses (with subsections for each tense, including formation, use, similarities, differences, and summaries), Conclusion, and Bibliography. Each chapter is summarized within the document.
What are the key themes explored in the paper?
Key themes include: comparing English and Romanian past tense formations; analyzing the usage of past tenses in both languages, highlighting similarities and differences; examining the influence of aspect and mood; exploring the morphological differences between the languages; and contrasting the flexibility in English tense usage with the relative rigidity in Romanian tense usage.
What are the keywords associated with this paper?
Keywords include: English, Romanian, past tense, contrastive analysis, tense, aspect, mood, morphology, syntax, TAM (Tense-Aspect-Modality), linguistic typology, grammaticalization.
- Citar trabajo
- Hannes Krehan (Autor), 2012, The Past Tense System in English and Romanian, Múnich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/293475
