An Analysis of the Relation Between Phase,Situation and Aspect Suffix“LE”in Chinese

LIN Ru

In the research on the Chinese temporal system， Chen （1988） proposed the ternary structure of Chinese temporal system. Based on the ternary structure of the Chinese temporal system， many researches have focused on discussing Chinese aspect system. Compared with the research on aspect， there are fewer studies on Chinese verbal situations， such as Ma （1981）， Deng （1985）， Dai （1997）， etc.， which are all based on Vendlers （1967） four categories of verbal situations. And compared with verbal situation， there are fewer studies on phase. Most researchers believe that phase and verbal situations are the same concept. However， this article believes that in the study of Chinese temporal system， we should first distinguish between phase and verbal situations， and then compare with aspect. Based on the distinction between phase and verbal situations， this article combines the situation and verbal aspect suffix “LE”， which is also an aspect marker， and tries to sum up the relationship between the situation and “LE”.

Keywords： phase， situation， aspect， verbal aspect suffix “LE”

Introduction of Phase and Situation

Chen （1988） proposed the ternary structure of the Chinese time system， dividing the Chinese time system into “phase”， “tense” and “aspect”. The phase reflects the inherent temporal characteristics of the pure propositional meaning of the sentence， which is mainly determined by the lexical meaning of the predicate verb. The lexical meaning of other sentence components also plays an important role in selection and restriction of this sentence. Among them， the object and the complement play a particularly significant role. The tense indicates the time when the situation occurs， which is expressed as the relative position of the time and the speaking time or another reference time on the time axis. The aspect expresses the specific state of the situation at a certain moment. The categories divided according to the characteristics of the phase structure are called situation types. Chen （1988） believes that the concepts of phase and situation are the same. A classical discussion on situation is the four categories mentioned in Vendler （1967）1. Dai （1997） and Gong （1995）， etc. are all based on the four categories of Vendler （1967）.

Many researches have also discussed the specific content of the phase. However， the discourses of various researches are more based on logic and description， not specific to the use of a certain example or the comparison of verbs， and most theoretical descriptions are still very abstract. Chen （1988） did not clearly state what the temporal structure is， but only mentioned abstractly and vaguely.

Zhang （1998） believes that it is impossible for people to establish a clear concept of the phase structure only from abstract descriptions， not only the phase structure， but also the other important item， situation. This article agrees with Zhang （1998）s point but doesnt agree that some of Chen （1988） etc.s researches treat phase and situation as the same thing. We believe that these two concepts are not the same， otherwise why we use two different words to describe the same thing？ Comrie （1976， p. 48） also believes that， “The term ‘phase will be used to refer to a situation at any given point of time in its duration”. That means phase is contained in situation.

Zhang （1998） believes that in a continuous situation， we can choose to cut off at a certain time point A， then what we see is the phase of this situation at time A. No matter from which point we cut in this situation， the phase we see should bethe same. The statesand situations have different time points at different times. Zhang （1998） believes that there are only two basic types of aspect： perfective and imperfective. Every state of an affair， as long as there is a certain continuity in time， has a process from beginning to end. This process is called “Qing Zhuang”（situation） in theory. A situation can be divided into countless “Shi Xiang” （phase）， each of which may be different.

The Difference Between Phase and Situation

This article believes that phase and situation are two different concepts， but they are related to each other. The phase is a characteristic of verbs， mainly based on the verb itself. With the development of time， each stage of the verb itself shows different characteristics. The sum of all the phases of the verb or the common feature shown by all the phases is situation. Different from the time phase， in addition to the characteristics of each stage of the verb itself， the situation has also to consider the issue of arguments. And it is not just verbs that have situations， Gong （1995） believes that sometimes nouns and adjectives can also express situations.

Here are two examples to specifically describe the difference between phases and situations. For example， state verbs like “zhidao” （to know） and “ai” （to love）， with the development of time， the internal state of development is homogeneous. It can be seen as a straight line when represented by an image. Each point on the straight line is a phase， but these phases all look the same， but in fact each phase is a separate individual. And then lets considersome action verbs like “pao” （to run） and “tiao” （to jump）. With the development of time， the internal development state is non-homogeneous and arbitrary， so the image representation can also be regarded as an arbitrary curve. Similar to the above-mentioned “state verbs”， every point on this arbitrary curve is also regarded as a phase.

Each individual phase is combined into an entirety， and this entirety can be regarded as a category. We can choose a “name” based on the characteristics of this type， and this name is the situation type. For example， the situation expressed by verbs such as“zhidao” and “ai” can be classified as Vendler （1967）s states， and the situation expressed by verbs such as “pao” and “tiao” can be classified as activities. In other words， it can be simply considered that the situation is a classification of phase.

Relation Between Phase and Aspect Marker

This article believes that the biggest difference between phase and aspect isthat aspect has the aspect marker， while the phase does not. The common aspect markersare“LE”， “ZHE” or “GUO” etc.2 If the predicate in a clause has no aspect marker， and there is no operator that affects the truth value， then the various stages of the verb are the so-called phase， and the sum of all the phase constructions of the verb is the situation. The phase is based on the verb itself， and the situation must also take into account the issue of arguments. Of course， this is not to say that the phase does not consider the argument at all. Many verbs have an argument in their innate nature. It just means that the phase is more concerned with the state at a certain point in time than the situation. When there are aspect markers in a clause， or an operator that affects the truth value， then the phase that originally belonged only to the verb will be changed due to the addition of the aspect marker. In other words， the phase is the meaning of the predicate itself， it is the action state of the verb at each point in time； but the situation is based on the classification of the phase， and certain phases have certain similar characteristics， and these characteristics are summed up as the situation. After the situation is marked with the aspect marker， it can be given a new meaning that may be the same or different from the original situation. This new meaning is the aspect meaning.

Shang （2004） believes that the situation aspect （semantic aspect） should be called “situation” instead of treating it as aspect. “Situation” is closely related to the intrinsic semantic features of verbs， the object and adverbial in the sentence， etc. It is often the intrinsic semantic features of these components that are “synthesized”through certain operating procedures.

But it is worth noting that the meaning of aspect generally expresses the internal temporal characteristics of the situation. The researchers classify the marker with the function of “temporalreference” into the category of aspect， which means either to expand the category of aspect or to confuse the functions of aspect and phase.

Next， we will give an example to illustrate the relation between phase and aspect marker “LE”.

Relation of Phase and Aspect Marker

Zhang （2017） gave a very appropriate example of phase with different aspect markers.And in Zhang （2017）， the descriptions of the phase and aspect is relatively accurate.However， Zhang did not use this example to explain the difference between phase and aspect in details.

In this article， we decide to use Zhangs example3 and make a detailed analysis of the difference between the phase and the aspect. Zhang （2017， p. 47）：

（1） （zuo tian） ta pai ZHE wo de jian bang……

（Yesterday） He patted my shoulder

（2） （zuo tian） ta pai LE wo de jian bang……

（Yesterday） He patted me on the shoulder.

Zhang （2017） believes that the tense system focuses on whether an event occurred in the past， present or the future， the aspect focuses on the speakers way of observing the event at a certain stage， and the phase focuses on the internal temporal characteristics of the clause. The tense system and phase of the two sentences have not changed， but the aspect has changed. These are all Zhangs explanations of （1） and （2）. Obviously， to understand the differences between phase， tense and aspect， these are not enough. Lets make more interpretations of this research.The time adverb is “zuo tian” （yesterday）， so the tense system is the same—past. There is no doubt about this. The problem lies in Zhangs interpretation of the phase and aspect. Zhangs article did not specifically explain how these two sentences are different in aspect. This article will make some changes to Zhangs example sentences and add an extra verb “shuo” （to say）， which is more conducive to see and explain the difference between the two example sentences.

（3） （zuo tian） ta pai ZHE wo de jian bang shuo……

（Yesterday） He patted my shoulder and said

（4） （zuo tian） ta pai LE wo de jian bang shuo……

（Yesterday） He patted me on the shoulder and said

After adding another verb “shuo”， it is very obvious that （3） and （4） are different in the action state. （3） means to speak while patting， “pai” （to pat） has a feature of continuity and repetition， and the two actions of “pai”and “shuo” happened at the same time. While （4） means “pat” was the first action， then “speak” came secondly， which means “speaking” was after “patting”. Different with （3）， in （4） the action of “pai” is not repeated. It can be said it is a one-time action. This is the biggest difference between （3） and （4）， and the reason is the aspect marker after the verb “pai” are different， which is caused by the different semantic features of “ZHE” and “LE”. Different aspect markers have different meanings.

The biggest problem of Zhangs opinion is the phase. Zhang believes that the phases of these two sentences are also the same， but this article believes that the phases here are different. So where are the phases reflected？ Or howare the situations of sentences reflected？ Because verbs are both “pai”， if we dont consider the aspect markers but only describe the process of the action of “pai”， it is nature to think that phases in the two sentences are the same. It means same verbs have same phases. But the fact is that the phase is not necessarily the same because the verb is the same verb. The same verb will also show different phases because of the different aspect markers. For example， “pai” in （3） has the meaning of continuous repetition， while in （4） has the meaning of one-time action. Such repetitiveness or one-time action means different phases of the same verb. If there is no aspect marker， the proposition “he patted me on the shoulder” can be understood as the phase of repeated patting， or it can be understood as the phase of only one “pat” action.

And different verbs may sometimes show the same phase. For example， if we replace “pai” with “mo” （to touch）， （5） and （3） are both repetitive， so their phases are the same. （6） and （4） are both one-time action， and their phases are also the same. This is how different verbs can express the same phase.

（5） （zuo tian） ta mo ZHE wo de jian bang shuo……

（Yesterday） He touched my shoulder and said

（6） （zuo tian） ta mo LE wo de jian bang shuo……

（Yesterday） He touched my shoulder and said

A certain action corresponds to one or several features for its own internal process， and this corresponding feature can also correspond to other verbs. Zhang （2017） considers that the temporal phase is the observation target of the aspect， and the aspect reflects the way the speaker observes the temporal phase.

Lets look at another example， replacing the “pai” in the above example sentence with “an” （to press）.

（7） （zuo tian） ta an ZHE wo de jian bang shuo……

（Yesterday） He pressed my shoulder and said

The aspect markers in （5） and （7） are the same， but the action of “an” has its own one-time attribute， which is a kind of “static” action， so even if it is used in conjunction with the aspect marker“ZHE”， it does not mean pressing repeatedly. That is to say， different verbs can represent different time phases even if the aspect markers are the same.

Therefore， it cannot be said that because the verbs are different， the time phases must be different， nor can the verbs be the same， and the time phases must also be the same. Lets look at an example where the verbs are the same and the aspect markers are also the same.

（8） qiangshanggua LE yi fu hua.

There hangs a picture on the wall.

（9） ZhangSanzaiqiangshanggua LE yi fu hua.

Zhang San hung a picture on the wall.

Although the verbs and aspect markers are the same in （8） and （9）， the phase and aspect meaning are different. The situation in the first sentence is static， and the second sentence is dynamic. （8） and （9） have different phases. （8） is imperfective， and （9） is perfective， so （8） and （9） have different aspects， too. The reason for the difference is that the sentence patterns are different.

Conclusion

Now， lets summarize the relation between verb， phase and aspect meaning.

1. The nature of the verb itself determines the phase， whilephase and aspect marker constitute the aspect meaning.

2. If the aspect meaning is different， the phase is also different.

3. If the aspect meaning is the same， then the phase might be the same or different.

4. Sentence patterns also have an impact on phase and aspect meaning.

There are also some studies that have found the difference between phase and aspect. For example， Gu（2007） and Zhang （2017） believe that phase is objective and aspect is subjective. Zhang （2017） also emphasizes that the progressive aspect （or continuous aspect） and the statephase are mutually exclusive， and aspect has a suppressive effect on phase4.

Why should we distinguish phase and aspect？ Thats because in some studies， the phase of the verb is equivalent to the aspect. Previous studies on the meaning of “LE” mainly focused on the meaning of “LE”combined with different types of words. The biggest problem with this method is that it is not easy to effectively distinguish the synthesized meanings， and it is not clear which is the meaning of the verb and which is the meaning of “LE”. Therefore， the determination of the meaning of “LE” is very important for the whole research.

References

Chen， P. （1988）. On the Chinses ternary structure of temporal system. Studies of the Chinese Language， （6）， 401-422. Comrie， B. （1976）. Aspect （Cambridge Textbooks in Linguistics）. Cambridge Cambridge University.

Dai， Y. J. （1997）. Research on the tense and aspect system of modern Chinese. Hangzhou： Zhejiang Education Publishing House Press.

Deng， S. X. （1985）. The temporal structure of Chinese verbs. Language Teaching and Linguistic Studies， （4）， 7-17， 48.

Gong， Q. Y. （1995）. Phase， tense and aspect in Chinese. Beijing： The Commercial Press.

Ma， Q. Z. （1981）.Categories of time-quantity objects and verbs. Studies of the Chinese Language， （2）， 86-90

Shang， X. （2004）. The internal oppositeness and neutralization of grammatical aspect—A contrastive study of English and Chinese （Degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Shanghai： East China Normal University）.

Vendler， Z. （1967）. Linguistics in philosophy. Ithaca Cornell University Press.

Zhang， C. Y. （2017）. The temporal system of modern Chinese： A systemic functional linguistics approach （Degree of Doctor. Beijing： University of Science and Technology Beijing）.

Zhang， J. Q. （1998）. On the tense and aspect structure of modern Chinese. Linguistic Researches， （3）， 17-25， （4）， 18-26.