Re[4]: [tied] Re: Ablaut, hi-conjugation, stress alternation, etc

At 11:47:29 PM on Monday, December 25, 2006, Patrick Ryan
wrote:

> Brian M. Scott:

>> At 10:27:40 PM on Monday, December 25, 2006, Patrick Ryan
>> wrote:

>>> Richard Wordingham:

>>>> For punctuality, try 'I shall read the street name
>>>> carefully next time I'm there.'. 'I shall be reading
>>>> the street name carefully next time I'm there' would be
>>>> unusual, though it might be appropriate if one had to
>>>> puzzle out what was written.

>>> Certainly, the 'carefully' suggests perfectivity.

>>> But why should we be constrained to interpret this
>>> punctually?

>> You aren't so constrained, but Richard just demonstrated
>> that it's the obvious and usual interpretation: if a
>> non-punctual interpretation were normal, 'I shall be
>> reading ...' wouldn't sound so odd.

> Sorry, but I cannot agree.

> One of the things that make this kind of analysis so
> difficult is that English does not regularly distinguish
> punctual and durative. Nor even imperfective and
> perfective.

In this example, however, it does: the default significance
of 'shall read' is punctual, that of 'shall be reading',
durative.

> 'I shall be reading ...' would be the form I would expect
> if someone had misread a street name and wanted to assure
> someone that a careful and slow effort would be made to be
> accurate in the future.

A point that Richard already made. Of course when I said
that 'I shall be reading ...' sounds odd, I meant in the
contexts in which one would normally use 'shall read' --
which is to say when a punctual interpretation is intended.
Obviously the phrasing whose normal interpretation is
durative is appropriate when that's the desired
interpretation!

Brian