Abstract
The Czech aspect is usually described in terms of the perfective - imperfective distinction and aspectual pairs (psát - napsat). Aspect is considered a grammatical category of the Czech verb, it is expressed through inflection.
Nevertheless, this is not always the case as will be demonstrated through instances of aspectual homonymy and polysemy. Homonym is an expression that has two meanings/functions, that have no semantic relation.
It is accidental similarity between two expressions. Example: Kvůli mléku dojí krávu. (impf.) Dojí zbytek večeře. (pf.) A polyseme is an expression with different, but related meanings.
The paper focuses on homonymous and/or polysemous verbal forms of the Infinitive, Present, Imperative, as well as Past and Passive Participles. These forms are defined by the following parameters: 1) Degree of homonymy.
The degree of homonymy between two verbs can vary, sometimes only one of the levels of the paradigm is homonymous. In other cases, the level in which the perfective/imperfective forms are homonymous, stretches up to a degree of complete overlap that is a homonymy of the entire paradigm.
Examples: snít - Narkotika netoleruji. Sním bez drog. (impf.) and sníst - Večer sním, na co přijdu. (pf.) share forms in the Indicative Present only. okolkovat - Bush okolkuje, odkládá rozhodnutí (impf.) versus Na lince okolkuje 850 lahví za hodinu (pf.) are homonymous in the whole paradigm except for Passive Participle since the Passive Participle of the transitive verb okolkovat doesn't exist. 2) Dynamics of the axis "aspectual homonymy - aspectual polysemy" of the verbal forms under consideration is another parameter followed.
Example: Dolétat - Obraz hvězd k nám dolétá s notn ým zpožděním (impf.) Až příští rok dolétá raketoplán, budeme se z oběžné dráhy vracet pouze pomocí padáků (pf.) The prefix do- expresses two different meanings, however a formal and semantic relatedness can nevertheless be observed. The third relevant parameter derives from the fact that aspectual interpretation of a sentence isn't exclusively linked to the verbal form.
It is also dependent on the circumstances in which it is used. Perfective versus imperfective interpretation depends for instance on: a.
Nature of the subject: opadat - nadšení opadá versus listí opadá: If the subject is an abstract noun or voda (water), the verb opadat is interpreted imperfectively. If the subject is divisible into elements or parts, the verbal form is interpreted as a result of the event and hence perfectively. b.
The tenses used: obejít se - Na dovolené jsme se obešli bez auta. Events that took place in the past (Preterit) tend to be interpreted as perfective. c.
Activity or state: Interpretation of the verbal form as an activity (involves a change) or a state. States "describe situations that do not change over time, e.g. are stative" (Croft, 2012, 34), states fade into qualities and relations, they are perceived imperfectively: Po oční operaci se už rok obejde bez brýlí.
The fact that aspectual homonymous and polysemous expressions exist, implies that the aspectual interpretation of a sentence is not given by the morphological make-up of the verb only. Besides that, the aspectual interpretation is co-determined by aspectual markers, by (non)existence of analytical future tense, by compatibility of the particular verbal form with phasal verbs etc., the aspectual interpretation of a sentence is also dependent on the specific situation in which the particular sentence is used.
Bermel N., I. Kořánová (2008).
From Adverb to Verb: Aspectual Choice in the Teaching of Czech as a Foreign Language. In C.
Cravens & M.U. Fidler & S.C.Kresin (Eds.), Between Texts, Languages, and Cultures, Slavica Publishers, Indiana University, Bloomington 53-70.
Croft, W. (2012). Verbs, Aspect and Causal Structure.
Oxford: Oxfrod University Press. Dostál, A. (1954).
Studie o vidovém systému v staroslověnštině. Praha: SPN.
Kopečný, F. (1962). Slovesný vid v češtině.
Praha: Nakladatelství ČSAV. Petkevič, V. (2010).
Morfologická homonymie v současné češtině. Praha: NLN.
Starý, Z. (2017) Biaspectuals revisited. Sali, 1, 111-123.
Trávníček, F. (1923). Studie o českém vidu slovesném.
Praha: Česká akademie věd a umění. Vendler, Z. (1967).
Verbs and times. In: Linguistics and Philosophy.
Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 97-121.