The Variable Expression of Futurity

Future Time Reference:

• Inflected future (IF)- e.g. je sortirai 
• Adding a future morpheme creates an instantly recognisable future time form
• Periphrastic future (PPF)- e.g. je vais sortir
• Based on the verb 'aller'
• Historical - PPF was used very colloquially at first, then gradually became more neutral
• Present Futurate (PF) - e.g. je sors
• Having 3 possible ways of referring to the future allows for variation

Semantic Differences:

•  According to prescriptive values, choice of future time form is decided by:
• The distance of the event - is it proximal or distal in relation to the present
• Speaker interest and engagement - i.e. are they personally involved in the event
• Degree of certainty - i.e. how likely is it to happen
• Various prescriptive linguists have attempted to assign meaning to the different future forms
• PPF - Prescriptive Reasons for use
• Confais - Immediacy & proximity/intentionality/imminence/conviction 
• Fleischmann - if the speaker is personally involved in the event
• Vet - present preparation
• IF - Opposite meanings attached 
• i.e. distal, no personal involvement, uncertain, no present preparation
• PF 
• Imbs - use for certainty
• Must be used in concurrence with a temporal adverb in order to make sense
• The presence of the adverb is a linguistic constraint

 Descriptive Studies:

• Poplack & Turpin - Quebecois
• Jeanjean - Metropole
• King & Nadaseli - Acadian
• Wales - Metropole - journalistic discourse

Form	Poplack	Jeanjean	King	Wales
PPF	73%	58%	53%	10%
IF	20%	42%	47%	90%
PF	7%	-	-	-

Observations:

• PPF was the most frequently used form in Quebec, which is often more advanced in language change than Metropolitian and Acadian French
• There is little difference between Acadian and Metropolitan French - they often mirror each other
• PPF is hardly used in written language, suggesting it is only acceptable as a spoken form for the moment
• IF is hardly used in Quebec and less frequently used in Acadia and the Metropole
• IF is used almost exclusively by journalists - the prestige form in written language
• PF is minimally used across the board

Findings:

• One could possibly predict the disappearance of other forms in favour of the PPF if the current trends continue 
• As Quebec is more advanced in language change, the Metropole and Acadia will probably eventually catch up
• a case of morphological change
• PPF used irrespective of semantic context in real speech (Quebec)
• Therefore the semantic constraints assigned by prescriptive grammarians did not hold
• No evidence that prescriptive grammarians are correct at all 

Prescriptive values:

• Prescriptive grammarians dislike variation and therefore attempt to assign a meaning to each variant form 
• Poplack's findings discredit this theory
• Proves that one form can be used to express multiple meanings

Lexical vs Grammatical Morphology

The meaning behind our use of morphology

Types of morphology:

• Lexical
• Derivational - changes word class (creates new words)
• e.g. nouvelle -> renouveller (adj -> verb)
• Grammatical 
• Inflectional - does not change word class 
• e.g. nouvelle -> nouvelles, fermer -> fermerai 
• word form changed but no new word created

Types of Morphemes:

•  Bound - can't exist independently
• e.g. donn-ais - 'ais' can't exist independently
• has to be bound to make sense
• Free - can make sense independently
• e.g. - "les sans travail"

Morphological Meaning:

• The underlying meanings of morphology are very universal - e.g. the idea that certain morphemes indicate certain times exists across many languages

Tense - morphemes which indicate tense anchor events in time

• e.g. je donne vs j'ai donné vs je donnerai
• -e = present morpheme, -é= past morpheme, -erai = future morpheme

Aspect - the different ways of presenting an event within one time frame

• e.g. two verbs can be in the past tense, yet present the event in different ways 
• French - passé composé vs imparfait - aka the perfective and imperfective 
• Perfective - implies action completed, once
• Imperfective - implies a habitual, incomplete action
• English examples of aspect - progressive vs non-progressive
• I am speaking English vs I speak English
• Doesn't exist in French
• languages differ in how they mark aspect

Aspectual values:

• Perfective
• Perfect value e.g. j'ai déjà vu le film
• relating to present 
• Aorist e.g. je suis sorti à cinq heures
• completed, not related to the present
• Imperfective 
• Characterising/Continuous 
• e.g. j'habitais dans un appartement quand j'étais à Paris
• characterises the continuous whole of the time in Paris
• Habitual 
• e.g. "je sortais de temps en temps quand j'étais ..."
• refers to several incidents, habits during this time
• Progressive 
• e.g. il quittait quand je suis arrivé"
• expresses a sense of 'was doing', of being in progress during one particular moment

 Modality:

•  expresses possibility or doubt concerning an event 
• e.g. "il est possible qu'il soit en retard"
• soit = may, might

The concepts of Tense, Aspect, Modality are so universal that they are known as TAM

Number and Person:

• Verbs:
• Morphemes can indicate plurality e.g. 'e' vs 'ent'
• And which person the verb is referring to (1st, 2nd, 3rd)
• Nouns 
• Morphemes can indicate plurality of a noun
• e.g. livre-s interessant-s - plural markers on nouns and adjectives
• also on past participles - e.g. les livres que j'ai achetés
• English has less markers of plurality than French
• less differentiation for verb endings
• no adjective endings

Gender:

• Often expressed morphologically, moreso in French than in English
• e.g. le livre vs la langue
• French articles express gender, English articles do not
• e.g. elle est sortie 
• French past participles (verbs) express gender, English do not

Pronominal Reference: 

• Pronouns are used to avoid repeating nouns
• e.g. J'ai vu le film. Il était très intéressant.  
• French and English pronoun use differs, especially under word order
• Can refer to a noun or people 
• e.g. mes amis m'ont accompagné
• Pronouns don't exist independently of sentences, i.e. they're morphemes 

 Conclusions: 

• Are grammatical morphemes a communicative luxury in language?
• it is possible to be comprehensible without morphology 
• however without morphemes, many subtleties of language would be lost
• e.g. Moi hier aller cinéma vs Je suis allé au cinéma hier
• Morphology allows communicative efficiency
• Cross linguistic differences (i.e. between languages) exist
• Is it possible for variation to exist within the grammar of a language when grammatical rules for morphology invariably apply 
• Does morphological homogeneity exist across time/people/space (geographical variation)
• see 'futurity' and 'on' vs 'nous' variation