Studia Slavica Hung. 55/2 (2010) 415–424 DOI: 10.1556/SSlav.55.2010.2.28 0039-3363/$ 20.00 © 2010 Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest Is the Great Aspect Theory Possible? Perspectives and Reality PÉTER PÁTROVICS ELTE BTK Lengyel Filológiai Tanszék, H-1088 Budapest, Múzeum krt. 4/D. E-mail: p.patrovics@freemail.hu (Received: 6 July 2010; accepted: 18 August 2010) Abstract: This paper seeks to find an answer to the question of whether an all-embracing “great theory” on aspect is possible. First, the author describes shortly the situation in aspect research of our days, then he draws a comparison between the present state of aspect research and that of the theoretical physics. Refuting existing views of human language and its category, the aspect as a stable, once and for all fundamental and completely rational system which acts by rules, the paper presents arguments in favour of the existence of communication fragments being the fundamental units of language (and aspectual) usage. Keywords: philosophy of language, aspect theories, aspectual usage 1. Apparently we have to agree with linguists who draw our attention to the fact that there isn’t a uniformly accepted theory within aspectology, but a great variety of theories 1 (cf. PETE 2009: 29, STAMBOLIEVA 2008: 16). The same idea is 1 The Vendler categorization, which has been mentioned on numerous occasions in literature, is not an aspect theory. In the study published in 1957, the author does not even mention the word aspect. Despite of this, his categorization has significantly influenced aspect researchers later on. According to Henk Verkuyl’s basic supposition, aspect is a category existing on a syntactic level in German languages and it can be compositionally derived from the meaning of the verb and its com- plements. Though Verkuyl’s formalism has not influenced posterity significantly, the terms of sen- tence aspect and compositionality were introduced by him and later they have become the enduring components of aspect research. Dowty’s ideas were later on developed and applied to German by Marcus Egg (EGG 1994, cf. PÁTROVICS 2004: 20–24). Carlota Smith’s controversial two-component approach already mentions the situation aspect and the viewpoint aspect related to Vendler’s event types. There are many theories about the aspect and the tense system as well as the suitability of as- pect and different tense levels in certain languages (DESCLÉS–GUENTCHÉVA 2006: 11–38, GUŁAWSKA 2000, HARWEG 1976: 5–28, KREISBERG 1980, KOZŁOWSKA-RA 1980: 35–46, LINDSTEDT 1985). For instance, Kiefer identifies aspect with the inner tense structure of the sentence. Ba kowski’s theory (on the origins of Slavonic aspect) is also worth noting. He believes that there is a strong relation- ship between the formation of the aspects of Slavonic verbs (perfective or imperfective) and the two possible positions (before and after the verb) of the so-called converbiums, which are linked to the verb. All this takes us to the Slavonic line of aspect research, which gave birth to a great variety of theories, oddly enough, completely ignored by Kiefer. It is worth mentioning A. V. Bondarko’s theory that discussed the issue of aspect in the frame of functional grammar and introduced the no- tion of aspectuality as a functional-semantic field (cf. BONDARKO 1983: 76–115). We have to note that Bondarko’s theory is far more elaborate and consistent than Carlota Smith’s theory and, at the same time, it allows us to speak of aspect in those languages where it is not expressed morpholo- gically (on how to apply this on non-Slavonic languages, see JÁSZAY 1993: 64–69, PÁTROVICS 2004: Authenticated patrovics.peter@btk.elte.hu | Downloaded 12/14/21 10:46 AM UTC