Herramientas de estadísticas deportivas en internet

(30) a. *I go to Chicago unless my boss forbids me10.

b. (Google) I am going unless some unknown demand stops me. c. (Google) I will go unless there is severe or dangerous weather. (31) a. *I fly to Chicago if my boss asks me.

b. ?*I am going if you go11.

c. I am going if my health allows me/if I am able.

d. (Google) Barak said to Deborah, "I will go if you go with me. I will not go if you don’t go with me."

e. (Google12) The young man thought for a moment and then he said "I will go - if you will go with me".

(32) a. I will fly to Chicago tomorrow.

b. ˇe I am going to fly to Chicago tomorrow.

c. I was going to fly to Chicago tomorrow, but my boss forbade me. (33) a. Bill will throw himself off the cliff.

b. Bill is going to throw himself off the cliff.

(34) a. Pieper was going to be Chief Executive Officer of Philips in 2 years time.

b. (Google) Tony Blair in 1997: ’I am going to be a lot more radical in government than people think’.

(35) (Comrie) If/When you go out/*will go out in the rain, you will get wet. (36) (Comrie)

a. If you are going to do the shopping, I’ll give you money. b. If you do the shopping, I’ll give you money.

c. If you’ll do the shopping, I’ll give you money. (37) (Comrie)

a. *If it’ll rain, you should take your umbrella. b. If it’s going to rain, you should take your umbrella. (38) a. #Harry moves to Philadelphia.

b. Next Tuesday, Harry moves to Philadelphia.

One can distinguish two main dimensions along which future events can be classified. The first dimension concerns two possible perspectives on future events in so far as they can be affected by humans: as events per se, and as goals, to be achieved by a plan (which may possibly fail). In very rough outline one may say that the use of the present tense emphasizes the first perspective. A good example of this is (25-a), where (usually against one’s

10_{Habituals such as ‘I drink the water wherever I go – unless the natives come running} at me, screaming "DON’T DRINK THE WATER OR YOU’LL DIE"’ (Google) are of course perfectly fine.

11_{That is, Google did not find any instances of ‘I am going if you go’, or indeed any} instance ‘I am going if (event phrase)’. The examples found were all of the kind illustrated in (31-c).

118 8. TENSE

better judgement) one considers only the event of the train’s departure, ab- stracting from delays. Other examples are (27-a) and (29-a). Sentence (26) furnishes an example in the same vein, except that the ‘event’ is actually more like a state13.

Examples (30-a) and (31-a) show that the present tense is no longer allowed if even a mild form of conditional planning is introduced. By con- trast, sentences (30-c) and (31-d) show that the auxiliary will is fine with planning. Indeed, the auxiliaries often indicate that some amount of plan- ning is involved, but here an orthogonal dimension comes into play. Sup- pose we view a future event from the perspective of goals and plans; the other case will be treated later. If willis used in contexts such as (32-a), it is indicated that no actions of self interfere with the execution of the plan. On the other hand, if be going to V is used in that same context ((32-b) and (32-c))ˇe, the possibility of an obstacle arising is deliberately left open. Thus sentence (33) is false if Bill in the end does not jump off the cliff, un- like sentence (33-b): as Comrie [17, p. 64-5] remarks, the second sentence can be shouted as a warning and an injunction to do something to prevent Bill from jumping, whereas the first sentence cannot be used in this way. Sentence (34-a) is a true statement which expresses an intention that was once actual, but which was never realized14. The sentences in (32) make a similar point: the conjunction of an intention together with the denial of its execution has to be expressed by be going to, as in (32-c), not bywill. The use of willindicates the presence of a plan, which may have all sorts of preconditions; but it does not allow the possibility of the agent’s inter- ference with the preparation. Sentence (30-c)ˇe shows that such plans may have preconditions,

Now suppose we view a future event purely from the perspective of its occurring. Then it is no longer possible to talk about possible obstacles to the execution of a plan; but we may still classify events as to whether their occurrence is regarded as certain or doubtful. The present tense is indicated in the first case, the auxiliaries in the second. Sentence (27-a) is a good example of the first, with (27-b) being distinctly awkward15_{. By contrast,}

sentence (28-a) is excluded, and its meaning has to be expressed by (28-b). We have not said much so far about the purely temporal features of the three ways to express future tense. Steedman’s example (38) from [109, p. 908] shows that the use of the syntactic present tense for future tense needs the preliminary establishment of a temporal referent, just as we saw in the case of the past tense. We will therefore model this version of the future

13_{Google actually yielded very few such examples.} 14_{By contrast, the sentence}

(i) Pieper would be CEO of Philips in 2 years time.

introduces a reference timeRsuch that Pieper definitely is CEO at timeR+ 2yrs. 15_{Oddly enough, this is how (27-a) is expressed in meteorologists’ jargon (Darrin} Hindsill p.c.).

5. FUTURE TENSE 119