4.3.2.1. Unboundedness (vs. compactness)
The progressive aspect converts a temporally compact, bounded, ter
minated event, one that has sharp temporal boundaries, into a temporally diffuse, unbounded, ongoing process, which thus resembles a state.3 The English progressive is marked by the auxiliary 'be' before the verb and the suffix -ing on the verb. When the progressive combines with the three main tenses, the auxiliary 'be' — unless preceded by another auxiliary — behaves like the main verb and carries the tense marking:
(11) a. Present progressive: She is working
b. Future progressive: She will be working
Past progressive: She was working
The progressive aspect represents a stative semantic perspective on an otherwise non-stative event. Its use does not imply that the event per se was unbounded or diffuse, but rather that from the perspective of the speaker, the event is described in the middle of happening, with its boundaries disre garded and its temporal span accentuated. A spatial metaphor may help clarify our notion of 'perspective' here. Compare the very same 'objective' event, described first in the simple bounded past, then as progressive past:
(12) a. Bounded past: She cut the log
b. Progressive past: She was cutting the log
The bounded-past perspective in (12a) may be likened to a narrow camera- angle — say a fish-eye lens — view. The event is observed from close prox imity, taking up the entire frame, so that it is viewed as a protracted object progressive-past perspective in (12b) may be likened to a wide camera- angle — say a fish-eye lens — view. The event is observed from close pro ximity, taking up the entire frame, so that it is viewed as a protracted object whose boundaries are not included in the frame. The two perspectives may be represented diagrammatically as:
(13) Bounded (narrow-angle) perspective:
(14) Progressive (wide-angle) perspective:
The interpretation of the progressive aspect varies a little when the verb is super-compact, i.e. of a very short duration, as in 'kick', 'blink', 'hit' or 'shoot'. With such verbs, the progressive typically assumes an iterative interpretation, i.e. a progression of repeated acts. As illustrations, con sider:
(15) a. He was kicking the couch
b. She was blinking her eyes rapidly c. was hitting the door with both hands d. They were shooting at the house
4.3.2.2. Proximity (vs. remoteness)
One consequence of the metaphor of narrow vs. wide camera-angle perspective on the event is of particular interest. In the visual construction of space, a wide lens-angle represents either a large or a nearby object. From the progressive perspective then, an on-going event is thus scrutinized
from close proximity, with all details visible. It is as if the observer is placed right at the scene. In contrast, from a bounded, narrow-angle perspective the event is viewed from a remote vantage point. The observer is removed from the scene and its minute details.
The strong, near automatic association of the progressive with the pre sent — absent explicitly marked tense — is indeed a cognitive reflection of the metaphoric extension from spatial to temporal proximity. Proximity — whether spatial or temporal — has similar cognitive consequences.4
4.3.2.3. Simultaneity (vs. sequentiality)
The progressive perspective on an event is often established through bringing the observer onto the scene in the middle of the event, when it is already going on. This is most commonly accomplished by depicting in an adjacent clause the entry of a witness onto the scene. Thus compare (15) above with (16):
(16) a. When I came in, he was kicking the couch
b. When he looked up, she was blinking her eyes rapidly They saw that he was hitting the door with both hands d. The police caught them shooting at the house
This juxtaposition of two event-clauses, the one compact and representing the observer's entry or perspective, the other the depicted event-in-prog- ress, indeed involves a pragmatic dimension of the progressive aspect. The feature of simultaneity — to contrast with sequentiality — of two clauses is 'pragmatic' in the sense that it cannot be defined without reference to another clause, i.e. to the discourse context. As a more explicit illustration of this, compare the two highlighted clauses in (17a,b) below, representing the same 'objective' events:
(17) a. Bounded past:
After she came home, he cooked dinner, and they ate and went to bed.
b. Progressive past:
When she came home, he was cooking dinner. Then they ate and went to bed.
One could further suggest that the pragmatic feature of 'simultaneity1
is implicit even in the single-clause use of the progressive. That is, a simul taneous point-of-reference is always implicit in the discourse context of a
progressive-coded clause. Consider, for example, the typical elicitation of progressive-coded single-clause responses:
(18) a. Question (context):
What is he doing (now, as we are talking)? b. Response:
He's eating supper. Question (context):
What was he doing (then, when you entered the room)? d. Response:
He was eating supper.
The discourse contexts 'now' (18a) and 'when you entered the room' (18c) establish the temporal reference-point that is simultaneous with the on going event in the responses (18b) and (18d), respectively. Granted, not all contexts for progressive-marked clauses are as explicit as (18a,c). Neverthe less, it is possible that the seeming absence of the pragmatic feature of 'simultaneity' in isolated progressive-marked clauses is the mere conse quence of disregarding the natural discourse context.
In connected discourse, the bounded ('perfective') past — as in (17a) — is typically used to code events that are temporally sequential, often vis- a-vis both the preceding and following event-clauses. In contrast, the pro gressive ('imperfective') aspect — as in (17b) — is typically used to depict events that are simultaneous to a contiguous event-clause.
In narrative text, the sequential past-perfective aspect is much more frequent than the simultaneous progressive. This is due to the fact that nar rative tends to be action oriented, so that its coherence structure most com monly involves chains of sequentially-ordered events. These past/perfective- marked events follow each other in temporal order, and are typically pack aged in main clauses. Within these chains, the simultaneous-progressive aspect is interspersed more sparsely, quite often in dependent clauses. As illustrations of the use of both aspects in narrative, consider the following fiction passage:5
(19) "...Within the mouth of the draw he drew reins again. With his first glance he recognized the body for what it was, but only when he was quite sure that he was alone did he approach it. He circled it as warily as a wolf, studying it from all angles, and when he finally stopped, within a dozen feet of the dead man, he knew much of..."
The simultaneous progressive in narrative can also contrast with the
habitual tense-aspect, which then codes the more sequential information
much like the past-perfective did in (19). As illustration of this, consider:6
(20) ''...Movement attracts the eye, draws the attention, ren
ders visible. A motionless object that blends with the sur
roundings can long remain invisible even when close by, and Shalako was not moving..."
While the habitual-marked clauses in (20) do not involve, strictly speaking, actual events that took place at temporally-ordered points in time, the sequences
'attracts the eye' > 'draws attention' > 'renders visible' and
'blends with the surroundings' > 'can remain invisible'
are nonetheless well ordered, while the progressive-coded 'was not moving' is clearly outside the sequence.
4.3.2.4. The habitual progressive
The simple progressive form, while most often interpreted as the pre sent progressive, can also signal a habitual progressive. This may be high lighted by the use of specific time adverbs:
(21) a. Present progressive:
She is watching TV (right now). b. Habitual progressive:
(Whenever I come over), she's (always) watching TV
The habitual-progressive in (21b) is clearly the progressive aspect in the habitual tense, i.e. without a specific time reference. It may also be con trasted with the simple habitual, as in:
(22) a. Simple habitual:
QUESTION: What does he do for a living? RESPONSE: He works at a gas station. b. Progressive habitual:
QUESTION: What's he doing nowadays? RESPONSE: Working at a gas station.
In a clear sense though, the simple habitual in (22a) characterizes a "more habitual" situation, with a less specific time-reference and a wider
temporal scope. In contrast, the progressive-habitual in (22b) characterizes
a "less habitual" situation, with a much narrower temporal scope. Obvi ously, habits require time to establish, so that the progressive habitual in (22b) is clearly a less prototypical habitual.7
4.3.3. Other progressive aspectuals