@cite{tsilia-zhao-2026}: Tense and Perspective #
@cite{tsilia-zhao-2026} @cite{sharvit-2003} @cite{zhao-2025}
The cross-linguistic incompatibility of temporal ⌈then⌉ with shifted present tense is derived from tense presuppositions anchored to a perspectival parameter π.
The ⌈then⌉-Present Puzzle #
When PRES and ⌈then⌉ occur in the same minimal clause, they share the same π (Shift Together). PRES requires overlap with π; ⌈then⌉ requires disjointness from π. The temporal assertion (g(n_pres) ⊆ g(n_then)) bridges them → presupposition failure.
Deleted tense escapes because it carries no presupposition — no overlap requirement with π, so ⌈then⌉ can freely pick a disjoint reference.
Key empirical finding #
This incompatibility holds for the shifted present but NOT for the deleted present. This distinguishes the two for the first time, motivating the perspectival analysis.
Cross-linguistic data #
| Language | "then" form | Shifts perspective? |
|---|---|---|
| English | then | yes |
| German | damals/dann | yes |
| Mandarin | 那时 nà-shí | yes |
| Japanese | その時 sono-toki | yes |
| Greek | τότε tóte | yes |
| Russian | тогда togda | yes |
| Hebrew | אז az | yes |
| Hungarian | akkor | yes |
Tense shift typology (Tables 1 & 2) #
Present-under-past: English never shifts; Greek/Hebrew/Russian shift in attitude reports only; Japanese shifts in both attitudes and relatives.
Present-under-future: ALL languages shift (WOLL is intensional → provides OP_π site). But English present-under-future is deleted (SOT), not shifted, which is why English ⌈then⌉ is compatible with it.
All "then" adverbs from Fragment entries.
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
Every "then" adverb in our inventory shifts perspective.
Shift Together: OP_π is propositional — it scopes over the entire embedded clause. All perspective-sensitive items in that clause (tense + ⌈then⌉) therefore share the SAME shifted π.
Formally: opPi sets perspectiveTime once for the whole frame.
Any two reads of perspectiveTime from the same shifted frame agree.
The interesting consequence: within a shifted clause, PRES requires overlap with the SAME π that ⌈then⌉ requires disjointness from. There is no LF where they read different perspectives — unlike the pronominal analysis where independent anchor indices could in principle diverge.
The @cite{sharvit-2003} simultaneous reading is the special case where a PRES
presupposition is trivially satisfied at the shifted perspective.
simultaneousFrame has R = P' = E_matrix, satisfying presPresup.
All surveyed languages allow the present to shift under future in attitude reports — because WOLL provides an intensional environment.
All surveyed languages allow the present to shift under future in relative clauses — because WOLL is intensional.
English is the only surveyed language where SOT can delete the present.
Among non-Japanese languages, pastRelative = false.
Under future, all languages shift — WOLL is universally intensional.
WOLL is intensional → it provides an OP_π binding site. This predicts tense shift under future even in relative clauses, unlike past where relative clauses are extensional and lack OP_π.
WOLL contains PRES → SOT can delete an embedded PRES under future. In SOT languages, the matrix PRES (from WOLL) c-commands the embedded PRES, licensing deletion. This is why English ⌈then⌉ is compatible with present-under-future (the present is deleted, not shifted).
The paper's key cross-linguistic prediction for ⌈then⌉ under future:
In SOT languages where SOT can delete the present (English), ⌈then⌉ is compatible with present-under-future (because the present is deleted, not shifted — no presupposition clash).
This single parameter (sotDeletesPresent) predicts the variation in
Table 2's ⌈then⌉-present column.
Shifted present in attitude report + ⌈then⌉ → clash. OP_π shifts π to the attitude time. PRES and ⌈then⌉ in the embedded clause both read the shifted π. Same clash as root clause, but with shifted π instead of S.
Example: *Nate said Erica is angry then. (Greek/Hebrew/Russian/Japanese)
When OP_π is absent (no tense shift), ⌈then⌉ is evaluated relative to the default π. If the embedded tense is deleted, the only presupposition is then's ¬(g(n) ○ π), which is satisfiable.
Example: John said that in ten days he would say to his girlfriend that they were meeting then. (English/Greek — deleted past)