I. Introduction 371
‘present zone’; and the portion that follows t
0
(and starts immediately after t
0
)
is the ‘post-present zone’.
To locate situations in these three zones we use the present perfect, the
present tense and the future tense (or a ‘futurish form’ Ϫ see 7.3.1), respec-
tively. Each of these tenses shows present (nonpast) morphology.
I have already read that article. (Have read is a present perfect tense form locating
its situation time somewhere in the pre-present zone.)
I am very angry with her. (Am locates its situation time at t
0
.)
I{will / am going to} be in France tomorrow. (Note that am going to be locates its
situation time in the post-present. As stressed in 2.13.2, the situation time is the time
of the actualization of the predicated situation, not the time of anticipation of that
actualization. See also the definition of ‘tense’ in 2.12.1 and the discussion of futurish
forms in 7.3.)
8.7 Visual representation of time-spheres and zones
As noted in 2.36, the linguistic conceptualization of time in terms of time-
spheres and zones can be represented as in Figure 8.1. In this diagram the time
line is represented as consisting of two time-spheres. The dotted line in the
middle of the time line represents the fact that there is felt to be a break
between the two time-spheres. (As stressed in 2.36, the diagram should not be
interpreted as representing the pre-present as more recent, i. e. closer to t
0
, than
the past Ϫ see also 2.39.)
Figure 8.1. Linguistic conceptualization of the time line in English.

8.8 Absolute zones
Whereas the present time-sphere is automatically divided into three zones by
t
0
, the past time-sphere consists of a single time-zone, which is defined as lying
completely before t
0
. The past time-sphere and the three present time-sphere
zones can therefore be said to make up the set of
absolute zones, i. e. the
four time-zones that are defined in direct relation to t
0
. (Note that, because the
past time-sphere consists of only one zone, it does not really matter whether
we speak of ‘past zone’ or ‘past time-sphere’.)
372 8. Temporal domains and relative tenses: theoretical foundations
8.9 The length of the time-spheres and zones
Except for the present zone, which is by definition conceived of as punctual
(see 2.35), the length of the time-spheres and the zones cannot be defined in
terms of objective time. As noted in 2.39, everything depends on how the
speaker conceptualizes time. Thus, the pre-present can be conceived of either
as very short (e. g. I have just met your brother) or as stretching indefinitely
far back (e. g. The universe has always existed), while the past time-sphere
may be conceived of as distant from t
0
(e. g. In those days Cleopatra ruled over
Egypt) or as almost reaching up to it (e. g. The manager left his office a minute
ago). It follows that one and the same situation can often be conceptualized
either as lying in the past time-sphere or as lying in the pre-present (compare
I met her just now with I have just met her). This is in keeping with the

observation (made in 2.36) that the past time-sphere is not conceptualized as
more distant from t
0
than the pre-present zone. (The past time-sphere is con-
ceived of as separated from the present time-sphere, whereas the pre-present
zone forms part of it, but the actual distance between the situation time and
t
0
is immaterial to this conceptualization.)
8.10 Absolute vs relative tenses
An absolute tense relates its situation time (ϭ the time of its predicated
situation) directly to t
0
by locating that situation time in one of the absolute
zones. As we have seen, English uses the (absolute) past tense, the present
perfect, the present tense and the future tense (or one of the ‘futurish tense
forms’ Ϫ see 2.9) to locate a situation in the past, the pre-present, the present
and the post-present, respectively.
A
relative tense relates its situation time to an orientation time other than
t
0
. In doing so it expresses a T-relation in a temporal domain (see 8.11 below).
The two terms can be illustrated by the sentence Yesterday I already knew
that I was getting ill. Here knew is an absolute past tense form representing its
situation time as lying in the past, while was getting is a relative past tense
form representing its situation time as T-simultaneous (ϭ coinciding) with the
situation time of knew.
8.11 Temporal domain
8.11.1 A temporal domain has been defined as a structured set of orienta-

tion times with the following characteristics: (a) except for the ‘central orienta-
tion time’ Ϫ see 8.15, each orientation time is temporally related to another
orientation time in the domain by means of a tense; (b) at least one of the
I. Introduction 373
orientation times in the domain is a situation time (see 2.15.4). A domain is
established by an absolute tense form and expanded by relative tense forms.
Thus, in John said he had worked hard all day, the reference is to a past
domain. This is established by the absolute past tense form said and expanded
by had worked, which is a relative tense form representing its situation time
as T-anterior to the situation time of said. See Figure 8.2.
Figure 8.2. The tense structure of John said that he had worked hard all day.
When representing a temporal domain by means of a diagram, we observe the
following conventions. The domain is represented by a Venn-diagram because
it is a set of orientation times (each related to another orientation time by a
tense form). The ‘central orientation time’ (see 8.15) is the only orientation
time that is placed on the time line, since it is the only orientation time that is
directly related to t
0
. A vertical line is used to represent the relation of T-
simultaneity, whereas a slanting line represents either T-anteriority or T-poste-
riority. A situation time that is T-anterior to its binding orientation time is
located to the left of the latter; a situation time that is T-posterior to its binding
orientation time is located to the right of the latter. All orientation times and
situation times are represented by a cross (or ‘x’), irrespective of whether they
are durative or punctual.
8.11.2 A domain is
unexpanded when it consists of just one situation time.
In that case the set of orientation times forming the domain is a singleton. An
example of this is He left at five and I will leave at eight, where each tense
form establishes a domain of its own (the one in the past, the other in the post-

present), neither of which is further expanded.
8.12 Two past tenses: the absolute preterite vs the
relative preterite
English has an absolute past tense, which establishes a past domain, as well
as a relative past tense, which expresses T-simultaneity in a past domain.
374 8. Temporal domains and relative tenses: theoretical foundations
The semantics of the absolute preterite is ‘The situation time is located in the
past time-sphere (defined relative to t
0
)’; the semantics of the relative preterite
is: ‘The situation time is T-simultaneous with an orientation time in a past
domain’.
4
Arguments for this distinction are adduced in sections 8.23Ϫ32 below.
8.13 Past vs present (time-sphere) tenses
The past (time-sphere) tenses are the tenses showing past tense morphology:
the absolute past tense, the relative tenses expressing a single relation in a
past domain, viz. the relative past tense (T-simultaneity), the past perfect (T-
anteriority) and the ‘conditional’ tense (T-posteriority), and the complex-rela-
tive tenses with past tense morphology, viz. the ‘conditional perfect’ tense
(would have V-en) and such (nameless) tenses as are built with had been going
to, would have been going to and would have been going to have V-en.
The present (time-sphere) tenses are the tenses showing present tense mor-
phology. These are the present tense, the present perfect, the future tense (plus
the present tense of the ‘futurish’ tense forms) and the absolute-relative tenses
(i. e. the future perfect and such (nameless) tenses as are built with have been
going to, will have been going to and will have been going to have V-en).
5
8.14 Temporal subordination or temporal binding
(T-binding)

By this we mean the phenomenon that a tense form T-relates a situation time
to another orientation time in a domain. Thus, in John said he would do
4. This is actually a simplification. In 9.17.1 we will see that a post-present binding orienta-
tion time may be treated as if it were t
0
, i. e. as a ‘pseudo-t
0
’, and that in that case we
can speak of a ‘pseudo-past time-sphere’ and ‘pseudo-past subdomains’. A pseudo-past
subdomain is established by a ‘pseudo-absolute’ past tense and expanded by the relative
tenses typical of (true) past domains:
(i) [Even if there are witnesses to the hold-up we are planning] they will no doubt say
to the police that they didn’t notice what was going on.
In this example, didn’t notice is a pseudo-absolute past tense form establishing a pseudo-
past subdomain in the post-present domain established by will say; was going on ex-
presses T-simultaneity in that pseudo-past subdomain Ϫ see section 9.18.3. It follows
that the correct definition of the semantics of the relative past tense is: ‘The situation
time is T-simultaneous with an orientation time in a past or pseudo-past domain or
subdomain’. (Another example of a relative past tense expressing T-simultaneity in a
pseudo-past (sub)domain is when a pre-present domain is developed as if it were a past
one: He’s told me once or twice that he was an only child Ϫ see 9.10.1.)
5. Judging from the Internet, some of these ‘nameless’ tenses are hardly ever used, but this
does not alter the fact that they are theoretically possible and that their semantics (i. e.
the structure of temporal relations which they express) is fully transparent.
I. Introduction 375
it, the situation time of would do is temporally bound by (ϭ temporally
subordinated
to) the situation time of said. The latter is the binding orien-
tation time
. In order to avoid any confusion with other meanings attributed to

the terms ‘bind’, ‘binding’ and ‘bound’ in the linguistic literature (e. g. ‘bound
pronouns’, ‘bound variables’) we will regularly use ‘
T-bind’, ‘T-binding’ and
‘
T-bound’ in our discussion of T-relations (i. e. temporal relations expressed
by tenses Ϫ see 2.16.1).
It is important to see that T-binding is only possible within one and the
same temporal domain. A T-relation between a situation time and t
0
is not a
T-binding relation: in a clause using an absolute tense, the situation time is by
definition not T-bound (i. e. not temporally subordinated).
376 8. Temporal domains and relative tenses: theoretical foundations
II. Temporal domains: further terminological
apparatus
The one orientation time that is not T-bound by any other in a domain is the central
orientation time. The absolute zone in which it is located determines the overall tempo-
ral nature of the domain. Thus, in (He said) he would do it tomorrow, the situation
time referred to by would do forms part of a past domain, established by the past tense
form said (or, in the absence of a head clause in the past tense, by an unspecified
central orientation time located in the past zone). There is a certain correlation between
temporal subordination and syntactic subordination: for one, the use of a relative tense
to express T-simultaneity is excluded in a syntactically independent clause; for another,
the use of an absolute tense is excluded in some types of subclauses.
If a situation time is represented as T-simultaneous with another situation time, the
exact duration and temporal location of the T-bound situation time is unidirectionally
determined by the binding situation time. Thus, in I noticed at once that Jim was ill,
the situation time expressed by [Jim] was [ill] strictly coincides with the time of my
noticing it, which is merely a point (rather than a durative interval) in the past time-
sphere. Of course, the full situation time of Jim being ill will be extralinguistically

interpreted as much longer than, and as properly including, the time of me noticing it
and may possibly even include t
0
, which shows that W-simultaneity is a concept quite
different from T-simultaneity.
Sometimes the speaker does not use a relative tense form, expanding an already
established domain, but instead uses an absolute tense form, causing a shift of domain,
either within the same time-zone or from one time-zone to another. When the shift of
domain is within the same zone, the hearer may draw clues as to the temporal ordering
of the situation times from such sources as the presence of temporal adverbials, the
order of appearance of the clauses, the linguistic and extralinguistic context, his prag-
matic knowledge of the world or, as will be summarized below in 8.45, the (non)-
bounded representations of the situationsreferred to.
We speak of a shift of temporal perspective when a situation intended to be interpre-
ted as located in one absolute zone is referred to by a tense form that is characteristic
of another zone, as when the present tense is used with reference to the post-present
zone (e. g. They’re leaving soon), to the past zone (e. g. Napoleon strikes back)orto
the pre-present zone (e. g. I hear John has been promoted).
8.15 Central time of orientation (central orientation time)
The central orientation time is the one orientation time in the domain that
is not T-bound by any other orientation time in the domain but is directly
II. Temporal domains: further terminological apparatus 377
related to t
0
. In most cases the central orientation time is the situation time of
the clause which establishes the domain by using an absolute tense form (as in
He left yesterday). When an absolute-relative tense is used (e. g. He will have
left by tonight) the central orientation time is the unspecified post-present ori-
entation time (here ‘contained’ in the Adv-time specified by tonight) to which
the situation time is temporally subordinated. As noted in 2.42.2, the central

orientation time is the only orientation time of the domain that is put on the
time line when we represent the semantics of a tense (i. e. the tense structure)
by means of a tense diagram.
8.16 The temporal nature of the domain
The temporal nature of the domain is determined by the absolute zone in which
the central orientation time is located. Thus, in He said he would do it tomor-
row the reference is to a past domain, established by said. The form would do
locates its situation time in that past domain, even though the ‘doing it’ is W-
understood as lying in the post-present. Similarly, in He would do it tomorrow
(interpreted as free indirect speech), the situation time forms part of a past
domain because the unspecified central orientation time (ϭ the time of ‘his’
thinking, saying, etc.) which T-binds the situation time is located in the past
time-sphere. This definition of the nature of a temporal domain accords with
the claim that a relative tense expresses no temporal relation other than a
domain-internal relation between a T-bound situation time and a T-binding
orientation time. (As pointed out in 2.16.1, tenses express T-relations, not W-
relations.)
8.17 The definition of T-simultaneity
8.17.1 As noted in 2.16.1, the simultaneity relation expressed by a relative
tense form can be referred to as
T-simultaneity (‘tense simultaneity’) in order
to distinguish it from
W-simultaneity (‘world simultaneity’ Ϫ see also 8.18.1).
In section 2.17, T-simultaneity was defined as a relation of strict coincidence.
This is in keeping with the distinction made between a situation time (the time
of a ‘predicated situation’ Ϫ see 8.1.3) and the time of a full situation: what is
represented as T-simultaneous with an orientation time is always a situation
time, not the time of a full situation.
6
Thus, in I noticed at once that Jim

was ill, the situation time expressed by [Jim] was [ill] and represented as T-
simultaneous (coinciding) with the situation time of [I] noticed is only a subin-
6. Of course, if the situation is L-bounded, the situation time is also the time of the full
situation Ϫ see 2.12.2.