On the systematic misconceptualization of aspect East and West leading aspectology astray 

Abstract.

ON THE SYSTEMATIC MISCONCEPTUALIZATION OF ASPECT EAST AND WEST LEADING ASPECTOLOGY ASTRAY

Krasimir Kabakciev

Arts, Humanities and Education Division, Athens Institute for Education and Research, Athens, Greece.

Abstract

Background: Despite decades of research, the grammatical category of aspect remains one of the most misinterpreted in both Eastern and Western linguistic traditions. In particular, Soviet and post-Soviet linguistics have perpetuated dogmatic views that overly associate aspect with verb morphology, often neglecting sentence-level mechanisms and the universal nature of aspect. Conversely, Western theories, though more open to modern frameworks, have introduced other misconceptions, such as the incremental-theme model.

Purpose: This paper aims to critically reassess prevailing misconceptions about verbal and compositional aspect, identify the consequences of Soviet dogmatism and Western oversimplifications, and advocate for a radical reform of aspectology based on compositional principles.

Results: The study demonstrates that aspect is not a purely verbal category but a universal sentence-level phenomenon shaped by interactions between nominal and verbal components. It introduces the concept of article-aspect interplay and argues that many traditional grammars and ESL teaching methods fail to reflect this interaction.

Discussion: The paper argues that a conceptual shift is needed in both Eastern and Western linguistics. It highlights how political ideologies have hindered theoretical development in the East, while theoretical fragmentation and superficial treatments have obstructed deeper insights in the West. Through extensive cross-linguistic evidence, the paper encourages a move away from outdated models and toward a unified understanding of aspect.

Keywords: aspectology, theory of compositional aspect, compositional aspect, verbal aspect, biaspectuality, Soviet and post-Soviet misconceptions of aspect.

Vitae

Krasimir Kabakciev is a Doctor of Sciences, Deputy Director of the Arts, Humanities and Education Division, Athens Institute for Education and Research. The scientific interests: TAM (tense-aspect-modality) across languages, aspectology, compositional aspect, verbal aspect, biaspectuality across languages, SOT (sequence of tenses), nominal determination across languages, article-aspect interplay, aspect-case interplay, lexical semantics, terminology, etc.

Correspondence: kkabakciev@gmail.com 

Article.

References. 

1. Abraham, W. & Leiss, E. (2012). The case differential: syntagmatic versus paradigmatic case – its status in synchrony and diachrony. Transactions of the Philological Society 110(3), 316–341.

2. Bakardzhieva-Morikang S. & Kabakčiev K. (2024). Ukrainian biaspectuality: an instantiation of compositional aspect in a verbal-aspect language. East European Journal of Psycholinguistics 11(1), 28–46.

3. Bezpoyasko etal. (1993). Bezpoyasko, O. K., Horodensʹka, V., Rusanivsʹkyy, V. M. Hramatyka ukraïnsʹkoï movy. Morfolohiya [Grammar of the Ukrainian language. Morphology]. Kyïv: Lybydʹ.

4.   Bulatović, V. (2013). Modern theories of aspect and Serbian EL2 learners. Belgrade English Language & Literature Studies V, 65–79.

5.   Bulatović, V. (2020). Thinking for speaking in the right aspect – on whether modern English grammars can do more. Revista Española de Lingüística Aplicada 33(2), 384–415.

6.   Bulatović, V. (2022). Aspect semantics and ESL article use. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching 60(2), 491–521.

7.   Bulgarian grammar (1983). Gramatika na savremennia balgarski knizhoven ezik. Tom 2. Morfologia [Grammar of modern literary Bulgarian. Volume I. Morphology]. Sofia: Bulgarian Academy of Sciences.

8.   Carlson, L. (1981). Aspect and quantification. Tedeschi, P., Zaenen, A. (eds.). Aspect and quantification. Syntax and semantics. Vol. 14. Tense and aspect. New York: Academic Press, 31–64.

9.   Comrie, B. (1976). Aspect: an introduction to the study of verbal aspect and related problems. New York: Cambridge University Press.

10.  Czardybon, A. & Fleischhauer, J. (2014). Definiteness and perfectivity in telic incremental theme predications. Gerland, D., Horn, C., Latrouite, A., Ortmann, A. (eds.), Meaning and grammar of nouns and verbs. Düsseldorf: Düsseldorf University Press, 373–400.

11.  Declerck, R. (2006). The grammar of the English verb phrase. Volume 1: The grammar of the English tense system. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gryuter.

12.  Dickey, S. M. (2024). Russian aspect from a cognitive linguistic perspective. Russian Linguistics 48(11).

13.  Dimitrova, D. (2021) Aspect coercion in Greek aorist and perfect verb forms. Studies in Greek Linguistics 41. Thessaloniki: Institute of Modern Greek Studies, 45–53.

14.  Dimitrova, D. & Kabakčiev, K. (2021). Compositional and verbal aspect in Greek: the aorist-imperfect distinction and the article-aspect interplay. Athens Journal of Philology 8(3), 181–206.

15.  Dimitrova etal. (2025, forthcoming). Dimitrova, D., Shabashvili, G., Kabakčiev, K. On the identicalness of some grammatical entities in Greek, Bulgarian and Georgian: triggered by language contact or not? Paper read at the Third International Conference on Language Contact in the Balkans and Asia Minor. Thessaloniki: Institute of Modern Greek Studies. https://ins.web.auth.gr/images/banners/PROGRAM_2023.pdf

16.  Dowty, D.R. (1979). Word meaning and Montague grammar: the semantics of verbs and times in generative semantics and in Montague’s PTQ. Dordrecht: Reidel.

17.  Fenn, P. (2010). A student’s advanced grammar of English. Tübingen: Narr Francke.

18.  Filip, H. (2000). Nominal and verbal semantic structure – analogies and interactions. Language Sciences 23, 453–501.

19.  Filip, H. (2017). The semantics of perfectivity. Italian Journal of Linguistics 29(1), 167–200.

20.  Fleischhauer, J. & Czardybon, A. (2016) The role of verbal prefixes and particles in aspectual composition. Studies in Language 40(1), 176–203.

21.  Friedrich, P. (1974), On aspect theory and Homeric aspect. International Journal of American Linguistics. Memoirs 28 and 29. 40(4): Part 2, 1–44.

22.  Ginzburg, M. (2009) Problema dvovydovykh diiesliv u fakhovykh tekstakh ta shlyakhy ii rozviazannia. Simonenko, L. O. (ed.). Ukrainska terminolohiia i suchasnist [The problem of biaspectual verbs in professional texts and ways to solve it. Ukrainian terminology and modernity]. Kyiv National Economic University, 290–294.

23.  Haxhillari, H. (2024). The category of determiner in Albanian. Athens Journal of Philology 11(4), 327–338.

24.  Heinämäki, O. (1974/1978). Semantics of English temporal connectives. Indiana University Linguistics Club.

25.  Heinämäki, O. (1984). Aspect in Finnish. Aspect bound: a voyage into the realm of Germanic, Slavonic and Finno-Ugrian aspectology, de Groot, C. & Tommola, H. (eds.), Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter Mouton, 153–178.

26.  Huddleston, R. & Pullum, G. K. (2002). The Cambridge grammar of the English language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

27.  Issatschenko, A. V. (1974). Review of T. Pettersson, On Russian predicates. A theory of case and aspect. Foundations of Language 11, 141–147.

28.  Jakobson, R. (1957). Shifters, verbal categories and the Russian verb. Roman Jakobson. Selected writings, III. The Hague: Mouton.

29.  Janda, L. (2004). A metaphor in search of a source domain: the categories of Slavic aspect. Cognitive Linguistics, 15(4), 471–527.

30.  Janda, L. (2007). What makes Russian bi-aspectual verbs special. Divjak, D. & Kochańska, A. (eds.). Cognitive paths into the Slavic domain. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter, 83–110.

31.  Janda, L. (2008). Semantic motivations for aspectual clusters of Russian verbs. Bethin, C. (ed.). American Contributions to the 14th International Congress of Slavists, Ohrid, September 2008. Vol. 1: Linguistics. Bloomington: Slavica, 181–196.

32.  Kabakčiev, K. (1984). The article and the aorist/imperfect distinction in Bulgarian: an analysis based on cross-language ‘aspect’ parallelisms. Linguistics 22, 643–672.

33.  Kabakčiev, K. (2000). Aspect in English: a ‘common-sense’ view of the interplay between verbal and nominal referents. Dordrecht: Springer.

34.  Kabakčiev, K. (2017). An English Grammar: main stumbling blocks for Bulgarians learning English. Stuttgart: Mariana Kabakchiev Verlag.

35.  Kabakčiev, K. (2019). On the history of compositional aspect: vicissitudes, issues, prospects. Athens Journal of Philology 6(3), 201–224.

36.  Kabakčiev, K. (2021a). Compositional disambiguation of biaspectuality in languages with verbal aspect: on Russian and Bulgarian data. Atiner’s Conference Paper Series No LNG2021-2723, 1–23.

37.  Kabakčiev, K. (2021b). Mapping temporal features between nominals and verbs in English and the article-aspect interplay diachronically. Belgrade English Language and Literature Studies 13, 29–57.

38.  Kabakčiev, K. (2023a). After Verkuyl’s discovery aspect is no longer a mystery, but aspectology needs a reform. Review article: Henk Verkuyl, The compositional nature of tense, mood and aspect, Athens Journal of Philology 10(3), 247–274.

39.  Kabakčiev, K. (2023b). On the temporal values of situation-participant NP referents mapped from Bulgarian perfects with aorist and imperfect participles. East European Journal of Psycholinguistics 10(1), 48–60.

40.  Kabakčiev, K. (2023c). On conceptualization and misconceptualization of compositional aspect in Bulgarian publications. Contrastive Linguistics 48(1–2), 42–54.

41.  Kabakčiev, K. (2024). Use of language and linguistics as political weapons by the Bulgarian communist regime 1944-1989: five case studies. Language: Codification, Competence, Communication 11(1), 59–71.

42.  Kabakčiev, K. (2025). On the gigantic fallacy that there is no Slavic-like aspect in the Romance languages and aspect resides only in the past domain. Athens Journal of Philology 12(1), 9–30.

43.  Karagjosova, E. (2024). The verbal expression of events of change in Bulgarian. Glossa 9(1), 1–42.

44.  Krifka, M. (1989). Nominal reference, temporal constitution and quantification in event semantics. Bartsch, R., van Benthem, J., van Emde Boas, P. (eds.), Semantics and contextual expressions, 75–115. Dordrecht: Foris.

45.  Krifka, M. (1992). Thematic relations as links between nominal reference and temporal constitution. Sag, I. A., Szabolcsi, A. (eds.), Lexical matters, 29–53. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publication.

46.  Krifka, M. (1998). The origins of telicity. Rothstein, S. (ed.), Events and Grammar, 197–235. Dordrecht: Kluwer.

47.  Kutsarova, S. (2025). An attempt at outlining the major features of compositional aspect in Modern Turkish. Athens Journal of Philology 12(1), 49–74.

48.  Langacker, R. W. (2008). Cognitive grammar: a basic introduction. Oxford University Press.

49.  Leiss, E. (2000). Artikel und Aspekt. Die grammatischen Muster von Definitheit. Berlin: de Gruyter.

50.  Lessa, A., Salgado, M. (2019). Aspect in the English language: a comparative analysis of form and meaning in traditional descriptive grammars. DELTA 35(4), 1–17.

51.  Lindstedt, J. (1986). Zashto se zapazvat svarshenite imperfekti i nesvarshenite aoristi v balgarskiya ezik? [Why are perfective imperfects and imperfective aorists preserved in Bulgarian?]. Ezik i literatura XVI, 205–212.

52.  MacDonald J. E. (2012). Nouns affect aspect syntactically. Choi, J. E., Hogue, A., Punske, J., Tat, D., Schertz, J. Trueman, A. (eds.), Proceedings of the 29th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics. Tucson: Coyote Papers. Working Papers in Linguistics 20, 73–80.

53.  Markkanen, R. (1979). Tense and aspect in English and Finnish. A contrastive study. Yvaskyla.

54.  Martin et al. (2020). Martin, F., Demirdache, H., del Real, I. G., van Hout, A., Kazanina, N. Children’s non-adult like interpretations of telic predicates across languages. Linguistics 58(5), 1447–1500.

55.  Mourelatos, A. P. D. (1981). Events, processes and states. Tedeschi, P., Zaenen, A. (eds.). Aspect and quantification. Syntax and semantics. Vol. 14. Tense and aspect. New York: Academic Press, 191–212.

56.  Padučeva, E. (2004). “Nakopitel’ effekta” i russkaja aspektologija [“Effect accumulator” and Russian aspectology]. Voprosy jazykoznanija 5, 46–57.

57.  Pavliuk, N. (2010). Contrastive grammar of English and Ukrainian. Donetsk.

58.  Pchelintseva, O. (2022). Aspectual properties of Ukrainian verbal action nouns. Russian Linguistics 46, 167–180.

59.  Plyushch, M. Y. (2010). Hramatyka ukrayinsʹkoyi movy. Morfemika. Slovotvir. Morfolohiya [Grammar of the Ukrainian language. Morphemics, Word formation. Morphology]. Kiev: Slovo.

60.  Russian Grammar I (1980). Russkaya grammatika. Tom I. Fonetika, fonologiya, udarenie, intonatsiya, slovvobrazovanie, morfologiya [Russian grammar. Volume I. Phonetics, phonology, stress, intonation, word formation, morphology]. Moscow: Nauka.

61.  Russian Grammar II (1980). Russkaya grammatika. Tom II. Sintaksis [Russian grammar. Volume II. Syntax]. Moscow: Nauka.

62.  Schopf, A. (1974). Der englische Aspekt. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft.

63.  Shabashvili, G. & Kabakčiev K. (2021). Verbal aspect vis-à-vis compositional: a typological case study of Georgian, against Russian and English data. Studies in Greek Linguistics 42. Thessaloniki, 375–384.

64.  Shanidze, A. (1980). Works III. Tbilisi: Tbilisi University Press.

65.  Sokolova, S. (2016). Aspektual’naia paradigma bazovogo glagola kak ego klassifikatsionnii priznak [Aspectual paradigm of the base verb as its classificational feature]. Scando-Slavica, 62(1), 79–99.

66.  Sokolova, S. (2020a). Aspektual’na simetriia ta asimetriia v ukrainskii i rosiiskii movah [Aspectual symmetry and asymmetry in Ukrainian and Russian]. Language: Codification, Competence, Communication 2(3), 33–46.

67.  Sokolova, S. (2020b). Aspektualʹni katehoriyi ukrayinsʹkoho diyeslova [Aspectual categories of the Ukrainian verb]. Knyha-plyus. Kiev.

68.  Tatevosov, S. G. (2015). Glagol’nye klassy i tipologija akcional’nosti [Verb classes and typology of actionality]. Moscow: Yazyki slavyanskoj kul’tury.

69.  Vendler, Z. (1957). Verbs and times. The Philosophical Review 66, 143–160.

70.  Verkuyl, H. (1972). On the compositional nature of the aspects. 1971. Dordrecht: Reidel.

71.  Verkuyl, H. (1993). A Theory of aspectuality. The interaction between temporal and atemporal structure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

72.  Verkuyl, H. (1999). H (1999) Aspectual issues: studies on time and quantity. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

73.  Verkuyl, H. (2022). The Compositional nature of tense, mood and aspect. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

74.  Vounchev, B. (2007). Aspektialnite harakteristiki v novogratskiya ezik – sredstva za izrazyavane i semantika [Aspectual characteristics in Modern Greek – expression devices and semantics]. Sofia: Sofia Uiversity Press.

75.  Vykhovanetsʹ, I. R. (1993). Hramatyka ukrayinsʹkoyi movy. Syntaksys [Grammar of the Ukrainian language. Syntax]. Kiev: Lybidʹ.

76.  Zydatiss, Z. (1976). Tempus und Aspekt im Englischunterricht. Kronenberg: Scriptor.