Leopold wrote:Normally, one would think that tenses could have nothing to do with anything but time.
And there is a difference between "tenses having nothing to do with time" and "the primary aspect of tense stems is to convey aspects and not time". Primary is not only.
This is quite intriguing for me, so, as I don't think it possible to get Stanley Porter's book, is it possible to find anything about it in the Net?
Thanks a lot
I mention the other authors in the context of 'primary aspect of tense stems' only to point out that there is a range of thought on this matter. It seems to extend from those who think that tense has nothing to do with time, to those who think it is primarily aspectual, secondarily temporal. I suppose there may still be some who think that tense is primarily temporal, but I am not aware of any.
See reference Bert posted. (Thanks Bert!)