On focus and the perfect aspect

Abstract

This paper introduces two novel empirical observations about sentences containing narrow focus on the perfect participle (e.g., Esme has [BEEN]???? married). First, we show that these sentences are examples of universal perfects, which entail that the eventuality described by the VP holds at the reference time. Broad-focused versions of the same sentences, on the other hand, only give rise to experiential readings. This observation is not accounted for by prior accounts of the perfect, which predict that universal readings only arise in the presence of certain overt adverbials (Iatridou et al., 2001; Portner, 2003). Second, we observe that perfect sentences with focused participles imply that the eventuality has held for a long interval. We analyze this “length implication” as an instance of domain focus that associates with covert even exhaustification (cf. Chierchia, 2006), where the focused domain is of the left boundary of the perfect time span. These two observations lead us to the generalization that universal readings of the perfect are only licensed when the LB is (at least partially) specified. From this, we trace the unavailability of universal readings under broad focus to competition between the present perfect and the simple present: universal readings are ruled out when semantically equivalent to the simple present. Since, by specifying the LB, both adverbials and the length implication make a universal perfect more informative than the simple present, it can surface. In sum, we argue that a full account of the perfect requires reference to both focal alternatives and competition.