A.

THEORY AND ANALYSIS

1. SOT is a syntactic phenomenon: SOT is a facet of clausal subordination (it refers to the
conditions imposed on subordinate tenses by the main verb), which means that SOT is a syntactic
problem. Because SOT is sensitive to the type of subordination, complement clauses and relative clauses
differ regarding how (un)constrained they are in the use of tenses.

Ex: I saw the girl who is crying. (Relative clause  we can have a present tense under a past)
I saw the girl who was crying. (Relative clause  we can also have a past tense under a past)
I believed that the girl was crying. (Complement clause  we need a past tense under a past)
*I believed that the girl is crying.

The interpretation of tenses in embedded clauses depends on the type of subordination, which
shows that SOT is a syntactic problem. In the complement clause the past tense has a present-like
interpretation. In the relative clause, the past is interpreted as a past and cannot have a present-like
interpretation.

2. The parameters that account for variation regarding the syntax and interpretation of tenses in
subordinate clauses are the SOT parameter and the Double Access parameter (DAR=double access
reading).
The SOT parameter expresses a difference between sentences which have the same content,
but different tense, mood, forms. The English Past and Romanian Present express simultaneity with the
main clause.

Ex: He said that Sarah still worked at the grocery store. ( Past Simple)

El a spus ca Sarah inca lucreaza la supermarket. (Prezent)

The DAR parameter refers to the interpretation of the present tense in subordinate clauses,
with respect to ET and with respect to the UT. The DAR readings are made manifest in the acceptability
of the present-under-past morphology, which breaks the SOT parameter.

Ex: He said that Mary is pregnant.

El a spus ca Maria este gravida.

5. The English past Tense is aspectually transparent because it inherits the aspectual class of the
lexical VP.
Ex:

Lexical aspect:
a. John loved Mary. State
b. He broke the mirror. Achievement
c. He painted a portrait. Accomplishment
d. He danced at his sister’s wedding. Activity
e. Kim tapped on the glass. Semelfactive

Unlike the English past Tense, Romanian past tenses are aspectually sensitive (is not aspectually
transparent). The Romanian past tense morphemes not only indicate pastness but they reinterpret the
aspectual class of the lexical VP, marking the VP for imperfectivity (Imperfect) or perfectivity(Perfect
Simplu, Perfect Compus).

In Romanian, Perfectul Compus and Perfectul Simplu are alw ays perfective, while in Englis the
past tense can be both perfective and imperfective depending on the context.

Ex: Rom.: Am construit o casa.  perfective

Eng.: I built a house.  perfective

He lived in a hotel while he built (was building) the house.  imperfective