REPROSPECTION AND PROSPECTION OF TEXTUAL TIME MARKERS

Shamsinur Aslanova Veysal,

Email: aslanovashamsinur71@gmail.com

ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2394-0137

PhD in Philology, Associate Professor

Head of the German Languages Department a

Azerbaijan University of Languages

DOI: https://doi.org/10.17721/StudLing2026.28.171-183

PDF  (ENGLISH)

ABSTRACT

This study addresses the functional properties of textual temporal markers, with a particular emphasis on the categories of retrospection and prospection. Drawing on T. Givón’s theory of thematic and referential cohesion and integrating recent advancements in cognitive linguistics (2015–2025), retrospection is interpreted as a grammatical text category that refers back to previously introduced information, ensuring textual unity. Prospection, in contrast, is presented as a discursive mechanism that directs the reader’s attention to forthcoming segments and shapes interpretative expectations.

The methodology is based on an integrative approach, incorporating discourse analysis and a systematic comparative examination of specific literary fragments. Unlike previous studies that rely solely on theoretical frameworks, this research provides a detailed linguistic analysis of selected text samples to demonstrate how temporal markers operate in practice. The findings reveal that retrospective structures are predominantly realized implicitly, whereas prospective signals are often expressed through explicit temporal and deictic means.

Particular attention is given to the interaction between temporal adverbials, tense forms, and anaphoric expressions. The results demonstrate that temporal markers do not only localize events but also perform essential pragmatic functions in regulating reader perception. By analyzing contemporary literary examples alongside classical ones, the study bridges the gap between traditional grammar and modern discourse pragmatics. Future research perspectives include a comparative analysis of these markers across different discourse types.

Keywords: retrospection; prospection; temporal markers; text cohesion; referential cohesion; anaphora; deixis; text grammar; narrative time; information structure.

References:

  1. Barnes, (2011). The sense of an ending. London, England: Jonathan Cape. (160 p.).
  2. De Beaugrande,, & Dressler, W. (1981). Introduction to text linguistics. London, England: Longman. (270 p.).
  3. Fleischman, (1990). Tense and narrativity: From medieval performance to modern fiction. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press. (443 p.).
  4. Galperin, R. (1981). Text as an object of linguistic study. Progress Publishers. (139 p.).
  5. Givón, (1983). Topic continuity in discourse: A quantitative cross-language study. Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins. (492 p.). https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.3
  6. Givón, (2001). Syntax: An introduction (Vol. 1). Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins. (500 p.). https://doi.org/10.1075/z.105
  7. Givón, (2020). The genesis of syntactic complexity: Diachrony, ontogeny, neuro-cognition, evolution. Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins. (358 p.). https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.218
  8. Halliday, A. K., & Hasan, R. (1976). Cohesion in English. London, England: Longman. (374 p.).
  9. Halliday, A. K., & Hasan, R. (1985). Language, context, and text: Aspects of language in a social-semiotic perspective. Victoria, Australia: Deakin University Press. (126 p.).
  10. Hawkins, (2015). The girl on the train. New York, NY: Riverhead Books. (336 p.).
  11. Ishiguro, (2014). The remains of the day (Reprint ed.). London, England: Faber & Faber. (258 p.). (Original work published 1989).
  12. Labov, (1972). Language in the inner city: Studies in the Black English vernacular. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press. (412 p.).
  13. Levinson, C. (1983). Pragmatics. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. (420 p.).
  14. Lyons, (1977). Semantics (Vols. 1–2). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. (897 p.).
  15. Stockwell, (2020). Cognitive poetics: An introduction (2nd ed.). London, England: Routledge. (214 p.). https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429324673
  16. Tartt, (2013). The goldfinch. New York, NY: Little, Brown and Company. (771 p.).
  17. Zeman, (2017). The evolution of perspective: The role of retrospection and prospection in narrative structuring. Journal of Pragmatics, 110, 43–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2017.01.008