It's either sloppiness or else narrative refocusing of the deictic
centre, though that would be more likely if it were "she would be
in hospital". All the same, you *can* say:
Next day she was in hospital.
--- which contrasts with "Tomorrow she was in hospital" but
possibly not with "The next day she was in hospital", so perhaps
"next year" has two readings, one where it is analogous to
"next day" and one (the one you were thinking of) where it is
analogous to "tomorrow".
--And.
> Richard,
> I think it's sloppiness, and ought to be "The next year". Without the
> article "next year" has to be deictic, i.e. taking 'now' as base line.
> Dick
At 15:16 06/04/2004, you wrote:
>Hello everybody,
>The other day I came across such a sentence:
>Next year she was in hospital and then she had died. Why not "the next
>year ...
>and ... died ? How would you account for all this ?
>Is there any justification or is it due to some sloppiness of the writer ?
>Best wishes to all of you
>Richard
>
>O SAPO já está livre de vírus com a Panda Software, fique você também!
>Clique em: http://antivirus.sapo.pt
Dick (Richard) Hudson, FBA
Dept of Phonetics and Linguistics,
University College London, Gower Street, London WC1E 6BT
020 7679 3152; fax 020 7383 4108; www.phon.ucl.ac.uk/home/dick/home.htm
|