Let us first consider a method. How do you expect me to prove narrator's
deictic center? Psychoanalysis? No.
What I can do - and what is the standard method of proof - is to show that
the observed facts are consistent with the hypothesis. Thus, for every
example of the supposedly irregular use of tenses (such as Michael's) I have
to show that:
a. The deictic center shift (assuming it happened) explains the usage of
tenses, and
b. That such shift is possible.
To prove b), I invoke Russian and English examples, and show that such
shifts are not alien to human mentality.
If you think of any different method of proof acceptable to you and otherIt is up to you to find a way to prove your own speculations. If there isn't one, your speculations are baseless.
correspondents, let me know.
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.