The semantic value of Finish and End

This part of the paper focuses on the comparison between end and finish, and

additionally it will also compare finish and complete. Altough very similar

semantically (they all express the coming to end of an event/ occurrence), the syntactic distribution of these aspectualizers point to some subtle differences between them. End and complete mostly appear with nominalizations (very rarely

both end and complete also allow for sentential complements); finish, on the

contrary often appears with both nominals and sentential complements (1- 2):

(1) They finished their conversation / having their conversation.

(2) They ended their conversation / *having their conversation. (Freed: 128)

In Freed’s interpretation, finish and end are different since although they share the

same presupposition (a prior event that has been brought to close), they have different consequences. Both (3) and (4) have as presupposition that a discussion had taken place; yet they imply different consequences. Sentence (3) with end

implies that the event is over but not necessarily completed; (4) with finish that the

event is completely over and also completed. According to Duffley (2006), finish

implies that ‘what one set out to do is done’ and also that ‘it connotes the completion of the final phase of the event in a process of elaboration’ (Webster’s 1968) (Duffley:101).

(3) They ended the discussion.

(4) They finished the discussion. (Freed: 128)

This difference between end and finish can be explained by the fact that they have

different relationships in relation to the temporal structure of the event: unlike end

which refers to the last temporal segment of the nucleus, finish refers to the coda of

the event named in the complement. This implies different consequences for sentences with end and finish: end expressses that the event is put an end to but not

175

completed, finish, by contrast signals that the event is over and completed. As finish refers to the coda of the event this allows finish to refer not only to the

temporality of the event but to the completion of the event itself (3) it is the event of discussion that is completed); on the contrary, in sentences with end it is usually

the time of the discussion that is brought to a close.

Dixon (2005) also notes that finish implies the complete termination of the

complement event; according to Dixon this might be explained by the fact that

finish expresses object orientation. That is, in (5) the event is seen as terminated

since the wall is painted entirely:

(5) John finished (painting) the wall on Tuesday. (Dixon:180)

An important difference between end and finish is with respect to intentionality,

more specifically the involvement of the subject in the event of the sentence (Freed 1979). End and finish in sentences (6-7) lead to different interpretation of the

events expressed in the complement:

(6) They ended Peter’s and Mary’s argument.

(7) They finished Peter’s and Mary’s argument. (Freed: 129)

Sentence (6) has the interpretation that they put and end to Peter’s and Mary’s argument without taking part in it (caused the argument to end), (7), by contrast, has as a consequence that they took part actively in the argument (the subjects have participated in the argument). As Freed (1979) notes finish requires that the subject

have some role in the completion of the event (be agentive); this may explain why (8) with an inanimate subject results as ungrammatical. In (9) and (10) the subjects can be considered to take part in the completion of the event; in (9) the subject is an acting agent; similar is the case in (10) where, although in a more restricted sense the subject may also be considered to contribute to the termination of the event (this makes (10) grammatical). Another example is (11); this sentence, although it contains an inanimate subject receives an agentive interpretation (the subject takes an active part in cooking).

176

(8) *Her teeth finished decaying.

(9) He finished his work and went home.

(10) The leaves finished falling last week. (Freed: 130)

(11) She looked around her appreciatively. "You've done a lot since I was last here." "Oh, not really. Just put up a few pictures and so on. I suppose I ought to organise some curtains, but I never shut them so it's hardly a priority. I'm not exactly overlooked." He walked round the end of the units and held out his hand. "Come and sit down for a minute while the lasagne finishes cooking." He sat on the settee and tugged her down beside him, leaning over and sniffing her hair.

(BNC)

As distinct from finish (which has a more restricted use with inanimate subjects), end occurs freely with inanimate subjects; sentences with end very often have a

causative reading, leaving the active participation of the subject in the prior- occurrence of the event unspecified. Examples of this are (12a) and (12b), which have a causative reading but where the agent that has caused the action to cease is not specified. Sentences (13a) and (13b) show that finish does not allow for

constructions where the subject is inanimate and does not acquire any agentive role. Finish does not seem either to imply such a causality as end does. This is also

shown by the fact that finish does not appear with ‘accidentally’ or ‘purposely’

(14):

(12a) The war ended. / (12b) The program ended. (Someone caused the war and the program to end)

(13a) * The war finished. / (13b) * The program finished.

(14) He *accidentally/purposely finished the conversation. (Freed: 131)

In some cases, the meanings of end and finish are very close (in (15) no obvious

difference can be detected between the use of end and finish since both verbs have

the same consequence - the letter is written); according to Freed this is due to the aspectual nature of the object (nouns expressing spatial and temporal beginnings and endings).

177

(15) He ended / finished the letter. (Freed: 131)

Being an achievement itself, finish often expresses the shift of an event (e.g. an

accomplishment) to an achievement reading; in such cases the event in question is seen as an instantaneous one (Piñon (2006), Dowty (1979) Pustejovsky and Bouillon (1996). An example of this is (16), where ‘buying the book’ coincides with ‘Rebecca’s signing her name’; the sentence expresses an event which is seen to be instantaneous). In such cases the temporal phase of finish overlaps the

temporal phase of the complement construction, since the event that has come to an end is seen as momentary64.

(16) Technically, Rebecca bought the book only when she finished signing her name on the credit card slip. (Piñon 2006: 21)

The event that appears as a complement of finish is often seen as a progressive one

so that the cessation can be understood to be of a particular ongoing event (Givón, 1993); (17) can be seen as a single occurrence that lasts for some time, sentence (18) would also sound strange in a habitual interpretation; it is rather to be understood as a single occurrence than a habitual one.

Although more rarely, finish can also express the end of a more repetitive or

habitual event; in sentence (19) making movies is seen as a habitual occurrence taking place at different times; in this sentence the use of finish is acceptable since

her making movies can be interpreted as implying a certain goal or result state (the number of films that are produced).

(17) She finished reading her book (she was reading it, then she finished) (18) She finished reading comic books (she was reading some, then she finished) (*she used to read them, then she quit). (Givón 1993)

64_{Smith and Escobedo (2001) and Fanego (2004) categorize verb phrases according to the degree of}

overlap they express. They contend that while certain verbs express a conceptual overlap where the latter actions happen simultaneously with the first one (e.g. verbs like ‘keep’, and also ‘enjoy’, ‘don’t mind’ etc.) there are also verbs that evoke prior rather than actual temporal overlap; this is also the case with the verbs finish, complete and also stop.

178

(19) A League Of Their Own is left heartbroken when she finishes making movies … because she keeps falling in love with her leading men. Stunning Laura, who shot to fame alongside Patrick Swayze in Point Break and Robin Williams in Cadillac Man, admits: "I'm forever falling in love with my co-stars. But they're always married or spoken for. (BNC)