Cite this article as: Anyanjor, T. A. (2026). Linguistic analysis of the influence of English future tense on decision-making. Sokoto Journal of Linguistics and Communication Studies (SOJOLICS), 2(1), 283-293. https://doi.org/10.36349/sojolics.2026.v02i01.025
By
Tina Akunna Anyanjor (PhD)
General
Studies Unit, Faculty of Humanities,
Claretian
University of Nigeria, Maryland, Nekede, Owerri, Imo State
Abstract
The
English tense deals with the relationship between the actions carried out by
the verb and the time they occurred. Languages across the globe differ widely
on how the future is couched. The objective of this study is to analyse
linguistically, how the use of English future tense can influence an
individual’s decisions in taking actions. The study is anchored on Sapir-Whorf
theory of linguistic determinism, as theoretical framework. The population of
the study was drawn from both secondary and tertiary education institutions in
Owerri, Imo State, Nigeria, using purposive random sampling. The data for this
study were sourced from questionnaires, unstructured open-ended oral
interviews, books and internet print materials. The data were analysed
descriptively and statistically, using content analysis, simple percentage and
Linkert four-scale coding. The result reveals that the use of English future
tense has an influence on the speaker’s decision-making, as there as a
relationship between grammar and cognition. The study concluded that languages,
such as English, with obligatory future time reference led their speakers to
engage in less immediate-oriented actions.
Keywords: Language, future tense,
decision-making, individuals, influence
1.0
Introduction
1.1
Background of Study
Language
plays a vital role in shaping how humans think. It not only serves as a mirror
of thought, but fundamentally, as a tool for thought (Cook, 1991). According to
Hudson (2003), the languages people speak have an influence on how they think
or view the world around them. In the English language, for instance, a male
sibling of one’s parents is referred to as an uncle. However, saying the same
thing in any Nigerian language, such as Igbo, Yoruba, Hausa, Kanuri, Efik or
Kalabari, and so on, is very difficult. The reason is that an uncle in any
Nigerian language could be an uncle by birth, or a senior member of the family
or village, one’s school teacher, and so on. The distinctions are primarily
based on the culture of the people, how they think or feel about things, and
how they make reference to things.
The
structure of the language also affects how, and how much information is
conveyed. The place of the future as an area of research has currently gained
prominence in English language studies mainly because of the relationship
between grammatical tense and decision-making. In the English language, tense
expresses the time of an action which are expressed in the present, past and
the future. These expressions, though grammatical in forms, can as well shape
the speaker’s perception of time, assess outcomes, and make decisions.
The
English future tense may influence the way people think about future outcomes
when making decisions. Languages differ in the way speakers grammatically mark
future events. Furthermore, the English language would need the speakers to
make a distinction between present and future events. When future actions are
couched differently from the present, individuals will likely see the future as
more distant or less immediate. For instance, the uses of a future marker like
‘will’ or ‘is going to’, as in: ‘It will rain tomorrow’, to mean that it will
rain in time to come.
Given
a global position of the English language as a language of education,
communication, research and so on, an understanding of how English tense shapes
decision-making is notably significant. This study, which is a linguistic
analysis of the influence of English future tense on the decisions people make
will go a long way shading more light on the relationship between language
structure, cognition, and human behaviour. This study contributes to the body
of knowledge to linguistic scholarship and interdisciplinary discussions on the
way language discreetly influences the way individuals plan, take decisions in
everyday life.
In
writing this paper, the following steps were taken: a theoretical and empirical
review of related literature on language and future-time reference, theoretical
framework, methodology, data presentation and analysis, discussion of findings,
recommendations and conclusion.
1.2
Statement of the Problem
Agreeably,
the English language is not only a medium of communication; it also defines how
individuals perceive time, which could refer to the present, the past or the
future. Despite the functional impact of the English tense in communication,
their grammatical differentiations which may shape an individual’s perception
of time and evaluate future actions, many studies have not been carried out on
it linguistically. Previous studies such as Chen (2013) were a cross-country
work in OEDC countries, which centred on savings, retirement, smoking habits,
sex and weight. Hence, there remains a gap in comprehending the degree to which
grammatical expression of time in English affects thought processes, especially
those affecting future consequences. Without enough linguistic analysis, there
may be difficulty in determining how the use of tense may influence a person’s
view of long-term outcomes when making decisions. So, because of inadequate
linguistic investigation into how the English future tense may have influence
on decisions individuals may make, this study investigates linguistically, how
English future tense can influence the decisions individuals make. This study
contributes to more understanding of the relationship between language thought
and human behaviour.
1.3
Research Questions
The
following questions guided the inquiry:
1.
What is the relationship between language and the way people think?
2.
To what extent could language use influence the decisions you make?
3.
To what extent could language affect your ability to make choices?
4.
To what degree could the use of the auxiliary verb ‘will’, influence the
decisions you make?
2.
Literature Review
Aarts
(2008; 2018) points out that most languages speak about time, and that the
English language has a way it allows the speakers to refer to situations that
are located in time or unfolding over time, or to situations that are
hypothetical or have not been actualised. The source further states that the
English grammar encodes the notion of time in a number of ways, one of which is
through tense, namely the present tense and the past tense, and these are
principally implemented through the use of inflectional endings (for example,
walk/walked). The source reports that unlike many other languages, English does
not have dedicated inflectional forms of the verb to encode future time. Aarts
emphasises that the future in English can be talked about in different ways.
For example, using the present tense verb form, which he refers to as the
‘present futurate’ because it is used in situations where the future is seen as
being scheduled in some way as the example below makes clear:
5.
He flies to Rome tomorrow
Aarts
further points out that paradoxically, the past tense can be used in making
future references. This he calls past futurate. For example:
6.
“When he called me last Monday, he was going to send me the document on
Tuesday”.
Another
way of talking about the future is by using the modal auxiliary verbs such as
‘will’ and ‘shall’ (Aarts, 2008; 2018). For instance:
7.
I will call you when I get back.
8.
Ishall write to you again once I have the results.
Aarts
points out that the modal verbs express the meaning of ‘intention’. The
difference between the two verbs is that ‘will’ is much more common than
‘shall’.
Anyanjor
(2023) aligns with Aarts (2008; 2018) that languages differ extensively in both
how and when they make future reference. The authors agree that English mainly
marks the future with either the future tense marker, ‘will’and ‘shall’, which
are modal auxiliary verbsor forms of verb ‘to be’, as in ‘be talking to’.
Nwokedi (2003) buttresses Anyanjor’s (2023) and Aarts’ (2008; 2018) views as he
states that the auxiliary verbs ‘will’ and ‘shall’ are used to indicate future
actions. He adds that the future tense can be expressed in a number of other ways
such as the following: by using the form ‘be + infinitive’; the present
progressive; the simple present; the form ‘be’ + ‘about to’ and an infinitive;
and by using the form ‘be to’ and an infinitive. The following sentences are
used as examples, respectively:
9.
Chidi is going to succeed.
10.
We are electing new leaders soon.
11.
The plane departs at noon.
12.
They are about to conduct general elections.
13.
Emeka is to begin his new house soon.
In
contrast, some languages mark future events using a much larger and diverse
setof constructions. For example, Bittner (2005) records that Kalaallisut (West
Greenlandic), hasat least 28 distinct constructions which mark future time:
The
linguist, Roman Jakobson explains how languages differ in how speakers couch
the timing of events (tense) in languages as: Languages differ essentially in
what they must convey and not in what they may convey (Jakobson, 1956). The
author exemplifies thus: If I want to explain to an English-speaking colleague
that I will attend a seminar later today, I could not say ‘I go to a seminar’.
English grammar would oblige me to say: ‘I (will go, am going, have to go) to a
seminar’. In this way, it is inherent of English to compel its speakers to
divide time between the present and future in a way some other languages do
not. However, it does not imply that speakers of such languages do not
comprehend the distinction between present and future tenses.
Ogbulogo
(1997) distinguishes between English modal auxiliary verbs ‘will’ and ‘shall’.
He explains that ‘will’ and its past tense form ‘would’ express willingness,
intention and in insistence. For willingness, ‘will’ is used for all persons –
first, second and third persons as in:
14.
I will let you go (that is, I am willing to let you go).
15.
They will do the job (that is, I know that they are willing to do the job).
The
source further states that ‘will’ can be used to express intention in sentences
like:
16.
I will buy him the books.
17.
We will visit the zoo.
‘Will’,
can also be used to show a prediction of an action that normally follows from
inference, as in the following sentences:
18.
The food will be enough for the students (based on the quantity and the number
of guests).
19.
Harmattan will come in December (as is usually the case).
Dahl
(2000) specifically distinguishes between languages which he refers to as
futureless, and those which are not. Future-time reference (FTR) studies both
when and how languages expect users to mark the timing of events (Dahl, 2000).
The author refers to futureless languages as those that do not bearthe
compulsory grammaticalised future-time reference in main clause
prediction-based contexts. Thieroff (2000) adopts a future-time rule from
typological linguistics that separates languages into two major groups: weak
and strong FTR. Thieroff advocates an unbiased language of weak-FTR, for
futureless languages, and denotes non-weak-FTR languages as strong-FTR. The
author remarks that a central characteristic of the weak versus strong FTR
categorisation is the difference in the obligatory marking of future events.
This criterion separates those languages that require future events from those
that do not.
Schiffrin
(1981) points out that it is a widespread belief among linguists across
languages, both in writing and discussions, that narrating the past in the
present makes a story more vivid and immediate by moving past events out of
their original time frame and into the moment of speaking. Schriffrin narrates
that jokes are nearly always told in the present tense, as in ‘a man walks (not
walked) into a bar’. This is frequently attributed to a need for proximity and
surprise in successful humour. The author points out that, if talking about
temporally distant events in the present tense makes them feel more immediate,
languages which force this way of speaking may make future events appear nearby.
On
another note, Dancygier & Eve (2009) report what some linguists call
distancing. This means where past or future tenses are used rather than the
present tense to show that a current event is distant in some other way. For
illustration, a thing that is distant from current reality (doubtful or
insolvable), is often spoken about in the past tense, as in:
20.
I wish I had a child right now.
The
sentence ((20) above implies that the person does not have a child at present.
Note that the past-tense ‘had’ is not meant to describe a past state, which
would require an auxiliary ‘had’:
21.
I wish I had married when I was a student.
The
authors note that this use of the past tense to convey distance from reality
occurs in both wishes, like above, and also in if-clauses:
22.
If I had a child I would send him to school.
James
(1982) and Mezhevich (2008) agree that non-past uses of past tenses are wide
across languages, and while less common, future tenses are also used. They
agree that if speaking about current events in a distant tense makes them feel
distant, languages that oblige speakers to use a future (distant) tense may
make future events feel more distant. That is, we could imagine that weak and
strong-FTR languages would incontinently restate into different willingness to
plan. Alternatively, one could represent such an effect as shifting the beliefs
that weak and strong-FTR speakers hold. If weak-FTR speakers perceive that the
future is closer, then it would affect the decision one makes. For instance, in
English, which is a strong-FTR language, elaborate information is given in the
verb about the tense. James (1982) exemplifies with the following sentences:
23.
It rained yesterday.
24.
It is raining now.
25.
It will rain tomorrow.
Still,
it is ungrammatical to say:
26.
It rained tomorrow.
Mezhevich
(2008) further notes that many Germanic languages, of which English is one, use
the present tense to express future actions more frequently and more
extensively than English, and have less rigid use of the future tense.
For
instance:
27.
I am going home hereafter.
So,
every time speakers talk about time, they are forced to consider the future
differently from the present because they are grammatically different.
A
study carried out by a behavioral economist, Chen (2013), on the effect of
language on savings behaviour, among others, on the Organisation for Economic
Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries, revealed a huge difference in
savings behaviour. In the study, Chen came up with the linguistic-savings
hypothesis, which states that, being required to speak in a distinct way about
future events leads speakers to take fewer future-oriented actions. By
analysing text samples extracted from the web, it was confirmed that this
linguistic distinction of the present and the future captured a central
tendency of how languages mark future events.
In
the study, Chen looked at the grammatical basis of how people talk about time.
According to the source, some languages speak about the future, using specific
forms of verb such as the modal auxiliary verbs ‘will’ and ‘shall’, whereas
some other languages are not couched with specific form of their verbs for
future actions. For instance, the English language requires that one gives
elaborate information in the verb about the time. The researcher, by his
analysis, suggests that making reference to the present and the future the same
way, makes speakers feel about them in the same way, which could make it easier
to save.
Chen’s
(2013) analysis revealed that among the OECD countries, the average difference
in savings was 5% between speakers of future and futureless languages, the
impact of which was huge. For instance, weak-FTR language speakers were 30%
more likely to save in any year and they retired with 25% more savings than
strong –FTR speakers. In the study, for instance, Luxemburg led the way with
over 40%, while the United Kingdom (UK) and the United States of America (USA)
both lagged well behind, saving just 15%, with Greece trailing at 10%. His
research revealed that there was a significant correlation between savings
behaviour and language spoken. Chen’s (2013) study was a cross-linguistic
survey, but the present study is limited to speakers of both English and Igbo
languages
As
could be seen from the reviewed literature, each concept of English time is
couched differently, as English has a distinct grammatical marker that creates
conceptual partition between present and future time (tense). However,
futureless languages such as Chinese for instance, does not divide the time
spectrum in the same way English does, hence the difference between future and
present is less defined. A Chinese speaker would say:
28.
Yesterday it rain
29.
Now it rain
30.
Tomorrow it rain
So,
the English language has an obligatory distinct way of marking future
references by using the modal auxiliary verbs ‘will’ and ‘shall’, hence it is
referred to as a strong FTR- language. When a sentence is couched using these
markers, one does not need to be told that the speaker is making a future
reference. This strong characteristic of the English grammar is brought to the
fore in this paper. Thus, this study argues that though English has a strong
way of marking the future, these markers make speakers see the future to be
distant and thus affecting the speakers’ decision-making. Previous studies such
as Chen (2013) were a cross-country work in OEDC countries, which centred on
savings, retirement, smoking habits, sex and weight. Hence, the present study
examines linguistically, how the English future tense could influence the
decision-making of people around Owerri, Imo State, Nigeria.
3.
Methodology
This
study is a descriptive and statistical study, aimed at investigating
linguistically, the extent to which language, specifically the English future
tense, could influence the way people think and make decisions at different
points in time. Data were sourced from questionnaires, unstructured interviews,
standard textbooks, and internet print materials. An open-ended unstructured
questionnaire was administered to forty (40) English language teachers from
four (4) tertiary education and thirty (30) from the secondary schools in
Owerri, Imo State, Nigeria, to allow objectivity and free-handed reliable data.
So, a total of seventy (70) respondents were used for the study. The subjects
were selected using purposive random sampling, which means that the researcher
relied on her judgement in choosing the data. Out of the total of seventy
respondents, fifty-six (56) filled and returned their questionnaires, which
were analysed descriptively and statistically, using simple percentage.
4.
Theoretical Framework
This
study is hinged on Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis on Linguistic Determinism as the
theoretical framework. The hypothesis is named after the American linguist
Edward Sapir (1921) and his student, Benjamin Lee Whorf (1956). Both of them
worked extensively on American Indian languages (Carroll, 1956). The theory
states that cognition is determined by language. It argues that individuals
experience the world based on the structure of the language they habitually
use. Whorf lays out his view on the relationship between language and thought.
He states that our thinking is affected by the grammar of our language. Grammar
involves conceptual distinctions that are very general and that we use very
frequently. For example, the distinction between singular nouns and plural
nouns. Whorf’s claim is that we do not only apply these distinctions when
putting thoughts into words, but that they affect the way in which we
understand our experiences at all times, whether or not we are using language.
The hypothesis claims that:
our
grammar is the only thing that influences our thinking…the background
linguistic system… of each language is… itself, the shaper of ideas… We dissect
nature along lines laid down by our native language …all observers are not led
by the same physical evidence to the same picture of the universe, unless their
linguistic backgrounds are similar (Sapir, 1921).
It
is the view above that is implied by the phrase ‘linguistic determinism’.
Though
Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis has faced much controversy because of the important
influence it ascribes to grammar, rather than to vocabulary (Hudson, 2003), the
theory of linguistic determinism is still relevant in linguistic studies today.
This theory is germane to the present study, because the theory suggests that
the language one speaks can shape one’s perception and attitude, including
those towards time and decision-making, which is the concernof the present
study.
5.
Data Presentation and Analysis
The
primary data obtained from the questionnaires were presented and analysed
accordingly hereafter. The thematic data alone were presented hereafter,
leaving out the demographic data of the respondents. Of the fifty-six (56)
respondents who duly filled and returned their questionnaires, 46 of 82.1%
indicated being familiar with the research topic to a very high extent, while
the remaining 10 of 17.9% indicated the extent of their familiarity with the
topic to be high. Furthermore, whereas the former ‘strongly agreed’ that there
was a correlation between language and cognition, the latter “agreed” to it.
All
the 56 of 100% respondents “strongly agreed” that language use would affect the
choices people make. The number was recorded for responses on whether or not
language use had effect on the choices people make. On the extent to which
future tense reference could affect the ability to save, 41 of 73% indicated
‘very high extent’, and 10 indicated high extent, while 5 respondents indicated
low extent. On the degree to which the use of the auxiliary verb ‘will’ and
‘shall’ influenced the choices they make, 37 of 66.1% held that the use of the
auxiliary verb ‘will’ had influence on their choices, whereas 33.9% claimed
otherwise. For the 37 of 66.1%, the use of the modal auxiliary verb influenced
their choices to a ‘very high extent’; while the 19 of 33.9% indicated that the
influence was at a ‘high extent’.
6.
Discussion of Findings
Given
the data presented and analysed above, the four research questions have been
aptly answered by both the secondary and primary data. By answering the
questions, the study has also met its objectives, as the questions were derived
from the objectives. The majority of the respondents strongly agreed that there
is a correlation between language and thought. This is in agreement with the
theory of linguistic determinism which states that our thinking is affected by
the grammar of our language (Whorf, 1956; Carroll, 1956). Our language can
shape our perceptions, and attitude, including those towards time value, and
decisions we make per time.
The
study has proved that language use affects the choices we make, as all the
respondents strongly agreed that language could change how we see things by
affecting our choice behaviours. For instance, the way we talk about something
could influence the way we act towards it. Some of the respondents expressed
their beliefs in the power of the tongue.
On
whether FTR language could affect the ability to save, majority of the
respondents agreed that if savings or other choices were talked about
futuristically, it might result to procrastination; hence the influence of
language is present. Furthermore, using language futuristically makes the
future distant. It would make people relax in taking decision, because they
would have a mindset that there is enough time. The above affirms Chen’s (2013)
postulation that languages which grammatically distinguish the present and the
future may bias their speakers to distinguish them psychologically, leading to
less future-oriented decision making. This would make the future feel more
distant, and since saving involves current costs for future rewards, would make
saving harder. Chen was of the view that in some languages that grammatically
equate the present and future, the speakers of such languages would be more
willing to save for a future which appears closer. So, FTRcan affect the
ability to save, as the future is deemed to be far away.
On
the influence of the use of auxiliary verbs ‘will’, on choice behaviours; as
linguists, the following sentences were linguistically analysed by some
respondents to prove further their arguments:
31.
I will be saving for retirement.
32.
I have to be saving for retirement.
The
two sentences, though futuristic, expressing willingness and intention
(Ogbulogo, 1997; Aarts, 2008; & 2018), the latter sounds more obligatory.
It then implies that when the latter expression is used, though futuristic, the
speaker sees it as immediate. Thus, the use of the auxiliary verb ‘will’, could
influence the choices one makes, and thereby seeing the future as not
immediate, thereby not taking immediate action. If talking about temporally
distant events in the present tense makes them seem more immediate, languages
that force this way of speaking may make future events seem closer, while
languages such as English, which has a strong way of marking the future, make
speakers see the future to be distant, thus delaying decisions to take
immediate action.
Future
time reference in language, such as using future tense verbs, can potentially
influence attitudes towards behaviour, social influence on the behaviour,
individual’s ability to perform the behaviour, and ultimately influence choice
behaviours. For instance, if individuals frequently use future time reference
in their language, it may signal a greater orientation towards the future and
long-term planning. This could lead to more positive attitudes towards certain
choices that have a future-oriented impact, such as saving money or leading a
healthy lifestyle. Again, individuals who use FTR language may perceive greater
control over their future actions and may be more likely to make choices that
align with their future goals.
Overall,
the influence of English future tense on decision-making is still a relatively
unexplored area of research. More extensive studies on the topic under study or
a related one should be carried out, especially a cross-linguistic study based
on Nigeria’s multilingual nature. In addition, similar studies should be
carried out, with a focus on the economic implication of language use on
savings, retirement, child bearing, and a lot more, in Nigeria; and even a
comparative study of English and other Nigerian languages.
7. Conclusion
This
study has examined the influence of English future tense reference on the
choice of actions by a speaker. As evidenced in the analysis of both the
primary and secondary data, the study has met its objectives, answered the
research questions and had scholarly addressed the issues raised. This study
has shown that the English language with strong-FTR leads speakers to perceive
the future as more distant and abstract, which can influence their
decision-making. The findings confirmed that thought patterns could be
influenced by the grammatical patterns of the language concerned. These
concepts and thought patterns seem to affect behaviour, not only when talking,
but also in decision-making.
Overall,
the argument that the English language with obligatory future-time reference
leads their speakers to engage in less immediate-oriented behaviour is proved
to be true, because of a specific characteristic of modal auxiliary verb
‘will’. This suggested that the effect of language that was measured occurred
through a channel that was independent of either cultural or cognitive
differences between linguistic groups, but a homogenous linguistic group. The
certainty that language acts as a powerful marker of some deeper driver of
intertemporal preferences could not be ruled out. Though speakers of the
English language which is a strong-FTR. may not have the intention to delay
taking future decision, the presence of the future tense marker ‘will’ make them
do so unconsciously.
References
Aarts,
B. (2008). English Syntax and Argumentation,3rd edition. PALGRAVE.
Aarts,
B. (2018). English Syntax and Argumentation, 5th Edition. PALGRAVE.
Anyanjor,
T. A. (2023). English Across Disciplines, 2nd edition, Ambix
Publishers, Nigeria.
Bittner,
M. (2005). Future discourse in a tenseless language. Journal of
Semantics, 22, 339-
387.
Carroll,
J. (1956) ed., Language and Thought: Selected Writings of Benjamin Lee
Whorf.
MIT
Press.
Chen,
M. K. (2013). The effect of languages on economic behaviour: evidence from
savings
rates,
health behaviours and retirement assets. American Economic Review,
103(2), 690-731. https//dx.doi.org/10.1257.
Cook,
V. J. (1991). Second Language Learning and Language Teaching.Hodder
Arnold.
Dahl,
O. (2000). The grammar of future time reference in European languages. In Tense
and
Aspect in Language of Europe, Osten Dahl, ed. 309-328.
Dancygier,
B. & Eve, S. (2009). Mental spaces in grammar: Conditional constructions.
Cambridge Studies in Linguistics. Cambridge
Hudson,
R. A. (2003). Sociolinguistics, 2nd ed.Cambridge University Press.
Jakobson,
R, (1956). Fundamentals of Language. Mouton & Company.
James,
D. (1982). Past tense and the hypothetical: A cross-linguistic study. Studies
in
Language 6(3), 375-403.
Mezhevich,
I. (2008). A time-relational approach to tense and mood.In Proceedings of the
27th
West Coast Conference in Formal Linguistics, ed. Natasha Abner and
Jason Bishop, 326-334.
Nwokedi,
B. F. C. (2003). A Complete Course in English.Ben-Frank Publishers.
Ogbulogo,
C. (1997). Problem Areas in English Grammar and Usage, 2nd
edition.
Estoris Nig. Ltd.
Sapir,
E. (1921). An introduction to the study of speech.Language, 5, 358.
Schriffrin,
D. (1981). Tense variation in narrative.Language, 57 (1), 45-62.
Thieroff,
R. (2000). On the areal distribution of tense-aspect categories in Europe.In
Tense
Whorf, B. L. (1956). Language, thought and reality:
Selected writing of Benjamin Lee
Whorf, ed. J. B. Carroll.MIT Press.
0 Comments