Till Vs Until

Student : Dominick AnzianUniversity of Cocody-Abidjan / Ivory Coast Master Level : MOG

PLANI. TILL AND UNTIL : THE POINT OF VIEW OF THE

TRADITIONAL GRAMMAR

1.Dictionaries’ point of view

2.Traditional grammar books’ point of view

II. TILL AND UNTIL : THE METAOPERATIONAL

APPROACH

1.Presentation of the MOG’s framework

2.Differential properties : Toward their

invariant values

1


III. TILL AND UNTIL : THEIR RESPECTIVE

SYSTEMIC ORDER

INTRODUCTION

Human being has in his hands a powerful and great gift: Language. Then for Him to be able to

use it efficiently, He decided to investigate it. One of its important discovers is that of

Language is a system stated by Ferdinand De SAUSSURE. When defining that, he did not

point out a particular language but all the languages spoken over the whole world are

concerned. Here in our work, our focus is on English language especially on its grammar

study. And during a long time, traditional or descriptive grammar has dominated that field.

This grammar (through books and dictionaries) states that two (2) units having the same

features and taken from the system are equals and therefore interchangeable. Let‘s explain it

with the following example using the two units (till and until) that we will be analyzing:

(1U): …And when he had taken him, and brought him to his mother, he sat on her knees till

noon, and then died.

So going along with the traditional point of view, (1U) will become:

(1U’): …And when he had taken him, and brought him to his mother, he sat on her knees

until noon, and then died.

Here, the above utterances have the same meaning since traditional grammar states that till

and until are equals that is, they have the same value.

But we must bear in mind that being a system,” language is a coherent set and no two (2)

words (units) can have the same value. Each word has a distinct value even though it can

2


refer to the same meaning expressed by another unit1”. So we must understand that each

unit in the system has its core value which makes him completely different from the others.

That is what Henry Adamczewski stumbled on an idiosyncratic grammar when writing his

thesis about ‘’be + ing” in 1976: the MetaOperational Grammar (MOG). Contrary to the

traditional grammar, He stated that the linear utterance is not the meaning that is, the meaning

is to be found in the internal structuring operations done by the speaker or utterer. Therefore,

the point of view of the traditional grammar about till and until is put into question.

So, when reconsidering the above utterances (1U) and (1U’), the problem is, is there is any

difference between till and until in English language. In case there is, what will be the

implication of this difference?

Dealing with the above two (2) questions, we will have to find out their respective invariant

value and then propose their systemic order. By doing so, this analysis will throw light on the

use of till and until in traditional grammar books in general but will help learner in particular.

For us to be able to reach our objective within the framework of MOG, we will first of all see

the use of till and until in traditional grammar books then, we will investigate then in the

MOG perspectives to discover their difference and finally try to propose their respective

systemic order .

1 See UV 304 : Micro-System in English Grammar by Dr. KPLI ( Licence 2007-2008)

3


I. TILL AND UNTIL : THE POINT OF VIEW OF THE TRADITIONAL

GRAMMAR

1. Dictionaries’ point of view

According to dictionaries, the word Till has four(4) functions:

As conjunction and preposition, it is consider as the short form of Until. It is a

variant of Until that is acceptable in all styles of languages. Sometimes written

‘’Til’’ in a non standard form.

As a dynamite verb, it means cultivate, labour and work.

As a noun, it means a box, case or drawer into which money taken from

customers is put. It also means a glacial deposit consisting of rock fragments of

various sizes.

Let’s clarify that what retain our attention in this work is the conjunction and preposition

functions.

As for Until, it views as a conjunction and preposition too. It is confused with Till

In a nutshell, dictionaries consider Till and Until to be equal that is Till=Until.

Let us see what traditional books say about them.

2. Traditional grammar books’ point of view

4


Here, we intend to present how Till and Until are viewed by the traditional approach.

Let’s first give the definition of preposition and conjunction (subordinating) and then analyze

the use of Till and Until.

Preposition is a word that connects one thing with another, that is, it introduces a complement.

It’s usually followed by a noun or pronoun. And subordinating conjunction is use to join

sentences together.

As a preposition :

Till or Until is used to say when an action or situation ends:

(5T): In this situation, Lily appears to have taught with great credit to himself till 1952, when he died of a plague, at the age of 56.

(29U): More important, the interim constitution guarantees parties with more than 5 percent of the vote participation in government until 1999, so the NP and the Inkatha Freedom Party (IFP), headed by Chief Mongosuthu Buthelezi, are also part of the government of national unity.

In these utterances, the complements are time words.

We can have noun or expression after Till and Until:

(18T): It wasn’t till this morning that they found her.

(11U): And the LORD's anger was kindled against Israel, and he made them wander in the wilderness forty years, until all the generation, that had done evil in the sight of the LORD, was consumed.

(86): Until the day break and the shadows flee away, turn, my beloved, and be thou like a roe

or a young hart upon the mountains of Bether.

In (86), The expression introducing by the preposition (Until) is simply put before “turn, my

beloved … of Bether”. Being there doesn’t change the meaning.

We can also give the beginning and the end of an action or situation:

(88T): And when they had appointed him a day, there came many to him into his lodging; to whom he expounded and testified the kingdom of God, persuading them concerning Jesus, both out of the law of Moses, and out of the prophets, from morning till evening.

5


(82U): The tubes run everyday from 5.30 in the morning until a quarter past twelve in the evening, the only exception being Sunday ( 7.30 am – 11.30 pm

As a conjunction (subordinating):

Until or Till is used to say how long a situation continues:

(72T): Then he kissed her, biting her lip till I tasted blood.

(40U): For thus saith the LORD God of Israel, The barrel of meal shall not waste, neither shall the cruse of oil fail, until the day that the LORD sendeth rain upon the earth.

Here, in these utterances, the speaker point out the period or duration.

Until or Till is used with the present simple to express a future:

(39T): Then shalt thou bring forth that man or that woman, which have committed that wicked thing, unto thy gates, even that man or that woman, and shalt stone them with stones till they die.

(48U): Behold, as the eyes of servants look unto the hand of their masters, and as the eyes of a maiden unto the hand of her mistress; so our eyes wait upon the LORD our God, until that he have mercy upon us.

Until or Till can be at the beginning of an utterance:

(84): Until I come and take you away to a land like your own land, a land of corn and wine, a land of bread and vineyards, a land of oil olive and of honey, that ye may live, and not die: and hearken not unto Hezekiah, when he persuadeth you, saying, The LORD will deliver us.

(91T): Till I come, give attendance to reading, to exhortation, to doctrine.

In a nutshell, Till and Until alike can be used to after a time word (they are preposition of

time) or expression or after a main clause (they are most of the case subordinating clause

introducing a clause of time).

As dictionaries, traditional grammar books view them being the same, interchangeable.

Let’s now analyze them within the framework of the metaoperational grammar.

II. TILL AND UNTIL : THE METAOPERATIONAL APPROACH

6


Before going to the pursuit of the invariant value of these units, we will first give the

definition of MOG, then account for its methodology and finally some of its tools.

1. Presentation of the MOG’s framework

Metaoperational Grammar is a grammar which maintains that language contains markers

underlying the inner structuring process achieved by the speaker or utterer. Contrary to the

traditional grammar, the metaoperational one takes into account the speaker which is the core

value in the process of enunciation. Thus, to paraphrase Dr KPLI who says : «En Grammaire

Metaopérationnelle le sens se structure, se construit selon des paramètres clairs.

L’énonciateur est le maître du jeu verbal. C’est lui qui construit le sens en mobilisant les

outils en sa possession en tenant compte du co-énonciateur et de la situation discursive2 » ,

metaoperational grammar deciphers or uncodes surface markers in utterances to bring about

the real meaning. So the grammar is not the one giving taxonomy but it is the one which

solves problems once and for all. And going along with that, Henri Adamczewski (1996: P

56) states that:

“La grammaire qui est appelée à prendre la relève de celle dont nous venons d’énumérer les

insuffisances est fondée sur la découverte que les énoncés réfléchissent l’activité structurante des

énonciateurs et que la surface peut présenter des traces visibles des opérations d’encodage… Ces

operateurs de surface qui exhibent et sous-entend à la fois le travail d’énonciation-les

métaoperateurs-définissent une Grammaire Metaopérationnelle. ’’

Therefore, the ultime goal of the metaoperational grammar is to find out and decipher markers

or tracers that underlying the internal structuring of the process in English language in particular

but also in all others languages written and spoken in general.

Here are some basic concepts of that grammar 3:

Micro-system : it is a pair of units two(2) sharing one feature that allows them to be

interchangeable. But they remain different and opposed with their other features.

Invariant value: it is a core value or kernel value in any linguistic unit. That value is not in

contrast with the speech effects which are the values of the unit in different context.

System of phases: it is the different steps we have in the structuring process. These

steps are represented by Phase 1 and Phase 2, related to a micro-system.

2 Paper “ La problématique du sens en Grammaire Metaopérationnelle ‘’ by Dr KLPI, P.63 See UV 304 : Micro-System in English Grammar By Dr. KPLI ( Licence- 2008-2009)

7


Speaker: it is the one who chooses operators according to some contextual instances

and the type of message he /her wants to convey.

Now, let’s use that grammar’s framework to analyze Till and Until and bring out their

respective core value.

2. Differential properties : Toward their invariant values

First of all we will analyze them separately and then put then exchange them in some

utterances in order to find out their respective property (invariant value).

Analysis of Till

(3T): And Moses said, Let no man leave of it till the morning.

(26T): Although applied linguistics can be dated back to the 1940s in the United

States (Kaplan, 2002: vii), applied linguistics as a recognized discipline did not begin

to establish itself in China till the late 1970s, at the end of the Cultural Revolution.

(31T): He founded the Leningrad/Petersburg phonological school, being till now (parallel to t he Moscow version of phonology), one of two main Russian phonological schools.

(32T): For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death till he comes.

(59T): There is therefore no danger that the language of any nation shall fall into disuse, till the people by whom it is spoken, shall either adopt some other or become themselves extinct.

Let’s analyze the above utterances.

In (3T), Moses is reported to the people an instruction that he received from God. He alone

knew the instruction that is, the manna should not be kept at all. Thus Till introduces a

complement ( the morning) .

In (26T), the utterer is giving an information on the subject (applied linguistics) about his

establishment in China. This establishment begins a precise time that is, the complement

introducing by Till: the late 1970’s.

In the utterance (31T), here again, the utterer is giving an information on the

Leningrad/Petersburg phonological school. This school founded a long time ago could have

8


disappeared since, but at the moment of the enunciation, the speaker indicates the state at a

precise time : now.

In (32T), the subordinate clause: he comes , is a complement introducing by the speaker and

ignoring by the co-speaker. Till , indicates an action that will occur in the future at a precise

point. And that will put an end to the situation in the main clause.

In (59T), the utterer introduces a complement that if it occurs, the main clause will be

realized. It could have been another complement that is, the utterer has the choice. “… the

language … into disuse “ if “the people…adopt…or become themselves extinct”. We can see

here that the complement is a starting point.

Analysis of Until

(2U): And it came to pass, when midday was past, and they prophesied until the time

of the offering of the evening sacrifice, that there was neither voice, nor any to

answer, nor any that regarded.

(9U): Man goeth forth unto his work and to his labour until the evening.

(4OU): For thus saith the LORD God of Israel, The barrel of meal shall not waste,

neither shall the cruse of oil fail, until the day that the LORD sendeth rain upon the

earth.

(79U): I dropped my hand heavily on Teddy’s shoulder and squeezed it in mock

friendliness until I winced with pain.

Let’s analyze the above utterances:

In (2U), the utterer is describing a situation: the prophesied – which goes on until the complement (the time of offering of the evening sacrifice). He insists on how long the situation last that is, it has began them stop at a certain point indicated in the complement.

In (9U), we have the same case where everyone knows that a man used to work and labour until “the evening”.

In (40U), the prophet Elijah is declaring a word on a woman. The situation here is that, there is no rain and that cause a famine. The complement: the day that the lord sendeth rain upon the earth” is the final point of the situation indicated in t he main clause. Thus that situation is prolong until it reaches its limit indicated in the subordinate clause.

9


In (79U), the puts his hand heavily on his friend’s shoulder and squeezes it. So he would not wince with pain ( the complement) if the situation in the main clause did not last long. The prolongment of the situation stops when “he winced with pain”

Substitution process

Here, we will just take some utterances with Till and exchange this operator with that of Until

and vice versa to see whether our two (2) above analysis are right or not. After that we will be

able to state the invariant values of those two (2) operators.

(3T’): And Moses said, Let no man leave of it until the morning.

Here in this utterance, although the confusion can be made with the use of Till and Until,

something comes up to deny this interchangeability.

In fact, the complement (the morning) is completely unknown by the people. So, they were

receiving the information for the first time with the use of “Let no man”. And Moses is not

telling the people about how much longer they shall eat the manna but he points out the

starting point of the situation. Thus the use of Until is not appropriate in this context. The

complement therefore, is non-presupposed and that make Till to be rhematic, the appropriate

one.

(40U’): For thus saith the LORD God of Israel, The barrel of meal shall not waste, neither shall the cruse of oil fail, till the day that the LORD sendeth rain upon the earth.

With this utterance, we are in a context where the situation is still going on. “That” is a trigger

of a pre-existing situation. And even more, the utterance is insisting on the duration, the

prolongment of the situation that is, there still having no rain. Till is therefore inappropriate in

this context. The qualified operator is Until and its scope here is the complement “ the day

that the Lord sendeth rain upon the earth”. Until presupposed the complement and extend

its validity to a limit point.

Now, let’s see the following two utterances having both Till and Until :

(99TU): But the priests were too few, so that they could not flay all the burnt offerings: wherefore their brethren the Levites did help them, till the work was ended, and until the other priests had sanctified themselves: for the Levites were more upright in heart to sanctify themselves than the priests.

10


(99TU’): But the priests were too few, so that they could not flay all the burnt offerings: wherefore their brethren the Levites did help them, until the work was ended, and till the other priests had sanctified themselves: for the Levites were more upright in heart to sanctify themselves than the priests.

In (99TU), Till introduces a complement “the work was ended” underlying the static fact of

the situation whereas Until involves a pre-constructed complement “ the other priests had

sanctified themselves” where the sacrifice ends and Until is underlying the duration of the

situation. In Israel, all priests must sanctify himself after performing a sacrifice. It is a

tradition. Therefore if we use (99TU’) in his context, the meaning will be blurred, even

completely wrong for that meaning is not le linear structure but the internal one.

To conclude part, let‘s consider the following schemas:

Or

X = Main clause or simple expression

Y= The complement

Till introduces Y related to X to point out the static state or starting point of X

(Can be an action or event) through Y.

11

X Till/Until Y

Till/Until Y, X


Until prolongs the situation in X by taking into account the predication Y , that

is , the validity of the predication. But contrary to Till, it has a limit point (End point

of an action or an event) indicated in the complement or subordinate clause.

After finding the different invariant value of Till and Until, we can now account for and

propose their respective systemic order.

III. TILL AND UNTIL : THEIR RESPECTIVE SYSTEMIC ORDER

As said earlier in this analysis, the system of phases is related the micro-system. So, does the

systemic order. And this is where we will be dealing with their real invariant value of Till and

that of Until. For we must bear in mind that in metaoperational grammar, the invariant value

of a linguistic unit is merely its systemic value. So we will have to discover which of them

come first in the structuring process.

Let’s analyze for the last time this other and following utterance:

(100TU): Woe unto them that rise up early in the morning, that they may follow strong

drink; that continue until night, till wine inflames them!

Here in the above utterance, the scope of Till and Until alike is on the complement, that is on

“night” for Until and “wine inflames them” for Till.

With the use of Till, we have a paradigmatic choice. The complement expressing a starting

point could have been another one related to the context. The speaker has the choice. The

complement is non presupposed. But with the use of Until, the speaker has no choice of the

complement “night” which is the end point, the final limit. One cannot limit what has never

begun. We have also “that” and the verb “continue” which trigger the themacity. He is on a

12


pre-constructed situation. We have a closed paradigm. The complement “night” closes the

choice. We have therefore the trace of the speaker.

The opening and closing paradigm correspond to the phases defined in metaoperational

grammar :

Till < Until >Phase 1 Phase 2

Like Too/Also and A/The, etc., the linear presentation of those operators in the utterance is

iconic to that systemic order.

CONCLUSION

Through our analysis, we can notice that Till and Until viewing only as a preposition and a

conjunction is not sufficient, even unable to account for their difference. We can also see how

dictionaries and traditional grammar books consider them to be equal and consequently their

meanings are the same in utterances whatever the discursive process. For them we have this:

Till = Until. So we can state that traditional grammar has failed to reveal the core value of

these operators since we know that no two (2) words or units can have the same value in the

system. That is why the question of knowing the difference and its implication have been

raised. For us to be able deal with this question, we resort to an idiosyncratic grammar that is ,

the MetaOperational Grammar (MOG) , a reliable and intelligible theoretical grammar.

Through its methodology and tools of analysis, we found out the properties of Till and Until.

Till has a metalinguistic feature introduces the static state or starting point of an action or

event, indicated in the complement. Whereas Until prolongs the situation in the main clause

by taking into account the predication, that is , the validity of the complement. But contrary to

Till, it has a limit point (End point of an action or an event) indicated in that complement

or subordinate clause. From there, we have the difference between Till and Until. And this

leads us to much more about them. Indeed, this difference helps us to highlight their

13


respective functioning in the system and cope definitely with the problem that traditional

grammar has been facing.

At the semantic level, Till is merely giving an information by introducing the complement.

The speaker finds a predicative relation for the first time, but remains neutral about the

relation. The complement is not pre-constructed. Therefore, Till is Phase 1 or Rhematic.

With its counterpart Until, we have the contrary. In fact with Until the information is coming

back for the second time into the discourse. The speaker is involved in such a utterance.

Hence the complement is pre-constructed. Until is a presupposing unit in English language.

Until is therefore Phase 2 or thematic.

Till Rhematic / Phase I

Until Thematic / Phase II

We have consequently a perfect micro-system: TILL / UNTIL

And the linear presentation is iconic to the above systemic order.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

ADAMCZEWSKI, H. et GABILAN, J-P, (1992) : Les Clés de la Grammaire Anglaise,

Armand Colin, Paris

ADAMCZEWSKI, Henri. (1982) : La Grammaire Linguistique de l’Anglais,

Armand Colin, Paris

ADAMCZEWSKI, Henri. (1996) : Genèse et Développement d’une Théorie Linguistique

Suivi de Les Dix Composantes de la Grammaire

Metaopérationnelle de l’Anglais,

La TILV, Editeur, France

KPLI Y.K. Jean François (1997) : La Problématique du sens en Grammaire

Metaopérationnelle,

Dans la Revue N°1 du LTML. (www.ltml.ci)

14

http://www.ltml.ci/


Colins English Dictionary, Edition 2005.

15

Documents

Till Vs Until