@article{oai:kumadai.repo.nii.ac.jp:00028078,
 author = {Matsuse, Kenji and 松瀬, 憲司 and Matsuse, Kenji and 松瀬, 憲司},
 journal = {熊本大学教育学部紀要},
 month = {Dec},
 note = {application/pdf, 論文(Article), It seems quite strange that the future time reference, which is considered to be obviously nonfactual, has been dealt with in the indicative mood, where ‘factuality’ modality is designated, since the Greco-Roman period; neither ancient Greek nor Latin, though both were highly-inflected languages, had the future tense in the subjunctive mood, the main function of which is to mark ‘non-factuality’ modality, and even now neither do Modern Greek and many Latin-descendent Romance languages. Apparently,
this practice is thought to be seen in Present-day English too, but it will be more appropriate to say that since we no longer have any morphological mood distinction in Present-day English, the future time reference need not be considered being involved with the indicative mood, but should rather be treated as having several marked constructions with special items for representing non-factuality. Thus the indicative mood as verbal inflection is irrelevant to Present-day English; we just have unmarked/default finite verbal forms for the present or past factuality.},
 pages = {91--100},
 title = {未来時に 「事実性」 はあるのか : 英語における直説法と接続法},
 volume = {62},
 year = {2013},
 yomi = {マツセ, ケンジ and マツセ, ケンジ}
}