Margaret asked:

How are the ecstasies of time articulated in language (Heidegger's philosophy)?

Heidegger's Being and Timedoesn't say. It essentially deals with ecstasies in terms of
circumspection and the ready-to-hand (hammer).

As unities operating together is the past (reflection) an objectifying factor?

============

Heidegger does allocate a section of Being and Timeto deal with language and time; it is the section
preceding his discussion of circumspection. Section 68(d): 'The Temporality of Discourse'. He says
there that discourse does not temporalize itself primarily in any definite ecstasis.

He identifies however identify three connections between time and language: (i) That language can
discuss time, we can talk about time (ii) That discourse takes time, it is a temporal event (iii) That
discourse in itself is temporal.

On these points take a look at Francoise Dastur's Telling Time — sketch of a phenomenological
chrono-logy.

On the point of the past as reflection acting as an objectifying factor it seems to me that this would not
really qualify as the past as such. It would rather here be a modification of the present, in the act of
reflection or recollection (which is happening now). It is the now (in various guises) which acts as the
unifying factor, for the past to be really past it would have to be beyond reflection and recollection,
incapable of unified.

Brian Tee