Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: time distinctions

From:Yoon Ha Lee <yl112@...>
Date:Wednesday, August 23, 2000, 22:03
On Wed, 23 Aug 2000, H. S. Teoh wrote:

> On Wed, Aug 23, 2000 at 04:56:35PM -0400, Yoon Ha Lee wrote: > > A Chinese-American told me once that Chinese (Mandarin?) doesn't have > > verb tenses. Is this true? I can see a language getting by using > > circumlocutions or something to indicate time. I've been thinking of > > doing that with Aragis. > > Don't be surprised that Mandarin (or other dialects, AFAIK) doesn't have > any verb tenses. In fact, it's so analytical that nouns don't even have > number! Tense in Mandarin is picked up by context. For example, a question
Is Korean analytical or something else? Nouns don't have number in Korean, either, and it's something that's never bothered me.
> AFAIK every language has a way of expressing time at least those three > time distinctions. It's just a question of whether this distinction is > built into the language, or it's expressed by using explicit words to > indicate time (or anywhere in between).
That's what I figured. For Aragis I'm thinking of using poetic forms: something like "before the white azalea" might mean "last year," if the white azalea represents regret for lost love.
> > Maybe narratives and historicals go in here, too? I've wanted to include > > a "legendary" tense in Chevraqis, which indicates something that > > "took/takes place" in a legendary context, so you'd use it when speaking > > of folklore (Tyl Eulenspiegel's exploits?) or legends (Niebelungenlied? > > creation myths?) or prophecies (the Book of Revelation? Götterdämerung? > > and I *know* I misspelled that somehow). But then I'm not sure if it'd > > count as a tense. (wistfully) It'd be *fun* if I knew it were allowable. > > Allowable? Anything is allowable, as long as it's consistent with the rest > of your grammar :-) In fact, there are several other conlangs that > incorporate these things into verbs.
That's heartening to know.
> E.g., Laadan verbs can indicate various degrees of "trust", e.g., you use > one form for information you got from somebody that you don't trust, > another form for your own opinion, another form for info from somebody you > totally trust (and therefore assume as fact), etc..
I'm using evidentiality because <rueful sigh> it's neat, darnit, though the system I'm using isn't as complex.
> Another thing you can do with verbs is "mood": > - Indicative: the "usual" tense, used for making statements ("He was at > the house") > - Imperative: for commands ("Go to the house!") > - Optative: something the speaker wishes to happen ("I wish that he > would go to the house!") > - Subjunctive: for possible happenings which may or may not be actual > occurrences ("if he had gone to the house, he would have seen the > thief") > - Hortative(sp?): speaker tells himself, or the group he's representing, > to do something ("Let's go to the house!")
I've got indicative and imperative. Optative will probably some other c construction. You'd use the "probable" (an aspect? though my wretched Japanese grammar calls it a "mood") for the subjunctive. YHL