Re: time distinctions

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