Re: TYPOLOGY: (conlangs and natlangs): "Tense-Prominent" vs "Aspect-Prominent"

Dirk Elzinga wrote:

> Eldin:
>
> You need to look at this book:
>
> Bhat, D. N. S. 1999. The prominence of tense, aspect, and mood. John
> Benjamins. ISBN: 155619935X.
I'd be very interested to know what typological generalizations it
proposes, if you've read it. :) From "Adjective Classes: A Cross
Linguistic Typology" I know of the following claims regarding stative
verbs and verby adjectives vs nouny adjectives:

(1)
if a language is head marking, it will have verb-y adjectives
if a language is dependent marking, it will have noun-y adjectives, or
adjectives will form a separate class

(2)
if a language is aspect prominent (to use the terminology of Bhat), it
will have verb-y adjectives
if a language is tense prominent, it will have noun-y adjectives, or
adjectives will form a separate class

There thus seems to be a proposed cluster of the features head marking,
aspect prominent, with verb-y adjectives/stative verbs on the one hand,
versus dependent marking, tense prominent, with noun-y adjectives on the
other. Dixon, in the introductory paper of "Adjective Classes", claims
that (1) seems to hold quite well, although there are exceptions (eg
Korean), but (2) seems to have rather numerous exceptions.
 I haven't read any other proposed typological correlations connected to
mood or evidentiality marking rather than tense or aspect marking.