Re: Theory about the evolution of languages

Trebor Jung wrote:

>
>"It depends on whether you consider synthetic tenses to be separate, I
>suppose; just as some number things such as "You will have been reading" as
>an instance of the continuous future perfect tense (or some such) in
>English, whereas others say that English only has two tenses: present ("I
>go") and past ("I went"), all other forms of the verb being formed from
>(present or past) participle or infinitive + auxiliary verbs, and not being
>counted as separate tenses."
>
>My opinion is that English has two tenses, past and nonpast, and uses a
>whole lot of analitical constructions with auxiliaries and participles (the
>selection process of what combination to use is insanely baroque). The
>auxiliary 'will' does not substantiate a 'future tense': it's modal.
>
>
Perhaps.  I prefer to count it as a tense, but that's due to taste.
English very definitely *used to* have only two tenses, though. With the
exception of 'be', which had a (generally) future (though it could also
be present as well) conjugation as well.

However, that still leaves English with only three tenses.  Past,
Present, Future.  The rest of its deluge of 'tenses' are, in fact,
aspects or moods.

Let me demonstrate:

I do - Present, Indicative Mood,  Habitual aspect(usually): Present
I have done - Present, Indicative Mood, Perfective aspect: Perfect
I am doing - Present, Indicative Mood, Imperfective aspect:: Continuous
I did - Past,  Indicative mood,  Punctual aspect(for the purposes of
this, Punctual and Habitual are the same):Preterite
I had done - Past, Indicative mood, Perfective aspect: Pluperfect
I was doing - Past, Indicative mood, Imperfective aspect:, Imperfective
aspect: Imperfect