Re: Habitual and perfect marking and statives
|From:||Isaac Penzev <isaacp@...>|
|Date:||Thursday, February 1, 2007, 20:11|
Eric Christopherson wrote:
| Another issue concerns conflation of aspect with stativity*. I have
| seen a few conlangs, and at least one reconstructed natlang (PIE
| according to one analysis), where the perfect aspect of eventive
| verbs is conflated with the stative verb derived from the eventive.
| I.e., stative verbs and eventive perfects have the same form. I like
| this idea quite a bit, but again I would like to ask how common a
| pattern it is.
I am too tired and too busy atm to give a large comment, but your ideas may
be workable. I myself am meditating over a conlang project that conflates
aspects. Perfective forms of terminative verbs and actual forms of durative
verbs are unmarked, while perf. of dur. and act. of term. have distinct
non-zero morphemes. Habitual for both is marked, too.