Re: tense marking and typology

On 9 Jun 99, at 15:32, J.Barefoot wrote:

> I'm trying to come up with a pragmatic tense marking system for Asiteya
> (or Astya, both tenetative names, really just the word for "the
> language"), where different word orders mean different tenses. Is there
> any precedent for this? Does it violate typology rules completely to allow
> SVO, VSO and SOV in the same language (even if the language is,
Well, English, French and German all change word-order to change
from indicative to questioning, so I don't see why not.


> admittedly, in intense typological flux)? Also, I would be thrilled if
> someone could see fit to share some info on tense systems other than the
> usual European past-present-future.  The rigid distictions of a time-line
> don't appeal to me anymore.
What about:

past vs. non-past

now vs. not now (past, future, irrealis, etc)

personal memory vs. indirectly known past vs. immediately
experienced now

interesting/important now/past/future (as opposed to happening
now/past/future)



Jim Henry III
Jim.Henry@pobox.com
http://www.pobox.com/~jim.henry/gzb/gzb.htm
*gjax zaxnq-box baxm-box goq.