Tense

[warr0120]

Hi Bob,

I'd love to see your draft paper on modalities and aspect in Dakota!

Pat Warren

On 4 Apr 2003, R. Rankin wrote:
> I think that in those Siouan languages where tense
> morphology may actually exist, it represents an
> innovation.  Often it seems to involve an auxiliary,
> *?uN 'do, be' with one or more prefixes that has become
> grammaticalized.  There really are no past tense
> morphemes, per se.  I would say that this statement
> about the lack of tense is true even for the so-called
> 'future'.  If you ask for a sentence in future time,
> you will normally get a reply with (iN)-ktA in Dakota
> and its equivalent in other languages.  But this affix
> means both more and less than 'future tense'.  You'll
> also get it with conditionals, modals 'may, might' and
> other utterances that make it clear that what it really
> marks is 'irrealis mode'.  It just marks something that
> hasn't actually happened.
>
> There is plenty of morphology that marks modalities and
> plenty that marks aspect (progressive/continuative,
> habitual, perfect, etc.).  Ordinarily, if time
> reference is really required, it is provided with an
> adverb or a temporal conjunction.  I did a talk on this
> when I was in Australia and can send a copy of the
> draft if you like.  It isn't very polished.
>
> It is the progressive or continuative aspect that
> usually uses the positional auxiliaries (although
> Mauricio Mixco also finds it in use with other
> constructions as well in his Mandan sketch).  But
> action of the verb can be progressive in the past or
> the future as well as the present, so the positionals
> don't necessarily mark present.
>
> The traditional grammarians who produced the earlier
> (often very good) grammars of Dakota, Lakota, etc. used
> terms like 'future' because they didn't distinguish
> 'kind of action' from 'time of action' in their
> grammars.  It is still used to translate ktA today by
> some.  But, as I say, I don't think it's tense per-se.
>
> >Most often, the 3Pl subject form -ire (or -hire) is
> given to indicate the
> subject.  However, in getting forms this actually is
> the past tense.
>
> Jagu aire?
> Jagu e-ire?
> What say-3Pl?
> What did they say?
>
> Jagu anaaNk?
> Jagu e-naaNk?
> What say-3Pl?
> What are they saying?
>
> HC may operate differently from LAK in this regard, but
> I'd guess that the difference between the two above
> examples would be non-continuing vs. continuing action,
> not tense.  Try "what do they say?" for the first and
> "what were they saying" for the second and see what
> emerges.  I can't begin to predict, but it should be
> interesting to contrast all four meanings.
>
> >I think Miner is the only one that correctly lists
> these forms.  Yet there
> is no extensive treatment of tense in his work.  This
> seems to be the only
> form that indicates something took place in the past
> rather than not in the
> future.Past can be indicated through the absence of the
> positional in other cases.
>
> waNk  naNka naNwaNnaNks^aNnaN.
>
> waNk  naNka  naNwaN-naNk-s^aNaN.
>
> man   that (sit) sing-POS (sit)-Declarative
>
> That man is singing (seated).
>
> waNk naNka naNwaNnaN.
>
> waNk naNka naNwaN- naN
>
> man that (sit) sing- Declarative.
>
> That man sang.
>
> How about 'that man was singing' and 'that man sings
> well', where the first is progressive but in the past
> and the second is present but not progressive.  I
> really wonder if you'll get any overt tense morphology.
>
> Bob Rankin
>
> >In the above forms the demonstrative can be replaced
> with the indefenite
> article -iz^aN or the defenite article -ra with the
> same effect.
>
> >My question is if you all think there is more to tense
> in Ho-Chunk than what i have read?  What is happening
> in other Siouan langauges.  I believe I read in a paper
> somewhere that Lakhota also makes a future-non-future
> distinction.  Do positionals have a similar effect (I'm
> especially curious
> about Chiwere)?  Thank you.
>
> >On a side note, a budding linguist like myself, and as
> a person with a
> vested interest in Ho-Chunk langauge study I really
> appreciate this List.
> You all have no idea how much more efficient and
> valuable my studies have become based on the archives
> and current comments on this List.  Thank you all
> again.
>
> Henning Garvin
> UW-Madison
> Anthropology/Linguistics
>
>
>