An-lang Digest, Vol 98, Issue 9

Mon Aug 15 02:15:04 UTC 2011

Hi David and everyone,

Cena and Nolasco are on target. I've seen that there is no tense (but rather aspect) in S. W. Palawano as well. (Resty... interesting, though, that Palawano's completed aspect for <-um-> is <-umin->; doesn't seem that for us the <-in-> is only PV, unless it's a homophonous coincidence.)

When I studied Tagalog, we were given the concept of completed, incompleted, future and 'basic' (the affix+root form with no reduplication) but as I learned Palawano, some of those terms went out the window.

Luther's point is interesting in light of what I've been pondering on Palawano aspect. (I would appreciate feedback from anyone on my thinking on this.) For the four aspects, I started with a somewhat standard grid of initiated(begun) vs. non-initiated(non begun) and completed vs. incomplete, giving four possibilities (which match our four forms). But that created a logically impossible cell of "non-initiated+completed" which would correspond to the so-called (but not!!) "future." Palawano uses this not-really-future (irrealis) form for timeless and potential events as well as "future", even when describing past/completed events in a narrative. So I changed the grid to completed vs. incomplete and potential vs. actual. The Potential vs. Actual event might be close to what Luther mentions, Prof. Wolfe's "real/unreal."

-Bill

On Aug 15, 2011, at 10:00 AM, an-lang-request at anu.edu.au wrote:

> Send An-lang mailing list submissions to
> 	an-lang at anu.edu.au
> 
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> 	http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/an-lang
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> 	an-lang-request at anu.edu.au
> 
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> 	an-lang-owner at anu.edu.au
> 
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of An-lang digest..."
> 
> 
> Today's Topics:
> 
>   1. Re: An-lang Digest, Vol 98, Issue 8 (Scott Robertson)
>   2. Re: Irrealis imperative? (somewhat OT) (john at research.haifa.ac.il)
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Message: 1
> Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2011 10:19:18 +0800
> From: Scott Robertson <aircaraccess at millenicom.com>
> Subject: Re: [An-lang] An-lang Digest, Vol 98, Issue 8
> To: an-lang at anu.edu.au
> Message-ID: <4E4730A6.9070905 at millenicom.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
> 
> Chris,
> 
> Begun/not begun is the same thing as realis/irrealis in Cebuano.  Prof. 
> Wolfe's books call them real/unreal.  Cebuano has a third time 
> mode--infinitive, or tenseless or abstract or whatever you want to call 
> it.  I like to call it surrealis to make it fit with realis/irrealis but 
> no one else will want to use that.
> 
> I found the concept of relative tense particularly useful for Cebuano 
> time modes, since there is no distinction made between present and past 
> time sense provided by the realis affix.  Context such as time words or 
> cause/effect words provides the distinction.  Then the irrealis is often 
> used when there is a past or present time sense in more formal grammar, 
> though speakers of Visayan seem to be getting away from that and using a 
> redundant realis affix when a time word in the context has already 
> marked the sentence as having a past time sense.
> 
> Luther
> 
>> I have a question on the terminology. I first encountered the "Begun/Not
>> Begun" distinction a few years ago in the context of a Cebuano grammar
>> sketch written by UP Diliman linguist Jessie Grace Rubrico (and then later
>> on, I saw the terminology in Reid 1992).  But I think this may be actually
>> irrealis/realis mood. What's your (and others') take on this?
>> 
>> As far as the ambiguity of Tagalog -um- is concerned.  Until the 20th
>> century, Tagalog had the infix -ungm- which was used for the aspects under
>> the realis mood, imperfective&  perfective. It's a reflex of
>> Proto-Austronesian *-umin- and there are reflexes of this in other
>> Philippine languages. My recently-completed undergrad thesis focuses on
>> this.
>> 
>> --Chris Sundita
>> 
>> On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 3:55 PM, Resty Cena<restycena at gmail.com>  wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> paradigm is irregular,all other affix voice paradigms are regular and
>>> comparable. The irregularity ofthe -um-affix stems from the fact that the
>>> aspect Begun uses it as well(bumili, bumibili), rather than switching to an
>>> n variant, theway the infinitive of mag-verbs do it, for example, magbili
>>> becomes nagbiliand nagbibili. But then, -um-cannot use -in- to express
>>> Begun, for that would be the same form asthe Begun aspects of a patient
>>> verb. It could have invented *-un-, todistinguish it from -in-, but, I
>>> guess, it must be thinking, ?Well, Ialready have the -um- form, so I?ll just
>>> use it rather than inventanother infix. That should confuse linguists.?
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 2
> Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2011 14:53:16 +0300
> From: john at research.haifa.ac.il
> Subject: Re: [An-lang] Irrealis imperative? (somewhat OT)
> To: "Kroeger, Paul" <paul_kroeger at gial.edu>
> Cc: "an-lang at anu.edu.au" <an-lang at anu.edu.au>
> Message-ID: <1313322796.4e47b72c75744 at webmail.haifa.ac.il>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1255
> 
> There are many languages around the world in which both the
> irrealis(/subjunctive) and the imperative are marked with the maximally
> unmarked verbal form.
> John
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Quoting "Kroeger, Paul" <paul_kroeger at gial.edu>:
> 
>> In Urim (PNG, non-Austronesian), I believe the irrealis form is the standard
>> way to mark an imperative.
>> 
>> -- Paul Kroeger
>> 
>> From: an-lang-bounces at anu.edu.au [mailto:an-lang-bounces at anu.edu.au] On
>> Behalf Of Roger Mills
>> Sent: Friday, August 12, 2011 1:22 PM
>> To: an-lang at anu.edu.au
>> Subject: [An-lang] Irrealis imperative? (somewhat OT)
>> 
>> An interesting, possibly amusing, question has arisen in quite another
>> context: Does anyone know if, in languages with a well-marked/well-defined
>> irrealis mode, can there be an "irrealis imperative"?
>> 
>> Roger Mills
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> This message was sent using IMP, the Webmail Program of Haifa University
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> An-lang mailing list
> An-lang at anu.edu.au
> http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/an-lang
> 
> 
> End of An-lang Digest, Vol 98, Issue 9
> **************************************

_______________________________________________
An-lang mailing list
An-lang at anu.edu.au
http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/an-lang