TAM and nominals -- summary

[Rachel Nordlinger]

Dear LingTYP-ers,

A few weeks ago I posted a message to the list asking for information on
languages which mark tense, aspect, mood and/or other clause-level
information on nominals or pronouns.  I would like to thank all of the
following for their very helpful responses.  My apologies if I have
inadvertently missed someone.

Sasha Aikhenvald, David Beck, D. N. S. Bhat, Juergen Broschart, Pierluigi
Cuzzolin, Matthew Dryer, Elena Filimonova, David Gil, Martin Haspelmath,
Marco Last, Bill Lewis, Tom Payne, Wolfgang Raible, Hans-Jürgen Sasse,
Andrew Spencer, Bjoern Wiemer.

These responses covered a wide range of languages, all exhibiting some
variety of TAM marking on (or associated with) NPs or pronouns.  Following
Matthew Dryer's post to the list distinguishing the different phenomena
that could all be classified as instances of this, I have so far divided
the data that I received into the 4 types listed below.  Where possible I
have allocated languages to types; guesses are marked with question marks.
I am still trying to track down information on many of the languages
mentioned -- in many cases I have made allocations on the basis of only a
very small amount of data -- so my apologies if there are any errors or
misunderstandings.  I would greatly appreciate any feedback and/or
corrections.

1. Languages in which clause-level TAM information is affixed to nominals
and/or pronominals (possibly portmanteaux with case markers).
Kayardild, Lardil (non-Pama-Nyungan, Australia), Pitta Pitta, Gurnu
(Pama-Nyungan, Australia), Supyire (Niger-Congo, Mali), Yag Dii
(Niger-Congo, Cameroon), Coptic (Egyptian), Gusiilay (Niger-Congo); Apurina
(Arawak, Brazil);  Tigak? (Oceanic), Iai (Oceanic).  Also probably in this
category are languages in which case morphology interacts with the TAM
system, e.g. ergative case is only found in perfective aspect clauses
(Hindi) or past tense clauses (Guaymi (Chibchan, Costa Rica and Panama)).
The partitive/accusative distinction on objects in Finnish might also fall
into this category.  English subject pronouns with contracted auxiliaries
could also be thought of in this way (and have been analysed as such by
Andrew Spencer, Louisa Sadler, Julia Barron and perhaps others).

2. Languages in which TAM clitics can appear on nominals, so the
association of TAM information with nominals is somewhat accidental.
This situation is found in Garrwa (Australia).

3.  Languages with so-called tensed pronominals that are actually better
treated as an auxiliary-type verbal element.  These usually appear in a
fixed position before the verb that is distinct from a NP position, and are
no more pronouns inflecting for TAM than they are TAM words inflecting for
the pronominal features of the clausal subject.  These are the ones for
which the GB notion of "INFL" seems appropriate.
Hausa, Karaja (Ge-Pano-Karib, Brazil) and Wolof (Niger-Kordof).

4.  Languages in which TAM markers appear on nominals which are serving
some sort of predicative function in the clause.  This category contains
two (possibly related) sub-types:
(i) the TAM on nominals contributes to the semantics of the NP, e.g.
chair-PAST means 'a former chair', chair-FUT means 'a future chair', etc.
This seems to be quite prevalent in North American languages (e.g. Cayuga,
Lushootseed, Santiam, Nootka?) and some Amazonian languages (e.g. Tariana,
Carib languages).

(ii) tense information is associated with the predicate nominal in a
verbless clause.
Lango? (Nilo-Saharan, Uganda and Sudan).  In some languages case marking
associated with the nominal predicate conveys some tense information in
these clause types (e.g. Russian, Maori).

Once again, thank you to everyone who responded.

Rachel Nordlinger




**************************************************************************

Dr. Rachel Nordlinger
Dept. of Linguistics and Applied Linguistics
University of Melbourne
Victoria 3010
AUSTRALIA
ph. +61-(0)3-9344-4215, fax. +61-(0)3-9344-8990