[Lingtyp] Intuitions about inclusive time reference

[Alex Francois]

dear Östen,

Mwotlap (Oceanic, Vanuatu) would use the TAM marker I label “Prospective”,
with the form *so *[or *so ni-* for 3sg]:

Merē  *so    ni*-vētleg  na-faēl  namun  a   qiyig  agōh.
(name)  Prosp   3sg-send         Art-file         Poss:3sg    Foc  today
 Dx1
lit. “Mary is/was going to send her files precisely today.”

The Prospective *so (ni-)* is polysemous between near-future ~ deontic ~
volitional ~ conative ~ frustrative uses [see its dictionary entry
<https://marama.huma-num.fr/Lex/Mwotlap/s.htm#%E2%93%94so%20(ni-)>].
But the key here is that Mwotlap (as often happens in Oceanic languages)
does not encode absolute tense [=deictic location with respect to the time
of utterance], but only relative tense and aspect  (cf. François 2003: 39ff
<https://marama.huma-num.fr/data/AlexFrancois_Mwotlap-Predicat_2003_SLP.pdf#page=60>;
2005: 132
<https://marama.huma-num.fr/data/AlexFrancois_LingTyp-Mwotlap_2005.pdf#page=18>
).
Thus, a Stative clause *kē ne-mlaklak* means “he's glad” or “he was glad”,
a iamitive *kē mal gengen* “he's already eaten” or “he'll have already
eaten”, etc.
Likewise, the Prospective *Kē so ni-hole van hiy nēk *can mean :

   - irrealis readings based on time of utterance
   → {he's going to call you | he should call you | he wants to call you}

   - irrealis readings with reference to a past anchor
   → {he was going to call you | he was supposed to call you | he should
   have called you}

________
The only difficulty Mwotlap may have with your example is not with the
verb's TAM, but with the adverb “today”. That is because Mwotlap
dislexifies between “today:Past” (*aqyig*) and “today:Future” (*qiyig*).
Yet in the (rare) cases of ambiguity, then the default term is the
'future' today (see sense #2 of *qiyig
<https://marama.huma-num.fr/Lex/Mwotlap/q.htm#%E2%93%94qiyig%E2%93%971>*).

best
Alex
------------------------------

Alex François
LaTTiCe <http://www.lattice.cnrs.fr/en/alexandre-francois/> — CNRS–
<http://www.cnrs.fr/index.html>ENS
<https://www.ens.fr/laboratoire/lattice-langues-textes-traitements-informatiques-et-cognition-umr-8094>
–PSL <https://www.psl.eu/en>–Sorbonne nouvelle
<http://www.univ-paris3.fr/lattice-langues-textes-traitements-informatiques-cognition-umr-8094-3458.kjsp>
Australian National University
<https://researchprofiles.anu.edu.au/en/persons/alex-francois>
Personal homepage <http://alex.francois.online.fr/>
_________________________________________


---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Östen Dahl <oesten at ling.su.se>
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2024 at 22:29
Subject: [Lingtyp] Intuitions about inclusive time reference
To: lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org <lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>


I would like to ask for intuitions about the following, in one or more
languages that you are acquainted with.



Suppose your colleague Mary said on Monday: "Tomorrow I'm going to submit
my grant proposal." Now it's about noon on Tuesday, and you have no idea
whatsoever of the time of the realization of her intention. Maybe she did
it in the morning, maybe she'll wait until midnight, and maybe she's just
doing it right now. How would you express the sentence below in your
language(s), replacing SUBMIT by a suitable verb form? The idea is that you
should try to use a maximally simple and natural formulation without
excluding any possibility.



Today Mary SUBMIT her grant proposal



All comments are welcome.



Thanks in advance!

- Östen
_______________________________________________
Lingtyp mailing list
Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
https://listserv.linguistlist.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lingtyp/attachments/20240215/1bfeb030/attachment.htm>