[Lingtyp] Lingtyp Digest, Vol 130, Issue 24

Joseph Brooks brooks.josephd at gmail.com
Sun Jul 27 23:55:12 UTC 2025 

Dear Sergey,

Speaking only for Chini (Lower Sepik-Ramu, in PNG), some complexities aside
there is a clear-cut morphological distinction between perfective and
imperfective, where these are inclusive of types of imperfectivity (eg both
a phasal-habitual and a stative) and perfectivity (eg both a generalized
pfv and a more specific one that is not really conducive to a short
descriptive label).

The morphological evidence for a binary distinction here is twofold: (1)
the differential forms for realis suffixes (exclusively -apa for IPFV verb
stems, vs a diversity of forms for PFV) and then (2) especially in the
suffixal forms on irrealis-marked verbs used to mark a wide range of clause
types (questions, relative clauses, among others). Simply put, -n marks
(irrealis-inflected) perfective stems of various kinds while -ch marks
(irrealis-inflected) imperfective stems of various kinds (and then -y, for
realis-inflected forms, but here both pfv and ipfv). Hope this helps,
cheers, Joseph

On Mon, Jul 28, 2025 at 2:30 AM <lingtyp-request at listserv.linguistlist.org>
wrote:

> Send Lingtyp mailing list submissions to
>         lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>         https://listserv.linguistlist.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>         lingtyp-request at listserv.linguistlist.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>         lingtyp-owner at listserv.linguistlist.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Lingtyp digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>    1. once again about perfective vs. imperfective aspect
>       (Sergey Loesov)
>    2. Re: once again about perfective vs. imperfective aspect
>       (Christian Lehmann)
>    3. Re: once again about perfective vs. imperfective aspect
>       (Juergen Bohnemeyer)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Sun, 27 Jul 2025 18:20:04 +0300
> From: Sergey Loesov <sergeloesov at gmail.com>
> To: "LINGTYP at LISTSERV.LINGUISTLIST.ORG"
>         <lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>
> Subject: [Lingtyp] once again about perfective vs. imperfective aspect
> Message-ID:
>         <
> CAPsdraeqF+UHiuLz-reTgWen+xdwmuDorbx5umfAp1n9i_VEOg at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Dear colleagues,
>
> Please allow me a na?ve question: do we believe in a one-feature binary
> opposition of ?perfective? vs. ?imperfective? aspect in languages that,
> unlike English (e.g., yesterday he wrote ~ yesterday he was writing) or
> Spanish (ayer escribi? ~ ayer estaba escribiendo), do not exhibit a
> clear-cut morphological distinction of this kind within the same tense, if
> I may put it as simply as possible?
>
> Thank you very much!
>
> Sergey
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lingtyp/attachments/20250727/8000b94f/attachment-0001.htm
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Sun, 27 Jul 2025 18:21:14 +0200
> From: Christian Lehmann <christian.lehmann at uni-erfurt.de>
> To: lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
> Subject: Re: [Lingtyp] once again about perfective vs. imperfective
>         aspect
> Message-ID: <d0661ac5-37a0-4f8b-a0a2-3add34dc2e5a at uni-erfurt.de>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; Format="flowed"
>
> Dear Sergey,
>
> you may wish to specify your question. First of all, there are languages
> without any aspect at all, e.g. German. Second, there are languages with
> more than two aspects at the same morphological level, e.g. Yucatec
> Maya. So what exactly is the question?
>
> Cheers, Christian
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Am 27.07.2025 um 17:20 schrieb Sergey Loesov via Lingtyp:
> >
> > Dear colleagues,
> >
> > Please allow me a na?ve question: do we believe in a one-feature
> > binary opposition of ?perfective? vs. ?imperfective? aspect in
> > languages that, unlike English (e.g., yesterday he wrote ~ yesterday
> > he was writing) or Spanish (ayer escribi? ~ ayer estaba escribiendo),
> > do not exhibit a clear-cut morphological distinction of this kind
> > within the same tense, if I may put it as simply as possible?
> >
> > Thank you very much!
> >
> > Sergey
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Lingtyp mailing list
> > Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
> > https://listserv.linguistlist.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp
> --
>
> Prof. em. Dr. Christian Lehmann
> Rudolfstr. 4
> 99092 Erfurt
> Deutschland
>
> Tel.:   +49/361/2113417
> E-Post:         christianw_lehmann at arcor.de
> Web:    https://www.christianlehmann.eu
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lingtyp/attachments/20250727/98fb64cc/attachment-0001.htm
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Sun, 27 Jul 2025 16:29:04 +0000
> From: Juergen Bohnemeyer <jb77 at buffalo.edu>
> To: Sergey Loesov <sergeloesov at gmail.com>,
>         "LINGTYP at LISTSERV.LINGUISTLIST.ORG"
>         <lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>
> Subject: Re: [Lingtyp] once again about perfective vs. imperfective
>         aspect
> Message-ID:
>         <
> SJ0PR15MB4696FAAD5CD6D1C78A7922FCDD5BA at SJ0PR15MB4696.namprd15.prod.outlook.com
> >
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
>
> Dear Sergey ? Every utterance has aspectual reference, regardless of
> whether that aspectual reference is constrained by a functional expression
> (an aspect marker) or not. Therefore, *semantically*, a dynamic event
> description, regardless of tense, necessarily has either
> imperfective/progressive reference, perfective reference, perfect =
> post-state/time reference, prospective = pre-state/time reference, habitual
> reference, or generic reference. Those are the logical possibilities.
> (Dynamic b/c state descriptions are more or less inherently imperfective.)
> ? Best ? Juergen
>
> Bohnemeyer, J. (2023). Elicitation and documentation of tense and aspect.
> Language Documentation and Conservation 26: 59-98. PDF attached.
>
>
>
> Juergen Bohnemeyer (He/Him)
> Professor, Department of Linguistics
> University at Buffalo
>
> Office: 642 Baldy Hall, UB North Campus
> Mailing address: 609 Baldy Hall, Buffalo, NY 14260
> Phone: (716) 645 0127
> Fax: (716) 645 3825
> Email: jb77 at buffalo.edu<mailto:jb77 at buffalo.edu>
> Web: http://www.acsu.buffalo.edu/~jb77/
>
> Office hours Tu/Th 3:30-4:30pm in 642 Baldy or via Zoom (Meeting ID 585
> 520 2411; Passcode Hoorheh)
>
> There?s A Crack In Everything - That?s How The Light Gets In
> (Leonard Cohen)
> --
>
>
> From: Lingtyp <lingtyp-bounces at listserv.linguistlist.org> on behalf of
> Sergey Loesov via Lingtyp <lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>
> Date: Sunday, July 27, 2025 at 11:20
> To: LINGTYP at LISTSERV.LINGUISTLIST.ORG <lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>
> Subject: [Lingtyp] once again about perfective vs. imperfective aspect
> Dear colleagues,
> Please allow me a na?ve question: do we believe in a one-feature binary
> opposition of ?perfective? vs. ?imperfective? aspect in languages that,
> unlike English (e.g., yesterday he wrote ~ yesterday he was writing) or
> Spanish (ayer escribi? ~ ayer estaba escribiendo), do not exhibit a
> clear-cut morphological distinction of this kind within the same tense, if
> I may put it as simply as possible?
> Thank you very much!
> Sergey
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lingtyp/attachments/20250727/c64c42f2/attachment.htm
> >
> -------------- next part --------------
> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
> Name: Bohnemeyer_2023.pdf
> Type: application/pdf
> Size: 936297 bytes
> Desc: Bohnemeyer_2023.pdf
> URL: <
> http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lingtyp/attachments/20250727/c64c42f2/attachment.pdf
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Subject: Digest Footer
>
> _______________________________________________
> Lingtyp mailing list
> Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
> https://listserv.linguistlist.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of Lingtyp Digest, Vol 130, Issue 24
> ****************************************
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lingtyp/attachments/20250728/3d5179da/attachment.htm>

More information about the Lingtyp mailing list