Take the 2-minute tour ×
Linguistics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for professional linguists and others with an interest in linguistic research and theory. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Mandarin Chinese appears to be a language that may not express tense (at least in the way I will define below), and it does not seem to allow aspectual coercion.

By not expressing Tense I mean, such a language will fail to show morphological exponence of past or present-oriented meanings. English shows present and past on the verb by suffixation to a root or root suppletion (he goes versus he went respectively).

By allowing aspectual coercion, I mean in this case that phrases that by themselves would denote momentaneous events, e.g., achievement verb phrases like win the chess match or arrive, can be used to convey other aspects when they appear (a) with progressive aspect, or (b) with adverbials like in an hour in some cases. Some examples in English, which don't sound bad to my ear:

  1. Mary is winning the chess match
  2. Mary won the chess match in 5 minutes
  3. The train is arriving
  4. The train arrived in 2 hours

Such a language as answers my question would (a) not show morphological exponence of past/present by means of affixation or suppletion, but (b) equivalent sentences as (1)-(4) would be perfectly acceptable.

share|improve this question
1  
Let me double-check that I understood you correctly. So you're interested in languages without (grammaticalized) tense but with aspectual marking? If so, then Bhat calls them aspect-prominent languages. See his "The prominence of tense, aspect, and mood" as something to start with. –  Alex B. Nov 14 '11 at 20:12
1  
@AlexB. no, it's not a question about lgs without tense but with aspect. The 2 phenomena I'm interested are not obviously connected, but may be (theoretically). A language without aspect might not have equivalents for (1) and (3), which leaves (2) and (4). An answerer of this question would either speak or have regular access to a speaker of a tense-less language and a way of translating some of (1-4) that preserves aspectual properties (progressive in (1,3), use of adverbial in (as opposed to for) in (2,4)). Note that some semantic theories would predict (1-4) to sound bad in English. –  Alexis Wellwood Nov 14 '11 at 20:28
2  
I am wondering if a bona fide example can be found easily. If a verb's aktionsart class is achievement, then it is usually incompatible w/ progressives and "in 5 minutes" adverbials. We say that there is coercion in the English cases because English-speaking semanticists still feel that "win"&"arrive" are achievements, even though the test fails. If I consult a speaker of Gengbe, and "Mary is winning the match" is grammatical it could be either because the equivalent verb is in a different Aktionsart class, or that there is true coercion. What may be needed is a Gbe-speaking semanticist. –  jlovegren Nov 15 '11 at 0:14
2  
@AlexisWellwood Can you give an example of a language with looser requirements: one that has aspectual coercion, whether or not it also has tense marking? I suspect you may include English in this category, but its coercion is achieved through adding prepositional phrases. I'd be interested to see an affix that changes the lexical aspect of the verb root, thereby restricting the set of PPs that are possible to adjoin to it. –  Alek Storm Nov 15 '11 at 12:15
    
In Quechua and Aymara, there's no morphological distinction between past and present but the languages have a variety of aspect suffixes. E.g. sartwa "I went/I go" vs. sarasktwa "I'm going" vs. saraskaktwa "I keep going", etc. There's a morphologically distinct future tense though. –  Atamiri Sep 27 '13 at 20:33
show 1 more comment

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.