04.03.2013 Views

the university of chicago the phonology and ... - SIL International

the university of chicago the phonology and ... - SIL International

the university of chicago the phonology and ... - SIL International

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

c. A(IK A(IK A(IK A(IK ( ( ( ( M= M= M= M= J(A J(A J(A J(A C=F=( C=F=( C=F=( C=F=( 5 5 5 5<br />

Jesus SS return:FUT REFL-3SG on-top soil<br />

‘Jesus will return to earth.’<br />

d. ==( ==( ==( ==( F=( F=( F=( F=(<br />

=(C=( =(C=( =(C=( =(C=( <br />

<br />

1PL.INCL:FUT REP-eat:FUT ano<strong>the</strong>r DET EMPH<br />

‘We will eat again later.’<br />

There has been some discussion in <strong>the</strong> literature concerning <strong>the</strong> precise distinction<br />

between what I am calling <strong>the</strong> non-future <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> future tenses. Boyd (1989: 206) notes<br />

that many Adamawa-Ubangi languages have a basic distinction between perfective aspect<br />

(<strong>the</strong> situation is looked at from <strong>the</strong> outside, without distinguishing its internal structure)<br />

<strong>and</strong> imperfective aspect (<strong>the</strong> situation is looked at from <strong>the</strong> inside, <strong>and</strong> is concerned with<br />

<strong>the</strong> internal structure; cf. Comrie 1976:4). For Linda, Cloarec-Heiss (pp. 310ff) considers<br />

this distinction to be one <strong>of</strong> completed (“accompli”) aspect (<strong>the</strong> process or state is<br />

considered to be acquired or certain) versus incompleted (“inaccompli”) aspect (<strong>the</strong><br />

process or state is considered to be incertain or in <strong>the</strong> process <strong>of</strong> succeeding; cf. Boyd<br />

1995: 22). This is <strong>the</strong> distinction that Kam<strong>and</strong>a chooses in describing Mono. However,<br />

Cloarec-Heiss (1995b: 85) changes her mind <strong>and</strong> considers <strong>the</strong> distinction in Linda to be<br />

one <strong>of</strong> real mode (<strong>the</strong> process or state is considered to be existing) <strong>and</strong> virtual mode (<strong>the</strong><br />

process or state is considered possible or desirable; cf. Boyd 1995:22). The data in my<br />

corpus point toward a distinction <strong>of</strong> non-future versus future, but a more detailed study is<br />

necessary to clarify this.<br />

Progressive aspect. The progressive aspect is indicated by <strong>the</strong> verb (I (I (I (I ‘to be’<br />

inflected for TAM, followed by <strong>the</strong> infinitive form <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> main verb.<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

(25) a. I( I( I( I( ( ( ( ( J5 J5 J5 J5<br />

1SG be:NF INF-hit song<br />

‘I am (was) singing.’<br />

b. ( ( ( ( I I I I ( ( ( ( J5 J5 J5 J5<br />

1SG:FUT be:NF INF-hit song<br />

‘I will be singing.’<br />

c. I(I( I(I( I(I( I(I( (= (= (= (= C=(=CK( C=(=CK( C=(=CK( C=(=CK( AA AA AA AA<br />

1SG RED-be:NF INF-go to.water NEG<br />

‘I’m not going to <strong>the</strong> water.’<br />

109

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!