If in a language finite and non-finite (attributive and/or argument) functions of converbs are equally marked or equally unmarked, then the language is non-tensed (in Stassen’s sense).
Standardized
IF finite and non-finite (attributive and/or nominal) functions of converbs are equally marked or equally unmarked, THEN there is non-tensedness.
1. Kalinina uses the term “markedness” in the sense of Croft (1991: 67), meaning the relative structural complexity of two constructions. If one and the same form gets either nominal (case) or verbal (person) inflectional morphemes depending on its either argument/attributive or predicative functions, these functions are EQUALLY MARKED. If both functions receive no morphological marking, they are EQUALLY UNMARKED. Obviously, the functions of a form can be equally marked only in languages with inflectional morphology, and the functions of a form are equally unmarked in languages without inflectional morphology. 2. Stassen defines a language as tensed, if predicates in main sentences are obligatorily marked for a Past-NonPast distinction by means of bound morphology (see ##1031, 1032).
1. Kalinina uses the term “markedness” in the sense of Croft (1991: 67), meaning the relative structural complexity of two constructions. If one and the same form gets either nominal (case) or verbal (person) inflectional morphemes depending on its either argument/attributive or predicative functions, these functions are EQUALLY MARKED. If both functions receive no morphological marking, they are EQUALLY UNMARKED. Obviously, the functions of a form can be equally marked only in languages with inflectional morphology, and the functions of a form are equally unmarked in languages without inflectional morphology. 2. Stassen defines a language as tensed, if predicates in main sentences are obligatorily marked for a Past-NonPast distinction by means of bound morphology (see ##1031, 1032).