Universal #1657
Legacy number: 1657
| Number | 1652 |
| Original | 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. |
| Keywords | finiteness, complexity, converb, non-tensed |
| Domain | inflection, syntax |
| Type | implication |
| Status | achronic |
| Quality | statistical |
| Basis | 40 languages surveyed by Kalinina |
| Source | Kalinina 1998 |
Discussion
Counterexamples
Diyari (Pama-Nyungan), possibly Sinhalese (Indo-Aryan) (but the data is insufficient) (Kalinina 1998).
Notes
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).
Log in to join the discussion.
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 <a class="innerLink" href="browse.php?entry_id=1031"><img src="../img/entry.gif" border="0">, <a class="innerLink" href="browse.php?entry_id=1032"><img src="../img/entry.gif" border="0">).