|
The future / non-future split in Vincentian Creole: Evidence from the interpretation of bare verbs| title | The future / non-future split in Vincentian Creole: Evidence from the interpretation of bare verbs |
|---|
| start_date | 2024/04/29 |
|---|
| schedule | 14h-16h30 |
|---|
| online | no |
|---|
| location_info | Salle 124 & sur Zoom |
|---|
| summary | The bare form of verbs in Vincentian Creole can be described as ambiguous between past and present or, more accurately, to use Eide’s formula, “inherently underspecified as to whether it denotes present or past” (Eide 2006: 349). I argue that Vincentian Creole makes a future/non- future tense distinction. This is based on the categorisation proposed by de Haan (2010) who states that languages that use the same form for past and present make a future/non-future tense opposition, while those that combine present and future make past/non-past opposition (see also Comrie 1985). Although this typology seems simplistic from the outset, I elect to apply the classification here as a first approach to the study of future tense in Vincentian Creole. In this language, as in other English-based creoles (see Maurer et al. 2013), tense is not marked by means of inflectional morphology on the verb, but rather periphrastically, as summarised below. |
|---|
| responsibles | Cabredo Hofherr |
|---|
Workflow history| from state (1) | to state | comment | date |
|---|
| submitted | published | | 2024/04/16 15:34 UTC |
| |
|