Chlouvānem: Difference between revisions

Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 586: Line 586:


Note that the “impact on the present” meaning and the use of evidentials are independent from each other. Using a first inferential, for example, does not change the implications given by the use of perfect or past, though the actual interpretation is often heavily dependent from context:
Note that the “impact on the present” meaning and the use of evidentials are independent from each other. Using a first inferential, for example, does not change the implications given by the use of perfect or past, though the actual interpretation is often heavily dependent from context:
: ''palias jāyim junianerire'' - “apparently, the girl painted her [own] face”. Past tense: it can be assumed that the girl painted her own face sometime in the past; e.g. the girl is now painting her face, and given the way she does it, it’s reasonable to believe it’s not her first time.
: ''palias jāyim junirṇek'' - “apparently, the girl painted her [own] face”. Past tense: it can be assumed that the girl painted her own face sometime in the past; e.g. the girl is now painting her face, and given the way she does it, it’s reasonable to believe it’s not her first time.
: ''palias jāyim ujunianerirā'' - “apparently, the girl has painted her [own] face”. Perfect “tense”: it can be assumed that the girl now has a painted face, but the speaker has not seen her; e.g. in her room there are face painting colours open or that look like they’ve been recently used.
: ''palias jāyim ujunirṇa'' - “apparently, the girl has painted her [own] face”. Perfect “tense”: it can be assumed that the girl now has a painted face, but the speaker has not seen her; e.g. in her room there are face painting colours open or that look like they’ve been recently used.
Second inferential changes the speaker’s deduction, but not the implications given by tenses:
Second inferential changes the speaker’s deduction, but not the implications given by tenses:
: ''palias jāyim junianuyere'' - “apparently, the girl painted her [own] face, but probably didn’t”. Past tense: as before, but while she, or something she did, had made the speaker believe she had already painted her face at least once in the past, the way she’s doing it makes think that she probably never did.
: ''palias jāyim junirākek'' - “apparently, the girl painted her [own] face, but probably didn’t”. Past tense: as before, but while she, or something she did, had made the speaker believe she had already painted her face at least once in the past, the way she’s doing it makes think that she probably never did.
: ''palias jāyim ujunianuyerā'' - “apparently, the girl has painted her [own] face, but probably didn’t”. Perfect “tense”: as before; highly dependent on context. For example, there are face painting colours out of place, but it’s unlikely she did paint her face - e.g. it may not be a logical time to do it, or too little colour seems to have been used.
: ''palias jāyim ujunirāka'' - “apparently, the girl has painted her [own] face, but probably didn’t”. Perfect “tense”: as before; highly dependent on context. For example, there are face painting colours out of place, but it’s unlikely she did paint her face - e.g. it may not be a logical time to do it, or too little colour seems to have been used.


The Chlouvānem perfect is however also used where English would use ''past perfect'' or ''future perfect'', as the “impact on the present” is understood to be on the time the main action in the sentence takes place, thus something that happened earlier is considered to have an impact on it:
The Chlouvānem perfect is however also used where English would use ''past perfect'' or ''future perfect'', as the “impact on the present” is understood to be on the time the main action in the sentence takes place, thus something that happened earlier is considered to have an impact on it:
Retrieved from "https://linguifex.com/wiki/Chlouvānem"