LINGUIST List 23.1391
|
Mon Mar 19 2012
Qs: Speaker/Hearer Related Temporal Expressions
Editor for this issue: Zac Smith
<zac linguistlist.org>
|
New! Visit LL's Multitree project for over 1000 trees dynamically generated from scholarly hypotheses about language relationships: http://multitree.linguistlist.org/
We'd like to remind readers that the responses to queries are usually best posted to the individual asking the question. That individual is then strongly encouraged to post a summary to the list. This policy was instituted to help control the huge volume of mail on LINGUIST; so we would appreciate your cooperating with it whenever it seems appropriate. In addition to posting a summary, we'd like to remind people that it is usually a good idea to personally thank those individuals who have taken the trouble to respond to the query. To post to LINGUIST, use our convenient web form at http://linguistlist.org/LL/posttolinguist.cfm.
|
Date: 18-Mar-2012
From: Bettina Gruber <b.gruber uu.nl>
Subject: Speaker/Hearer Related Temporal Expressions
E-mail this message to a friend
Dear linguists, It is well know that within the spatial domain many languages have distinct lexical items to express closeness to the speaker as opposed to closeness to the hearer. I am wondering whether there are languages that have similar means in the temporal domain. For instance, one could imagine a language having distinct lexical items for the 'now of the speaker' as opposed to the 'now of the hearer'. Provided such languages exist, it would be interesting to know whether these items are morphologically complex, and if so, whether the individual components exist elsewhere in the grammar (e.g., the pronominal or temporal domain). If you know of any such language, I would be very grateful for a short message with some details. Best regards, Bettina Gruber
Linguistic Field(s):
Morphology
Typology
Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue
|
|
Page Updated: 19-Mar-2012
|
|
About LINGUIST
|
Contact Us
While the LINGUIST List makes every effort to ensure the linguistic relevance of sites listed
on its pages, it cannot vouch for their contents.
|
|