Advertisement

Linguistics and Philosophy

, Volume 36, Issue 5, pp 371–415 | Cite as

Temporal interpretation in Hausa

  • Anne Mucha
Research Article

Abstract

This paper provides a formal analysis of the grammatical encoding of temporal information in Hausa (Chadic, Afro-Asiatic), thereby contributing to the recent debate on temporality in languages without overt tense morphology. By testing the hypothesis of covert tense against recently obtained empirical data, the study yields the result that Hausa is tenseless and that temporal reference is pragmatically inferred from aspectual, modal and contextual information. The second part of the paper addresses the coding of future in particular. It is shown that future time reference in Hausa is realized as a combination of a modal operator and a Prospective aspect marker, involving the modal meaning components of intention and prediction as well as event time shifting. The discussion relates directly to recent approaches to other seemingly tenseless languages such as St’át’imcets (Matthewson, Linguist Philos 29:673–713, 2006) or Paraguayan Guaraní (Tonhauser, Linguist Philos 34:257–303, 2011b) and provides further evidence for the suggested analyses of the future markers in these languages.

Keywords

Tenseless languages Aspect Pragmatic principles Future Modality Hausa 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Abdoulaye, M. L. (2001). The grammaticalization of Hausa zâa “be going to” future. Journal of African Languages and Linguistics, 22, 1–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Abdoulaye, M. L. (2008). Perfectivity and time reference in Hausa. Linguistic Discovery, 6, 15–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Abusch, D. (1985). On verbs and time. Dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA.Google Scholar
  4. Bennett, M., & Partee, B. H. (1978/2008). Toward the logic of tense and aspect in English. In B. H. Partee (Ed.), Compositionality in formal semantics (pp. 59–109). Malden, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  5. Bittner, M. (2005). Future discourse in a tenseless language. Journal of Semantics, 22, 339–387.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bittner, M. (2008). Aspectual universals of temporal anaphora. In S. Rothstein (Ed.), Theoretical and crosslinguistic approaches to the semantics of aspect (pp. 349–385). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
  7. Bittner, M. (2011). Time and modality without tenses or modals. In R. Musan & M. Rathert (Eds.), Tense across languages (pp. 147–188). Tübingen: Niemeyer.Google Scholar
  8. Bohnemeyer, J. (2002). The grammar of time reference in Yukatek Maya. Munich: Lincom.Google Scholar
  9. Bohnemeyer, J. (2009). Temporal anaphora in a tenseless language. In W. Klein & P. Li (Eds.), The expressions of time (pp. 83–128). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  10. Bybee, J. L., Perkins, R. D., & Pagliuca, W. (1994). The evolution of grammar: Tense, aspect, and modality in the languages of the world. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  11. Cable, S. (2013). Beyond the past, present and future: Towards the semantics of ‘graded tense’ in Gĩkũyũ. Natural Language Semantics, 21, 219–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Condoravdi, C. (2002). Temporal interpretation of modals: Modals for the present and the past. In D. I. Beaver, J. D. C. Martinez, B. Z. Clark, & S. Kaufman (Eds.), The construction of meaning (pp. 59–88). Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
  13. Copley, B. (2009). The semantics of the future. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  14. Cresswell, M. J. (1990). Entities and indices. Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Enç, M. (1987). Anchoring conditions for tense. Linguistic Inquiry, 18, 633–657.Google Scholar
  16. Enç, M. (1996). Tense and modality. In S. Lappin (Ed.), Handbook of semantic theory (pp. 345–358). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  17. Gouffé, C. (1963/1966). Les problems de l’aspect en haoussa. I—Introduction. Le problème de l’aoriste et de l’accompli II. Comptes rendus du groupe linguistique d’études chamito-sémitiques [GLECS] 10, 151–165.Google Scholar
  18. Grubic, M., & A. Mucha (2012, April). Explaining the modal readings of Hausa sai (= “only”). Paper presented at Modality@OttawaU, Ottawa.Google Scholar
  19. Heim, I. (1994). Comments on Abusch’s theory of tense. In H. Kamp (Ed.), Ellipsis, tense and questions (pp. 143–170). Dyana 2. Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam).Google Scholar
  20. Jaggar, P. J. (2001). Hausa. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
  21. Jaggar, P. J. (2006). The Hausa completive tense-aspect used in wh-/focus constructions and historical narratives: A unified account. West African linguistics: Descriptive, comparative, and historical studies in honor of Russell G. Schuh. Studies in African Linguistics, pp. 100–133.Google Scholar
  22. Jóhannsdóttir, K., & Matthewson, L. (2008). Zero-marked tense: The case of Gitxsan. In Proceedings of NELS 37. Amherst, MA: GLSA.Google Scholar
  23. Kamp, H., & Reyle, U. (1993). From discourse to logic. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  24. Kaufmann, M. (2012). Interpreting imperatives. Heidelberg: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Klein, W. (1994). Time in language. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  26. Klingenheben, A. (1928/1929). Die Tempora Westafrikas und die semitischen Tempora. Zeitschrift für Eingeborenensprachen, 19, 241–268.Google Scholar
  27. Kratzer, A. (1981). The notional category of modality. In H.-J. Eikmeyer & H. Rieser (Eds.), Words, worlds, and contexts: New approaches in word semantics (pp. 38–74). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  28. Kratzer, A. (1991). Modality. In A. Von Stechow & D. Wunderlich (Eds.), Semantics: An international handbook of contemporary research (pp. 109–137). Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  29. Kratzer, A. (1998). More structural analogies between pronouns and tenses. In D. Strolovitch & A. Lawson (Eds.), The Proceedings of Semantics and Linguistic Theory (SALT) 8 (pp. 92–110). Ithaca, NY: CLC Publications, Cornell University.Google Scholar
  30. Kratzer, A. (2012a). Modals and conditionals. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  31. Kratzer, A. (2012b). What “can” can mean. In Lecture notes. Tilburg: LOT winter school.Google Scholar
  32. Lin, J.-W. (2003). Temporal reference in Mandarin Chinese. Journal of East Asian Linguistics, 12, 259–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Lin, J.-W. (2006). Time in a language without tense: The case of Chinese. Journal of Semantics, 23, 1–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Lin, J.-W. (2010). A tenseless analysis of Mandarin Chinese revisited: A response to Sybesma 2007. Linguistic Inquiry, 41, 305–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Matthewson, L. (2004). On the methodology of semantic fieldwork. International Journal of American Linguistics, 70(4), 369–415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Matthewson, L. (2006). Temporal semantics in a superficially tenseless language. Linguistics and Philosophy, 29, 673–713.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Matthewson, L. (2012). On the (non-)future orientation of modals. In A. Aguilar Guevara, A. Chernilovskaya & R. Nouwen (Eds.), Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung 16, MITWPL (PP. 431–446).Google Scholar
  38. Matthewson, L. (2013). Gitksan modals. International Journal of American Linguistics, 79(3), 349–394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Newman, P. (2000). The Hausa language. An encyclopedic reference grammar. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  40. Percus, O. (2000). Constraints on some other variables in syntax. Natural Language Semantics, 8, 173–229.Google Scholar
  41. Ogihara, T. (1995). The semantics of tense in embedded clauses. Linguistic Inquiry, 26, 663–679.Google Scholar
  42. Parsons, F. W. (1960). The verbal system in Hausa. Afrika und Übersee, 44, 1–36.Google Scholar
  43. Partee, B. (1973). Some structural analogies between tenses and pronouns in English. Journal of Philosophy, 70, 601–609.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Reichenbach, H. (1947/1980). Elements of symbolic logic. New York: Dover.Google Scholar
  45. Rooth, M. (1985). Association with focus. Dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA.Google Scholar
  46. Rullmann, H., Matthewson, L., & Davis, H. (2008). Modals as distributive indefinites. Natural Language Semantics, 16, 317–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Schlenker, P. (2006). Ontological symmetry in language: A brief manifesto. Mind & Language, 21, 504–539.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Schubert, K. (1972). Zur Bedeutung und Anwendung der Verbalparadigmen im Hausa und Kanuri. Afrika und Übersee, 55, 1–49.Google Scholar
  49. Schuh, R. G. (2003). The functional unity of the Hausa and West Chadic Subjunctive. UCLA Working Papers, (Vol. 9, pp. 17–42). University of California, Los Angeles, CA.Google Scholar
  50. Schwager, M. (2011). Imperatives and tense. In R. Musan & M. Rathert (Eds.), Tense across languages (pp. 37–58). Tübingen: Niemeyer.Google Scholar
  51. Shaer, B. (2003). Toward the tenseless analysis of a tenseless language. Proceedings of SULA, 2, 139–156.Google Scholar
  52. Smith, C. S., & Erbaugh, M. S. (2005). Temporal interpretation in Mandarin Chinese. Linguistics, 43, 713–756.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Smith, C. S., Perkins, E. T., & Fernald, T. B. (2003). Temporal interpretation in Navajo. Proceedings of the SULA, 2, 175–192.Google Scholar
  54. Smith, C. S., Perkins, E. T., & Fernald, T. B. (2007). Time in Navajo: Direct and indirect interpretation. International Journal of American Linguistics, 73, 40–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Tonhauser, J. (2011a). The Paraguayan Guaraní future marker –ta: Formal semantics and crosslinguistic comparison. In R. Musan & M. Rathert (Eds.), Tense across languages (pp. 207–232). Tübingen: Niemeyer.Google Scholar
  56. Tonhauser, J. (2011b). Temporal reference in Paraguayan Guaraní. Linguistics and Philosophy, 34, 257–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Tuller, L. A. (1986). Bijective relations in universal grammar and the syntax of Hausa. Dissertation, University of California, Berkeley, CA.Google Scholar
  58. Wolff, H. E. (1993). Referenzgrammatik des Hausa. Münster: LIT.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of LinguisticsUniversity of PotsdamPotsdamGermany

Personalised recommendations