• Lvxferre
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    3 months ago

    This is the sort of thing that I love reading on the internet.

    From a conlanger perspective I feel like the time reference could be split into four, to account time travel. For example: let’s say that both of us travelled to 3100, I remained there and you came back to 2024. Then you write me a letter, that I’m going to read as soon as we arrive in 3100, telling me about your experiences. You could use:

    • your current date as reference - 3100 comes after 2024, so it’s future
    • your personal experiences - you already experienced it, so it’s past
    • my current date as reference - as I’m in 3100, it’s present
    • my personal experiences - as I’m watching you experience it, it’s present

    Any given language could pick any of those references to model their tense around, or many of them, or even none (plenty languages IRL lack grammatical tense). If only doing things from the PoV of the speaker (you), that means 6~9 tenses for what most languages have 2 (past and non-past) or 3 (past, present, future).

    • Dasus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      This is the sort of thing that I love reading on the internet.

      Sorry to disappoint you, but most of that text is found offline — as it’s an excerpt from Douglas Adam’s “The Restaurant at the End of the Universe” (sequel to “The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy”). I probably should’ve attributed it.

      If only doing things from the PoV of the speaker (you), that means 6~9 tenses for what most languages have 2 (past and non-past) or 3 (past, present, future).

      And then you’d have to account who knows what, which version of a person you’re talking to. Say you’re having a conversation with someone before traveling in time to a time in which they’ve not timetraveled, so it’s either their subjective past or future, but then you continue the conversation, so you’d have to account for both the speakers perspective and the person being spoken to, who would then be subject to two different tense “totalities” since the conversation with them would have been taking place in two different times at the same time.

      I seriously suggest reading Douglas Adams and Terry Pratchett for that sort of thing. I used to use Pratchett books as a substitute for weed when I was a bit over twenty.