Tense & Aspect

Tense specifies when along a timeline a verb phrase occurs (e.g. past, present, future), whereas aspect characterizes how the verb phrase extends over time. In Najan, aspect is marked syntactically with a (possibly null) particle immediately preceding the verb or verb phrase. In contrast, tense has no direct syntactic representation, so it must be marked explicitly with temporal arguments, inferred from the surrounding context, or else assumed from the verb’s aspect.

The continuous (ᴄᴏɴᴛ) aspect views a verb as ongoing or in progress. It is the default aspect, in the absence of an aspect particle. Without temporal arguments or additional context, a continuous verb phrase may be assumed to be in present tense. Najan does not distinguish between continuous and progressive aspects.

The perfective (ᴘғᴠ) aspect views a verb in its entirety, as a complete action or state. Without other clues, a perfective verb phrase is most likely to be in past tense. For example, je cici ⟨ci⟩ — bymarks the complement as an agent ko θe tcet is more likely to mean I ate (simple past) or I have eaten (past perfect) than I will eat (simple future).

The inchoative (ɪɴᴄʜ) aspect views a verb as beginning, as in je dje sic, [he] starts to cry. Inversely, the cessative (ᴄᴇss) aspect views a verb as ending: je vat sic, [he] stops crying. By default, verbs in these aspects are in present tense.

The habitual (ʜᴀʙ) aspect views a verb as occurring regularly over some period of time, centered on the present by default. If je cici ⟨ci⟩ — bymarks the complement as an agent to vɪg is in present tense, it means you are going, and the corresponding habitual phrase, je cici ⟨ci⟩ — bymarks the complement as an agent to fxe vɪg, means you go [regularly]. If we instead assume past tense, then they translate respectively to you were going and either you would go or you used to go.

The gnomic (ɢɴᴏ) aspect views a verb as a general truth with little or no temporal structure. As such, the concept of tense is usually inapplicable. Gnomic verb phrases often feature generic determiner phrases as arguments and express an aphorism, a mathematical truth, etc.

The gnomic verb phrase above expresses a general mathematical fact. If it were written in the continuous aspect instead (without hon), it would leave open the possibility that two might not have always been or might not always be greater than one.

Inferring Tense from Context

As described above, aspect markers can also carry a small amount of tense information. For example, perfective aspect often implies past tense. However, these associations are secondary to context. Suppose a speaker first says:

By using the preposition lɪ, the speaker has established a context in the future. Suppose the speaker then says je cici ⟨ci⟩ — bymarks the complement as an agent ko θe tɪz. In isolation, since this sentence is in perfective aspect, one might interpret it as I have spoken (present perfect) or I spoke (simple past). However, since future tense has already been established, one should instead translate the second clause as I will speak or I will have spoken (sometime tomorrow, after having gone).