On Jun 8, 2010, at 6:34 PM, Garth Wallace wrote: > On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 2:06 PM, Sai Emrys <[log in to unmask]> wrote: >> On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 6:32 AM, Adam Walker <[log in to unmask]> >> wrote: >> >>> +/- cyclictical world (the world will end / there is no end, only >>> a cycle) >> >> This one has always amused me. (I think I proposed a past-and-future >> vs present tense system a long while ago; it would work well together >> with this.) > > You know, I'm not sure that any natlangs use a binary > present/nonpresent tense distinction, but it doesn't seem unreasonable > even without a cultural belief in cyclic time. I could see a > realis/irrealis distinction evolving into it... I don't know about natlangs, but ObConlang, I've chosen to implement something of the sort in one of my projects. There is realis/irrealis distinction, with the realis referring to the present time, as well as the accessible (immediate) past and future, and the irrealis referring to the inaccessible past, future, and hypothetical.