In Swedish can say e.g. "Jag har gått när du kommer imorgon" lit. 'I have
gone when you come tomorrow'. It's an effect of the fact that you can use
the present tense with future meaning without any extra marking, a
remainder of the Old Germanic past vs. non-past tense system. If you use
one of the explicit future marking constructions like _kommer att_ +
infinitive you must use it on both verbs however.  You can't say things
like **"Jag gick när du kommer" with one verb in the preterite and one in
the present tense.

AFMOC Sohlob has aspect (habitual, perfect and progressive) but no tense.
It also has an irrealis mode which must normally be used when talking about
the future but also in other situations. I still have to stay and think
when expressing myself in that system.


Den torsdagen den 17:e januari 2013 skrev Njenfalgar:

> 2013/1/16 Nikolay Ivankov <[log in to unmask] <javascript:;>>
> > As already said, Hopi. Hopi is polysynthetic, with up to AFAIR 5 prefixes
> > and up to 5 suffixes that you can attach to the root. Agian AFAIR the
> first
> > suffix in a clause shows relative time/aspect/something like that with
> > respect to the previous clause, such as immediate following, preceding,
> > cause, result and others, including, again AFAIR, gnomic. The grammar
> > was available online on Rosetta Project about a decade ago, and I've been
> > trying to TeXify then, but now I'm unable to find the files. But I'm
> really
> > thinking some you will definitely find it after some googling today.
> >
> > Best,
> >
> > Kolya
> >
> That sounds like what I was thinking of indeed. The Google-ing I did today
> lead mostly to the Hopi time controversy, which is about the question of
> whether Hopi has nouns describing absolute time. My language does have
> those. :-)
> --
> Dos ony tãsnonnop, koták ony tãsnonnop.