117
(176)
Onore de Balzak ayt-gan ekan… (Uz)
Honoré de Balzac say-
PRF EVID
‘Honoré de Balzac (apparently) said…’
The result of the surfacing of either double past meaning or the distant/non-specific past
meaning contributed by -
gan/-GAn is that it is not possible to express simple,
recent past
meaning when
ekan/eken is present. This gap in the paradigm is remedied by employing the
converbial past in -
(i)b/-(I)p.
The converbial past in -
(i)b/-(I)p is not incompatible with the expression of non-firsthand
evidence, as it expresses non-confirmativity. Within the same conversation, it is possible to
employ both -
(i)b/-(I)p and
ekan/eken, switching between these forms as necessary
to correctly
indicate temporal reference:
(177)
— Ularni Layens-Xill yaqinida
ushlab olishibdi.
— Kim ushlabdi?
— Mister Glison bilan ruhoniy. Ular
aravada ketayotgan ekan.
O‘sha bola tag‘in qo‘shib qo‘ydi:
— Menga buni yuqori sinfdagi bir
bola aytdi.
(Uzbek: Joyce 2007, 22)
—They
were caught near the hill of
Lyons.
—Who
caught them?
—Mister Gleeson and the minister. They
were on a car.
The same fellow added:
—A fellow in the higher line told me.
(Joyce 2006, 50)
In (177), the speakers start by employing the converbial past in -
(i)b,
which bears is able to
express past tense and non-confirmativity without the distant, non-specific, or perfect meanings
contributed by -
gan. When the progressive form -
ayotgan is introduced, that is able to take
ekan,
as it is only
ekan in this sentence that contributes past tense. In addition
to expressing past tense,
ekan also indicates a non-firsthand information source; this source is made explicit in the final
sentence above when the speaker relates that he was told this information by a third party.
Similar examples are also found in Kazakh:
118
(178)
Öytkeni Qïtay qazaq-tar men-i “üylen-gen eken, pïšaqta-p öltir-ip ket-ip-ti”
dep te ösepte-gen. (Kaz)
But China Kazakh-
PL
me-
ACC
marry-
PRF EVID
, stab-
CVB
kill-
CVB
PCTV
-
CPST
-3
COMP
too
gossip-
PRF
‘But they gossiped to me that he had been married and stabbed [her] to death.’
30
In this example, the content of the gossip (which is enclosed in quotations)
begins with eken and
refers to a more distant event of non-specific temporal reference. The more recent, temporally
specific event employs the converbial past in -
(i)p, so as not to force a (plu-)perfect or
temporally non-specific reading.
In summary,
ekan/eken only sometimes bears past tense reference. However, when that
past tense reference creates ambiguity due to the combination of the perfect -
gan/-GAn and
eken,
the non-confirmative converbial past may be employed in its place. Table 30
summarizes the
features of the forms discussed up to this point.
Table 30: Temporal and Confirmative Features of Relevant Forms
P
as
t
Spe
ci
fi
c
D
is
tant
*
Conf
ir
m
at
iv
e
Non
-F
ir
st
hand
R
epor
tat
iv
e
P
AST
-
di/DI
+
+
-
+
Ø
Ø
P
RF
-
gan/GAn
+
-
+
Ø
Ø
Ø
CP
ST
-
(i)b/(I)p
+
Ø
Ø
-
Ø
Ø
E
VID
ekan/eken
+/-
Ø
Ø
-
+
Ø
R
EPORT
emish/-mis
†
Ø
Ø
‡
+
+
Notes:
* Does not apply to Kazakh
† Uzbek
emish is sometimes indicates pastness, Kazakh -
mIs in unmarked for tense
30
Šešenqululï, Qažïmurat. 2010. “Iye, me žiyi ğašïq bolamïn.” Ayqïn: Respublikalïq Qağamdïq-
Sayasiy Gazet, 8 Jul. Accessed 9 Feb 2011.
http://www.aikyn.kz/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2907&Itemid=66
119
‡ Uzbek
emish is non-confirmative, Kazakh -
mIs appears to be unmarked for confirmativity
Yüklə
Dostları ilə paylaş: