3 ms·
Right, English doesn't have a future tense (in the sense of tense as marked by inflection). So what's the contrast of note? That the one sentence marks the futu
by Chinjut 12y ago
Right, English doesn't have a future tense (in the sense of tense as marked by inflection). So what's the contrast of note? That the one sentence marks the future by use of a modal auxiliary (in addition to the explicit "tomorrow"), while the other marks the future only by explicit description of the time "tomorrow"? Mark me as highly skeptical that this is of any significance...
- smorrow 12y agoI'm saying it's a strange example to say that some languages do or don't have a grammaticalization of time, and then give two supposedly contrasting grammars as an example of each, when actually neither of them really has a future tense. But they said it as if one does.