Hopilavayi Tenses and Interpretations
Presentation Type
Oral Presentation
Abstract/Artist Statement
Hopilavayi is a Uto-Aztecan language spoken by about 4,000 people in Northeastern Arizona. According to the Hopi Dictionary Project (1998), Hopilavayi has two overt grammatical tenses: the future tense -ni and the habitual tense -ngwu. The lack of either tense is understood as the covert null tense -Ø that locates events in the non-future time. Much work has been done on Hopilavayi (cf. Whorf, 1938; Voegelin & Voegelin, 1969; Jeanne, 1978; Voegelin & Voegelin and Jeanne, 1979; Kalectaca, 1982; Malotki, 1983; Hill et al., 1998), but none have explicitly analyzed how temporal interpretations might differ from temporal locations encoded in the tense.
In this project I analyze the temporal interpretations and behaviors of each tense in Hopilavayi. I argue that out of the three tenses, only the null tense -Ø exclusively locates time, while the future tense -ni and the habitual tense -ngwu employ aspectual and modal interpretations in addition to temporal location. This research is cushioned within the literature, relying on the multitude of data published. This research is important because it contributes to an understanding of the different temporal categories and their behavior and reopens the discussion of Hopilavayi which has been dormant for over a score. Lastly, this research is intended to analyze Hopilavayi in a respectful manner and not to exotify it (cf. ‘The Hopi Time Controversy’. Also Whorf, 1941; Malotki 1983).
Mentor Name
Leora Bar-el
Hopilavayi Tenses and Interpretations
UC 331
Hopilavayi is a Uto-Aztecan language spoken by about 4,000 people in Northeastern Arizona. According to the Hopi Dictionary Project (1998), Hopilavayi has two overt grammatical tenses: the future tense -ni and the habitual tense -ngwu. The lack of either tense is understood as the covert null tense -Ø that locates events in the non-future time. Much work has been done on Hopilavayi (cf. Whorf, 1938; Voegelin & Voegelin, 1969; Jeanne, 1978; Voegelin & Voegelin and Jeanne, 1979; Kalectaca, 1982; Malotki, 1983; Hill et al., 1998), but none have explicitly analyzed how temporal interpretations might differ from temporal locations encoded in the tense.
In this project I analyze the temporal interpretations and behaviors of each tense in Hopilavayi. I argue that out of the three tenses, only the null tense -Ø exclusively locates time, while the future tense -ni and the habitual tense -ngwu employ aspectual and modal interpretations in addition to temporal location. This research is cushioned within the literature, relying on the multitude of data published. This research is important because it contributes to an understanding of the different temporal categories and their behavior and reopens the discussion of Hopilavayi which has been dormant for over a score. Lastly, this research is intended to analyze Hopilavayi in a respectful manner and not to exotify it (cf. ‘The Hopi Time Controversy’. Also Whorf, 1941; Malotki 1983).