I once had a conversation with a man from deep jungle Guatemala. When I asked him how far it was to the nearest town his reply was: “as far as it takes to weave 3 hats, 4 if you hurry.” Incidentally the conversation was in an American jail after he was arrested for illegal entry. I’m still amazed he made it as far as he did.
It takes longer if you hurry? Clearly they have no concept of time!
Thank you for the delightful image of a Guatemalan running through the underbrush, hiding from La Migra and frantically weaving hats.
I have no idea what those numbers mean. Are they like a ZIP code?
I read it as if the man thought that getting the hats made was more important than the traveling. An enlightening thought for a time-obsessed person such as myself.
Not so different from expressing “He will jump” using an auxiliary verb with the literal etymological meaning of “He wishes(/desires/intends) to jump”, is it? English has no future tense either…
That threw me for a second too, but it could mean that the hurrying applies to the hat-making and not to the travelling (although that would be a slightly weird way of expressing it). So if you’re a fast weaver you could get 4 done in that time instead of 3.
If they breed the tribe with no concept of time to the tribe with no concept of space, they will have children without any limiting concepts of space-time, who will be be able to go anywhere and any time at any moment.
There’s a catch. If you explain to them where and when you want them to go, you’ve contaminated their minds and they can’t do it.
Now I’m pretty sure that these guys had been contacted briefly before.
Sometime in the 60’s for about 20 minutes?
I believe that 's the case but of course when they were asked they just looked blankly and shrugged.
It absolutely means that the hurrying applies to the hat making. Conversely, it means that the weaver has no concept of getting to the next town in a specific amount of time. It takes as long as it takes and making hats is more important than getting there. I wish I could be more like the weaver. My car has no ‘stop and smell the roses’ gear.
Lots of languages don’t inflect for time. Japanese, for example. They express time by adding auxiliary words like “Yesterday” or “In one month”. So they’d literally say something like “Three weeks ago, I jump. And tomorrow, I jump.” If true, you’re just saying that they have a low degree of fusion. Nothing weird about that.
Or English.
Sure they do! A hora and mañana.
English does inflect for time, just not in every tense and not in every verb.
I (have) woven hats = past[sub]1[/sub]
I wove hats = past[sub]2[/sub].
I (Ø/will) weave hats = present / future.
Whoops, sorry. I had my brain still stuck on reading “inflect for time” as meaning “inflect to indicate future time” specifically, which English lacks. English of course has past vs. present tense inflections (as well as the participles used in indicating progressive and perfect aspects), as you note.