Sussex R., Cubberley P. The Slavic Languages

Подождите немного. Документ загружается.

b. Complex future tenses

1. Imperfective future

a. The formation of this tense shows three complex alternatives:

(i) Future of ‘be’ þ imperfective infinitive (East and West Slavic)

(135a) Ukr bu

du (bu

s ...) hovory

ty ‘I (etc.) shall be speaking’

(135b) Pol be˛de˛ (be˛dziesz ...) m

owic

‘I (etc.) shall be speaking’

Bulgarian, which usually follows model (c) below, has a rarer

alternative form with the inflected future auxiliary (a short form

of ‘to want’, like B/C/S above) with the vestigial infinitive:

(135c) Blg

sta [

](

ste

s ...) vı

dja ‘I (etc.) shall be seeing’

(ii) Future of ‘be’ þ imperfective l-participle (Slovenian; Polish,

alternative to (a) )

(136a) Sln vı

del b

om, vı

del b

s ... ‘I (etc.) shall be seeing’

(136b) Pol be˛de˛ (be˛dziesz ...) m

owił ‘I (etc.) shall be saying’

(non-clitic auxiliary)

(iii) Invariant future particle + present tense (Bulgarian, Macedonian)

(137a) Blg

ste ka

zvam,

ste ka

zva

s ... ‘I (etc.) shall be saying’

(cf. (a), where the auxiliary inflects)

(137b) Mac k

eka

ˇzuvam, k

eka

ˇzuva

s ... ‘I (etc.) shall be saying’

Negative forms are expressed in Bulgarian by nja

ma da or ne

ste

(colloq.) + present, and in Macedonian by ne

ma da or ne k

e +

present.

Future perfective

a. Bulgarian and Macedonian possess complex forms of the future

perfective, with the invariant future particle and the perfective

‘‘present’’:

(138a) Blg

ste napı

sa ‘I shall write, I shall have written’

(138b) Mac k

ena

sam ‘I shall write, I shall have written’

b. Future of ‘be’ + perfective l-participle (Slovenian, as for imperfective):

(139) Sln b

om ku

pil ‘I shall buy’

5.5 Paradigms 289

3. Future perfect

The future perfect is a step further into completed actions in the future

than the future perfective: the future perfect translates only ‘I shall

have -ed’. It is found in Belarusian and South Slavic.

a. The Proto-Slavic form was the future of ‘be’ + l-participle, which is

continued in B/C/S, virtually imperfective only:

(140) B/C/S bu`` d



em govo

rio ‘I shall have spoken’

b. Bulgarian has the future of auxiliary ‘be’ ( ¼ invariant particle þ

present or future) þ the aorist l-participle, in either aspect:

(141a) Blg

ste s ˘am pı

sal ‘I shall have been writing’ [Imprfv]

(141b) Blg

ste b ˘a

da pı

sal ‘I shall have been writing’ [Imprfv]

(142a) Blg

ste s ˘am napı

sal ‘I shall have written’ [Prfv]

(142b) Blg

ste b ˘a

da napı

sal ‘I shall have written’ [Prfv]

c. Macedonian uses the invariant future particle + perfect in imam

(‘have’) -no (below) (either aspect):

(143a) Mac k

eı

mam pı

sano ‘I shall have been writing’ [Imprfv]

(143b) Mac k

eı

mam napı

sano ‘I shall have written’ [Prfv]

4. Future in the past

Bulgarian is also able to form a ‘‘future in the past’’ – that is, a future

action viewed from a point of time in the past, and which translates

into English as ‘I would have done ...’, ‘I was on the point of doing ...’.

They are therefore close in meaning, and sometimes in form, to the

past conditional (5.5.5.7). The Bulgarian future in the past is formed

from the aorist of the auxiliary ‘be’ + da + present (normal) or perfect

(rare) of the verb:

(144a) Blg

stja

xdapı

sa ‘I would have written’

(144b) Blg

stja

xdas˘am napı

sal ‘I would have written’

Other languages, including Macedonian, use the past conditional

(5.5.5.7) to express this tense form.

5.5.5.6 Past tenses

a. Simplex past tenses

The simplex past tenses are: (a) the imperfect and the aorist; and

(b) the imperfective and perfective past in East Slavic. Polish represents

a special case of the past: the l-participle is present along with the

290 5. Morphology: inflexion

auxiliary, but they are fused together as one word. Since the form is

parallel to the auxiliary of the other languages, we shall discuss this

tense under complex past tenses below.

1. Imperfective and perfective past (East Slavic)

The past tenses in East Slavic have lost the auxiliary from the

former perfect and are formed with the ‘‘bare’’ l-participle

(5.5.5.10):

(145a) Imperfective: Rus pe-l [Masc], pe

-la [Fem],

-lo [Neut], pe

-li [Pl]

Ukr spiva

-v, spiva

-la, spiva

-lo, spiva

-ly

‘I/you/he/she/it was, we/you/they

were singing’

(145b) Perfective: Rus prope

-l, prope

-la, prope

-lo, prope

-li

Ukr prospiva

-v, prospiva

-la,

prospiva

-lo, prospiva

-ly

Aspects of the morphophonology of these tenses are discussed

under past participle active (5.5.5.10).

2. Imperfect

The Proto-Slavic imperfect is retained in Sorbian, B/C/S, Bulgarian

and Macedonian. Like the past imperfective, it refers to a past

action in progress (‘I was doing’) or repetition (‘I used to do’). A

thematic vowel and inflexions are added to the root, which is

imperfective except occasionally for a Bulgarian perfective. The

base stem is that of the infinitive, or its equivalent (l-participle)

in Bulgarian and Macedonian. Inflexions are then added after a

thematic vowel (which was complex in Proto-Slavic (table 5.28), but

is now simplified in all [table 5.29] ). The inflexions are very similar

to those of the aorist (table 5.30), excepting the 2–3 Singular.

B/C/S has two qualifications:

a. all verbs with infinitives in -ati have -



a-:

pe%vati ‘to sing’, pe%v



ah’;

b. verbs where the infinitive and present stems are identical have

either -ij



a- or -



a-: pe

i ‘to cook’, pe

cij



ah/pe



ah ‘was cooking’;

Note the Sorbian secondary gender in the 2–3 Du: -

staj ¼ [MascPers].

Morphophonology

a. The modern thematic vowel is determined by language, verb class and

ending (see table 5.28). Bulgarian has /a/ before /x/ in Class I and II,

5.5 Paradigms 291

Table 5.28. Proto-Slavic imperfect tense

Class I I III IV IV V

Theme -

ea-/-aa- nes-

ea- mo ˇz-aa- pis-aa- vid-

ea- no

s-aa- b-

ea-

Endings 1Sg -xy

(all classes) 2Sg -

3Sg -

1Du -xov

2Du -

seta

3Du -

sete

1Pl -xomy

2Pl -

sete

3Pl -xo˛

Table 5.29. The modern imperfect tense

Blg Mac B/C/S Sorb

Themes

Class I/II ja/e e ij



tres-ja

-x tres-e-v tre

sij



ah tr

asech

tres-e

se tres-e-

se tre

sij



se tr

ase

Class III ee j



pı

s-e-x pi

s-e-v bı%j



ah bijach

Class IV ee j



ol-e-x mol-e-v mo%lj



ah sły

sach

Class VI aa



dja

l-a-x

cit-a-v d e%l



ah dz

´ˇ

ełach

Endings

1Sg -x -v -h -ch

2Sg -

se -

3Sg -

se -

1Du -chmoj

2Du -

staj/-

stej

3Du -

staj/-

stej

1Pl -xme -vme -smo -chmy

2Pl -xte -vte -ste -

3Pl -xa (/a

/-[

]) -a -hu -chu

(tres-e-a,

cit-a-a)

292 5. Morphology: inflexion

otherwise /e/:

cet-ja

-x,

cet-e

se ‘was reading’. Sorbian shows regular

vowel mutation between palatals: bij-a-ch, bij-e-

se ‘was hitting’;

b. Palatalization of the stem follows the present-tense pattern. B/C/S

has a choice in verbs with either -ij



a- (pe

cij



ah ‘was cooking’ PV2)

or -



a- (pe



ah PV1).

3. Aorist

The aorist, like the imperfect, is found only in Sorbian, B/C/S,

Bulgarian and Macedonian. It designates a past action seen at a

single point in time, like the English ‘I did’, ‘I said’. It is formed

from the perfective infinitive stem in all four languages; Bulgarian

and B/C/S also allow its formation from the imperfective stem.

Since Bulgarian and Macedonian have no real infinitive, the aorist

forms a good guide to the form of this stem.

In Proto-Slavic, the oldest form of the aorist (often called the ‘ ‘root

aorist’ ’) had been replaced by a form involving a thematic -s-, known

therefore as the ‘‘sigmatic aorist’’, in all forms except the 2–3 Singular,

which never shows this theme. In the following, we show only the

sigmatic form (the root form can be retraced by deleting the -s- and

recovering underlying root consonants lost because of it). Where the

stem ended in a consonant (Class I, Class II without the suffix -n-), the

clusters with -s- were often simplified by the deletion of the stem

consonant. Further, the -s- itself underwent change in some forms: to

-x- (initially after /i/, then after all vowels by analogy), and to -

s- before

the front vowel ending -e˛ in the 3 Plural. In a further development, the

consonant stems of Classes I and II also acquired the -s-,atthesame

time inserting the fill vowel -o- (these forms being referred to as the

‘ ‘second sigmatic aorist’’). The Proto-Slavic forms of this last pattern

are shown in table 5.30; the modern forms are shown in table 5.31.

Morphophonology

1. Stems ending in a vowel keep that vowel for all aorist forms; stems

ending in a consonant add:

1Sg, 1–3Pl: Blg, Mac, B/C/S: -o; Sorb -e:

Blg

o-x, Sorb pjek-e-ch ‘I baked’

2–3Sg: all languages -e: Blg pe

c-e, Sorb pje

c-e ‘he/she/it baked’

2. 1st Palatalization of Velars in 2–3Sg (preceding example);

3. Sorbian a. secondary gender in 2–3Du (as imperfect)

b. regular vowel mutation between palatals:

pob

eˇz-a-ch ‘I ran’, pob

eˇz-e-

e ‘you [Pl] ran’;

5.5 Paradigms 293

4. Macedonian: x has become v, except in the 3Pl, where it becomes

j between i and a: stori-v ‘I did’, stori-ja ‘they did’ (< *storix,

*storixa), otherwise it is lost: treso-v ‘I shook’, treso-a ‘they shook’.

5. Stress and length: note differences between the two tenses in:

Bulgarian stress: Blg va

lja

x [Aor] ‘I rolled’ (variants)’;

valja

x [Imperf]

B/C/S length: B/C/S ı

mah [Aor] ‘I had’; ı



ah [Imperf]

Table 5.31. The modern aorist tense

Blg Mac B/C/S Sorb

1Sg -(o)x -(o)v -(o)h -(e)ch

tre

s-o-x tres-o-v tre

s-o-h -tr

as-e-ch

pı

-x pi

sa-v pı

sa-h -pisa-ch

olı

-x -moli-v mo%li-h modlich so

2Sg -e/ø -ø -ø -ø

tre

s-e tres-e tre

s-e -tr

as-e

pı

sa pı

sa -pisa

olı

moli mo%l



i modli so

3Sg -ø -ø -ø -ø

1Du -(e)chmoj

2Du -(e)

staj/-(e)

stej

3Du -(e)

staj/-(e)

stej

1Pl -(o)xme -(o)vme -(o)smo -(e)chmy

2Pl -(o)xte -(o)vte -(o)ste -(e)

3Pl -(o)xa [

]-(o)a -(o)

se -(e)chu

Table 5.30. Proto-Slavic aorist tense

Theme

Inf stem ending in consonant:

-o-/-e#; Inf stem ending in vowel: ø

Class I I III III IV V

Endings

1Sg -xy nes-o-xy rek-o-xy napisa-xy pozna-xy promysli-xy by-xy

2Sg -(e)ø nes-e re

c-e napisa-ø pozna-ø promysli-ø by-ø

3Sg -(e)ø all ¼ 2Sg

1Du -xov

e nes-o- rek-o- napisa- pozna- promysli- by-

2Du -sta etc.

3Du -ste

1Pl -xomy

2Pl -ste

3Pl -

se˛

294 5. Morphology: inflexion

b. Complex past tenses

1. Compound past (perfect)

The compound past adds an auxiliary to the l-participle, either

imperfective or perfective. The auxiliary is ‘be’ (5.5.6). The only

exception is Macedonian, which has special forms of its own. The

auxiliary may be either clitic (Cz, Slk, B/C/S, Sln, Blg):

(146) Cz v

e-l jsem, v

e-l jsi, v

e-l ø ‘I/you [Sg]/he knew’

or non-clitic (Mac, Sorb):

(147) Sorb sy

m/sı

/je

edz

e-ł ‘I/you/he knew’

The 3 Person auxiliary is omitted in Czech, Slovak, Macedonian

(and Polish – see below). While subject pronouns are normally

omitted with 1–2 Person forms in languages with the compound

past, in the 3 Person the pronoun usually stands, since otherwise

there would be no clear marker of [Person] in the sentence. The

participle undergoes regular alternations, as in the simplex past

tense. In Polish we find a special case. Here the auxiliary has been

reduced to an affix, which is attached directly to the l-participle:

(147) Pol s

piewa-ł-e-m ‘I [Masc] sang’

piewa-ł-a-sz ‘you [Fem Sg] sang’

i.e.: s

piewa-ł + vowel marking gender + person

and/or number

cf. (148) Cz zpı

va-l-ø jsem, zpı

va-l-a jsi ...

Unlike East Slavic, [Person] is clearly marked on all forms except

the 3 Person, which consists of the bare l-participle with its mark-

ing for gender and number:

(149) Pol s

piewa-ł-ø ‘he sang’, s

piewa-ła ‘she sang’

Macedonian has special forms of the compound past. Here the

-participle form can express the renarrative (5.5.5.8), and the

auxiliary is clitic:

(150a) Mac (ti) si pı

sa-l ‘they say that you were writing’

(150b) Mac (ti) si na

pisa-l ‘they say that you have written’

though these forms can also be interpreted as non-renarrative. This

tense, known in Macedonian as the ‘‘past indefinite’’, contrasts with

5.5 Paradigms 295

the past definite, which is an active tense formed from the past

participle passive of intransitive verbs. This construction has a clitic

auxiliary and an agreeing participle:

(151a) Mac ne sme ru

´ˇ

ca-ni ‘we haven’t had dinner’

(151b) Mac doktorot e

otid-en ‘the doctor has left’

Yet another Macedonian form of the compound past has the

auxiliary ‘have’ and the neuter singular of the past participle

passive of transitive verbs:

(152) Mac imame napisa-no dva pisma ‘we have written two letters’

Polish has a somewhat similar construction, but the participle

agrees with the object, like an attributive adjective:

(153a) Pol mam ksia˛

zk-e˛ przeczyta -na˛ lit. ‘I have the book (all) read’

(153b) Pol mam przeczyta-na˛ ksia

zk-e˛ lit. ‘I have a read book’

2. Pluperfect

The pluperfect is found in all the languages except Russian. It

is formed from an auxiliary with the l-participle of either aspect:

the imperfective translates as ‘had been doing’, and the perfective

as ‘had done’. Bulgarian has only the aorist participle of either

aspect. The auxiliary has two principal forms, both of which were

used in Proto-Slavic:

a. Past tense of ‘be’: Ukr, Cz, Pol, B/C/S, Sln (154a)

b. Imperfect of ‘be’: Blg, Mac, B/C/S (rare), Sorb (154b)

(154a) Ukr vona

sla

bula

‘she had gone’ [Prfv]

(154b) Blg te bja

xa do

slı

‘they had arrived’ [Prfv]

The omission of the auxiliary in the complex form of ‘be’ follows

regular rules, as outlined under the perfect tense above. Special

alternative forms are found in Macedonian, with the imperfect of

‘be’ + the perfective past of the verb:

(155) Mac be

se sum storil ‘I had done’

And in Belarusian the only form is the past tense of ‘be’ + the past

gerund:

(156) Bel jana

byla

pra

cyta

sy ‘she had read’

296 5. Morphology: inflexion

The word-order of the elements in the pluperfect may vary.

Languages with a clitic auxiliary in the past perfect of ‘be’ must

locate this clitic in second position:

(157a) B/C/S ja

sam bı%o stı%gao OR bı%o sam stı%gao OR stı%gao

sam bı%o ‘I had arrived’

Non-clitic elements may simply invert (cf. 154a):

(157b) Ukr vona

bula

xody

la ‘she had gone’

5.5.5.7 Conditional and past conditional

a. Simple conditional

The conditional expresses ‘ ‘would

VERB’’. It is formed with the l-parti ciple

of either aspect (in Bulgarian, the aorist participle) plus one of:

a. an invariant clitic particle:

Rus, Ukr, Bel, Slk, LSorb: by; Sln, Mac: bi

(158) Rus ja by pole ˇza

l ‘I would lie down for a while’

b. the inflected conditional of the auxiliary ‘be’, either clitic (B/C/S,

Cz, Pol) (159a) or non-clitic (Blg, USorb) (159b):

(159a) Pol poczekałbym ‘I [Masc] would wait’

Cz ˇzil bych ‘I [Masc] would live’

(159b) Blg bı

x napı

sal ‘I [Masc] would write’

b. Past conditional

This rather literary tense, which is absent in East Slavic, is formed with

the l-participle and the past conditional of the auxiliary ‘be’:

a. invariant by/bi:

(160) Slk byl bi som ¨robil ‘I [Masc] would have done’

b. clitic auxiliary:

(161) Pol byłbym ¨zrobił OR ¨zrobiłbym był ‘I [Masc] would

have done’

c. non-clitic auxiliary:

(162) Sorb ¨bych ¨byl

‘

¨zdz

´ˇ

‘

‘I [Masc] would have done’

5.5 Paradigms 297

Bulgarian and Macedonian have special forms for this tense. Bulgarian has

either the imperfect of the auxiliary

sta þ da þ present/perfective present:

(163a) Blg

stja

xdap˘atu

vam ‘I would have gone’

or a new form which adds imperfect endings to the aorist (perfective) stem:

(163b) Blg pro

cita

se ‘you [Sg] would have read’

(Both these forms also normally express the future in the past [5.5.5.5].) In

Macedonian the usual form is k

e þ imperfect:

(164a) Mac da me sa

se, ne k

eı

se stra

‘if you loved me you wouldn’t be afraid’

Macedonian also has a special form using imperfect endings on the aorist stem, like

that of Bulgarian except that the future particle k

e is retained:

(164b) Mac k

e izbe

se ‘he would have run out’

5.5.5.8 Renarrative

The renarrative forms of literary Bulgarian and Macedonian denote events which

the speaker did not witness or cannot vouch for. The renarrative shows elaborate

adaptation of existing morphological material into complex paradigms. It is

marked by the absence of the 3 Person auxiliary in compound tenses (cf. past

perfect), and in some forms by special renarrative participles: the ‘‘imperfect’’

participle, which adds participial endings to the imperfect stem ( pı

se-x/-v [Imperf

1Sg]: participle pı

sel [MascSg] ); and the Macedonian ‘‘hybrid’’ participle, which

adds an imperfective theme to the aorist (perfective) stem (napi

s-a-v [Aor 1Sg]:

participle napi

s-e-l [MascSg] ). The correlations between indicative and renarrative

forms are complex, and in table 5.32 we show only the common forms – those of

present, aorist, perfect and future (Scatton, 1984: 337).

Table 5.32. Renarration in Bulgarian and Macedonian (all forms are 1Sg [Masc] )

Bulgarian Macedonian

Indicative Renarrative Indicative Renarrative

Present pı

sa pı

sel sa˘mpi

sam pi

sal sum

Aorist pı

sax pı

sal sa˘ m napi

sav napi

sal sum

Perfect pı

sal sa˘mbı

lsa˘ mpı

sal sum pi

sal, sum imal napi

sano

imam pi

sano

Future

ste pı

stja

lsa˘mdapı

sa k

epi

sam k

e sum pi

sel

298 5. Morphology: inflexion