(Udmurt)

Pst

Pst: There is either but one grammatically distinct past tense or several ones that are differentiated by principles other than expressing the distance of the event in time.

(1)tondyšetsk-i-d
youstudyPST2SG
‘you studied’ (Keľmakov – Hännikäinen 2008 : 179)

(2)tonkyrʒ́a-d
yousingPST.2SG
‘you sang’ (Keľmakov – Hännikäinen 2008 : 179)

(3)mikulaš-tolbabajjöl-mesnoju-em,pećeńńa-mesno
Santa_Clausmilk1PL.ACCPCLdrinkPST2.3SGbiscuit1PL.ACCPCL
śi-em!
eatPST2.3SG
’Santa Claus drank our milk and ate our biscuits as well! (Kubitsch 2018: 260)

(4)sotolonton-eutća-zvalno,
(s)heyesterdayyouACCsearchPST.3SGAUX.PSTand
özšeďty.
NEG.PST.3SGfind.CNG.SG
’(S)he was looking for you yesterday but did not find you.’ (Keľmakov – Hännikäinen 2008: 269)

(5)stuďent-josdorazyśot-emuž-eztolonik
studentPLfor.3PLgivePTCP.PSTworkACCyesterdayPCL
bydesti-iľľamvylem.
finishPST2.3PLAUX.PST2
’The students (allegedly) already did their homework yesterday.’ (Keľmakov – Hännikäinen 2008: 269)

(6)tolonsokuno-os-yz-lyös-jos-seuśt-i-z.
yesterdayDEMguestPL3SGDATdoorPLACC.3SGopenPST3SG
’Yesterday it opened its doors for visitors.’ (UdmCorp.)

In Udmurt, simple past forms have been claimed to be used to refer to past events closer to the speech time (Perevoshchikov et al. 1962: 206, Bartens 2000: 209–210), similarly to the past tense forms combining simple past verb forms with a past tense auxiliary (see below). Simple past tenses have two types: the so-called first past formed with the -i suffix in case the verbal stem ends in -y (1), and without a suffix, with the verbal endings directly attaching to the stem in case it ends in -a (2). The so-called second past expresses information not personally observed and can have different evidentiality-related functions (3) (cf. e.g. Kubitsch 2018).

In Udmurt, distant past events can be expressed by combining the simple past form of the verb with auxiliaries in different forms (Perevoshchikov et al. 1962: 206, Alatyryev et al. 1970: 122–123, Bartens 2000: 209–210, Keľmakov – Hännikäinen 2008: 268–269; occasionally the term plusquamperfekt is also used for this, seе Bartens 200: 209, Keľmakov – Hännikäinen 2008: 268–269). The following combinations have been observed: v.pst + aux.pst (4), v.pst2 + aux.pst, v.pst + aux.pst2, v.pst2 + aux.pst2 (5), v.ptcp.pst + aux.pst. The functions of these forms are not determined by the distance of the event in time (l. Bartens 2000: 209–210), but, presumably, depend on differences in evidentiality (Alatyryev et al. 1970: 122–123, Kel’makov – Hännikäinen 2008: 269), moreover Kel’makov and Hännikäinen (2008: 269) also assume an aspectual distinction. Examples (4)–(5) clearly indicate that this past tense is not restricted to expressing distant past events, in other words, the distant past meaning is not fully grammaticalized. Of course it would be conceivable to assume that Udmurt expresses events taking place a day before the speech time using this tense form, but sentences with the temporal adverbial yesterday can also be expressed with simple past (6), that is, the distinction is not (or not solely) based on distance from the speech time. More research is needed to establish the details.

Author: Laura Horváth


[🠐 back]