a comparative analysis between conditionals in classical ... · a comparative analysis between...

50
Uppsala University B.A. Exam Paper Department of Linguistics and Philology 10 units Program of Oriental Studies Philology Iranian Languages September 2007 A comparative analysis between conditionals in Classical Persian, Modern Persian and Modern Tajik By Alexander Nilsson Supervised by Prof. Carina Jahani Department of Linguistics and Philology

Upload: vonga

Post on 27-Jul-2018

237 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Uppsala University B.A. Exam Paper

Department of Linguistics and Philology 10 units

Program of Oriental Studies Philology

Iranian Languages September 2007

A comparative analysis between conditionals in Classical Persian, Modern Persian and

Modern Tajik By Alexander Nilsson

Supervised by Prof. Carina Jahani

Department of Linguistics and Philology

2

Transliteration ........................................................................................................................ 3

Modern and Classical Persian ....................................................................................... 3

Tajik....................................................................................................................................... 4

Terminology ............................................................................................................................ 5

1 Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 6

1.1 Purpose .................................................................................................................... 6

1.2 Method...................................................................................................................... 6

1.3 Material..................................................................................................................... 7

1.4 Short historical outline of CP, MP and MT ..................................................... 7

1.5 A note on TAM-forms in CP ................................................................................ 9

2 Theoretical Background ............................................................................................ 10

2.1 Definition of conditionals .................................................................................. 10

2.1.1 Conditionals in logic................................................................................... 10

2.1.2 Conditionals in linguistics ........................................................................ 10

2.1.2.1 Classification............................................................................................... 11

2.1.2.1.1 Factual versus theoretical P-clauses ............................................ 12

2.1.2.1.2 Neutral versus nonneutral theoretical P-clauses....................... 12

2.1.2.1.3 Closed-P, open-P, tentative-P and counterfactual-P clause ... 13

2.1.2.1.3.1 Closed-P conditionals ................................................................ 13

2.1.2.1.3.2 Open-P conditionals ................................................................... 14

2.1.2.1.3.3 Tentative-P conditionals............................................................ 14

2.1.2.1.3.4 Counterfactual-P conditionals ................................................. 15

2.2 Summary of grammatical descriptions ......................................................... 15

2.2.1 Conditionals in CP ...................................................................................... 16

2.2.2 Conditionals in MP ...................................................................................... 16

2.2.3 Conditionals in MT ...................................................................................... 17

3 Analysis .............................................................................................................................. 19

3.1 Analysis of conditionals in CP......................................................................... 19

3.1.1 With the Ø-present tense in the P-clause ............................................. 19

3.1.3 With the mi-present tense in the P-conditional................................... 24

3.1.4 With the past-i tense in the P-clause ..................................................... 24

3.1.5 The Ø-past tense in the P-clause ............................................................ 28

3.1.6 Conclusions .................................................................................................. 29

3.2 Analysis of conditionals in MP ........................................................................ 29

3.2.1 Present Subjunctive ................................................................................... 29

3.2.3 Imperfect ........................................................................................................ 32

3.2.4 Preterit ............................................................................................................ 36

3.2.5 Conclusions ........................................................................................................ 37

3.3 Analysis of conditionals in MT ........................................................................ 37

3.3.1 Present Subjunctive in the P-clause ...................................................... 37

3.3.2 Imperfect in the P-clause........................................................................... 41

3.3.3 Conclusions ........................................................................................................ 46

4. Conclusions and reflections .................................................................................... 46

Bibliography ......................................................................................................................... 49

3

Transliteration Modern and Classical Persian

�ب b� � �ز z� � �ق q�

�پ p� � �ژ ž� � �� k�

�ت t� � �س s� � �گ g�

�ث � � �ش š� � �ل l�

�ج j� � �ص �� � �م m�

�چ č� � �ض #� � �ن n�

�ح '� � �ط )� � �و v�

�خ x� � �ظ � � �ه h�

�د d� � �ع ‛� � 6� y�

�ذ 9� � �غ � � <� ’�

�ر r� � �ف f� � � �

����

����

����

Long vowels and diphthongs

�ا/آ � ā�

6� i,�ey�

�و u,�ou�

����Short vowels

a� e� o��

4

Tajik

Note:�The�old-fashioned�and�

redundant� letter� “ь”�will� not�

be� transcribed.�Ezafe� and� ro�

(rā)� will� be� separated� from�

the� preceding� word� with� a�

hyphen� for� sake� of� clarity.�

а� a� � о� o�

б� b� � п� p�

в� v� � р� r�

г� g� � с� s�

a� ġ� � т� t�

д� d� � у� u�

е� e� � g� �

ё� yo� � ф� f�

ж� ž� ���� х� x�

з� z� ���� n� h�

и� i� ���� ч� č�

q� ī� ���� s� j�

й� y� ���� ш� š�

к� k� ���� ъ� ‘�

y� q� ���� э� e�

л� l� ���� ю� yu�

м� m� ���� я� ya�

н� n�� � �

5

Terminology �

ClosedClosedClosedClosed----P� conditionalP� conditionalP� conditionalP� conditional::::� conditional� with� a� closed� P-clause,� expressing� a� condition� which� the�

speaker�treats�as�assumed�to�be�fulfilled�in�the�actual�world.�

CP:CP:CP:CP:�Classical�Persian�

CounterfactualCounterfactualCounterfactualCounterfactual----P�P�P�P�conditionalconditionalconditionalconditional:�:�:�:�P-clause�referring�to�a�world�that�is�assumed�by�the�speaker�to�

be�different�from�(incompatible�with)�the�real�world.�

FactualFactualFactualFactual----P�conditionalP�conditionalP�conditionalP�conditional::::�conditional�with�a�factual�P-clause,�referring�to�a�situation�that�forms�

part�of�the�real�world.��

IrrealisIrrealisIrrealisIrrealis�conditional�conditional�conditional�conditional::::�Conditional�which�is�not�presented�as�possibly�matching�the�actual�world.�

In�this�paper,�irrealis�encompasses�P-conditonals�and�counterfactual-P�conditionals.�

MP:�MP:�MP:�MP:�Modern�Persian�

MT:�MT:�MT:�MT:�Modern�Tajik�

NeutralNeutralNeutralNeutral----P� conditional:P� conditional:P� conditional:P� conditional:� conditional� with� a� neutral-P� conditional,� which� merely� expresses� a�

supposition,�without�presupposing�anything�about�the�relation�of�compatability�between�the�

supposed�world�and�the�actual�world.�

OpenOpenOpenOpen----P� conditional:P� conditional:P� conditional:P� conditional:� P-clause� whose� situation� is� assumed� to� be� one� that� may� or� may� not�

actualize�(or�have�actualized�in�the�real�world.�The�fulfilment�of�the�condition�is�thus�treated�

as�uncertain,�but�as�a�real�possibility�by�the�speaker.�

P:P:P:P:����the�proposition�expressed�in�the�conditional�clause�of�a�sentence.�

PPPP----clause:�clause:�clause:�clause:�the�conditional�clause�of�a�conditional�sentence.�

Q:Q:Q:Q:����the�proposition�expressed�in�the�head�clause�of�a�conditional�sentence.�

QQQQ----clause:clause:clause:clause:�the�head�clause�of�a�conditional�sentence.�

TentativeTentativeTentativeTentative----P� conditionalP� conditionalP� conditionalP� conditional:�:�:�:� A� P-clause� where� the� speaker� assumes� the� fulfilment� of� the�

supposition�as�a�rather�unlikely�possibility.�

ImaginaryImaginaryImaginaryImaginary----P�P�P�P� clause:�clause:�clause:�clause:�A� subtype� of� neutral-P� conditionals�where� the�P-clause� has� an� irrealis�

meaning.� It� is� formally� indistinguishable� from� a� counterfactual� conditional� but� it� does� not�

presuppose�anything�about�the�truth�or�nonthruth�of�P�in�the�actual�world.�

6

1 Introduction �

Conditionals�pose�a�number�of�questions.�Their�logical�structure�has�been�a�puzzle�

to�philosophers�since�Aristotle.�They�have�been�used�as�a�testing�ground�for�some�of�

the�most�influential�theories�in�the�philosophy�of�language,�such�as,�for�instance,�the�

theory�of� implicature.�Their� linguistic� form�also� seems� to� escape�elegant,� uniform�

descriptions�and�they�have�been�an�object�of�interest�to�research�in�a�whole�range�of�

fields,� including� syntax,� semantics,� pragmatics,� discourse,� language� acquisition,�

history� of� language,� language� universals,� and� language� teaching.� This� is� because�

conditionals� have� an� imposing� variety� of� forms,� and� a� still� more� overwhelming�

variety�of�interpretations.�They�are�an�area�of�language�use�where�the�interaction�of�

form,� meaning,� and� context� is� exceptionally� complex� and� fascinating.� (Dancygier�

1999:2)�

My� interest� in� Persian� conditionals� began� a� couple� of� years� ago� when� I� noticed� that� the�

grammatical�explanations�of�Thackston’s�An�introduction� to�Persian�did�not� fully�cover� the�

possible�ways�in�which�conditional�clauses�were�constructed�in�Modern�Persian.��It�dawned�on�

me�that� they�on�the�whole�were,� if�not�overlooked,� then�certainly�not� studied�thoroughly� in�

most�grammars.�My�interest�was�further�boosted�when�I�noticed�how�the�conditionals�in�Tajik�

differed�from�the�ones�in�Modern�Persian.�

�1.1 Purpose

The�object�of�this�paper�is�to�describe�and�compare�the�ways�in�which�conditional�sentences�

are�formed�in�Classical�Persian,�Modern�Persian�and�Modern�Tajik�(henceforth�CP,�MP�and�

MT,�respectively)�as�pertaining� to� the�TAM�(i.e.� time,�aspect�and�mood)�of� the�verb� in� the�

conditional� clause� (protasis).� Depending� on� the� TAM� of� the� verb� in� the� protasis,� the�

conditionals�in�the�variants�of�Persian�can�express�differing�meanings�as� to�how�the�speaker�

views�the�fulfilment�of�the�conditional.���

1.2 Method

The�method,�in�essence�a�qualitative�one,�consists�in�analyzing�conditionals�found�in�CP,�MP�

and�MT� texts,� to� categorize� them�and� to�define�how� they�differ� in� their� semantic�make-up,�

using�the�definitions�as�set�up�by�Declerck�and�Reed.�It�is�thus�the�conditionals�in�the�written�

language� that� will� be� analyzed,� included� those� in� dialogue.� Naturally,� since� open-P�

conditionals�with�the�present�subjunctive�in�the�P-clause�are�quite�straightforward�and�not�in�

7

need�of�analysis�per�se,� focus�will� instead�be� laid�on�possibly�ambiguous�P-clauses,�which�to�

me�are�a�lot�more�compelling.�

1.3 Material1111����

Extracts� from�Tārix-e� beyhaqi,�Qābusnāme,� Siyāsatnāme� and�Čahār�maqāle,� as�well� as� the�

whole� of� Sa‛di’s� Golestan� have� been� searched� for� conditional� clauses,� disregarding� the�

passages�with�poetry�since�poetry�uses�a�different�set�of�rules.�The�extracts�considered�would�

have�covered�the�era�of�CP�pretty�well,� if� it�were�not�for� the�fact� that�a� lot�of� them�did�not�

have� any� conditional� clauses� in� them.� � There� is� therefore� an� overrepresentation� of�

conditionals�from�Qābusnāme�and�Siyāsatnāme.�

� The�MP�material�consists�of�full�books�as�well�as�extracts�from�contemporary�books�

in�sociology.�For�MT,�the�book�that�was�mostly�used,�or�rather,�had�the�most�conditionals,�was�

a�book�containing� some�of�Ayni’s� collected�work.�Being�one�of� the�greatest� intellectuals�of�

Tajikistan,� and�more� or� less� the� father� of�MT,� his� language� is� probably� the� benchmark� by�

which�later�works�of�MT�have�to�be�measured.�If�nothing�else�is�indicated,�all�the�translations�

in�this�paper�are�made�by�me.�

The�secondary�source�that�has�come�to�most�use�in�the�writing�of�this�paper�is�Declerck�

and� Reed’s� Conditionals:� a� comprehensive� empirical� analysis.� In� this� book,� they� have�

systematized� and� classified� conditionals,� based� on� the� English� language.� Dancygier’s�

Conditionals�and�Prediction�:�Time,�Knowledge�and�Causation�in�Conditional�Constructions�

has�also�been�very�useful.�Although�Declerck�and�Reed�reject�a� lot�of�her� ruminations,�her�

book� has� still� been� a� source� of� great� interest,� especially� since� it� provides� a� backdrop� with�

which�the�thoughts�in�Declerck�and�Reed’s�book�can�be�compared�and�tested.�

Perry’s�A�Tajik�Persian�Reference�Grammar��and�Thackston’s�An�introduction�to�Persian��

have�been�key�in�drawing�out�the�grammatical�outlines�of�MT�and�MP,�respectively.�Although�

Lazard’s�A�Grammar� of� Contemporary� Persian� has� been� consulted,� I� have� found� that� the�

description�of�conditionals�in�Thackston’s�grammar�was�superior�to�it.�

I� have� had� no� luck� in� finding� any� comprehensive� description� of� conditionals� in� CP.�

Perhaps�useful�information�could�have�been�found�in�Phillot’s�Higher�Persian�Grammar�and�

Lazard’s�La� langue�des�plus�anciens�monuments�de� la�prose�persane,� but� I� could�never�get�

hold�of�them.�

1.4 ����Short historical outline of CP, MP and MT 1 Not all of the material will be dealt with here, for a full list, see the bibliography.

8

New�Persian�belongs� to� the�South�Western� group�of� the�New� Iranian-languages�within� the�

Indo-Iranian�branch�of�the�Indo-European�language�family.�The�emergence�of�New�Persian�

is� linked� to� the� Arab� conquest� and� the� fall� of� the� Sāsānid� Empire� in� the� 7th� century.��

According� to� a� prevailing� view,� the� language� can� be� divided� into� three�periods:�Early�New�

Persian� (9th-12th� centuries),� Classical� Persian� (13th� century� onwards)� and� Modern� Persian�

(from�the�19th�century�to�the�present�day.2�Classical�Persian�was�the�lingua�franca�of�Central�

and�South�Asia,�until�the�European�encroachment�in�these�areas.�

Modern�Persian,�Modern�Dari� (as�opposed� to� the�Dari�which�denoted� the� language�

spoken�at�the�end�of�the�Sasanid�period)�and�Modern�Tajik�have�all�branched�from�Classical�

Persian,� and� the� divergence� took� place� in� the� 16th� century.� Thus,� they� share� a� common�

foundation�of�classical�literature�stretching�from�Rudaki�to�Jāmi.�Modern�Persian,�as�a�term,�

is� usually� linked� to� the� spoken� dialect� of� Tehran,� and� can� thus� be� used� for� the� variant� of�

Persian�spoken�in�Iran�as�a�whole.�The�rule�of�the�Qājār�dynasty�in�the�19th�century�marks�the�

beginning� of� the� modern� period,� with� Tehran� as� a� capital.� However,� not� all� the� typical�

features� of�Modern� Persian� can� be� ascribed� to� the� 19th� century� of� Tehran� –� from� the� 15th�

century� and� on,� certain� characteristics� of� Classical� Persian� were� described� by� native�

lexicographers� as� “embellishments”� and� archaic.� (Jeremiás� 2003:433)� In� the� 19th� and� 20th�

centuries� a� desire� for� modernity� led� to� a� modification� of� the� literary� language.� Later,� the�

language�was�further�distanced�from�the�variants�spoken�in�Afghanistan�and�Central�Asia�by�

the�modernization�processes�instigated�by�Reza�Shah�during�the�1920s�and�30s.�(Utas�2007)��

Tajik�Persian,�or� sometimes,�Tajik,� is� a� variant�of�New�Persian� spoken� in�Tajikistan�

and�some�parts�of�Uzbekistan,�notably�the�twin�cities�of�(Tajik)�Persian�culture�-�Samarqand�

and�Bukhara.�It�is�the�official�language�of�the�republic�of�Tajikistan,�and�has�since�the�1920s�

been�fostered�as�a�literary�and�national�language�of�this�region.��

The�speech�areas�of�Tajik�and�Iranian�Persian�are�not�contiguous,�but�lie�at�opposite�

ends� of� a� speech� continuum� that� is� interrupted� by� areas� of� Turkic� (Turkmen� and�Uzbek)�

speech.�In�between�the�two�variants�are�the�Persian�dialects�of�Afghanistan.�

During�the�past�century,�the�Tajik�language�has�changed�considerably.�The�causes�of�

this� are�manifold� but� can� be�mostly� attributed� to� the� two� waves� of� government-sponsored�

linguistic�engineering�and�the�influence�of�foreign�languages�-�notably�Russian�and�Uzbek.��

2 �In�this�paper,�the�term�“Classical�Persian”��generally�encompasses�both�the�“Early�New�Persian”�and�the�

“Classical�Persian”�in�the�above�mentioned�classification.

9

In� a� series� of� governmental� interventions� on� the� orthography� of� the� language,� the�

script� was� first� changed� from� Arabic� into� Latin� in� 1928� and� then� to� Cyrillic� in� 1939.� The�

modern�literary�language�was�in�essence�planned�and�exemplified�by�(Soviet)�Tajik�writers�of�

the�1920s�and�1930s.�Drawing�on�the�literary�style�of�the�Bukhara,�they�set�the�standard�for�a�

language�that�to�a�certain�extent�was�influenced�by�Uzbek,�having�not�only�Uzbek�calques�of�

words,� but� also� that� of� syntactic� structures.� The� written� language� was� thus� an� engineered�

language�aimed�at�both�unifying�and�separating,�unifying�in�that�it�merged�the�characteristics�

of�the�differing�dialects�of�the�region,�separating�in�that�it�tried�to�accentuate�the�differences�

with� the� Persian� of� Iran� as�much� as� possible.� For� example,� the� subjunctive� prefix� ‘ba’� was�

widely�used�in�some�of�the�Tajik�dialects�and�was�looked�upon�as�a�norm�within�the�literary�

language.�In�the�constructing�of�the�new�Tajik�language,�however,�it�was�deemed�superfluous�

and�was�done�away�with.�(Roy�2002:30)�During�the� last� few�decades,�a�more�varied�style�of�

writing� has� been� introduced� by� people� from�different� regions�within� the� country� as�well� as�

from� people� who� have� travelled� abroad,� especially� to� Iran.� This� has� brought� the� language�

closer�to�the�Persian�of�Iran.�(Perry�2005:2)�

During�the�last�century,�two�major�linguistic�interventions�have�taken�place�on�behalf�

of�the�government.�First,�from�the�late�1920s�to�the�1950,�there�was�Russianization�and�later,�

from� the� late� 1980s� onwards,� the�Tajik� language� has� had� a� re-Persianization� resulting� in� a�

decision�to�return�to�the�Perso-Arabic�script,�a�choice�that�has�yet�to�see�fruition.�

1.5 A note on TAM-forms in CP

Although�the�TAM-forms�in�MP�and�MT�should�be�quite�clear,�a�short�sketch�on�the�TAM-

forms�in�CP�would�be�desirable.�There�are�three�present-future�TAM-forms:�(Jahani�2005)�

1. Ø-present�tense,�e.g.�konam�–�simple�present,�a�non-focus�form.�

2. be-present� tense,� e.g.� bekonam� –� used� mainly� for� punctual� actions,� has� gradually�

developed�into�the�Present�Subjunctive�of�MP�and�MT.�

3. (ha)mi-present� tense,� e.g.� (ha)mikonam� –� used� mainly� to� mark� habitual� and�

continuous�actions�and�states��

There�are�also�three�past�TAM-forms:�(Jahani�2005)�

1. Ø-past�tense,�e.g.�kardam�–�simple�past�used�as�a�non-focus�form.�

2. be-past�tense,�e.g.�bekardam�–�used�for�actions�that�are�definitely�ended,�can�denote�

movement�out�of�etc.�

10

3. (ha)mi-past�tense�and�past-I�tense,�e.g.�(ha)mikardam�or�kardami�–�used�for�habitual�

and�continuous�actions�in�the�past.�The�latter�is�also�used�to�mark�irrealis.��

2 Theoretical Background 2.1 Definition of conditionals 2.1.1 Conditionals in logic

Although� this� paper� will� deal� with� conditionals� on� a� linguistic� level,� I� find� it� necessary� to�

present,�however�cursory,�the�rendition�of�conditionals�in�philosophy.�Here,�the�antecedent�is�

portrayed�by�the�letter�P,�the�consequence�by�the�letter�Q.�They�are�connected�by�an�arrow�

(→)�which�is�pronounced�“If…then—”.�P�and�Q�can,�on�their�own,�either�be�true�(T)�or�false�

(F).��

Now,� P→Q� can� be� ordered� into� a� ‘truth� table’,� commonly� used� by� logicians� to�

demonstrate� what� is� called� ‘material� implication’,� sometimes� more� aptly� called� ‘material�

conditional’�since�it�doesn’t�‘imply’�in�the�everyday�sense�of�the�word:���

PPPP���� QQQQ���� PPPP→Q→Q→Q→Q����

T� T� T�

T� F� F�

F� T� T�

F� F� T�

As�can�be�seen�from�the�above�table,�the�material�conditional�(i.e.�P→Q)�is�only�false�when�P�

is�true�and�Q�is�false.�In�other�words,�we�are�faced�with�two�paradoxes�—�whenever�P�is�false,�

P→Q� is� true,� and� whenever� Q� is� true,� P→Q� is� true.� These� are� called� the� paradoxes� of�

material�implication,�and�a�lot�has�been�written�in�this�field.�(Tomassi�1999:131)� �

Suffice� it� to� say� that� the�material� conditional� presented� above� does� not� correspond�

fully�to�the�English�“If…then—“,�moreover,�there�are�several�studies�that�claim�that�material�

implication�cannot�fully�represent�the�semantics�of�conditionals.�(Dancygier�1999:14)�

�2.1.2 Conditionals in linguistics

Despite�the�plethora�of�literature�dealing�with�conditionals,�linguists�have�failed�to�present�a�

unified�analysis�of� the� form�and�meaning�of� conditionals.�Rather,� terms�previously�used�by�

other� linguists� are� sometimes� renounced� altogether,� sometimes� adopted� and� invested� with�

11

Conditionals

Factual Theoretical

Neutral Nonneutral

Open Closed

Tentative Counterfactual

new�meaning,� creating� at� times� a� needlessly� incoherent� and� confusing� terminology.� In� this�

paper�I�will�try�to�adhere�to�the�terminology�as�proposed�by�Declerck�and�Reed.�

The�vast�number�of�ways�in�which�one�can�analyze�and�pigeonhole�conditionals�entail�

that� it� is� impossible� to�pinpoint�one� true�definition�of� ‘conditional�meaning’�or� ‘conditional�

interpretation’.� (Declerck�&�Reed� 2001:8)� The� view� which� is� endorsed� by�most� linguistics�

(rather�than�logicians)�is�that�the�criteria�for�conditional�sentences�can�be�defined�as�follows3:�

Conditionals�are�complex�sentences,�consisting�of�a�main�clause�(called�the�apodosis,�or�QQQQ)�

and� a� subordinate� clause� (called� the� protasis,� or� PPPP).� (Dancygier� 1994:1)� The� latter� is�

introduced�by�a�conjunction,�if,�which�is�the�prototypical�conditional�marker.�In�a�contracted�

manner,�the�definition�can�be�expressed�thus:�if�if�if�if�PPPP,�,�,�,�QQQQ.�(Kaufmann�2006)�

�2.1.2.1 Classification

The�most�conspicuous�way�in�which�conditionals�differ�from�one�another�is�the�verb�form�of�

the�P-clause;�it�signals�how�we�are�supposed�to�interpret�the�conditional.�If�we�use�English�as�

a� language�of� reference,�we�can� see� that� in�many�pedagogic�grammars�and�handbooks,� the�

following�verb�forms�are�presented:�

(1a)�I�will�be�happy�if�she�comes.�

(1b)�I�would�be�happy�if�she�came.�

(1c)�I�would�have�been�happy�if�she�had�come.�

To� a� great� extent,� focus� is� not� so�

much� on� analysis� of�meaning� as� it�

is� on� verb� form.� Grammars�

associate� the� different� patterns�

with� three� different� meanings:�

‘possible’,� ‘unlikely’� and� ‘contrary�

to�fact’,� respectively.�Declerck�and�

Reed� calls� them� ‘open’,� ‘tentative’�

and� ‘counterfactual’.� (Declerck� &�

Reed�2001:59)�

3 It should be noted that some sentences carry a conditional meaning (e.g. Tell him a joke, and he’ll laugh.) but

they are beyond the scope of this paper.

12

A�simplified� rendering�of�Declerck�and�Reed’s� classification�of� conditionals� can�be�

presented�thus:�Conditionals�can�be�either�a)�factual�or�theoretic;�b)�if�theoretical:�neutral�or�

nonneutral� supposition;� c)� if� nonneutral:� closed,� open,� tentative� or� counterfactual�

supposition.�

�2.1.2.1.1 Factual versus theoretical P-clauses

Case-specifying-P� conditionals� are� a� very� broad� set� of� conditionals� where� “the� p-clause�

specifies� a� case� or� the� case(s)� in� which� the� Q-situation� actualizes� or� in� which� the� Q-

proposition�applies.”�(Declerck�&�Reed�2001:47)�They�refer� to�a�possible�world,�depending�

on�if�it�is�not�this�world�or�if�it�is�the�actual�world,�they�can�be�further�divided�into�‘factual’�P-

clauses� and� ‘theoretical’� (or� ‘nonfactual’4)� P-clauses.�A� factual� P-clause� refers� to� situations�

that�to�some�extent�has�actualized�or�will�actualize�in�the�actual�world;�on�the�other�hand,�a�

theoretical� P-clause� makes� an� assumption� of� a� situation� that� takes� place� in� a� theoretical�

world.�

“If�I�had�a�problem,�I�always�went�to�my�supervisor”�is�a�factual-P�–�the�situations�that�

were�actualized�happened� in� the�actual�world�(albeit� in� the�past).�“If�he�comes,� she�will�be�

very�happy�to�see�him�again.”�is�a�theoretical-P�–�the�prospect�of�seeing�him�lies�in�the�future,�

it� is� therefore� separated� from� the� actual� world.� It� may,� or�may� not� turn� out� in� the� actual�

world.�

����2.1.2.1.2 Neutral versus nonneutral theoretical P-clauses

Theoretical� P-clauses� can� be� further� divided� into� ‘neutral’� and� ‘nonneutral’.� The� clause� is�

neutral� if� the� supposition� is� no� more� than� a� pure� supposition.� If� the� supposition� is�

accompanied� by� a� presupposition� about� the� relation� of� the� compatibility� between� the�

supposed�world�and�the�actual�world,�it�is�nonneutral.��

Two�examples�of�nonneutral-P�conditionals:�

a)�If,�as�has� just�been�claimed,� the�river�will� rise�as�high�as� this,�our�meadows�will�be�

flooded.�(nonneutral-P:�the�speaker�assumes�that�the�claim�that�has�just�been�made�is�

true;�the�conclusion�expressed�in�the�Q-clause�is�based�on�this�assumption.)�

4 The� term� ‘nonfactual’,� which� is� synonymous� with� ‘theoretical’,� should� not� be� mistaken� for�

‘counterfactual’,�which�means�‘incompatible�with�the�actual�world’.�

13

b)� If� John� had� been� careful,� this� would� never� have� happened.� (nonneutral-P:� the� P-

clause�presupposes��that�the�P-proposition�‘John�was�careful’�is�false�[counterfactual].)�

(Declerck�&�Reed�2001:52)�

As�has�been�stated�above,�a�neutral-P�conditional�is�considered�neutral�“if�nothing�is�said�or�

implied�concerning�the�(in)compatability�of�the�P-clause�with�the�actual�world.”�(Declerck�&�

Reed� 2001:52)� A� typical� neutral-P� conditional� is� therefore� an� imaginary-P� counterfactual,�

purely�suppositional�but�incompatible�with�the�actual�world.�

In�your�place�I�would�have�been�happy�if�I�had�got�a�first.�(This�implies�neither�‘I�did�

not�get�a�first’�nor�‘I�got�a�first’,�and�neither�‘I�{was�/�am}�not�happy’�nor�‘I�{was�/�am}�

happy’.�It�is�therefore�an�imaginary-p�conditional.�

Another� common� type� of� neutral-P� conditionals� is� where� the�Q-clause� expresses� a� present�

habit,�the�Q-clause�is�therefore�factual�but�as�a�whole�the�conditional�is�viewed�as�neutral.�In�

the�sentence�If�I�go�into�town,�I�take�the�bus,�the�Q-clause�implies�the�repetition�of�instances.�

Since�none�of�these�instances�need�actualize�at�the�time�of�speech,�P�is�neutral.�Because�of�the�

factuality� of� the�Q-clause,� it� uses� the� present� tense.� (Declerck�&�Reed� 2001:75)� Note� the�

difference�between�a�neutral�P-conditional�and�a�factual�P-conditional.�If�the�tenses�in�both�

clauses�were�in�the�past�tense,�it�would�have�been�the�latter.��

����2.1.2.1.3 Closed-P, open-P, tentative-P and counterfactual-P clause

Nonneutral� theoretical� P-clauses� can� be� divided� into� four� groups,� “dependening� on� the�

assumed�truth�relation�between�the�supposed�possible�world�and�the�actual�world:�nonneutral�

suppositions� may� be� ‘closed’,� ‘open’,� ‘tentative’� or� ‘counterfactual’.”� (Declerck� &� Reed�

2001:53)�

�2.1.2.1.3.1 Closed-P conditionals

The� supposition�P� is� ‘closed’� if� it� is� given� in� the� context� and� the� speaker� assumes� (at� least�

ostensibly)�that�P�is�true:�

If,� as� you� say,� John�will� come�here�himself� tomorrow,�we’d�better�not�dispatch� this�

letter�to�him�but�invite�him�to�have�a�talk�with�us.�(The�speaker�accepts�the�truth�of�the�claim�

that�John�will�come�tomorrow)�

It�is�often�the�case�in�closed-P�conditionals�that�the�P-clause�is�echoic�in�one�sense�or�

another,�this�doesn’t�mean�that�they�have�to�be�echoes�of�utterances,�they�can�just�as�well�be�

14

echoes� of� a� mental� thought.� Moreover,� a� closed-P� conditional� “always� has� an� element� of�

‘suspending� disbelief’� about� it,� i.e.� the� speaker� is� willing� to� assume� P� as� true,� but� is� not�

necessarily� committed� to� its� truth.”(Declerck�&�Reed�2001:83)�Declerck� and�Reed�make�a�

distinction� between� ‘closed’� and� ‘factual’� conditions.� The� conditional� is� ‘closed’� when� the�

speaker� assumes� it� to� be� fulfilled� on� the� basis� of� another� speaker’s� authority.� When� the�

speaker�knows� it�to�be�fulfilled�(i.e.�when�the�information�is�gathered�first-hand),�it�is�called�

‘factual’.� Due� to� this� slight� distinction� between� the� two� conditionals,� Declerck� and� Reed�

allegedly�were�the�first�ones�to�document�it.�(2001:2)�

Dancygier,�who�doesn’t�make�any�distinction�between�‘closed’�versus�‘factual’,�has�a�

similar�but�somewhat�differing�view,�in�the�sentence�If�(as�you�say)�John�left�for�France�last�

week,�we�need�another�interpreter,�Dancygier�asserts�that�the�speaker�of�the�sentence�“does�

not� necessarily� express� any� doubt� at� all� about� the� truth� of� the� protasis,� but� may� be� fully�

accepting�the�truth�of�the�interlocutor’s�claim,�even�if�she�does�not�mark�that�full�acceptance�

with�a�non-conditional�form.”(Dancygier�1999:19)�

�2.1.2.1.3.2 Open-P conditionals

When�the�speaker�treats� fulfilment�of� the�supposition�as�uncertain,�but�as�a�real�possibility,�

the�supposition�is�‘open’:�I�will�be�happy�if�we�find�a�solution.�By�nature,�these�P-clauses�often�

refer�to�the�future�with�the�connotation�that�the�P-situation�and�the�Q-situation�are�viewed�as�

open�possibilities.��

Open-P� conditionals� can� also� refer� to� past,� pre-present� or� present� situations,�

provided�the�speaker�is�uncertain�whether�the�P-situation�has�actualized�or�not.�If�the�speaker�

of�a�P-clause�referring�to�the�nonfuture�treats�the�situation�as�true,�it�is�a�closed-P�conditional.�

On� the� other� hand,� if� the� speaker� is� uncertain� whether� it� has� occurred� or� not� and�merely�

makes�a�pure�supposition�regarding�this�situation,� then�that�clause�has�a�neutral� theoretical�

meaning� and� is� thus� a� neutral-P� clause.� In� the� context� of� P-situations� dealing� with� the�

nonfuture,�the�P-clause�is�only�open�if�the�speaker�assumes�that�there�is�a�real�possibility�that�

the�supposition�will�turn�out�to�be�true�in�the�actual�world.�(Declerck�&�Reed�2001:91-92)�

�2.1.2.1.3.3 Tentative-P conditionals5

When� the� speaker� treats� fulfilment� of� the� supposition� as� a� rather� unlikely� (but� not�

impossible)�possibility,�the�supposition�is�‘tentative’:�I�would�be�happy�if�we�found�a�solution.��

5 Since this type of conditional does not exist in Persian, or rather, is merged with the irrealis conditionals, little

attention will be paid to it in this paper.

15

People�often�call�these�conditionals�‘hypothetical’,�but�Declerck�and�Reed�prefer�to�call�them�

tentative.�

Tentative-P�conditionals�are�similar�to�those�of�open-P�in�that�they�both�refer�to�the�

future,�but�unlike�open-P�conditionals,�they�cannot�refer�to�the�past.�

�2.1.2.1.3.4 Counterfactual-P conditionals

When�the�speaker�presupposes�the�supposition�is�contrary�to�fact,�i.e.�false�in�the�real�world,�

the�supposition�is�‘counterfactual’:�I�would�have�been�happy�if�we�had�found�a�solution.�In�this�

sentence,� P� is� presupposed� to� be� false� in� the� actual� world� but� true� in� a� counterfactual�

theoretical� P-world.� Counterfactual-P� conditionals� thus� make� a� presupposition� concerning�

the� truth� relation�between� the�actual�world�and�a� theoretical�P-world.�This�does�not�mean,�

however�that�the�Q-proposition�in�a�counterfactual�P-condition�necessarily�is�contrary�to�fact;�

rather,�if�Q�is�true�in�a�counterfactual�world,�then�it�is�“by�implicature�interpreted�as�false�in�

the�actual�world.”�(Declerck�&�Reed�2001:91-92)��

There� are,� however,� ways� in� which� this� implicature� is� blocked� or� cancelled,� for�

example,�Q�in�If�we�had�taken�the�other�road,�we�would�have�been�here�in�time.�is�interpreted�

as�counterfactual,�the�implication�is�that�#Q�(=�not�Q,�i.e.�‘we�were�not�here�in�time’)�is�to�be�

taken�as�a�truth�in�the�factual�world.�

However,�a�blocking�of�the�counterfactual�Q-interpretation�in�the�sentence�above�is�

made�by�the�use�of� ‘also’:�If�we�had�taken�the�other�road,�we�would�also�have�been�here� in�

time.�Here,�Q�is�interpreted�as�true�in�an�imaginary�world.��

Declerck� and� Reed� make� a� distinction� between� ‘irrealis’,� ‘counterfactual’� and�

‘imaginary.’�In�the�general�literature,�‘irrealis’�is�used�to�denote�‘counterfactuals’,�but�are�also�

sometimes�used�for�tentative-P�conditionals.�Sometimes�the�term�‘imaginary’�is�also�used�for�

counterfactuals.� In� Declerk� and� Reed’s� terminology,� the� term� ‘irrealis’� encompasses� both�

counterfactual-P�conditionals�and�imaginary-P�conditionals.�

2.2 Summary of grammatical descriptions We�can�apply�Declerck�and�Reed’s�way�of�analyzing�conditionals�on�the�conditionals� in�the�

different�variants.�We�then�see�a�clearer�picture�of�how�conditionals�are� constructed� in� the�

variants�when�we�have�the�same� ‘language’� to�describe�them.�Using�the�criteria�of�Declerck�

and�Reed�as�a�model,�the�explanations�of�conditionals�found�in�grammars�can�be�described�as�

follows.�

����

16

2.2.1 Conditionals in CP

As� has� been�mentioned� above,� information� about� conditionals� in�CP� has� been� scarce,� and�

useful� information� could� have� been� found,� if� I� could� have� gotten� hold� of� Phillot’s�Higher�

Persian�Grammar�and�Lazard’s�La�langue�des�plus�anciens�monuments�de�la�prose�persane,�

but� unfortunately,� the� opportunity� never� presented� itself� for� me� to� do� so.� � The� only�

information�regarding�conditionals�in�CP�was�that�past-i�tense�is�used�for�the�irrealis�mood.�

(Thackston�1993:202)�

�2.2.2 Conditionals in MP Closed-P conditionals

These�take�the�Present�Indicative�in�the�P-clause�(Thackston�1993:152):�

agar�midānid�čerā�nemiguyid?�

If�you�know,�then�why�don’t�you�say�so?�

�Open-P conditionals

These�normally�take�the�Present�Subjunctive�in�the�P-clause�(Thackston�1993:152-3):�

agar�u-rā�peydā�konam,�mikošameš!�

If�I�find�him,�I’ll�kill�him!�

However,�if�focus�is�laid�more�on�the�action�of�the�Q-clause�than�on�the�eventuality�of�the�P-

situation�happening,�the�Preterit�is�used.�That�is,�the�speaker�is�not�so�much�concerned�with�

conveying� the�doubtfulness�of� the�P-clause� as�he� is�with�what� the� consequence�will� be� (the�

actuality�of�the�Q-clause).�(Thackston�1993:153)�:�

Agar�raftid�inhā-rā�farāmuš�nakonid.�

If�you�go,�then�don’t�forget�these.�

Open-P�conditionals�that�refer�to�the�past�use�the�Subjunctive�Perfect:�

agar�u-rā�dide�bāšid,�pas�midānid�man�če�miguyam.�

If�you’ve�seen�him,�then�you�know�what�I’m�talking�about.�

�Irrealis: (counterfactual-P and imaginary-P conditionals)

17

MP�does�not�normally�distinguish�between�past�irrealis�(If�I�had�been)�and�future�irrealis�(If�I�

were� to� be),� it� uses� the� Imperfect� throughout.� The� correct� translation� must� therefore� be�

gathered�from�context,�the�sentence�agar�miāmadid,�šomā-rā�mididam�could�either�mean�“If�

you�had�come,� I�would�have�seen�you.”� (past� irrealis)�or�“If�you�were� to�come,� I�would�see�

you.”�(Thackston�1993:154-5):�

In�colloquial�and�less�formal�MP,�the�imperfect�may�be�substituted�with�the�Pluperfect:�

agar�u-rā�dide�budam,�be�u�gofte�budam.�

If�I�had�seen�him,�I�would�have�told�him.�

Dāštan�and�budan�do�not�normally�take�the�mi-prefix,�even�in�irrealis�conditionals.�

�2.2.3 Conditionals in MT Factual

Conditionals� that� take� place� in� the� past� and� are� described� as� habitual-repetetive� take� the�

Present�Subjunctive�in�the�P-clause�and�the�Imperfect�in�the�Q-clause�(Perry�2005:381).�This�

combination�of�TAM-forms�is�symptomatic�for�denoting�factual�P-clauses�in�Tajik:��

Modarkalonam,�ba’zan�begohiho,�agar�Očaxurdī�du-se�rz�naomada�monad,�maro�

az�pa-yi��mefiristod.�(Amonov�1995:90)�

Some� evenings� my� grandmother� would� send� me� after� Očaxurdī,� if� he� had� not�

showed�up�for�two�or�three�days.�

�Closed

For�closed-P�conditionals�referring�to�present�actions�the�Present�Indicative�and�the�Present�

Progressive�Subjunctive�are�employed�(Perry�2005:380):�

�Present Indicative

Agar�holo�kor�mekunī,�xalal�narasonam.�

If�you’re�working�now,�let�me�not�disturb�you.�

�Present Progressive Subjunctive

18

Agar�darsho-yi�xondagi-ro�xonda�istoda�bošad,�xalal�narason!�

If�he�is/�has�been�keeping�up�with�the�lessons�taught,�then�don’t�ruin�it!�

�If�the�condition�is�“inferred�as�intended�imminent”,�the�Durative�Past�Subjunctive�is�used�in�

the�P-clause�(Perry�2005:381):�

Xub,�šumo�namexrda�bošed,�man�xram.�

“Well,�if�(as�it�seems),�you’re�not�going�to�eat,�I’ll�eat’�

When�there�is�an�assumption�that�the�conditional�has�just�been�accomplished,�the�verb�of�the�

P-clause�is�in�the�Past�Subjunctive.�(Perry�2005:382).�

In�kitob-ro�xonda�bošed�agar,�čaro�naovarded?�

If�you’ve�read�this�book,�why�didn’t�you�bring�it?�

�Open

For�ordinary�open-P�conditionals,�the�Present�Subjunctive�is�employed�in�the�P-clause�(Perry�

2005:376):��

Abr�agar�az�qibla�xezad,�saxt�boron�mešavad.�

If�clouds�come�from�the�south,�there�will�be�heavy�rain.6�

If�the�condition�is�a�punctual�act�that�has�to�be�completed�before�the�execution�of�the�action�

in�the�Q-clause,�the�Preterit�is�used�(Perry�2005:381):�

Agar�omad,�gyed�ki�nazd-i�man�daroyad.�

If�(and�when)�he�comes�[lit.�came],�tell�him�to�come�and�see�me.�

�Irrealis: (counterfactual-P and imaginary-P conditionals)

The�imperfect�form�is�used�in�both�clauses.�The�verb�budan�takes�the�prefix�–me�when�it�is�in�

a�conditional�sentence�(Perry�2005:379)�

6 This example can also be classified as a neutral-P conditional, having a Q-clause that expresses a gnomic

(universal, omnitemporal) interpretation like If water boils, it changes into steam.

19

-� Dar� hama-yi� in� korho� amir� ayb� nadorad.� Agar� inguna� korho� nodurust� mebud,�

mulloho�ki�sohibon-i�shariatand�-ro�man’�mekardand�[…]�

-� In� all� these� doings,� the� amir� hasn’t� done� anything�wrong.� If� this� kind� of� activity�

were�wrong,�the�clergy,�who�have�the�sharia,�[lit.�are�the�owners�of�the�sharia]�would�

have�banned�it.�

The� Pluperfect� may� also� be� used� in� the� P-clause� to� denote� the� irrealis� condition:� (Perry�

2005:379).�

Agar�hamroh-i�man�rafta�buded,�-ro�medided.�

If�you�had�gone�along�with�me,�you�would�have�seen�him.�

����

3 Analysis In� this�analysis,� the� conditionals�will�be� isolated,� translated�and�analyzed.�Attention�will�be�

paid� to� the� TAM-form� in� the� P-clause� and� the� Q-clause� and� a� commentary� to� each�

conditional�will�be�provided.�Naturally,�some�conditionals�will�require�more�commentary�than�

others.�They�will� be� grouped� according� to� the�TAM-form� in� the�P-clause.�As� context� is� of�

outmost�importance�when�interpreting�conditionals,�commentaries�regarding�the�context�will�

be�given�in�square�brackets.�

3.1 Analysis of conditionals in CP

�3.1.1 With the Ø-present tense in the P-clause

CP�1.� agar�farmāyi�man��u-rā�xāmuš�gardānam.�(Sa‛di�1988:29)�

If�you�order�me�I�will�silence�him.�

TAM�in�P-clause:�Ø-present�tense.�

TAM�in�Q-clause:�Ø-present�tense.�

Commentary:�Open-P�conditional.��

CP�2.� agar�be�#arurat�čizi�nevisid�in�do�beyt�kāfi�ast.�(Sa‛di�1988:200)�

If�you�necessarily�have�to�engrave�something,�then�these�two�couplets�are�sufficient.�

20

TAM�in�P-clause:�Ø-present�tense.�

TAM�in�Q-clause:�ast.�

Commentary:�Closed�P-conditional.�

CP�3.� [His�wife�is�pregnant.]�goft�agar�xodāy�‛azza�va�jalla�marā�pesari�dahad�joz�in�xerqah�

ke�pušideam�harče�melk-e�man�ast�iār-e�darvišān�konam.�(Sa‛di�1988:196)�

� �

He�said:��If�the�glorious�and�dignified�God�gives�me�a�son,�I�will�donate�everything�I�

own�to�the�dervishes,�except�this�patched�cloth�which�I�am�wearing.�

TAM�in�P-clause:�Ø-present�tense.�

TAM�in�Q-clause:�Ø-present�tense.�

Commentary:�Open�P-conditional.�

CP�4.� �ol)ān� goft� “agar� došman-e� man� nisti� čerā� došman-e� marā� bexedmat� āvorde-i?”�

(Neām�al-Molk�1962:204)�

The� sultan� said,� ’If� you� are� not� my� enemy� why� have� you� taken� my� enemy� into�

service?’�(Nizam�al-Mulk�1978:160)�

TAM�in�P-clause:�Ø-present�tense.�

TAM�in�Q-clause:�Perfect.�

Commentary:� Closed� P-conditional� using� Ø-present� tense� in� the� P-clause� since� the� sultan�

assumes�this�fact�to�be�true,�and�then�makes�conclusions�about�it.�(the�Q-clause).�

CP�5.��� gar�kesi� šoġli�dārad�va� šoġli� digar�dar� xvāhad� ijābat�nakonand� […](Neām�al-Molk�

1962:214)�

� �

[…]� if� anyone� who� has� an� appointment� asks� for� another,� his� request� should� be�

disregarded�[…](Nizam�al-Mulk�1978:170)�

TAM�in�P-clause:�Ø-present�tense.�

TAM�in�Q-clause:�Ø-present�tense.�

Commentary:�Open�P-conditional.�

21

CP�6.� agar�čāre�nist�bar�sare�mā�‛āmeli�mosalmān�gomār�[…](Neām�al-Molk�1962:215)�

If� there� is�no�other�alternative,�appoint�a�Muslim�collector�over�us� […]�(Nizam�al-

Mulk�1978:271)�

TAM�in�P-clause:�Ø-present�tense.�

TAM�in�Q-clause:�Imperative�

Commentary:� Open� P-conditional� or� closed,� depending� on� how� you� interpret� the�

sentence.��

CP�7.� ammā�agar�naxvori� sud-e�do� jahāni� to�bāšad�va�xvošnudi-ye� izad-e� ta‛ālā�beyābi� va�

ham�az�malāmat-e�xalqān�o�mojālesat-e�bi�‛aqlān�o�fe‛l-e�ma'āl�raste�bāši�(Keykāvos�

1951:37)�

Should� it� happen� that� you� do� not� drink,� you� will� not� only� earn� rewards� in� both�

worlds�and�win�divine� favour�but�also�you�will�be�saved�public�disapprobation,� the�

society�of�witless�companions�and�senseless�conduct.�(Kai�Kā’ūs�1951:57)�

TAM�in�P-clause:�Ø-present�tense�.�

TAM�in�Q-clause:�Ø-present�tense.�

Commentary:�Open�P-conditional�

CP�8.� agar� farzandān-e� xā�� o� a�il� �ad� piše� dārand� va� az� ān�kasb� nakonand� ‛eyb� nabāšad�

(Keykāvos�1951:75)�

Even� though� the� sons� of�men�of� quality� and�high� birth� acquired� a� hundred� crafts�

(provided� they�did�not� employ� them�for� gain)� it�would�be�no� fault� […](Kai�Kā’ūs�

1951:123)�

TAM�in�P-clause:�Ø-present�tense�(dārand)�and�Ø-present�tense�(nakonand).�

TAM�in�Q-clause:�Ø-present�tense�(nabāšad).�

Commentary:�Open�P-conditional.��

22

CP�9.� agar��āle'�bovad�va�sar-e�kadxodā’i�dārad�va�dāni�ke�šoġli�tavānad�kard�va�az�ān�čizi�

bedast� tavanad� āvarad� va� dar� vey� ruzbehi� dāni� � tadbir-e� zan� xvāstan-e� u� kon� […]�

(Keykāvos�1951:77)�

If�he�is�a�proper�youth,�capable�of�having�charge�of�a�household,�and�you�know�that�

he� can� carry� out� a� task� an� earn� something� by� doing� so,� and,� further,� if� you� are�

assured�of�his�success�then�set�about�the�task�of�seeking�a�wife�for�him.�(Kai�Kā’ūs�

1951:124)�

TAM�in�P-clause:��bovad�+�Ø-present�tense�(dārad).�

TAM�in�Q-clause:��Imperative.�

Commentary:�Open�P-conditional.��

CP��10.� “agar�man�dar�in�kār�bevājebi�ranj�baram�va�timār�dāram�va�nago9āram�ke�hi�xalali�

bedān�rāh�yābad�xodāvandegār-e�mā�pendārad�ke�in�az�kefāyat�o�honar-e�yār-e�man�

ast�na�az�ehtemām�o�jaldi�o�kušeš-e�man.”�(Neām�al-Molk�1962:201)�

‘If� I� take� pains� to� do� the� work� expediently,� and� take� care� not� to� let� anything� go�

wrong,�our�master�will�think�that�this�I�due�to�the�capability�and�skill�of�my�partner,�

not�to�my�own�diligent�and�patient�efforts.’�(Nizam�al-Mulk�1978:158)�

TAM� in�P-clause:�Ø-present� tense� (baram)�+�Ø-present� tense� (dāram)�+�Ø-present� tense�

(nagozāram).�

TAM�in�Q-clause:�Ø-present�tense.�

Commentary:�Open�P-conditional.�

CP�11.� Translation� from� Arabic:� čun� bimār� šavand� išān� rā� parasteš� makonid� va� agar�

bemirand�bejenāzešān�naravid��(Neām�al-Molk�1962:207)�

[...]� if� they� are� ill,� do� not� visit� them;� and� when� they� die,� be� not� present� at� the�

funerals.�(Nizam�al-Mulk�1978:163)�

TAM�in�P-clause:�Ø-present�tense.�

TAM�in�Q-clause:�Imperative.�

23

Commentary:� Open� P-conditional.� The� translation� renders� the� agar� as� when� and� čun�

(literally�when)� as� agar.� A�more� literal� rendering� would� be:�When� they� get� ill,� do� not�

attend� them�and� if� they�die,�do�not�go� to� their� funerals.�As�can�be�seen� from�the�above�

example,�čun�and�agar�seem�to�be�used�interchangeably�in�CP.�

CP� 12.� gouhar� agar� dar� xalāb� oftad� hamčonān� nafis� ast� va� ġobār� agar� be� falak� ravad�

hamčonān�xasis�(Sa‛di�1988:235-236)�

� � �

If�a�jewel�falls�in�the�mud,�it�is�still�precious�and�if�dust�flies�to�the�sky,�it�is�still�base.�

For�both�clauses:�

TAM�in�P-clause:�Ø-present�tense.�

TAM�in�Q-clause:�ast.�

Commentary:�Neutral�P-conditional�making�a�statement�of�omnitemporal�validity.�

CP�13.� 'okamā�gofte-and�dust-rā�čandān�qovvat�made�ke�agar�došmani�konad��

tavānad.�(Sa‛di�1988:56)�

The� sages� have� said:� ”Don’t� give� a� friend� such� a� power� that,� if� he� gets� the�

opportunity�to�turn�against�you,�he�will.�

TAM�in�P-clause:��Ø-present�tense.�

TAM�in�Q-clause:�Ø-present�tense.�

Commentary:��Open-P�conditional.�

3.1.23.1.23.1.23.1.2�With�the�be�With�the�be�With�the�be�With�the�be----present�tense�in�the�Ppresent�tense�in�the�Ppresent�tense�in�the�Ppresent�tense�in�the�P----clauseclauseclauseclause����

CP�14.� be�hame�'āl�agar�nabi9�xvori��bāyad�ke�bedāni�ke�čegune�bāyad�xvord�ke�agar�nadāni�

xvordan�zahr�ast�va�agar�bedāni�pāzahr�(Keykāvos�1951:37)�

Be�that�as�it�may,�if�you�indulge�in�wine,�you�must�know�how�to�drink,�for�it�is�poison�

if�you�do�not�know�how�it�should�be�drunk�whereas�it�is�a�physic�against�poison�if�you�

do�know�(Kai�Kā’ūs�1951:58)�

1st�conditional�

TAM�in�P-clause:�Ø-present�tense.�

24

TAM�in�Q-clause:�bāyad�+�Ø-present�tense.�

2nd�conditional�

TAM�in�P-clause:�Ø-present�tense�.�

TAM�in�Q-clause:�ast.�

3rd�conditional�

TAM�in�P-clause:�be-present�tense�.�

TAM�in�Q-clause:�ast�

Commentary:�All�of�them�are�open�P-conditionals.�

CP�15.�� �bedān� ke� agar� ‛āmeli� bemirad� yā� ma‛zul� šavad� ān� kār� rā� foru� nabāyad� go9āšt�

(Neām�al-Molk�1962:216)�

Know�that�if�a�tax-collector�dies�or�is�dismissed,�his�work�cannot�be�allowed�to�lapse.�

(Nizam�al-Mulk�1978:171)�

TAM�in�P-clause:�be-present�tense�and�Ø-present�tense.�

TAM�in�Q-clause:�Impersonal�construction.�

Commentary:�Open�P-conditional.�

�3.1.3 With the mi-present tense in the P-conditional

CP��16.� va�emruz�in�tamyiz�barxāste�ast�ke�agar�jahudi�bekadxodāi�va�‛amal-e�torkān�miāyad�

mišāyad�va�agar�tarsā�yā�gabr�yā�qarma)i�mišāyad.�(Neām�al-Molk�1962:202)�

But� nowadays� all� distinction� has� vanished;� and� if� a� Jew� administers� the� affairs� of�

Turks,� it� is� permitted;� and� it� is� the� same� for� Zoroastrians,� Rafidis,� Kharijis� and�

Qarmatis.�(Nizam�al-Mulk�1978:159)�

TAM�in�P-clause:�mi-present�tense.�

TAM�in�Q-clause:�mi-present�tense.�

Commentary:��Open�P-conditional.�

�3.1.4 With the past-i tense in the P-clause

25

CP�17.� (About�a�man�who�had�gone�to�the�veterinary�for�his�eye�problems.)�“[…]�agar��in�

xar�nabudi�piš-e�bey)ār�narafti.”�(Sa‛di�1988:199)�

”[…]�if�he�weren’t�an�ass,�he�wouldn’t�have�gone�to�the�veterinary.”�

TAM�in�P-clause:�Past-i�tense.�

TAM�in�Q-clause:�Past-i�tense.�

Commentary:��Counterfactual.�

����CP�18.� va� ‛ajabtar� az� in� hame� ān� ke� behame� ruzgār� šoġl� be� kasi� farmudandi� � ke� u� pāk�

e‛temād�o�a�il�o�pārsā�budi�va�agar�enqebāz�kardi�o�ejābat�nakardi�bekarah�o�zur�dar�

gardan-e�u�kardandi�[…]�(Neām�al-Molk�1962:202)�

Even�more�extraordinary�is� the� fact�that� in�all�previous�ages�a�public�appointment�

was� given� to� a�man�of� the� same� religion�and� the� same� rite,�who�was�pure�alike� in�

religion� and� origin;� and� if� he� was� averse� and� refused� to� accept� it,� they� used�

compulsion� and� force� to� make� him� take� the� responsibility.� (Nizam� al-Mulk�

1978:159)�

TAM�in�P-clause:�Past-i�tense.�

TAM�in�Q-clause:�Past-i�tense�tense.�

Commentary:� Factual� P-conditional.�The� past-i� tense� tense� used� here� to� denote� repetitive-

habitual�acts�committed�in�the�past�and�not�counterfactuality.�

CP��19.� va� agaragaragaragar�kesi�dar� ān� ruzgār�bexedmat-e� torki� āmadi�bekadxodāi� yā� šoġli�digar� agaragaragaragar�

gofti�”'anafi�ma9habam�yā�šāfe‛i�ma9habam�va�az�šahri�ke�sonni�bāšad”�qabul�kardi�

va�agaragaragaragar�gofti�”ši‛iam�va�az�qom�va�kāšān�va�ābeam”�u-rā�napa9irofti,�gofti�”�berou�ke�

mārkošim�na�mārparvarim”�agaragaragaragar�če�besyār� �māl�o�ne‛mat�piš�kešidandi�napa9irofti�

[…]�(Neām�al-Molk�1962:203)�

In�former�times�if�a�man�offered�himself�for�service�to�a�Turk�as�an�administrator�or�

a�cleaner�or�a�stirrup-holder,�they�used�to�ask�him�what�province�and�city�he�came�

from� and� what� rite� he� professed;� if� he� said� that� he� was� of� the� Hanafi� or� Shafi’i�

persuasion�and�from�Khurasan,�Transoxiana�or�a�Sunni�city,�he�was�accepted;�but�if�

he�said�that�he�was�a�Shi’ite�from�Qum,�Kashan,�Abeh�or�Rayy�he�was�refused�and�

26

told,� ‘Be�gone;�we�kill�snakes�not�nourish�them.’�Even�if�money�and�presents�were�

offered,�the�Turk�would�not�accept�them�[…]�(Nizam�al-Mulk�1978:160)7� �

TAM�in�P-clause:�Past-i�tense.�

TAM�in�Q-clause:�Past-i�tense.�

Commentary:�Factual�P-conditional.�What�we�see�here�is�the�recurrent�use�of�past-i�tense�for�

denoting�repetitive-habitual�acts.�Not�denoting�counterfactuality.�

CP�20.� (Translation�from�Arabic�hadith:)�agar�pas�az�man�peyġāmbari�budi�‛omar-e�xa))āb�

budi�(Neām�al-Molk�1962:206)�

If�there�were�a�prophet�after�me,�it�would�be�’Umar�ibn�al-Khattab.’�(Nizam�al-Mulk�

1978:163)�

TAM�in�P-clause:�Past-i�tense.�

TAM�in�Q-clause:�Past-i�tense.�

Commentary:� Counterfactual.� It� is� interesting� to� note� that� in� the� Arabic� original,� the�

conditional�is�introduced�by�law,�denoting�counterfactuality.�

CP�21.� �(Interpretation� of� an�Arabic� 'adi:)� “agar�mo'ammad-rā�miparastîd�mo'ammad�

bemord�va�agar�xodā-ye�mo'ammad-rā�miparastid�u�bar�jāy�ast�va�hamiše�bāšad�va�

ān�ke�hargez�namord�va�namirad�u�ast.”�(Neām�al-Molk�1962:217)�

‘Oh� Muslims,� if� you� were� worshipping� [literally:� if� you� worship]� Muhammad,�

Muhammad�is�dead;�and�if�you�were�worshipping�[literally:�if�you�worship]�the�God�

of�Muhammad,�He�is�still�there�and�always�was�and�always�will�be,�He�it�is�who�will�

never�die.’�(Nizam�al-Mulk�1978:172)�

TAM�in�P-clause:�mi-present�tense.�

TAM�in�Q-clause:�mi-present�tense.�

Commentary:�Open�P-conditional.�

7 Although the translation is based on the same edition of the Persian as I am using, there are some

inconsistencies in it.

27

CP�22.�� va� az� ādamiān� agar�momken� budi� ke� hargez� kesi� namordi� vājeb� kardi� ke� ān� kesi�

mo'ammad-e�mo�)afā�budi�(Neām�al-Molk�1962:217)�

…for�all�of�mankind�had�it�been�possible�for�one�man�not�to�die,�then�that�person�

should�have�been�Muhammad�The�Elect�[…](Nizam�al-Mulk�1978:172)�

TAM�in�P-clause:�Past-i�tense.�

TAM�in�Q-clause:�Past-i�tense.�

Commentary:�Counterfactual�P-conditional.�

CP�23.�� man� goftam� “āh� dariġā� in� angoštari� ke� agar� dānestami� ke� malek� be'aqiqat� dar�

angošt� naxvāhad� kard� va� dar� daryā� xvāhad� andāxt� bari� bepa9iroftami� ke� hargez�

čenān�yāqut�nadide�budam”��(Neām�al-Molk�1962:223-224)�

I�exclaimed,�“Oh!�what�a�pity!�if�I�had�known�for�certain�that�Your�Majesty�would�

not�put�the�ring�on�his�finger�again�and�was�going�to�throw�it� into�the�sea,�well�–�I�

would�have�accepted�it,�for�I�had�never�seen�such�a�ruby.’�(Nizam�al-Mulk�1978:177)�

TAM�in�P-clause:�Past-i�tense.�

TAM�in�Q-clause:�be+past-i�tense.�

Commentary:�Counterfactual�P-conditional.�

CP�24.� pesar� čun� pil-e�mast� dar� āmad� be� �adamat-i� ke� agar� kuh-e� āhanin� didi� az� jāy� bar�

kandi�(Sa‛di�1988:29)�

The�boy�made�an�onslaught�like�a�furious�elephant,�with�such�an�impetus�that�if�he�

had�seen�a�mountain�of�iron,�he�would�have�uprooted�it�from�its�place.�

TAM�in�P-clause:�Past-i�tense.�

TAM�in�Q-clause:�Past-i�tense.�

Commentary:�Counterfactual�P-conditional.�

CP�25.� malek�goft� agar�dar�mofāve#e-ye�u� šab-i� ta’xir�kardi� če� šodi� ke�man�u-rā� afzun�az�

qeymat-e�kanizak�dādami�(Sa‛di�1988:65)�

28

What�would�it�have�mattered�if�he�had�delayed�his�intimacy�with�her�for�one�night?�I�

would�have�given�him�more�than�what�the�slave�was�worth.�

TAM�in�P-clause:�Past-i�tense.�

TAM�in�Q-clause:�Past-i�tense.�

Commentary:�Counterfactual-P�conditional.�

CP�26.� goft�agar�ān�dānā�budi�kār-e�vey�bā�nādānān�bedin�jā�naresidi.�(Sa‛di�1988:144)�

He� said:�“If�he�were� learned�he�wouldn’t�have� let�his� interactions�with� the� foolish�

come�to�this�stage.”�

TAM�in�P-clause:�Past-i�tense.�

TAM�in�Q-clause:�Past-i�tense.�

Commentary:�Counterfactual-P�conditional.�

CP�27.� goft�dariġ.�in�bande�bā�'osn�o�šamāyeli�ke�dārad�agar�zabān-e�derāz�o�biadab�nabudi�

če�budi.�(Sa‛di�1988:151)�

He�said:�Alas!�This�slave�with�his�beauty�and�good�qualities,�how�good�it�would�have�

been�if�he�weren’t�unmannerly�and�insolent.�

TAM�in�P-clause:�Past-i�tense.�

TAM�in�Q-clause:�Past-i�tense.�

Commentary:��Counterfactual-P�conditional.�

�3.1.5 The Ø-past tense in the P-clause

CP��28.� goft�ey�barādar.�'aram�dar�piš�ast�va�'arami�dar�pas.�agar�rafti�bordi�va�agar�xofti�

mordi.�(Sa‛di�1988:76)�

He�said:�”O�brother!�The�sanctuary�is�in�front�of�us�and�brigands�behind�us.�If�you�

go,�you�will�prevail�and�if�you�sleep�you�will�perish.”�

TAM�in�P-clause:�Ø-past�tense.�

TAM�in�Q-clause:�Ø-past�tense.�

29

Commentary:�Open�P-conditional�with�the�Ø-past�tense�in�both�clauses.�

CP�29.� sar-e�mār�be�dast-e�došman�bekub.�[…]agar�in�ġāleb�āmad�mār�košti�va�agar�ān�az�

došman�rasti.�(Sa‛di�1988:225)�

� �

Hit�the�head�of�the�snake�with� the�hand�of�the�enemy.� […]�If�the�enemy�succeeds�

then�you�have�killed�the�snake,�and�if�the�snake�succeeds�you�have�been�freed�from�

the�enemy.�

TAM�in�P-clause:�Ø-past�tense.�

TAM�in�Q-clause:�Ø-past�tense.�

Commentary:�Open�P-conditional�with�the�Ø-past�tense�in�both�clauses.�

�3.1.6 Conclusions

We�see�that�for�open-P�conditionals,�the�most�common�TAM-form�of�the�P-clause�is�the�Ø-

present� tense,� but� we� also� see� that� the� mi-present� tense� and� the� be-present� tense� are�

employed� without� any� outward� difference� in� their� usage.� The� be� seems� to� signify� nothing�

more�than�the�punctual�act�it�would�have�signified�outside�of�the�conditional,�i.e.�it�does�not�

alter�the�meaning�of�the�conditional�in�any�way.�

In�all�of�the�counterfactual�conditionals,�the�past-i�form�is�used,�but�this�form�is�also�

used� for� factual-P� conditionals.�One� interesting� TAM-form� to� be� noticed� is� the�Ø-past,� of�

which�was�found�only�two�examples,�both�from�the�Golestān.�

3.2 Analysis of conditionals in MP 3.2.1 Present Subjunctive

MP�1.�� agar�beyn-e�rāh�az�xastegi�beyoftand,�bā�sixak�bolandešân�mikonand�va�gāhi�čandin�

ruz,�bedun-e�xvorāk,�zir-e�tābeš-e�āftāb-e�suzān�yā�dar�āġelhā-ye�čerk�o�mota‛affen�

be�sar�mibarand.�(Hedāyat�2005:10)�

If� they� fall� due� to� fatigue,� they� get� them� on� their� feet� again� by� using� a� goad� and�

sometimes�they�spend�(some)�days�without�food�under�the�scorching�sun�or�in�dirty�

and�nauseous�folds.�

TAM�in�P-clause:�Present�Subjunctive.�

TAM�in�Q-clause:�Present�Indicative.�

30

Commentary:�This�is�a�neutral-P�conditional�expressing�present�habits�in�the�Q-clause.�

MP�2.� agar� ‛erāqihā�be� xākemān� tajāvoz�konand,�mel-e� sāyer-e�mardom-e� irān� jeloušān�

miistim�va�birunešān�mikonim.�(Fatā'i�1989:21)�

If� the� Iraqis� encroach� upon� our� land,� we�will,� like� the� rest� of� the� people� of� Iran,�

resist�them�and�drive�them�out.�

TAM�in�P-clause:�Present�Subjunctive.�

TAM�in�Q-clause:�Present�Indicative.�

Commentary:�Open�P-conditional.�

MP�3.�� “agar�sar-e�‛aql�biyāyi�va�bargardi,�ānvaqt�bāvaremān�mišavad�ke�rāsti-rāsti�māhi-ye�

fahmidei�hasti.�”(Behrangi�1997:10)�

“If� you�come�to�your� senses�and� return,� then�we�will�believe� that� you�truly�are�an�

understanding�fish.�”�

TAM�in�P-clause:�Present�Subjunctive.�

TAM�in�Q-clause:�Present�Indicative.�

Commentary:�Open�P-conditional.�

����

MP�4.� �“agar�to�čizi�darbāre-ye�inhā�midāni�be�man�begu.�”�(Behrangi�1997:16)�

“If�you�know�anything�about�these�things,�then�tell�me.�“�

TAM�in�P-clause:�Present�Indicative.�

TAM�in�Q-clause:�Imperative.�

Commentary:�Closed�P-conditional.�

MP�5.� �[...]�agar�ān�e'sās�rā�az�gušti�ke�dar�bošqāb�ast�neminamāyim,�barāye� in�ast�ke�be�

zur-e�adviye�va�poxtan�va�rangrazi�xvodemān�rā�gul�mizanim.�(Hedāyat�2005:68)�

If�we�do�not�get�that�feeling�from�the�meat�that�is�on�our�plate,�it�is�because�we�trick�

ourselves�with�the�use�of�spices,�cooking�and�colouring.��

31

TAM�in�P-clause:�Present�Indicative.�

TAM�in�Q-clause:�Present�Indicative.�

Commentary:�Closed.�

MP�6.� �mas¶alan�dar�berenj�meqdār-e� āzot-e� ān�kamtar� az�yek�dar�pānzdah�ast;� ammā�če�

ahammiyati�dārad?�besyāri�az�mardom-e�ru-ye�zamin�az�alāt�zist�mikonand�va�agar�

āzot-e� berenj� kam� ast� āyā� mišavad� goft� ke� činihā� žāponihā� #aiftar� az� digarān�

hastand?�������������������(Hedāyat�2005:29-30)�

For�example,�the�amount�of�nitrogen�in�rice�is�less�than�1/15,�but�what�significance�

does�it�have?�A�lot�of�people�on�earth�live�on�grains�and�if�the�level�of�nitrogen�in�

rice�is�low,�can�it�be�said�that�the�Chinese�and�Japanese�are�weaker�than�others?�

TAM�in�P-clause:�Present�Indicative.�

TAM�in�Q-clause:�Present�Indicative.�

Commentary:�Closed.�

MP�7.�� agar�bel·āfā�ele� ba‛d� az� xvordan-e� ān� e'sās-e� qovvat�minamāyand,� faqa)� dar� aar-e�

yek� tahyij-e� sāxtegi� va� xa)arnāk� ast,� mānand-e� alkol� ke� a‛�āb� rā� tahyij� mikonad.�

(Hedāyat�2005:49)�

If� they� feel� strong� [literally:� strenght]� immidiatly� after� eating� it,� it� is� because� of� a�

created�and�dangerous�stimulation,�like�that�of�alcohol,�which�stimulates�the�nerves.�

TAM�in�P-clause:�Present�Indicative.�

TAM�in�Q-clause:�Present�Indicative.�

Commentary:�Closed�P-conditional.�Echoic.��

MP�8.�� agar�tanāzo‛-e�baqā�rāst�ast,�ensān�tanāzo‛-e�fanā�minamāyad.�(Hedāyat�2005:66)�

If�the�[concept�of]�struggle�for�existence�is�true,�then�mankind�is�pursuing�a�struggle�

for�destruction.�

TAM�in�P-clause:�Present�Indicative�

32

TAM�in�Q-clause:�Present�Indicative�

Commentary:�Closed�P-conditonal.�

�3.2.3 Imperfect

4.� �“in� ast� gušt-e� gāv,� gusfand� o� parandegān� čeqadr� tarsnāk� mibāšad.� in� bu-ye� xun�

midahad,� in� az� koštār� soxan� mirānad.� agar� kesi� miandišid� jor’at� nemikard� � sar-e�

sofre�benešinad.”�(Hedāyat�2005:44)�

This�is�the�meat�of�cows,�sheep�and�poultry,�how�frightening�it�is!�It�smells�of�blood�

and�speaks�of�killing.�If�anyone�(ever)�thought�[about�this],�they�would�not�dare�sit�

at�the�dinner�table.�

TAM�in�P-clause:�Imperfect.�

TAM�in�Q-clause:�Imperfect.�

Commentary:� Counterfactual.� The� author� assumes� that� no-one� ever� thinks� about� these�

things.�

MP�9.�� agar�dokkān-e�‛araqforuši,�qa��ābi,�mahigiri,�va�morforuši�rā�mibastand;�tā�andāzei�

�ol'-e�‛omumi�va�barādari-ye�ādamiān��urat-e�xāreji�migereft.�(Hedāyat�2005:60)�

It� the� shops�of� the�alcohol� sellers,� the� slaughterers,� the� fishermen�and�the�poultry�

sellers� were� closed,� universal� peace� and� fraternity� among� mankind� would� to� an�

extent�realize.�

TAM�in�P-clause:�Imperfect.�

TAM�in�Q-clause:�Imperfect.�

Commentary:�Counterfactual.�Obviously,��the�author�sees�the�possibility�of�this�happening�as��

counterfactual.�

MP�10.� �agar� hame-ye�mardom�giāhxvār�mishodand� zamin-e�mā�mitavānest� az� se� elā� panj�

barābar-e�sākenin-e�konuni-ye�xvod�rā�xvorak�bedahad.�(Hedāyat�2005:80)�

If�eveyone�became�vegetarian,�our�earth�could�feed�tree�to�five�times�the�number�of�

its�current�inhabitants.�

TAM�in�P-clause:�Imperfect.�

TAM�in�Q-clause:�Imperfect.�

33

Commentary:�Counterfactual.��Cf.�example�(MP�9).�

MP�11.�� [Dialogue]� inhā� tarkeš�ast.� agar�kesi� dar� in�nazdikihā�bud�va� tarkešhā�be�u�

mixvord,�donimeaš�mikard.�(Fatā'i�1989:36)�

These�are�shrapnels.�If�anyone�were�nearby�and�the�shrapnels�hit�him,�they�

would�have�cut�him�in�two.�

TAM�in�P-clause:�Imperfect.�

TAM�in�Q-clause:�Imperfect.�

Commentary:� � I� interpret� this�one� to�be� counterfactual,� i.e.� the� speaker�knows� that�no-one�

was� nearby� and� got� hit.� It� could� also� be� interpreted� as� a� factual-P� conditional� -� describing�

events�of�the�past�that�have�fulfilled.�

MP��12.��“agar� ensān� 'eyvānāt� rā� nemixvord� ru-ye� zamin� rā� por� mikardand”� (Hedāyat�

2005:90-91)�

“If�mankind�didn't�eat�the�animals,�they�would�overrun�the�[face�of�the]�earth.”�

TAM�in�P-clause:�Imperfect.�

TAM�in�Q-clause:�Imperfect.�

Commentary:�Counterfactual�

MP�13.�� kafče�māhi�hā�yek�edā�goftand:�“ya‛ni�mā�nādānim?”��

māhi�goft:�“agar�nādān�nabudid,�midānestid�dar�donyā�xeylihāye�digar�ham�hastand�

ke�rixtešān�barāye�xodešān�xeyli�ham�xošāyand�ast!”�(Behrangi�1997:12)�

The�little�fish�said�with�one�voice:�“So�you�say�that�we�are�ignorant?�”�

The�fish�said:�“If�you�weren't�ignorant,�you'd�have�known�that�in�the�world�there�are�

those�whose�appereance�indeed�is�very�pleasing�to�their�own�kind.”��

TAM�in�P-clause:�Imperfect�(Preterit)�.�

TAM�in�Q-clause:�Imperfect.�

Commentary:�Counterfactual.�Since�the�imperfect�form�of�budan�is�not�employed�in�Modern�

Persian,�we�here�see�the�preterit�form�in�the�P-clause.�

34

MP�14.� �[The�narrator�is�describing�a�scenery]...agar�mixvāsti�az�bālā-ye�kuhhā�tah-e�darre�rā�

negāh�koni,�juybār�rā�mel-e�nax-e�sefidi�mididi.�(Behrangi�1997:13)�

If� you� (had)�wanted� to� see� the� bottom�of� the� valley� from� the�mountain� tops,� you�

would�have�seen�the�river�as�a�white�thread.�

TAM�in�P-clause:�Imperfect.�

TAM�in�Q-clause:�Imperfect.�

Commentary:� As� I� see� it,� this� conditional� conveys� some� sort� of� neutrality;� it� adresses� the�

reader� in� a� general� you� (that� might� even� include� the� speaker).� Moreover,� it� could� be�

interpreted�as�not�really�making�a�supposition�about�whether�or�not�the�condition�is�possible�

or�not.��

It� could� also� be� argued� that� this� is� a� counterfactual� P-clause,� and� the� use� of� the�

Imperfect� supports� that� theory.�For� this� conditional� to�be� counterfactual,� the� speaker�must�

presuppose� that� the� situation� in� P� is� contrary� to� fact� (i.e.� that� we� do� not� want� to� see� the�

bottom�of�the�valley�from�the�mountain�tops.)�It�might�also�be�that�focus�is�not�so�much�on�

the� counterfactuality� of� us� wanting� to� see� the� vista,� but� rather� on� the� factuality� of� that�

happening,�since�this�takes�place�world�constructed�by�the�author.�Therefore,�it�is�impossible�

for�us�as�readers�to�see�that�vista.�

MP�15.�� hame-ye� omidam� be� jāseb� bud.� agar� u� rā� peydā� nemikardam,� ma‛lum� nabud� če�

sarnevešti�dar�enteāram�bud.�(Fatā'i�1989:108)�

All�my�hope�was�in�Jāseb.�If�I�didn't�find�him,�it�was�not�certain�what�kind�of�fate�I�

would�have.�

TAM�in�P-clause:�Imperfect.�

TAM�in�Q-clause:�Preterit/Imperfect.�

Commentary:�Counterfactual.�

MP��16.��mardi�ke�hamsaraš�fout�kard,�bexo�u��agar�farzand�yā�farzandāni�dāšt,�nemi�tavānest�

bedun-e� komak-e� zan� omur-e� xvānevāde-rā� bečarxānad,� pas� bā� go9ašt-e� zamani�

kutāh�dobāre�ezdevāj�mikard...�(E’zāzi�2003:27)�

35

A�man�that�had�lost�his�wife�couldn't�take�care�of�the�family�chores�without�a�wife,�

especially�if�he�had�children.�Thus,�he�remarried�after�the�lapse�of�a�short�time.�

TAM�in�P-clause:�Imperfect�(Preterit).�

TAM�in�Q-clause:�Imperfect.�

Commentary:�Factual�P-conditional.�

MP�17.� agar� shouhar-e� zani� az�donyā�miraft� zendegi� va� tanhāyi� barā-ye�u�besyār� xa)arnāk�

bud.��(E’zāzi�2003:28)�

� If�the�husband�of�a�woman�passed�away,�life�and�loneliness�were�very�dangerous�for�

her.�

TAM�in�P-clause:��Imperfect.�

TAM�in�Q-clause:�Imperfect.�

Commentary:�Factual.�

MP��18� agar�zan-e�bive�farzandi�nadāšt� ‛o#vi�az�xānevāde-ye�gostarde�niz�ma'sub�nemišod�

va�mibāyest�az�)ariq-e�digari�zendegi-ye�xvod-rā�ta’min�konad�va�agar�hanuz�dar�xāne�

negahdāri�mišod�az�ruy-e�ra'm�o�morovvat�bud.�(E’zāzi�2003:28)�

If� a� widow� did� not� have� any� children,� she� was� not� counted� as� a� member� of� the�

extended�family�and�she�needed�to�secure�her�existence�in�other�ways.�If�she�was�still�

kept�in�the�family,�it�was�out�of�mercy�and�pity.�

1st�conditional�

TAM�in�P-clause:��Imperfect�(Preterit).�

TAM�in�Q-clause:�Imperfect.�

Commentary:��Factual.�

2nd�conditional�

TAM�in�P-clause:�Imperfect.�

TAM�in�Q-clause:�Imperfect�(Preterit).�

Commentary:�Factual.�

MP�19.� agar�pesar-e�rustāyi�dar�senin-e�pāyin�ezdevāj�karde�va�farzandāni�miāvord�mizān-e�

ma'�ul-e�zamin�barā-ye�taġ9iye-ye�hame-ye�ānhā�kāfi�nabud.�(E’zāzi�2003:32)�

36

If�a�boy�from�the�country�married�at�a�young�age�and�had�children,�the�amount�of�

crop�from�the�land�was�not�enough�to�feed�all�of�them.�

TAM�in�P-clause:��Imperfect.�

TAM�in�Q-clause:�Imperfect.�

Commentary:��Factual.�

�3.2.4 Preterit

MP�20.� �“hālā�agar�māhi�vāred-e�kise�šod,�digar�rāh-e�birun�āmadan�nadārad?�”�(Behrangi�

1997:17)�

Now,�if�a�fish�enters�(lit.�entered)�the�bag,�are�there�no�ways�of�coming�out?�

TAM�in�P-clause:�Preterit.�

TAM�in�Q-clause:�Present�Indicative.�

Commentary:�Open�P-conditional.�

MP�21.�� “�[...]�albatte�agar�yek�vaqti�nācār�bā�marg�ruberu�šodam�–�ke�mišavam�–�mohemm�

nist;�mohem�in�ast�ke�zendegi�yā�marg-e�man,�če�aari�dar�zendegi-ye�digarān�dāšte�

bašad.�”�(Behrangi�1997:29)�

“�[...]�Certainly,�if�I�one�day�come�face�to�face�with�death�in�a�dire�situation�–�and�I�

will�–�it's�not�important;�that�which�is�important�is�what�effect�my�life�or�death�will�

have�on�others.”�

TAM�in�P-clause:�Preterit�

TAM�in�Q-clause:�Present�Indicative.�

Commentary:�Open�P-conditional.�

����

MP�22�.� bištar-e�mardom-e�rustā,�vasāyelešān�rā�jam‛�karde�va�āmade�budand�tā�agar�‛arāq�

'amle�kard,�be�jā-ye�digari�beravand.�(Fatā'i�1989:8)�

Most�of�the�people�of�the�countryside�had�gathered�their�tools�and�come�so�that�if�

Iraq�would�attack,�they�would�go�to�another�place.�

37

TAM�in�P-clause:�Preterite.�

TAM�in�Q-clause:�Present�Subjunctive.�

Commentary:�Open-P�conditional.�The�subjunctive�tense�in�the�Q-clause�is�due�the�tā.�

�3.2.5 Conclusions

For�open-P�condiotionals�we�see�that�mostly,��the�Present�Subjunctive�is�used.�The�Preterit�is�

used�when� focus� seems� to�be�on� the�Q-clause� actualizing� rather� than�on� the�P-clause.�The�

Imperfect�is�used�for�both�factual-P�conditoinals�and�counterfactual-P.�Closed-P�conditionals�

use�the�Present�Indicative.�

����3.3 Analysis of conditionals in MT 3.3.1 Present Subjunctive in the P-clause

MT�1.�� Agar� maktabdor� yagon� bača-ro� sahv� karda� jeġ� zanad,� xalifa� suxan-i� -ro� tasheh�

mekard…�(Aynī�1949:12)�

If�the�teacher�erroneously�called�forth�a�child,�the�khalifa�would�correct�his�[i.e.�the�

teacher’s]�utterance…�

TAM�in�P-clause:��Present�Subjunctive.�

TAM�in�Q-clause:��Imperfect.�

Commentary:�The�imperfect�here�denotes�that�the�actions�were�common�and�happened�more�

than�once.�The� ‘if’� here� could�be� translated�with� ‘whenever’.� Since� its� fulfilment� lies� in� the�

past,�this�is�a�factual�P-conditional.�

MT�2.� Xususan�agar�kase�šabona�ba�qasd-i�ozmoiš,�yo�ba�sifat-i�šakkokī�dar�in�jo�biyoyad,�

albatta�ba�yak�balo�giriftor�mešudaast.�(Aynī�1949:53)�

Especially,� if� someone�went� to� this�place�with� the� intention�of� trying� [it�out]�or� in�

scepticism�[lit.�with�the�quality�of�doubtfulness],�he�would�certainly�be�subject�to�a�

calamity.�

TAM�in�P-clause:�Present�Subjunctive.�

TAM�in�Q-clause:�Mešudaast.�

Commentary:�Factual.�

38

MT�3.�� “agar�dev�ba�odam�zarar�rasondanī� šavad,�beštarin�ba� surat-i�gov-i�korī�daromada�

hamla�mekardaast”�(Aynī�1949:9)�

”If�a�demon�wanted�to�hurt�a�human�being,�it�mostly�transformed�to�the�shape�of�a�

bull�and�attacked.”�

TAM�in�P-clause:�Present�Subjunctive.�

TAM�in�Q-clause:�Mekardaast��

Commentary:�Factual.�

����

MT�4.�� Agar�on�bemor�šakkok�nabošad,�durust�mešud.�(Aynī�1949:61)�

If�that�sick�person�wasn’t�doubtful,�he�got�better.�

TAM�in�P-clause:�Present�Subjunctive.�

TAM�in�Q-clause:�Imperfect.�

Commentary:��Factual.�

����

MT�5.�� Agar� šabona� az� xona� baromadanī� šavad,� albatta� modaraš� hamroh� mebaromad.�

(Aynī�1949:71)�

If�he�wanted�to�go�out�in�the�night-time,�his�mother�certainly�came�with�him.�

TAM�in�P-clause:�Present�Subjunctive.�

TAM�in�Q-clause:�Imperfect.�

Commentary:��Factual.�

����

MT�6.�� Peštar�tayyor�kardan-i�yak�juft�mza�oson�nabud.�[…]�Agar�šogird�bošiyu�usto�šavī,�

boz�yak�gala�čizho-yi�digar�lozim�mešud�[…]�(Amonov�1995:23)�

Before,� the�making� of� one� pair� of� boots� wasn’t� easy.� […]If� you�were� a� pupil� and�

becoming�a�master,�you�also�had�to�have�a�bunch�of�other�stuff.�[…]�

TAM�in�P-clause:�Present�Subjunctive.�

TAM�in�Q-clause:�Imperfect.�

39

Commentary:�Factual.�

����

MT�7.�� Modarkalonam,�ba’zan�begohiho,�agar�Očaxurdī�du-se�rz�naomada�monad,�maro�

az�pa-yi��mefiristod.�(Amonov�1995:90)�

Some� evenings� my� grandmother� would� send� me� after� Očaxurdī,� if� he� had� not�

showed�up�for�two�or�three�days.�

TAM�in�P-clause:�Present�Subjunctive.�

TAM�in�Q-clause:�Imperfect.�

Commentary:�Factual�

MT�8.� Odamon� dar� holatho-yi� dušvor,� maxsusan� agar� fojiae� ry� dihad,� hamin� gapho-ro�

gufta,�ham�xudašon�va�ham�digaron-ro�tasallo�medodand.�(Amonov�1995:173)�

People�would�console�themselves�and�others�with�this�kind�of�speech�during�harsh�

conditions,�especially�if�a�calamity�had�taken�place.�

TAM�in�P-clause:�Present�Subjunctive.�

TAM�in�Q-clause:�Imperfect.�

Commentary:�Factual.�

����

MT�9.� �–Šumo�mulloed�yo�pahlavon?�–�padaram�az�on�mullobača�pursid.�

-�Man�mullo-yi�pahlavonam!�–�javob�dod�.�

-�Agar�mullo�bošed,�-�guft�padaram,�-�ba�jasadaš�nigoh�nakarda�bo�in�pisar-i�man,�ki�

haštsola�ast,�munozira�kuned.�Mardum�binand,�ki�haqiqatan�šumo�mulloed�yo�ne?�

Agar�pahlavon�bošed�bo�on�javone�ki�hamsol�va�hamjasad-i�sumo�ast�guštī�gired,�to�

mardum�binand�ki�kadom-i�šumo�zr�hasted?�(Aynī�1949:43)�

“Are�you�a�mullah�or�a�wrestler?”�my�father�asked�of�that�kid-mullah.�

“I’m�a�wrestling�mullah!”�he�answered.�

“If�you’re�a�mullah”,�said�my�father,�“then�argue�with�my�boy�here�who’s�eight�years�

old,� without� even� considering� his� stature.� Then,� people� will� see� if� you’re� truly� a�

mullah�or�not.�If�you’re�a�wrestler,�then�wrestle�with�that�youth�who�is�of�the�same�

age�and�stature�as�yourself,�so�that�people�will�see�which�one�of�you�is�strong.”�

40

1st�conditional�

TAM�in�P-clause:�Present�Subjunctive�.�

TAM�in�Q-clause:�Imperative.�

Commentary:�This�conditional�clause�fulfils�the�criteria�of�being�a�closed�P-conditional�since�

it� is� echoic� and� uses� the� information� the� other� person� has� supplied� as� a� basis� for� further�

reasoning.� Generally,� one� would� expect� the� present� indicative� to� be� used� with� closed� P-

conditionals�in�all�the�variants�of�Persian,�but�the�use�of�the�present�subjunctive�here�could�be�

a�dialectal�peculiarity�restricted�to�the�spoken�language�since�it�occurs�in�dialogue.��

����

MT��10.��Ammo�padaram�ba�man�tasallī�dod�va�agar�girya�nakarda�ba�maktab�davom�kunam�

ba�man�yak�kurra�girifta�dodanī�šud...�(Aynī�1949:7)�

But�my� father� comforted�me� [and� said� that]� if� I� continued� [lit.� continue]� to� go� to�

school�he�would�get�a�donkey’s�foal�and�give�it�to�me…�

TAM�in�P-clause:�Present�Subjunctive.�

TAM�in�Q-clause:��Preterit.�

Commentary:��Open-P�conditional.��Although�it�refers�to�the�future�it�uses�the�Preterit�in�the�

Q-clause,�an�unusual�construction.�

MT�11.�� Agar� maktabdor� baro-yi� zadan� čb� došta� bošad,� padaram� ham� xalačb-i� govronī�

dorad.�(Aynī�1949:8)�

If�the�teacher�would�use�a�stick�when�hitting,�my�father,�too,�had�a�goad.�

TAM�in�P-clause:�Present�Subjunctive�

TAM�in�Q-clause:�Present�Indicative.�

Commentary:�Open�P-conditional.�

MT�12.�� Va� man� gumon� mekardam,� ki� agar� tanho� yoband,� bo� on� angušton� časm-i� maro�

xohand�koft.�(Aynī�1949:8)�

And�I�thought�that� if�they�found�[me�when�I�was]�alone,�they�would�poke�my�eyes�

with�those�fingers.�

41

TAM�in�P-clause:�Present�Subjunctive.�

TAM�in�Q-clause:�Futurum.�

Commentary:�Open�P-conditional�with�the�future�tense�in�the�Q-clause.�

����

MT�13.� �Agar�domullo�tu-ro�zanad�bo�hamin�kordča�gšaš-ro�meburam.�(Aynī�1949:17)�

If�the�teacher�hits�you,�I’ll�cut�off�his�ear�with�this�very�knife.�

TAM�in�P-clause:�Present�Subjunctive�.�

TAM�in�Q-clause:��Present�Indicative.�

Commentary:�Typical�open-P�conditional.�

MT�14.�� Agar�nazareton�boz�andake�durtar�davad,�medided�ki�dar�lab-labi�j-yi�Mazrangon�

,[…]�harguna�daraxton-i�sabzu�xurram�sar�kašida�budand.�(Aynī�1949:50)�

If�you�directed�your�view�a�little�bit�further�away,�you�saw�that�at�the�banks�of�the�

river�Mazrangon,�[…]�all�sorts�of�green�and�pleasant�trees�had�sprung�up.�

TAM�in�P-clause:��Present�Subjunctive.�

TAM�in�Q-clause:��Imperfect.�

Commentary:�This�example�appears�after�example�(MT�16).�To�the�form�(Present�Subjuntive�

in�P�and�Imperfect�in�Q)�it�appears�to�be�factual,�but�it�has�more�of�a�neutral�meaning�to�it�

due�to�the�impersonal�you.�

����3.3.2 Imperfect in the P-clause

MT�15.�� Šakkokī�nakun!�–�guft�ba��maktabdor,�-�duo�naf’�nakardan�nadorad,��az�beixlosi-yi�

xudaš�murdaast.�Agar�ixlos�medošt,�xalos�mešud,�[…]�(Aynī�1949:25)�

“Don’t�be�doubtful!”�the�teacher�said�to�him,�“There�is�no�such�thing�as�prayers�not�

having�any�effect,�he�died�of�his�own�unbelief.�If�he�had�had�devotion,�he�would�have�

been�saved,�[…]�

TAM�in�P-clause:��Imperfect.�

TAM�in�Q-clause:�Imperfect.�

Commentary:�Counterfactul�P-conditional.�

42

MT�16.�� Agar�pagohon�dar�vaqt-i�baromad-baromad-i�oftob,�yo�in�ki�begohonī�hangom-i�fur�

raftan-i�xuršed-i�jahontob,�ba�bolo-yi�on�tal�mebaromaded,�manzarae-ro�medided�ki�

qalam�az�tasvir-i�on�ojiz�ast,�[…]��(Aynī�1949:49)�

If�you�went�to�the�top�of�that�hill�in�the�morning�when�the�sun�rises�or�in�the�evening�

when�the�world-illuminating�sun�sets,�you�would�have�seen�a�vista�which�the�pen�is�

incapable�of�describing.�

TAM�in�P-clause:�Imperfect.�

TAM�in�Q-clause:�Imperfect.�

Commentary:�The�storytelling�surrounding�this�example�and�the�one�below�uses�the�imperfect�

throughout.�This�could�either�be�neutral�or�counterfactual,�depending�on�how�you�view� the�

“you”� in� this� example.� The� addressee� here� is� the� second� person� plural,� commonly� used� in�

Tajik�to�denote�an�impersonal�you.�If�the�addressee�is�meant�to�represent�the�reader,�and�the�

speaker�assumes�the�situation�in�P�to�be�false,�then�this�one�is�a�counterfactual-P�conditional.8�

On� the� other� hand,� if� the� second� person� plural� here� denotes� an� impersonal� you,� this�

conditional�has�a�neutral�meaning.�Cf.�example�(MP�14).�

MT�17.�� Dialogue:� Agar� ba� jo-yi� tu� kas-i� digar� mebud,� albatta� in� pul-i� man� ba� harom�

mebaromad.�(Aynī�1949:166)�

If� someone�else�had�been� in�your�place,�my�money�would� surely�have�been�put� to�

waste.�

TAM�in�P-clause:�Imperfect.�

TAM�in�Q-clause:�Imperfect.�

Commentary:�Counterfactual.�

MT�18.�� Dialogue:� -�Dar�hama-yi� in�korho�amir�ayb�nadorad.�Agar� inguna�korho�nodurust�

mebud,�mulloho�ki�sohibon-i�šariatand�-ro�man’�mekardand�[…](Aynī�1949:226)�

8 I am led to believe that this train of thought is the most probable, seeing as how he describes the vista as being

impossible to describe with the pen – further accentuating the fact that “you had to see it for yourself – and you

didn’t”.

43

In�all�these�doings,�the�amir�hasn’t�done�anything�wrong.�If�this�kind�of�activity�were�

wrong,�the�clergy,�who�have�the�sharia,�[lit.�are�the�owners�of�the�sharia]�would�have�

banned�it.9�

TAM�in�P-clause:�Imperfect�.�

TAM�in�Q-clause:�Imperfect.�

Commentary:�Counterfactual.�

MT�19.� �Dialogue:� -�Ne,� -guft�Mahmud-arab,� -� dar� in� jo� xeš� nadorad,� on�mulloe� ki� ba� �

tarafdorī� kard,� Abdurahmon-i� Raftor� nom� domullo-yi� st.� Agar� � ba� Qorī� Ibod�

tarafdorī�namekard,�Qorī�Ibod�ham�ba�vay�dars�namexond�va��ki�tanho�hamin�yak�

šogird-ro� dorad,� misl-i� payġambar-i� beummat� mudarris-i� bešogird� šuda� memond.�

(Aynī�1949:230)�

“No,”� said�Mahmud-Arab,� “he� doesn’t� have� any� relatives� here,� that� mullah� who�

sided�with�him,�Abdurahmon�Raftor,��is�his�teacher.�If�he�didn’t�side�with�Qorī�Ibod,�

Qorī� Ibod�wouldn’t�be�his�student,�and� since�he�only�has� this�one�pupil�he�would,�

like�a�messenger�without�a�congregation,�become�a�teacher�without�a�pupil.�

TAM�in�P-clause:�Imperfect�.�

TAM�in�Q-clause:�Imperfect.�

Commentary:�Counterfactual.�

MT�20.�� Agar�hamon�ovozaho�rost�mebaromadand,�albatta�ba�kor-i�mo�ham�xalal�merasid.�

(Aynī�1949:240)�

If� those� very� rumours� had� turned� out� be� true,� they� would� surely� also� have� been�

harmful�to�our�affairs.�

TAM�in�P-clause:�Imperfect.�

TAM�in�Q-clause:�Imperfect.�

Commentary:�Counterfactual�

9�The�pronoun�’’�can�also�mean�’it’�in�MT.

44

MT�21.�� Haidarča,� jra!� –� guft� Mahmud-arab� –� tu� az� korho-yi� mo� mulloyon� čize-ro�

namedonī;�agar�bo�kadom�rohho�šikam�ser�kardan-i�mulloyon-ro�medonistī� ,�ba�in�

davlat,�ki�mullo�našuda�duzd�šuda�gaštaī,�hazor�bor�šukr�mekardī.�(Aynī�1949:247)�

“My� friend�Haidarča!”� said�Mahmud-Arab� –� you� don’t� know� anything� about� the�

ways�of�us�mullahs;�if�you�knew�the�ways�in�which�we�mullahs�fill�our�stomachs,�you�

would�have�thanked�a�thousand�times�the�fact�that�you�didn’t�become�a�mullah�but�a�

thief.�

TAM�in�P-clause:�Imperfect.�

TAM�in�Q-clause:�Imperfect.�

Commentary:�Counterfactual.�

MT�22.� �Dar� Registon� imrz� onguna� odamho� mardumro� az� nom-i� šariat� ba� šr� andoxta�

gašta�budand,�ki�agar�dar�dastam�kordam�mešud,�šikam-i�yak-du�nafar-i�in�dayusho-

ro� mekafondam� va� pas� az� on� xandakunon� xudam-ro� ba� dasti� jallodon-i� amir�

mesupurdam.�(Aynī�1949:250�

Today�at�Registon,�that�kind�of�people�started�an�uprising�among�the�people�in�the�

name�of�the�sharia.�If�I�had�had�a�knife,�I�would�have�cut�the�stomachs�of�one�or�two�

of� those� (lit.� these)� pimps�and� after� that� I�would� have� handed�myself� over� to� the�

executioners�of�the�amir,�laughing.�

TAM�in�P-clause:�Imperfect.�

TAM�in�Q-clause:�Imperfect.�

Commentary:�Counterfactual.�

MT�23.�� Agar�on�joyro�“Nikolayobod”�menomidand,�baro-yi�abadī�kardan-i�nom-i�hukumat-i�

Nikolay� ki� obodkunanda-yi� haqiqi-yi� on� joy� budaast,� boz� ham�munosibtar�mešud,�

[…](Aynī�1949:269)�

If�they�had�named�that�placed�“Nikolayobod”,�it�would�have�been�even�more�fitting�

for� immortalizing� the�name�of� the�reign�of�Nikolay,�who�was� the�real�cause�of�the�

civilization�of�that�place.�

TAM�in�P-clause:�Imperfect.�

45

TAM�in�Q-clause:�Imperfect.�

Commentary:�Counterfactual.�

MT�24.�� Narrated:�Agar� šumo�dar�mavsim-i�kor-i� solho-yi�1915-16�ba� in�zavod�meomaded,�

dar�oxir-i�saf-i�in�mehnatrziyon�yak�javon-i�17-18-sola-ro�medided�(Aynī�1949:309)�

� � �

If�you�had�come�to�this�factory�in�the�working�seasons�of�1915-16,�you�would�

have�seen�a�17-18�year�old�youth�at�the�end�of�line�of�the�daily�workers.�

TAM�in�P-clause:�Imperfect.�

TAM�in�Q-clause:�Imperfect.�

Commentary:��Given�the�fact�that�he�gives�a�specific�time�for�the�event�of�the�P-clause�to�fulfil�

and� that� he� also� uses� the� Imperfect� in� both� clauses,� it� seems� as� if� he� is� presuming� the�

condition�to�be�counterfactual,�viz.�he�expects�the�reader�to�not�have�been�there�at�that�time.�

MT�25.�� Agar�az�mo�norozigī�medidand,�jo-yi�mo�zindon,�tamošogoh-i�mo�Sibir�va�qarorgoh-i�

mo�po-yi�dor�bud.�(Aynī�1949:370)�

If�they�saw�discontent�from�our�side,�our�place�was�in�prison,�our�vista�Siberia�and�

our�resting�place�below�the�scaffold.�

TAM�in�P-clause:�Imperfect.�

TAM�in�Q-clause:�Imperfect�(Preterit).�

Commentary:� This� could� either� be� counterfactual� or� factual� depending� on� if� something�

actually�happened�to�them�or�not.�Furthermore,�who�are�meant�with�‘we’?�All�of�the�workers�

or�just�a�group�of�the�speaker’s�friends?

MT�26.� Sol-i� 1917� dar�Osiyoyi�Miyona� beborišī� va� xušksolī� šuda� qahtī� ry� doda� bud,� dar�

oxirho-yi� imsol� zaxiraho-yi� hama� kas� tamom� šud,� dar� gša10,� bešaho� agar� čize�

xrdanī� yoft� mešud,� hannoton� ġundošta� ba� amborho� [sic!]� joy� mekardand� (Aynī�

1949:373)�

10

The�make-up�of�this�sentence�is�peculiar,�as�if�an�e#āfe�is�missing.�I�have�not�translated�‘dar�gša’,�literally�‘in�

the�corner’,�because�I�could�not�make�the�sentence�comprehensible.

46

� �

In�1917,�there�was�famine�due�to�drought�[lit.� lack�of�rain�and�drought]� in�Central�

Asia.�At�the�end�of�the�year�[lit.�this�year]�everyone’s�supplies�had�come�to�an�end.��

If�anything�was� found�to�be�eatable� in� the�forests,� they�speculatively�took� it� to�the�

storages.���

TAM�in�P-clause:�Imperfect.�

TAM�in�Q-clause:�Imperfect.�

Commentary:� Factual� P-conditional.� As� can� be� gathered� from� the� context,� this� one� is� not�

counterfactual�since�it�describes�events�that�actually�took�place,�but�you�would�have�expected�

the� Present� Subjunctive� in� the� P-clause,� since� that� is� the� norm� in� creating� factual-P�

conditionals.� The� imperfect� here� must� then� denote� that� the� actions� were� recurring,� not�

counterfactual.�What�we�see�here� is�a�break�from�using�Present�Subjunctive� in�the�P-clause�

for�factual�P-conditionals.��

�3.3.3 Conclusions

From�the�above�analysis�we�can�see�that�the�system�of�using�the�Present�Subjunctive�in�the�P-

clause� and� the� Imperfect� in� the�Q-clause� for�denoting� factuality� is� fairly� solid.�Only� in�one�

example�did� the�MT�examples�diverge� from�this� rule�and� instead�use� the�Imperfect� in�both�

clauses.� �Counterfactual-P�conditionals�use�the�Imperfect� throughout.�We�saw�one�example�

of� a� closed-P� conditional� using� the� Present� Subjunctive� instead� of� the� presumed� Present�

Indicative.�

4. Conclusions and reflections In�CP,�there�seems�to�be�no�consistency�in�how�the�conditionals�with�the�zero-marked�present�

tenses� are� made.� The� arbitrariness� of� CP� when� it� comes� to� the� different� TAM-forms� in�

general� and� the� ones� denoting� the� present� tense� in� particular,� makes� it� hard� to� classify�

conditionals� since� before� one� can� classify� conditionals� on� the� basis� of� their� different� verb�

forms,�one�must�first�know�how�those�verb�forms�behave�outside�of�conditional�clauses.�

The�only�thing�that�we�can�say�is�consistent�when�it�comes�to�conditionals�in�CP�is�the�

way�the�past-i�tense�used�every�time�the�P-clause�is�counterfactual,�but�we�also�see�that�this�

form�is�used�in�factual�P-clauses.��A� far�more� interesting� phenomenon� is� the�way� the�Ø-past�

tense� is� used� in�open� conditionals.�Could� this� possibly� be� an� early� construction�of�what�we�

now�have�in�MP�and�MT�for�open�P-conditionals,�where�the�focus�is�more�on�the�Q-clause?�

47

The� results� from� the� analysis� show� that� the�main� difference� between�MP� and�MT�

conditionals�is�that�MT�has�a�specific�form�for�factual�conditionals,�but�as�we�can�see,�it�also�

reverts�back�to�using�Imperfect� throughout�–� like�MP.�In�analyzing�a� language� like�Persian,�

where�the�verb�forms�are�crucial�for�understanding�the�meaning�of�the�conditional,�one�must�

first� have� a� set� of� rigid� rules� regarding� the� form�of� the� verb� outside� of� conditional� clauses�

before� one� can� analyse� them� inside� conditional� clauses.� For� example,� what� is� the� real�

difference� between� bovad,� ast� and� bāšad� outside� of� conditional� clauses?� Since� CP� is� a�

language�in�transition,�with�verb�forms�that�(seemingly)�behave�arbitrarily,�analyzing�the�CP�

conditionals�where�the�form�of�the�verb�is�in�the�Ø-present�tense�is�of�little�use�–�one�has�to�

look�at�the�context�in�order�to�see�what�kind�of�conditional�it�is.�

The� use� of� the� past-i� tense� for� denoting� counterfactuality,� as� well� as� factuality,� is�

something�that�binds�these�three�variants�together�–�giving�us�a�link�whereby�we�may�see�their�

kinship�in�the�realm�of�conditionals.�We�saw�that,�even�though�MT�has�a�specific�TAM-form�

for� the�P�and�Q-clause� in�handling� factual�conditionals,�apparently� the�old�(i.e.�CP�way)�of�

denoting� factuality� shines� through11.� The� use� of� the�Ø-past� tense� in� the� conditional� of� CP�

points�at�another�common�trait.�This�could� indicate� that� its�usage�was�recurrent�before� the�

divergence�of� the� two�variants� in� the�16th� century;�on� the�other�hand,� the� form�seems� to�be�

very�rare�in�MT�since�not�a�single�one�of�them�was�seen�in�this�study.�The�equivalent�of�the�Ø-

past�tense�in�MP�and�MT�is�the�Preterit,�and�one�cannot�help�but�wondering�if�what�we�see�in�

Golestan12�is�the�same�kind�of�conditional�we�later�see�in�MT�and�MP,�albeit�in�an�earlier�and�

embryonic�stage.�If�so,�were�they�used�in�the�same�sense�as�they�are�used�in�MP�and�MT?�The�

examples�of�this�certain�type�of�Preterit-P�conditional�presented�in�this�paper�are�too�scarce�

for�this�kind�of�an�analysis,�but� further�studies,�especially� in� later�CP�texts�could�shed�some�

light�on�this.�

The�use�of�the�Present�Subjunctive�in�the�P-clause�and�Imperfect�in�the�Q-clause�for�

factual-P�conditionals�in�MT�is�a�recurring�phenomenon�and�should�therefore�be�viewed�as�a�

grammatical� function� in� the� variant.� However,� as� can� be� seen� from� example� (MT� 26),�

imperfect� can� also�be� employed� in� the�P-clause� for� factual-P� conditionals.�This� entails� that�

one�must�not�only�look�at�the�verb�forms�in�classifying�the�conditionals,�and�moreover�if�one�

11

See example (MT 26). 12

Both of the examples using Ø-past�tense�were�from�the�Golestān.�This�could�indicate�that�this�form�of�

conditional�structure�did�not�exist�in�Early�New�Persian,�but�was�a�later�innovation.�Moreover,�it�should�be�noted�

that�since�a�lot�of�the�prose�of�the�Golestān�have�a�poetic�language,�the�use�of�the�present-i�in�the�examples�most�

likely�are�due�to�this.�They�are,�I�believe,�still�interesting�to�this�study.

48

the� examples� above� clearly� uses� Imperfect� in� both� clauses� for� factual-P� conditionals,� there�

could� very� well� be� cases� where� the� conditionals� above� have� erroneously� been� analyzed� as�

being�counterfactual,�when�they� in�fact�are�factual.�Interestingly,� the�two�conditionals�I�had�

most�problem�with�defining13�had�a�very�similar�make-up.�They�both�described�sceneries�and�

had�the�Imperfect�in�the�P�as�well�as�the�Q-clause.�All� in�all,� it�boils�down�to�the�context�in�

which�the�utterance�is�made,�as�well�as�the�speaker’s�intentions�and�who�he�addresses.�

13

Examples (MP 14) and (MT 16)

49

Bibliography Primary sources CP:

Beyhaqi,�Abu�al-Fa#l�Mo'ammad�b.�»osein.�Tārix-e�mas‛udi�ma‛ruf�be�tārix-e�beyhaqi.��3�vol.�

198?.�(First�ed.�1940-53).�Tehrān:�Entešārāt-e�ketābxāne-ye�sanā’i�pp.�203-219�

Keykāvos�ebn-e�Eskandar�ebn-e�Qābūs�ebn-e�Vošmgīr,�Qābūsnāme,�edited�with�critical�notes�

by�Levy,�Reuben.�1951.�London:�Luzac�pp.�36-43,�74-81�

Neām�al-Molk,�Siyar�al-moluk�(Siyāsatnāme),�ed.�by�Darke,�Hubert.�1962.�Tehrān�(Majmu’-

e�motun-e�fārsi:�8)�pp.�201-225�

Sa‛di,�Golestān-e�Sa‛di,�ed.�by�Nurollāh�Izadparast.�1988.�Tehrān:�Dāneš�

Samarqandī,� � A'mad� ibn� ‛Umar� ibn� ‛Alī� Neāmī� ‛Arū#ī� 1957� Čahār� maqāle� ed.� by�

Mo'ammad�Mo‛in�Tehrān:�Zavvār�pp.�42-8�MP:

Behrangi,�¼amad.�Māhi-ye�siāh-e�kučulu.�1997.�Bethesda,�Maryland:�Iranbooks.�

E’zāzi,� Shahlā� ed.� Jāme‛šenāsi-ye� xvānevade.� 2003.� Tehrān:� Entešārāt-e� roušangerān� va���

mo)ale‛āt-e�zanān�pp.�25-37�

Fata'i,�»oseyn.�Ātaš�dar�xarman.��1989.�Tehrān:�Ketābhā-ye�šekufe�

Kār,� Mehrangiz.� 2003.� Pažuheši� darbāre-ye� xošunat� ‛aleyhe� zanān� dar� irān.� Tehrān:�

Entešārāt-e�roušangerān�va�mo)ale‛āt-e�zanān�pp.�33-40�

Hedāyat,�¼ādeq.�Favā’ed-e�giāhxvāri,�2005.�Tehrān:�Moassese-ye�entešārāt-e�negāh��

¾abi'iyān,�Yadullăh.�2003.�Irāniān�dar�mohājerat.�Tehrān:�NÀsr-e�alborz.�pp�123-131�MT:

Amonov,�Rajab,�1995,�Qissaho-yi�diyor-i�chašmasor,�Dušanbe:�Adib�

Aynī,�Sadriddin,�1949,�Asarho-yi�muntaxab,�Stalinobod:�Našriyot-i�davlati-yi�Tojikiston�

Faiziev,�Hazratqul,�1995,�Mardon-i�maydon,�Dušanbe:�Irfon�

Secondary sources

Dancygier,�Barbara.�1999.�Conditionals�and�Prediction�:�Time,�Knowledge�and�Causation�in�

Conditional�Constructions.�West�Nyack,�NY,�USA:�Cambridge�University�Press��

Declerk,� Renaat� &� Reed,� Susan.� 2001.�Conditionals:� a� comprehensive� empirical� analysis.�

(Topics�in�English�linguistics,�37).�Berlin�:�Mouton�de�Gruyter�

Hayyim,� Sulayman.� 1934-1936.� New� Persian-English� dictionary.� Teheran:� Librairie-

imprimerie�Beroukhim�

Jahani,�Carina�2005�Some�important�grammatical�differences�between�classical�and�modern�

Persian.��Unpublished�material.�

50

Jeremiás,�Eva�M.�2003�Iran�in”The�Encyclopedia�of�Islam”�ed.�by�Bearman,�P.J.�et.al.�Leiden:�

Brill�

Kai�Kā’ūs�ibn�Iskandar�A�mirror�for�princes:�the�Qābūs�nāma;�translated�from�the�Persian�by�

Reuben�Levy.�1951.�London:�The�Cresset�Press,�pp.�55-66,�119-131.�

Kaufmann,� S.� 2006� Conditionals� in� “Encyclopedia� of� Languages� and� Linguistics”� 2nd� ed.�

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/B0-08-044854-2/01031-2�

Nizam�al-Mulk,�The�book�of�government�or�Rules�for�kings�:�The�Siyar�al-Muluk�or�Siyasat-

nama�of�Nizam�al-Mulk.�transl.�from�the�Persian�by�Hubert�Darke,�1978,�London,�Henley�

and�Boston:�Routledge�and�Keagan�Paul.�(Persian�Heritage�Series:�32)�pp�158-179�

Perry,�John�R.�2005�A�Tajik�Persian�Reference�Grammar��Boston:�Brill�

Roy,� Olivier� 2002� Det� nya� Centralasien� translated� from� the� French� by� Ingvar� Rydberg.�

Original�title:�”L’Asie�centrale�contemporaine”.�Italy:�AlHambra�

Thackston,� Wheeler� M.� 1993� An� Introduction� to� Persian� Bethesda,� Maryland:� IBEX�

publishers�

Tomassi,�Paul.�1999�How�to�Think�Logically�:�A�Beginner's�Guide�to�Formal�Logic.�

London,�UK:�Routledge�

Utas,�Bo�2007�“Persiska”��in�Nationalencyklopedin�

http://www.ne.se/jsp/search/article.jsp?i_art_id=282151�

Last�accessed�5�September,�2007�

Utas,�Bo�2006�A�multiethnic�origin�of�New�Persian?� � in�“Turkic-Iranian�Contact�Areas”�ed.�

by�Johansson,�Lars�et.�al.�Wiesbaden:�Harrassowitz�verlag�