expressions of future in classical and modern

7/31/2019 Expressions of Future in Classical and Modern

1/27

Simin Karimi, Donald Stilo, Vida Samiian (eds.):

Aspects of Iranian Linguistics

Cambridge Scholars Publishing

Newcastle

2008


2/27

Aspects of Iranian Linguistics,

ed. by Simin Karimi, Donald Stilo and Vida Samiian

This book first published 2008 by Cambridge Scholars Publishing

12 Back Chapman St, Newcastle upon Tyne NE6 2XX

ISBN 9781847186393


3/27

Table of Contents

IntroductionSimin Karimi, Vida Samiian, Donald Stilo . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Recent advances in Persian lexicographyMohammad Reza Bateni . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

A link grammar parser for PersianJon Dehdari and Deryle Lonsdale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

Classifiers, plural and definiteness in PersianLewis Gebhardt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35

Optionality and variation: a stochastic OT analysisof M/p-echo reduplication in Colloquial PersianSaeed Ghaniabadi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57

Markedness and bare nouns in PersianJila Ghomeshi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85

The emergence of ergativity in Iranian: reanalysis or extension?Geoffrey Haig . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113

The noun phrase in HawramiAnders Holmberg and David Odden . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129

Expressions of future in Classical and Modern New PersianCarina Jahani . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153

Raising and control in PersianSimin Karimi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 177

Event structure of verbal nouns and light verbsGholamhossein Karimi-Doostan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 209

Differential object marking in a Medival Persian textGregory Key . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 227


4/27

vi Table of Contents

Marking of arguments in Balochi ergative and mixedconstructions

Agnes Korn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 249Inversion and topicalization in Farsi discourse:A comparative studyShahrzad Mahootian . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 277

Aspects of agrammatic language in PersianReza Nilipour . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 289

The individuating function of the Persian indefinite suffixDaniel Paul . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 309

Some remarks on Persian suffix r as a general andhistorical issueLudwig Paul . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 329

The Ezafe as a head-marking inflectional suffix:evidence from Persian and Kurmanji KurdishPollet Samvelian . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 339

Two sets of mobile verbal person agreement markers in the Northern Talyshi languageDonald Stilo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 363

Mood and modality in PersianAzita Taleghani . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 391

On the ergativity in the Pamir languages

Antje Wendtland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 419Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 435


5/27

Expressions of future in Classical and Modern New PersianCarina Jahani

1 Introduction 1

In the grammatical categorytense, i.e. time location of an action or astate, there are three possible sub-categories, namely past (i.e. before thedeictic centre), present (i.e. including the deictic centre) and future (i.e. after the deictic centre). The deictic centre may either be the speech moment, inwhich case we are dealing with absolute tense, or any other moment, whichgives relative tense. Tense is also closely related to two other categories,namelyaspect andmood , aspect being the internal temporal constituency of a situation, and mood expressing the speakers attitude towards the situation, particularly its likelihood or necessity.

In Iranian languages, as well as in most other Indo-European languages,the basic grammaticalised tense distinction is that between past and non- past (see also Comrie 1985: 44-45).2 When it comes to marking future timereference (as opposed to reference to the present time within the non-past3tense), there are various strategies found in Iranian languages. The purposeof this paper is to make a detailed investigation of strategies employed for marking future time reference in written New Persian, both in its classicaland modern variety. In Modern New Persian factual prose and fiction aredescribed as two different varieties, since they show a considerable amountof divergence. This study does not include spoken Persian.4

The main focus of the paper will be on future time reference in mainarguments. However, the study will inevitably also touch upon future time1The theoretical framework for this paper is mainly that presented by Comrie (1976,1985), Palmer (2001) and Dahl (2006).

2See also Crystal (2003: 196), who suggests this two-way tense distinction for Eng-lish.

3The term non-past tense will be used in this article for what is normally referredto as present, or present-future, tense in grammatical descriptions of Persian.

4My own observations indicate that the strategies found in fictional dialogue, which

is a way of representing spoken language, also occur in the actual spoken language.This subject, however, needs a study of its own, in which different registers of thespoken language would be analysed.


6/27

154 Expressions of future in Classical and Modern New Persian

reference in hypotactic constructions expressing, e.g. the condition for or purpose of the main argument, and modal constructions expressing, e.g. fu-

ture necessity, desire or intent. The focus will also be on absolute future,i.e. future time reference with the speech moment as the deictic centre.5 Themethod employed is analysis of selected prose texts from different genresand time periods written by a number of different authors.

2 Future time reference

Future time reference has a strong link to modality. A future action or

state isby definition uncertain, since it has not yet taken place. Palmer (2001:104-105) notes that [t]he future is not fully known and it is always no morethan a reasonable assumption that a future event will ensue, that [t]hereareplenty of examples of future tenses that are historically derived fromsubjunctives, and finally that [o]ther languages have future tenses thathave their origins in a modal-type auxiliary. Thus, the future is episte-mologically radically different from both what is behind usthe pastandwhat is taking place at this momentthe present. Future states of affairscannot be perceived or remembered, although they can be the subject of our

hopes, plans, conjectures and predictions. (Dahl 2006: 704).In languages that have the main tense opposition between past and non- past, often verbs of motion, obligation, volition, ability or doubt are usedto indicate future time reference (Ultan 1978: 110-114, Dahl 2006: 705),6 but at the same time, several of these languages allow the use of the generalnon-past tense together with lexical or contextual resources to indicate futuretime.

The grammaticalisation process of periphrastic constructions involveswhat Dahl (ibid.: 705) calls pragmatic strengthening and semantic5There are instances in New Persian where past verb forms are employed for fu-ture actions or states. Such instances are, e.g. temporal and conditional subordinateclauses which precede the main clause. The use of past tense in these hypotacticconstructions is best analysed as relative past with the main clause as the deicticcentre. Also, for immediate future Modern New Persian uses a past tense form of the verb, namely -marked past (also sometimes called preterite). This can also beregarded as relative past, i.e. the completion of the action is so imminent that thespeaker views it as already completed.

6In Indo-European (Germanic and Romance) languages we find, e.g. the Englishconstructions I am going to, I shall, and I will (see Berglund 2005: 32-33), theFrench and Spanish periphrastic expressions of future time je vais and voy a, andthe Swedish expression for future time jag skall.


7/27

Carina Jahani 155

bleaching, i.e. the meaning of, e.g. a volitional verb has to be strength-ened and at the same time the volitional element is gradually bleached off.

Eventually the auxiliary verb may merge with the main verb as an affixand thus a new morphologically marked form is established. He also notesthat [n]ormally, future-marking devices start out in main clauses, which are bearers of the illocutionary force of an utterance (ibid.).

Dahl further discusses the distinction between intention-based and prediction-based future, but notes that [a] straightforward grammatical opposition based on the distinction between intention-based and prediction- based future time reference is less common than one would perhaps think(ibid.: 706). The concept of intention-based versus prediction-based fu-

ture will play a major role in the investigation of future time reference inthe present study. Verbs of motion seem to stand semantically closer to prediction-based than intention-based future in the same way as verbs of vo-lition are clearly more closely related to intention-based than to prediction- based future. However, it will be noted in the present investigation that Per-sian only usesverbs of volition for both intention-based andprediction-basedfuture time reference.

3 Strategies for marking future time reference in Persian 7

As in several other Indo-European languages, there are two main strate-gies for marking future time reference in Persian:

1. lexical or contextual means of expressing the future with the verb in thenon-past tense

2. periphrastic verbal constructions with an upgraded, i.e. pragmaticallystrengthened and semantically bleached verb of volition as the auxil-iary.

Morphological marking of future time is only marginally encountered in Per-sian.

There are considerable differences between the verbal system in Classi-cal and Modern Persian. In the classical language, three different morpho-logically marked verb forms with non-past (present/future) time referenceare encountered, namely the -marked non-past (present stem + personalendings), this non-past form with the verbal prefixbe-, and the same formwith the verbal prefix (ha)mi-.7Hereafter the term Persian will be used to denote the New Persian language.


8/27


These verbal prefixes were already used in Middle Persian. Nyberg(1974: 46) describes one use of b in Middle Persian as, denoting the per-

fective aspect of the act,viz.that it comes to an end, or has its limit: withthe pret. it gives it the sense of an act completed in the pastwith thepres.it denotes the completion of the act in the future.8 For ham he gives themeaning always but notes that often the original sense has faded and thatham functions as a preverb denoting perduration or iteration (ibid.: 91).

In the modern language, the- and thebe-marked forms have mergedand are, although not totally interchangeably used,9 found to indicate irrealismodality,10 whereas the form with themi-prefix denotes realis modality.

In Classical Persian the form with the (ha)mi- prefix denotes mainly a

durative, progressive or iterative action11

but in Modern Persian it is thisvery form that is grammaticalised as non-past indicative (realis modality),including future time reference.

There are also in Persian two periphrastic constructions for future timereference, both based on theverb xvstanto want.They are thusmodal con-structions with a volitional verb as the auxiliary grammaticalised to indicatefuture time reference. One of these constructions, -marked non-past formof xvstan+ full or shortened infinitive ( xvham kard (an)), is used both as amodal construction of volition and for both intention-based and prediction- based future time reference in Classical Persian, but only for future timereference (intention-based and prediction-based) in Modern Persian. Thisconstruction will be referred to as volitional construction 1 in the analysisof the data found in sections 3.1 and 3.2 of this paper.

The second construction,mi-marked non-past form of xvstan + non- past subjunctive (mixvham bekonam), is used both as a modal constructionof volition and for intention-based future time reference in Modern Persian.The grammaticalisation process of this construction is thus underway in thelanguage right now, and the study of this process may give interesting in-8For comprehensive accounts of the prefixbe- in Classical Persian, see e.g.MacKinnon (1977), Lazard (1963: 298-326), and Windfuhr (1979: 94-96).

9In the negative form thebe- prefix is never present. In the positive form it is normally present, but some compound verbs only employ it facultatively, while others cannottake it at all.

10The terms indicative and subjunctive are normally used in grammatical de-scriptions of Persian. The corresponding terms used by Palmer (2001: 1-2) are re-alis and irrealis. Realis and indicative are used interchangeably in this paper.The same applies to irrealis and subjunctive.

11 Note, however, that Lazard (1963: 285, 289) finds it used in early Classical Persianalso for immediate future and for a prolonged or repeated action in the future.


9/27

Carina Jahani 157

sights as to how the pragmatic strengthening and semantic bleaching of theother construction took place in Classical Persian. This construction will be

referred to as volitional construction 2 in the analysis in section 3.2 below.Thus it is important to note that even if a verb of volition is used in theseconstructions, and they thus stand semantically closer to intention-based fu-ture than to prediction-based future and can be assumed to have started outas referring to intention-based future, volitional construction 1 is already inearly Classical Persian found to indicate both types of future time reference,whereas the two examples of volitional construction 2 found in Modern Per-sian indicate intention-based future. (In fn. 24, however, the possiblity of using this construction also for prediction-based future is discussed.)

Grammatical descriptions of Persian refer to different strategies for marking future time reference.12 Phillott (1919: 508, 226) calls the non-pasttense form (both-, be-, andmi-marked) indefinite future and the con-struction withxvstan+ short infinitive definite future. For the latter formhe remarks that it is seldom used in modern colloquial, the Present tensetaking its place on all occasionsIt is, however, still used by the Afghansand Indians, who seldom use the Present tense for the Future. By Persians itis used in correct writing.

Lazard (1992: 145, 158-159) refers to the use of themi-marked form inModern Persian for future time reference only in the colloquial language.The construction withxvstan + short infinitive (volitional construction 1)is by Lazard described as expressing future action and a denied hypoth-esis related to the future. He also refers to themi-marked non-past form of xvstan+ non-past subjunctive (volitional construction 2) as expressing theidea of being on the point ofparticularly in colloquial language (ibid.:159).

Mahmoodi Bakhtiari (2002: 75) does not limit the use of themi-markedform for future time reference in Modern Persian to colloquial language. He proposes that the construction withxvstan + short infinitive may indicatethat the speakers attitude is based on an observed state preparatory to a predicted event, rather than on a commitment to a subjective future truth,which may indicate that this construction is more used for prediction-basedfuture than for intention-based future (ibid.: 107-108).12For other descriptions of future time reference in Classical and Modern Persian,

see e.g. Fouchecour (1981: 163-164), Lambton (1974:150, 154), Thackston (1993:93-94), Windfuhr (1989: 536-537), and Xnlari (1346:39, 41).


10/27


3.1 Classical Persian

It may be useful to divide the Classical Persian texts into two phasesin time,13 the early classical period (10th12th century A.D.) and the lateclassical period (13th15th century A.D.).

Due to the character of many of the Classical Persian texts, i.e. factual prose such as historical chronicles, legends of saints, mirrors for princes,travelogues etc. with narrative passages mainly in the past tense there is onlyvery limited expression of future to be found in them. Most occurrences of future time reference are found in hypotactic constructions expressing con-ditions, temporal circumstances in the future, purpose, etc. and in modal con-

structions expressing necessity, volition, possibility, doubt, etc.1. Lexical or contextual means of expressing the future with the verb in the -marked non-past form:

Early Classical Persian14

(1) dar xar zamn qoum-ipeid yand ke in-r rfe i xvnand . agar in-r dar ybi beko ke in kfar-and ali goft y rasulollhalmat-e in ebad rasul goft be namz-e dine er naavand va jamatnakonand va namz-e jenzenakonand va dar salaf an zanand In the last days there will be found a people who will be calledrfe i. If you find them, kill them, for they are infidels. Ali said:Oh prophet of God, what will their sign be? The prophet said: Theywill not be present in the Friday prayer, and they will not assemble,and they will not pray over the dead, and they will treat their prede-cessors with sarcasm. (Siysat. pp. 206-207)

(2) fard be tam-ye dary mehmn-e man-i

Tomorrow you will be my guest watching the sea.(Siysat. p. 223)13See also Jahani 2000, where the same division has been made. The time between

1500-1900 is often described as a transitional period of literary stagnation and re-awakening. A study of texts also from this period was outside the scope of thisstudy.

14Unstressed grammatical suffixes, except personal endings on verbs, are separatedfrom the head by means of a hyphen.


11/27

Carina Jahani 159

(3) az n nxvitanensi ke vei ba xodvand dar hart kard dar ruzegr-eamir mamud yd kardam xvitan-r negh natavnestam dt va bi

enin sahv-inayoftad 15

I came to think of the impudence that he did towards [my] lord inHerat during the time of Amir Mahmud. I could not control myself,and such a mistake will not occur again. (Trix-e Bei. p. 212)

Late Classical Persian

(4) qiyn o atb-e in va dayyusn abad ol-bd dar duzaxband va b hamo batdrand va aranj-e tainbzand The judges and their followers and the cuckolds will be in hell for-ever and will have fellowship with each other and play fire-chess.

(Obeid p. 250)(5) pir-e zan goft t har se jam nagardid man amnatnadaham

The old woman said: I will not give the deposit until all three of youare gathered. (Hezr p. 679)

In these examples, the -marked non-past verb form is used, and the futuretime reference is expressed by lexical means, e.g. adverbs of time such asdar xar zamnin the last days (ex. 1) andfard tomorrow (ex. 2) and by context. This is a common way of expressing future time reference, andthere are several examples of it both in the early and the late classical textsstudied.

2. The non-past form morphologically marked with the prefixbe-

Early Classical Persian

(6) in-astasanak va ruzegr-a va goftr-a...in bud ke xvod be zen-

degigh gofti ke mar do-ye neipurianbeszad va nasxtThis is Hasanak and his days and his words. This was what he him-self said during his lifetime: The intercession of the Neishapurianswill arrange things for me, but it didnt. (Trix-e Bei. p. 215)

15In Classical Persian thebe- and na- prefixes can occur together (i.e.benakonad )(Lazard 1963: 277-278). The formnayoftad can therefore be analysed as the -marked non-past form. In Modern Persian thebe- and na- prefixes never occur together.


12/27



(7) zr-e xvod majuy ke in oqubat bar man be yek nafas be sar yad va bazah-e n bar to jvidbemnad Dont seek harm for yourself since this punishment on me will beended in one breath but its guilt will remain on you forever.16

(Golestn p. 44)

Thebe-marked form is thus encountered for future time reference, althoughnot very commonly in the texts investigated. This form is, in addition to fu-ture time reference, very often used in contexts of irrealis modality. Also the-marked form is often encountered in such context. The irrealis modalitymay be indicated by a modal auxiliary (see ex. 10), by the clause structure(see exs. 8, 10, 1217) or by other lexical or contextual means.

(8) pur kasn bar gomt t u-rbegirand Shapur appointed people to capture him. (Frsnme p. 62)

(9) amir goft t dar in bbbiyandiamThe emir said: Let me think about this. (Trix-e Bei. p. 206)

(10) agar nabixvori byad kebednike egune byad xvord

If you drink wine you must know how one should drink.(Qb. p. 37)(11) qot-r farmudim ke agar in jamat-e mojremn ke armt-e in

moayyan-ast pas az in armt noubat-i digarb gonhh movedatkonand gu o binibeborand We ordered the judges that, if this group of criminals, whose fineshave been defined, after these fines again return to [their] sins, theyshould cut off their ears and nose. (Hezr p. 799)

(12) zann-e besiyr kon t farzandn-e to besiyr gardand va ydegr-eto andar jahnbemnad Marry a lot of women in order to have many children so that your name may remain in the world. (Bahr. p. 50)

16An innocent man whom the king has sentenced to death says this to the king andthereby saves his life.

17Sentence no. 12 may have two interpretations, one modal in order to have manychildren and another consecutive with future time reference so that you will have

many children. I adopt the first interpretation here.


13/27

Carina Jahani 161

3. The non-past form morphologically marked with the prefixmi-

There are no examples of themi-marked form for future time reference inthe texts representing early Classical Persian selected in this investigation. Note, however, that Lazard refers to its use for future time reference in hisstudy of early Classical Persian prose texts (see fn. 11).


(13) in mor ma-r xabar dd ke lakar-imiresad ke sardr-e in to-yiThis bird informed me that an army would (lit. will)18 arrive whosecommander you are. (Bahr. p. 49)

(14) agar bimri eq-astabibmiybiIf the illness is love, you will find a doctor. (Hezr p. 670)

The use of themi-marked form not only for imperfective aspect (e.g. itera-tive, progressive, durative actions and states) but also for future time refer-ence has to do with the restructuring of the non-past tense system throughoutthe classical period from primarily marking aspectual distinctions to mainlymarking modal distinctions. The prefixbe- gradually takes on the role of marking irrealis modality (subjunctive) andmi-realis modality.

4. Volitional construction 1

Theconstruction with the verb xvstanto want + short or long infinitiveappears bothasa modal construction toexpress volition, and toexpress an in-tention or future time reference.19 This construction, which is common bothin early and late classical texts both for volition and for future time reference,and not only intention-based future (see exs. 18, 22, 23) but also prediction-18 Note the use of the tense form of the direct speech also in reported speech in Persian.19 Note also another construction used parallel to thexvham kard/kardanconstruc-tion to express volition. This is the construction with either a past or a non-pastform ( -marked, (ha)mi-marked or be-marked) of the verbxvstan + a non-pastform (either -marked or be-marked) of the main verb. This construction in itsnon-past form is the one that in Modern Persian is used not only for volition butalso for future time reference (intention-based future), in this article called voli-tional construction 2.

i. un mehmn mast avad vabexvhad ke ravad yek br va do br xvhe

kon va tavo namy va magor ke beravadWhen the guest gets drunk and wants to leave, urge him once or twice andshow courtesy and do not allow him to leave. (Qb. p. 41)


14/27


based future (see exs. 15, 16, 25), is particularly interesting. Its variant withthe short infinitive is in Modern Persian grammaticalised to indicate only

future time reference, particularly prediction-based future. A considerablenumber of examples of this construction found in the texts studied are pre-sented below in order to show the range of meaning it can have in ClassicalPersian:

Early Classical Persian

(15) goft and nli ke xod-ye tal to-r farzand besiyr dde-ast va azto besiyr xvhad budanva to-r bar hame jahn pdehixvhad budanHe said, why are you complaining, since God, may he be exalted,has given you many children and you will have many descendents,and you will reign over all the earth. (Trix-e Bal. p. 10)

(16) dnest ke taxt-e molk pas az pedar u-rxvhad bud He knew that the throne of the kingdom would be his after hisfather. (Trix-e Bei. p. 204)

(17) beram byad neast keasanak-r njxvhand vord You should take a seat in the pavilion because Hasanak will be brought there. (Trix-e Bei. p. 209)

(18) naxvham raft t ngh ke xodvand naxospadI am not going to leave (I dont intend to go, I will not leave) untilmy lord has gone to sleep. (Trix-e Bei. p. 212)

(19) sar-a-r be baddxvhim ferestd nazdik-e xalifeWe want (intend, are going) to send his head to Baghdad, to theCaliph. (Trix-e Bei. p. 214)

ii. hamn ke azayt-e xvod be tang made-imix

v

hike az in menat

xal

aviIt seems that you have got tired of living and want to be delivered fromthis suffering. (A person seeking revenge for his fathers death says thisto someone who introduces himself as his fathers killer.) (Bahr. p. 57)

iii. pas har ke xod-ye tal u-r maub-e aab-e xvod gardnide bad to xvhi ke bar uramat koniSo you want to be merciful towards whomever God, the exalted, has made a target of his wrath. (Obeid p. 254)

iv. moqaddammixvst ke n soxan-rbiyryad va be nou-i behtar beguyad

First he wanted to embellish that word and say it in a better way.(Hezr p. 849)


15/27

Carina Jahani 163

(20) doulat be kaml reside-ast va bande az em-e bad hamitarsadnamidnad ke in kr be kojxvhad resid

The state has reached its fullness and I am afraid of the evil eye. Ido not know how this will end. (Siysat. p. 203)(21) man goftam h dari in angotari ke agar dnestami ke malek be

haqiqat dar angotnaxvhad kard va dar daryxvhad andxt bri bepaziroftami ke man hargez enn yqut nadide budamI said alas for such a ring. If I had known that the king20 indeedwill not (does not intend to) put it on his finger and will throw it intothe sea, I would definitelyhaveaccepted it because I had never seensuch a ruby. (Siysat. pp. 223-224)

(22) un bazahxvhi kard br-i bazah-e bimaze makon arb ke xvorixvotar xvor va sam ke enavi xvotar enouWhen you want to (intend to, plan to) sin, then do not committasteless sin, when you drink wine, drink the best, and when youlisten to music, listen to the best. (Qb. p. 40)

(23) va in mohemm keman pi migiramlakarh-r ba xvitannaxvhambordan joz andak-i va bone o tajammol-e pdehi bar naxvhamdt And on this important [mission] which I undertake, I will not (donot intend to) take armies with me, just a few, and I will not (do notintend to) take with me baggage and royal luxuries.

(Frsnme p. 67)


(24) hom-ye eqbl un iyne-ye kas-i-r mavxvhad sxt va ed-ye edbr stne-ye digar-i-r molzematnemud agare miyn-e in

darajt nik motafvet-ast n yek-i dar ouj-e doulat va digar-i dar xai-e maellat amm mostaqbal-r qellat-e lat vaaf-elat azedrk be maqud mne nistWhen the phoenix (hum) of prosperity wishes to make the roof of one man its abode, and the owl of misfortune to haunt the thresholdof another, though their stations be widely different, the one in thezenith of good fortune and the other in the nadir of abasement, yetneither scarcity of equipment nor feebleness of condition preventsthe fortunate man from attaining his goal.

(Jahngoy p. 14; translation by Boyle in Juvaini (1958: 19))20The king is the interlocutor and the word malek could therefore also be translatedyou or my king.


16/27


(25) mifarmyand ke bar m kaf od ke ru-e neqe etebr-inadradva miguyand ke ne anbiyfarmude-and ke u-r

kaml o noqn-i nist va bad az farq-e badan bet-e xv

od qemo bqixvhad bud mal-astPeople say that they have discovered that the speaking soul doesnot exist and they argue that what the prophets have said, i.e. thatit (the soul) is perfect and flawless and that it will be fixed and ev-erlasting in its own nature after the separation from the body, isabsurd. (Obeid p. 235)

(26) moqarrabn-e salin un kasn-i-and ke be kuh-i boland bl mi-ravand amm qebat be zalzel-e qahr o navzel-e dahr az n kuh xvhand oftd va akk nist ke oftdan-e bolandtarnabtar xvhad bud va be zir madan-e forutarn sahltar The favourites of the sultans are like people who climb a highmountain but finally due to eruptions of fury and misfortunes of this world will fall down from that mountain, and there is no doubtthat it is harder for those higher up to fall and easier for those whoare lower to come down. (Bahr. p. 46)

(27) goftenin gamn mibaram ke az masfat-e dur made-ast va

gorosne-ast naxvstam ke vei-r gorosne goram pas goft emruze xvhi xvord goft ruzexvham dt

He said:I believe that he has come from far away and is hun-gry. I did not want to leave him hungry. Then he said: What are yougoing to (do you intend to) eat today? He answered: I am going tofast. (Bahr. p. 55)

(28) fesd-e in kr ad sl-e digar her xvhad od The corruption of this deed will be evident in a hundred years.

(Hezr p. 792)(29) az mafsade-ye n mosammi-i ke bad-e uxvhad bud andie kard

He thought about the mischief of the [man] appointed to be [king]after him. (Hezr p. 805-806)

(30) mitarsam ke inekyat-e man bqi mnad dar aqb-e m va r-i bovad m o ray-e m-r b in hameyd xvham kard t elm-e to-r ziydat gardnamI am afraid that this story of mine will remain among our descen-dants and be a shame to us and our prudence. Even so, I intend totell it in order to increase your knowledge. (Hezr p. 806)


17/27

Carina Jahani 165

(31) tahrh ke eskandar az frs xarb kard bdn nakonadnaxvhad rmid

He willnot restuntil he has rebuilt the towns in Fars that Alexander destroyed. (Hezr p. 812)(32) be sabab-e tark-e vaiyat-e u tavi-i va ub-i dar jahnxvhad

oftd Due to the neglection of his last will there will be anxiety and dis-turbance in the world. (Hezr p. 814)

(33) un jmedr biymad befarmud ke emruznaxvham puid jmedr jme-r bebast va be sary vordWhen the robe-keeper came, he said that he would not21 put [therobe] on today. The robe-keeper folded it and took it home.

(Hezr p. 837)

This construction is found in more examples of intention-based future andvolition (exs. 18, 19, 21-23) than of prediction-based future (exs. 15, 16,20) in early Classical Persian. This is but natural since the construction isa volitional construction. It is, however, noteworthy that it also is found for prediction-based future already in one of the earliest Classical Persian works,i.e.Trix-e balami(ex. 15). In the late Classical Persian works this construc-tion occurs as often for prediction-based (see exs. 25, 26, 28, 29, 32) as for intention-based (see exs. 27, 30, 33) future, but at the same time it is still, atleast at the end of the 13th century (e.g. inTrix-e jahngoy), used as amodal construction for volition (ex. 24).

It thus seems that this construction was mainly, but not exclusively, usedfor volition and intention-based future in early Classical Persian and thatit gradually became more and more common also in prediction-based futurethroughout the classical period.Even so, itwasstill in the lateclassical period

used, though less frequently, for modal expressions of volition. At the sametime, the variant with the long infinitive is no longer found in late ClassicalPersian. We thus seethat thepragmatic strengthening and semantic bleachingof this construction took at least more than 300 years, from mid-10th century(Balami) to late 13th century (Joveini). Further studies of late classical textsmay give examples of modal-volitional use of this construction even later.21See fn. 18.


18/27


3.2 Modern Persian 22

In Modern Persian we are dealing with both spoken language (althoughoutside the scope of this article) and various genres of written language.This investigation is limited to factual prose and fiction. Grammatical de-scriptions of Modern Persian (see above and fn. 12) refer to the use of thenon-past indicative verb forms for the future, some in less detail, others pay-ing more attention to different registers of the language. The non-past realis(indicative) form in Modern Persian is the one with themi- prefix. We thushave a lexical/contextual marking of the future also in Modern Persian.

As for the morphological form withbe-, it is in the modern language

grammaticalised, in variation with , as a marker of irrealis modality (subjunctive). However, in some occurrences of thisbe-marked form in the textstudied this form seems to be used for future time reference rather than irre-alis modality (see exs. 37, 41, 42 below).

The volitional construction 1 with the verbxvstan to want + short in-finitive is, on the other hand, grammaticalised for future time reference, anddoes not express volition in the modern language. Its use is restricted, how-ever, mainly to certain registers of the written language and also to formalspoken language.

An investigation of approximately 70 pages of factual prose and 70 pagesof fiction in Modern Persian chosen at random gives at hand that a further investigation of texts belonging to different genres and written at differenttimes may show interesting variations when it comes to expressing the fu-ture. All the factual prose texts investigated here are written after 1979, butthe fiction is written during a longer time span, and here texts from beforeand after 1979 (the year of the Revolution) are considered separately. Belowthe findings from these texts will be presented.

Factual prose

In the factual prose texts, there are altogether 34 occurrences of futuretime reference, 26 of these employ the volitional construction 1, seven usethe non-past indicative and mark the future with lexical or contextual means,and one occurrence is abe-marked form. It may be interesting to note thatin newspaper texts, only the volitional construction 1 is employed. Thereseems to be a strong tendency towards obligatory use of this construction

for future time reference in factual prose, and particularly when prediction-22Also including Dari and Tajik. For Tajik, see e.g. Rzehak (1999: 17, 86-87).


19/27

Carina Jahani 167

based future is intended (see ex. 34).

1. Volitional construction 1:

(34) hargh faliyath-ye muzei va toujihi-ye kfi pi az saromrianjm napazirad, mizn-e deqqat-e mrh-ye nahyi pinxvhad bud Whenever sufficient teaching and explanation does not take part before the census, the level of exactness in the statistical outcomewill be low. (Saromri p. 361)

(35) in xvod bas-i-ast ke dar j-yi digar va zamn-i digar be nxvhim

pardxt This is a discussion that we will engage in at another place andanother time. (Saromri p. 363)

2. Lexically/contextually marked future withmi-marked form of the non- past form:

(36) dar ad sl-e yande nazdik be nim-i az 6000 zabn-e moujud dar jahn y az miynmiravand , y dar l-e az bein raftan xvhand budIn the coming hundred years almost half of the 6000 existing lan-guages in the world will either be lost or be in the process of be-coming extinct. (Jahni p. 136)

3. The non-past form morphologically marked with the prefixbe-

(37) miavad pibini kard ke dar ad sl-e yande bein-e 50 t 90 dar adaz e hezr zabn-e moujud az beinberavand It can be predicted that in the coming hundred years between 50

and 90% of the six thousand existing languages will become ex-tinct. (Jahni p. 142)

Fiction

In fiction written before the Islamic Revolution (1979), there are sevenoccurrences of the volitional construction 1 for future, six in non-dialogueand one in dialogue, and there are 34 occurrences of a non-past indicativeverb form, i.e. lexical or contextual marking of the future, all in dialogue.There are, furthermore, sixbe-marked forms where the future time refer-enced seems stronger than the irrealis modality. In the post-revolutionary


20/27


texts, there are 17 future time references, all in dialogue, using the non-pastindicative verb form. There are also other constructions used for future time

reference in the texts investigated, namely the progressive-ingressive con-struction23 (twiceboth in pre-1979 texts), and the volitional construction2 (twiceboth in post-1979 texts).24 Examples:

1. Volitional construction 1 in non-dialogue:

(38) midnest ke gereftan-e zan-e digar bar badbaxti-ye uxvhad afzud He knew that taking another wife would (lit. will)25 increase hismisfortune. (H.M. p. 79)

2. Volitional construction 1 in dialogue:(39) agar eir az man va doxtar kas-e digar in dour o barh bad afsne

asar-inaxvhad dt If someone else than me and the girl is somewhere around here,the tale will not work. (Afsne p. 225)

3. Lexically/contextually marked future withmi-marked form of the non- past tense:

(40) avval savr-e min beim bad bar-t qq hammixaramLets first get on the bus, then I will buy goodies for you.

(Bae p. 20)

4. The non-past form morphologically marked with the prefixbe-:

(41) bad-e m enallh sar-el miyi vaesbi gap mizanim ...enallh ke beaqq-e xod inouribeeAfter supper, hopefully, you will come round and we will chat a

lot. Hopefully, by God, it will be like this. (Zanbur. p. 13)23The progressive-ingressive construction marks aspect in Modern Persian and is

normally used for actions that are in progress (e.g. I am writing a letter now) or are about to start (e.g. I am leaving now).

24Both these examples are of intention-based future. However, when this paper was presented and discussed an example of prediction-based future from Modern Per-sian was brought up and discussed, namely:

i. mesl-e inke brunmixvd biyd It seems like it is going to rain.25See fn. 18.


21/27

Carina Jahani 169

(42) yek ruz ham az omr-am bqi bad talfibekeamke ru-ye nn bekoni sag naxvore

If only one day of my life is left, I will take such a revenge that if it were spread on bread not even a dog would eat it (i.e. a terriblerevenge). (H.M. p. 82)

5. The progressive-ingressive construction:

(43) quali e be mouqe madi. mandram miram. xvharat-r tanhnagor Quchali, how well on time you came. I am leaving (i.e. I intend toleave any moment). Dont leave your sister alone.(Afsne p. 227)

6. Volitional construction 2:

(44) kei miyre? vaqti ke arusi kardim. arusi?mixvi arusi koni?When will he bring it (the comb)? When we have got married.Married? Are you going to get married?26 (ok. p. 247)

4 Concluding remarks

The primary strategy for Persian when it comes to expressing future timereference is lexical/contextual marking with the non-past form of the verb. Inwritten language, it is the one encountered the most commonly in ClassicalPersian (with a-marked verb form) and in the fiction genre of ModernPersian (with ami-marked verb form).

The periphrastic constructions used in Persian are based on the verb towant, thus volitional constructions. When it comes to written Modern Per-sian, obligatory use of the volitional construction 1 for future time referenceseems to be on its way of being established in some registers, particularlyin factual prose. A morphological marking of future time reference with theverbal prefixbe-plays a very marginal role.26The meaning of this sentence is not: Do you want to marry?, since the person

talking is a small girl, who would prefer to play rather than getting married andwho promises her playmates that her husband will bring them gifts, e.g. dolls andcombs. Further on in the story (ibid.) she also says:

i. mixvd bar-mun xunebeszeHe (the husband) is going to build us a house (not he wants to build us

a house).


22/27


S t r a t e g i e s

E a r l y C l a s s i c a l

L a t e C l a s s i c a l M o d e r n P e r s i a n

P e r s i a n

P e r s i a n

( f a c t u a l p r o s e ) ( f i c t i o n )

N o n - p a s t w i t h - m a r k i n g

e x s . 1 3

e x s . 4 5

N o n - p a s t w i t h b e - m a r k i n g

e x . 6

e x . 7

e x . 3

7

e x s . 4 1 4

2

N o n - p a s t w i t h m i - m a r k i n g

e x s . 1 3 1

4

e x . 3

6

e x . 4

0

V o l i t i o n a l c o n s t r u c t i o n 1

e x s . 1 5 2

3

e x s . 2 4 3

3

e x s . 3 4 3 5

e x s . 3 8 3

9

V o l i t i o n a l c o n s t r u c t i o n 2

e x . 4

4

P r o g r e s s i v e - i n g r e s s i v e

e x . 4

3

c o n s t r u c t i o n

T a b l e 1 : S t r a t e g i e s f o r m a r k i n g f u t u r e t i m e r e f e r e n c e i n C l a s s i c a l a n d M o d e r n P e r s i a n


23/27


24/27


25/27

Carina Jahani 173

Windfuhr, G. 1989. Persian, inThe Worlds Major Languages,ed.B.Com-rie, London: Routledge, pp. 523546.

Xnlari, N. 1346.Dastur-e zabn-e frsi, [Tehrn].Corpus

The texts investigated for early Classical Persian are:

Balami, Abu Ali Moammad,Tarjome-ye trix-e abari (qesmat-emarbu be Irn), ed. by Moammad Javd Makur, Tehrn 1337 H..(Abbreviated Trix-e Bal., pages chosen: 4-19 (line 11).)

Beihaqi, Abu al-Fal Moammad,Trix-e Beihaqi, vol. 1, ed. by Said Nafisi, [Tehrn] no year. (Abbreviated Trix-e Bei., pages chosen: 203-217.)

Ebn al-Balxi,Frsnme, ed. by G. Le Strange and R. A. Nicholson, Lon-don 1921. (Abbreviated Frsnme, pages chosen: 60-73 (line 3).)

Keikvos ebn-e Eskandar ebn-e Qbus ebn-e Vomgir,Qbusnme, ed. by Reuben Levy, Hertford 1951. (Abbreviated Qb., pages chosen: 36-43and 74-81.)

Ner ebn-e Xosrou Qobdiyni Marvazi, Abu Moinamid al-Din,Sa- farnme, ed. by Moammad Dabir Siyqi, Tehrn 1335 H.. (Abbrevi-ated Safar., pages chosen: 1-10.)

Nem ol-Molk (Abu Aliasanusi), Siyar ol-moluk (Siysatnme),ed. by Hubert Darke, Tehrn 1340 H.. (Abbreviated Siysat., pages cho-sen: 201-225.)

Classical Persian is here transcribed according to Modern Persian pro-nunciation conventions, which is not uncommon common in studies of Clas-sical Persian that do not particularly deal with phonological issues. Thus thevowels, which in the classical language were distinguished more by lengththan quality (a, , i, , , u, , ), are here transcribed according to their mod-ern pronunciation and without differentiating betweenmajhul andmaruf asa, , i, e, u, o.

The texts investigated for late Classical Persian are:

Hezr sl-e nasr-e prsi, vol. 3, ed by Karim Kevarz, Tehrn 1345H.. (Abbreviated Hezr, pages chosen: 659-681 (Sendbdnme), 787-816 (Trix-e abarestn), 831-857 ( Javme al-ekyt ).)

Jmi, Abd al-Ramn, Bahrestn,ed.byEsmilkemi, Tehrn 1367H.. (Abbreviated Bahr., pages chosen: 25-61.)


26/27


Joveini, Al al-Din A Malek ebn-e Bah al-Din ebn-e Moammadebn-e Moammad,Trix-e jahngoy, vol. 1, ed by Moammad Abd

al-Wahhb Qazvini, Leiden 1911. (Abbreviated Jahngoy, pages cho-sen: 14 (line 3)32 (line 11).) Sadi, [eix Mole al-Din],Kolliyt-e Sadi, ed. by Moammad Ali

Forui, Tehrn 1340 H.. (Abbreviated Golestn, pages chosen: 13-50(the textGolestn, ch. 1).)

Zkni, Obeid,Kolliyt-e Obeid-e Zkni, ed. by Moammad Jafar Ma jub, New York 1999. (Abbreviated Obeid, pages chosen: 231-255(the textAxlq ol-arf ))

The texts investigated for Modern Persian fiction are: Afr (Sistni), Iraj, Ayer-e brhui, in Fa lnme-ye ayeri:

Zaxyer-e enqelb, no. 4, autumn 1367. (Abbreviated Ayer, pageschosen: 43-55.)

ehre-ye irn, rhnam-ye siyati va mosferati, (Gitensi), Tehrn1374. (Abbreviated ehre, pages chosen: 79-85)

Jvidi, Shahruz, Jahni odan va marg-e zabnh, Majalle-yednekade-ye adabiyt va olum-e ensni, no. 193-194, pp. 136-143.(Abbreviated: Jahni.)

Modarresi, Yay, Saromri va masale-ye zabn, in Farhang , no.17, spring 1375. (Abbreviated Saromri, pages chosen: 359-371.)

Najafzde Brforu, Moammad Bqer,Zann-e dstnnevis dar irn,Tehrn 1375. (Abbreviated Zann, pages chosen: 8-20.)

Sanyi, Mehdi, Tjikn va zabn-e tjiki, inNme-ye prsi, no. 6, au-tumn 1376. (Abbreviated Tjik., pages chosen: 127-132.)

Seven news articles, all written after the Islamic Revolution and taken

from the Internet, newspapers or magazines, comprising altogether ca.20 pages. (Abbrevated News.)

The texts investigated for Modern Persian factual prose are:

l-eAmad, Jall, Bae-yemardom, published inSe tr , Tehrn 1357H.. (5th printing). (Abbreviated Bae, pages chosen: 17-25.)

Behrangi,amad, Afsne-ye moabbat , published inQe eh-yebehrang , Tehrn 1360. (Abbreviated Afsne, pages chosen: 215-230.)

Hedyat,deq, ji Mord , reprinted fromZende be gur in H.Kamshad,A Modern Persian Prose Reader , Cambridge 1968. (Abbre-viated H.M., pages chosen: 78-84.)


27/27

Carina Jahani 175

Sedi, olmosein, Zanburakxne, published inGur o gahvre,Tehrn 2536. (Abbreviated: Zanbur., pages chosen: 9-25)

okufyi-ye dstn-e kuth dar dahe-ye noxostin-e enqelb, ed. byafdar Taqizde, [Tehrn] 1372 H.. (Abbreviated ok., pages chosen:113-119, 211-219, 239-273.)

expressions of future in classical and modern

Documents