The latter form is set up for
this grammar. An additional advantage is setting up the past tense
marker with the modal auxiliary is that it fits in with the
theoretical assumption stated in the body of the grammar that the
moods are part of the future tense system and in this language they
are actually built up on the future tense form of the principal verb.
|
Obligatory mood:
|
All the
varieties excepting the five varieties, viz., Khezha, Chang, Zemi,
Rongmei and Liagmei, show the opposition between past and non-past in
this mood. The opposition in tense is, therefore, set up for this
grammar. Just as the potential modal showed this opposition by
suffixing the simple past tense marker to the modal auxiliary, in this
instance also the past tence marker is suffixed to the modal
auxiliary, as in :
|
jabo lage
‘must go’ (non-past)
jabo lagise ‘had to go’ (past)
|
Uniformity is
found in the use of the remaining modals. Hence those modals are set
up for this grammar, as they are.
|
| Sentences: |
Copular
sentences:
|
Most of the
varieties optionally delete the copula of the simple sentences having
the sentence structure of NNC. The delection of the copula, however,
is permitted in this grammar only for the equative sentences like:
|
itu moy gor
‘it is my house’
moy khetimanu ‘I am a peasant’
|
The deletion of
the copula with the possessive type of sentence is not permitted as
the deletion is likely to lead to misunderstanding and confusion, for
instance: moy kukur could be interpreted as ‘I am a dog’ rather than
‘I have a dog’. For avoiding such situations, the copula is retained
obligatorily in the case of possessive sentences, while it is deleted
obligatorily in the case of possessive sentences, while it is deleted
obligatorily with the equative sentences in the present. In the
non-present tenses, the equative and the possessive types of sentences
would show the copula, but there could be very little chance of
misunderstanding as the context would clearly indicate whether the
sentence of the equative or possessive type. This could be illustrated
with a few examples.
|
1-a
moy khetimanu ekta
‘I am a peasant’
b moy khetimau
ekta sile ‘I was a peasant’
2-b moy suali ekta
‘I am a girl’
b moy suali ekta
 sile
‘I had a girl’
c moy suali ekta
se
‘I have a girl’
3-a tay moy manu
‘he is my husband’
b tay moy manu
sile
‘he was my husband’
|
| 1-b could be
structurally considered as the past tense form of moy khetimanu
ekta se ‘I have a peasant’.
Such an expression is used one talks of different professions, like
teacher, peasant, officer, etc. Hence the context would indicate the
intended meaning. Similarly, 2-b Could be interpreted ‘I was a girl’
only when an elderly woman talks of her past life as a young girl, or
when a sex change had taken place after a surgical operation. The
context would clearly indicate if such an utterance is really meant,
otherwise 2-b would only be interpreted as ‘I had a girl’, but now she
left me or died etc. On the same lines 3-b. Would be interpreted as
‘he had my husband’ only in the context of captivating people or in an
expanding situation like: he has my husband under his thump etc. In
either case, the context would clearly indicate the intended meaning
without leading to any confusion. The copula is retained in the
locative type of sentences in all varieties. It is retained in this
grammar also with the locative sentences. |
|
|
