Masarykova univerzita Filozofická fakulta Ústav jazykovědy a baltistiky

Bakalářská diplomová práce

2013 Martin Frodl

Masaryk University Faculty of Arts Department of Linguistics and Baltic Studies

Aspect marking in Udmurt

Bachelor’s thesis

Martin Frodl

Advisor: Dr. Kozmács István, PhD.

Brno, spring 2013

Declaration

Hereby I declare, that this paper is my original authorial work, which I have worked out by my own. All sources, references and literature used or excerpted during elaboration of this work are properly cited and listed in complete reference to the due source.

Martin Frodl

v

Acknowledgement

I wish to express my gratitude to advisor Dr. Kozmács István, PhD. thanks to whom I got the opportunity to get acquainted with the enchanting Udmurt language several years ago. I am grateful he eventually also took on the uneasy task of supervising my thesis, notwithstanding all the difficulties such a long-distance communication brings about.

vii

Abstract

The aim of this thesis is to provide insight into the aspectual system of the Udmurt language. In the very beginning, a historical overview on the notion of aspect itself is given, followed by an introduction of some essential terminology. The core part exam- ines three principal ways that can be used to specify aspectual meanings in Udmurt. The first way consists in attaching various suffixes to verb stems, the second makes use of the aspectual characteristics of certain past tenses and the third one expresses particular aspects by coupling verbs with certain other verbs into participial construc- tions (so-called paired-verb constructions). The capabilities of each of these three meth- ods are explored and compared to one another.

ix

Shrnutí

Cílem této práce je podat ucelený pohled na aspektový systém udmurtštiny. Text za- číná přehledem vývoje chápání pojmu ‘aspekt’ v průběhu historie, za nímž následuje uvedení do terminologie používané ve zbytku práce. Hlavní část zkoumá tři nejvýz- namnější prostředky vyjadřování aspektuálních gramémů, kterými současná udmurt- ština disponuje. Prvním způsobem je připojování některých sufixů, druhý využívá as- pektuálních charakteristik jistých slovesných časů a třetí spočívá ve spojování plno- významových sloves s tzv. spárovanými slovesy do participiálních konstrukcí. Práce analyzuje vyjadřovací možnosti každé z uvedených metod a navzájem je porovnává.

xi

Keywords

Aktionsart, aspect, aspekt, Finno-Ugric, paired verbs, Udmurt, udmurtština, ugrofin- ské jazyky, vid

xiii

List of abbreviations

1pl first-person plural 1sg first-person singular 2pl second-person plural 2sg second-person singular 3pl third-person plural 3sg third-person singular abl ablative case acc accusative case aux conneg connegative verb form dat dative case def definite suffix elat elative case egr egressive case freq suffix gen genitive case ger1 gerund with ending -sa ger2 gerund with ending -ku ger3 caritive gerund with ending -tek ill illative case ines inessive case inf infinitive form ins instrumental case neg negative verb nwpast second (nonwitnessed) past tense past first (witnessed) past tense pl plural pp past pres present tense

xv px.1pl first-person plural personal suffix px.1sg first-person singular personal suffix px.2pl second-person plural personal suffix px.2sg second-person singular personal suffix px.3pl third-person plural personal suffix px.3sg third-person singular personal suffix

xvi Contents

1 Introduction ...... 3 2 The notion of aspect and related concepts ...... 5 2.1 Understanding of aspect throughout history ...... 5 2.2 Contemporary classification of aspects ...... 9 3 Aspectual roles of verbal suffixes ...... 13 3.1 -i̮l-/-ľľa- suffix ...... 14 3.1.1 Verbs not marked by the -i̮l-/-ľľa- suffix ...... 15 3.1.2 Verb marked by the -i̮l-/-ľľa- suffix ...... 17 3.2 -i̮- and -(j)a- suffixes ...... 22 3.3 Other verbal suffixes with aspectual meaning ...... 24 4 Aspectual meanings of tenses ...... 29 4.1 First past tense ...... 30 4.2 Second past tense ...... 30 4.3 Analytic tenses with val/vi̮lem ...... 31 4.3.1 Present tense + val ...... 32 4.3.2 + val ...... 33 4.3.3 Past tense + val ...... 34 4.4 Past participle + vań (e̮ve̮l) ...... 35 5 Paired-verb constructions ...... 37 6 Conclusion ...... 43

1

1 Introduction

In contemporary linguistics, verbal aspect is widely regarded as a separate grammat- ical category comparable to tense or mood. Following Comrie’s (1976, p. 3) defini- tion, individual aspects represent various ways of viewing the internal temporal con- stituency of a situation. Using different aspectual grammemes, one can thus for exam- ple refer to a situation as a whole or, by contrast, emphasize its duration. Other aspects make it possible to refer to particular phases of the situation like its beginning, termi- nation, resulting state etc. The distinction between tense and aspect has not always been made in the way it is done nowadays. Before the concept was first described in Slavic languages, semantic oppositions that would now be described as aspectual used to be classified as tenses (Plungjan, 2003, p. 292). This has in fact remained a common practice for languages where aspectual oppositions are grammaticalized to a lesser extent than in Slavic lan- guages: grammar handbooks most often describe the contrast between, say, French il lut ‘he read’ vs. il lisait ‘he was reading’ or Spanish leyó ‘(he) read’ and leía ‘(he) was reading’ as an opposition of tenses, even though it clearly is an aspectual one (Comrie, 1976, p. 1). To avoid confusion, it is essential to define the meanings of the terms Iam going to use in the following text. This will be done in Chapter 2, which will also give a short survey of how the understanding of the term aspect and similar concepts has changed throughout history. Following this general overview, I will turn my attention to the situation in the Ud- murt language, which is the central theme of my thesis. Udmurt has several ways to express the nuances which correspond to individual aspectual meanings. The one that is mentioned in nearly every work dealing with Udmurt aspect is by means of various verbal suffixes. These will be explored one after another inChapter 3. In fact, these suffixes are what is most often understood by the term ‘aspect’ (vid) in Udmurt lin- guistic tradition, as evident from the historical overview given in Kondrat’jeva (2011, p. 221–223). The general concept of verbal aspect is nevertheless much wider, as will be shown shortly, hence it is worth exploring other grammatical constructions as well. I have already indicated above that certain constructions conventionally desig-

3 1. Introduction nated as ‘tenses’ do also carry an aspectual meaning, in addition to the temporal one. Udmurt is no exception to this tendency: in Chapter 4, I will go through the individual Udmurt tenses, both simple and compound ones, examining the aspectual character- istics of each of them. Both suffixation and the choice of the tense are fairly common methods ofexpress- ing aspectual meaning in the languages around the world. Apart from them, there is one more way to accomplish this goal in Udmurt, characteristic of the languages of the Volga-Kama area. It consists in coupling a verb with another one into a participial construction. Verbs that can serve as ‘coupling partners’ to other verbs are known as paired verbs. There is several dozens of them in Udmurt, each connected with partic- ular aspectual meaning. Paired-verb constructions will be the subject of Chapter 5. In the concluding chapter, I will summarize the results of my findings and try to compare the capabilities of the three presented methods.

4 2 The notion of aspect and related concepts

This work seeks to give a description of the formal devices that express aspectual meanings in the system of one particular language – Udmurt. In order to do so, I shall set this task within a wider framework first, defining the key concepts and point out some possibly confusing terminology. As will be shown further on, the notion of aspect is far from unambiguous and it is therefore crucial to make clear which definitions I will draw on. In order to understand the rather complex terminology, it is worth having a look first at how the key terms of aspectology came into existence and how theirusede- veloped over time. The first section of this chapter will therefore provide a histor- ical overview of the matter. After that, I will outline the most important aspectual meanings that are distinguished in present-day linguistics, creating firm terminolog- ical background for the subsequent analysis.

2.1 Understanding of aspect throughout history

The very concept of verbal aspect (not the designation itself, though) has its roots in Russian linguistics. Here, it has traditionally been referred to as vid and has been known since the early 17th century at latest (Plungjan, 2003, p. 292; Młynarczyk, 2004, p. 35). In Russian, as well as in all the other Slavic languages, most verbs occur in pairs, each pair consisting of one verb of the (e.g. pisat’ ‘to write’) and one verb of the (e.g. napisat’ ‘to write’); their meanings being otherwise the same. The difference between imperfective and perfective verbs can be roughly described as that between unbounded and bounded situations, or – more precisely – between the presentation of these situations as unbounded or bounded, respectively (Comrie and Corbett, 1993, p. 10). Given the ubiquity of such aspectual oppositions in the verbal systems of Slavic languages, it should not be surprising that it was Russian where this concept was rec- ognized such a long time ago. Nonetheless, even in Russian linguistics did it take a long time to recognize vid as a distinct grammatical category separate from tense. The

5 2. The notion of aspect and related concepts first author known to make a clear distinction between tense and aspect wasNiko- laj Greč in his Russian grammar manual Prostrannaja russkaja grammatika (Greč, 1827, p. 256). In this book, he points out that the meaning of grammatical tenses contains not only the temporal component (i.e. present, past or future), but also certain accessory circumstances of the action, namely actuality vs. potentiality, repeatedness vs. non- repeatedness and perfectivity vs. imperfectivity. These additional features are what Greč calls vidy (plural of vid). Greč’s grammar constituted an important milestone in the investigation of aspect. It was in the French translation of this book where the term aspect itself appeared first, used as the translation equivalent of Russian vid; from French, it was soon adopted into English. A little later, German linguists started to denote the very same concept by the term Aktionsart. As time went by, these originally synonymous terms, referring to the Greč’s notion of aspect, started to differ in their meanings. To make things even worse, every single term has been used by various authors in various meanings, often incon- sistently with one another. This applies in particular to the term Aktionsart, which has been used for several different concepts that have little in common (Plungjan, 2003, p. 293). In what follows, I will therefore attempt to present the individual meanings in which the concerned terms are used. The term Aktionsart itself was first coined by Karl Brugmann as the German equiva- lent of Greč’s vid, that is to say, ‘circumstances of the action’ as they exist in the Slavic languages (Młynarczyk, 2004, p. 35; Plungjan, 2003, p. 292). Strictly speaking, Brug- mann’s categories did not exactly correspond to the Greč’s ones. Greč, on one hand, distinguished between six different cases of vid: indeterminate, determinate, frequenta- tive, non-frequentative, imperfective and perfective; see Greč (1827, p. 256) for their de- tailed description. Brugmann’s Aktionsart, on the other hand, consisted of five mem- bers: perfective (also called punctual, , ), imperfective (also called cursive, durative), , iterative and terminative; see Brugmann (1904, p. 493–494) for details. As much as the conceptions of these two authors differed, they had one important characteristic in common: both vid and Aktionsart were the only categories of their kind, neither counted on the existence of its counterpart. In other words, there was no opposition of aspect and Aktionsart.

6 2. The notion of aspect and related concepts

The first one who proposed a system employing both terms was the Swedish slav- ist Sigurd Agrell. In his study focused on Polish verbs (Agrell, 1908), he started to use Aktionsart as the umbrella term for the meanings conveyed by Slavic verbal prefixes (inchoativity, repeatedness, intensity etc.), whereas aspect referred to the imperfec- tive/perfective opposition (Plungjan, 2003, p. 293). Another meaning of Aktionsart emerged after Zeno Vendler published his influen- tial work on the semantic classification of predicates (Vendler, 1957). In this book, he suggested that each situation (typically described by a verb) can be classified as ei- ther state, activity, achievement or accomplishment according to certain rigid criteria. Al- though Vendler himself didn’t coin any particular catch-all term for these categories, both aspect and Aktionsart started to be used in this function by various authors (Plung- jan, 2003, p. 293). Bernard Comrie in his renowned handbook on aspect (Comrie, 1976) avoids the term Aktionsart altogether due to the ambiguity connected with its present use. As he points out, the contemporary linguistics draws the dividing line between aspect and Aktionsart at least in two different ways. In both cases, the distinction is morphological rather than semantic. Equally in both approaches, the term aspect is used for those se- mantic features that have been grammaticalized, whereas Aktionsart for the lexicalized ones. The difference is that while one approach requires that the lexicalized distinc- tions be realized by means of derivational morphology, the other does not put any constraint on them (Comrie, 1976, p. 6–7). The first way is particularly characteristic of Slavic linguistics. It is therefore no wonder that this conception has been adopted also by certain works on the aspect in Udmurt – a language that has been under Russian influence for centuries (e.g. Kondrat’jeva, 2007). However, the just mentioned criteria raised in turn another problem – how to realiably tell grammaticalized features from the lexicalized ones? This was indeed subject to many debates on what the term ‘gram- matical’ exactly means, many of which eventually settled on ‘expressed by inflectional morphology’, i.e. the part of morphology that has syntactic relevance, in contrast to the derivational morphology (Filip, 2011, p. 1187). In the Western linguistics, beginning from the 1970s, the term Aktionsart started to be more and more often associated with the Aristotelian classes as elaborated by

7 2. The notion of aspect and related concepts

Vendler (1957) and Dowty (1979), regardless of the derivative morphology. In addition, it has been suggested recently to denote this concept by the term actionality (Plungjan, 2003, p. 293). This understanding of Aktionsart (or actionality) is similar to the notion of inherent meaning of lexical items (Comrie, 1976, p. 6) and has therefore been des- ignated also by the more transparent term , as opposed to the , referring to the opposition of perfective and imperfective (Filip, 2011, p. 1188). As regards the term aspect, the situation was a bit less intricate than that of Aktion- sart. We have already seen that in its original meaning, after Sigurd Agrell suggested to differentiate both concepts from each other, aspect was used as the generic term relating to the perfective vs. imperfective opposition. The same applies also to the ap- proach adopted by Comrie (1976) almost 70 years later. According to his definition, ‘as- pects are different ways of viewing the internal temporal constituency of a situation’ (Comrie, 1976, p. 3). The difference between the perfective and imperfective aspects is drawn as follows: ‘perfectivity indicates the view of a situation as a single whole, with- out distinction of the various separate phases that make up the situation; while the imperfective pays essential attention to the internal structure of the situation’ (Com- rie, 1976, p. 16). In other words, this conception does not regard aspect as an objective characteristic of a situation, but rather the way the speaker looks upon it. Given one particular situation, it is very often possible to use both aspects when referring to it, depending on what we want to emphasize. In contemporary Russian linguistics, there is a growing tendency to refer to the Slavic opposition of perfective and imperfective as vid, leaving the term aspect for a more general concept that includes all the semantic oppositions of the kind (what it exactly means will be shown immediately). In this respect, Slavic vid can be viewed as a special case of aspect. The term Aktionsart, on the other hand, is not made use of in this conception at all (Plungjan, 2003, p. 293). For the reasons stated above, I will avoid the use of the term Aktionsart in my the- sis as much as possible and will refer to all the meanings it usually encompasses as aspects instead. In view of the fact that many works I draw on do use Aktionsart—or its translation equivalents—in some contexts (Kondrat’jeva, 2007; Kondrat’jeva, 2010; Kondrat’jeva, 2011; Winkler, 2001; Horváth, 2010; Horváth, 2012), I will point out the

8 2. The notion of aspect and related concepts difference in terminology whenever necessary.

2.2 Contemporary classification of aspects

In the rest of this chapter I will attempt to outline the classification of aspectual gram- memes (that is, the individual values in the category of aspect) as presented by Plung- jan (2003). He divides aspectual meanings into three major classes based on seman- tic criteria. The first class encompasses the grammemes expressing quantitative as- pectual meaning (količestvennaja aspektual’nost’). To the second class belong the gram- memes whose semantics is linked to the linear structure of a situation (linejnaja as- pektual’nost’). Finally, the third class includes the grammemes connected to particular phases of the described situation (fazovost’). The quantitative aspects describe a situation with respect to repetition. In this way, they can be regarded as a kind of verbal analogue of grammatical number in nouns. Within the context of the world’s languages, this kind of aspectual meaning belongs to the least grammaticalized ones (Plungjan, 2003, p. 294). This is an important note in the context of this work, since as we will see later, it is exactly this aspect that is in fact among the most grammaticalized ones in Udmurt (see e.g. Kondrat’jeva, 2007). Within this class, one can distinguish between several types of aspectual meanings; here I will follow the classification given by Plungjan (2003, p. 295). The first aspect of this class is called the . It refers to a situ- ation which takes (took, will take) place repeatedly during the concerned period of time, whether often or seldom, with a higher or lower degree of regularity. A special kind of iterative meaning called habitual meaning refers to those repeated situations that can be considered as characteristic properties of the subject, cf. English he smokes cigarettes, he collects stamps. The multiplicative aspect refers to a single situation that consists of a sequence of momentane ‘quanta’, cf. Russian kašljat’ ‘to cough (repeatedly)’, stučat’ ‘to beat’. The aspectual meaning of an individual quantum is called , cf. Russian kašl- janut’ ‘to cough once’, stuknut’ ‘to hit’. The distributive aspect refers to a situation consisting of successive phases in

9 2. The notion of aspect and related concepts which individual actants of given kind are involved one after another, cf. Russian on perečital vsë, čto našlos’ v biblioteke ‘he read everything that could be found in the library’ (i.e. one book after another). The grammemes collectively known as the linear aspects serve to make references to the individual fragments of the described situation. The notable fragments that are being referred to most frequently are naturally the starting point, the middle and the endpoint, to which a number of authors including Plungjan (2003, p. 297) add also the preparation stage (coming before the event) and the resulting stage (coming after the event). With regard to these stages, one can distinguish between the following aspec- tual meanings: The refers to the preparation stage of a situation (‘X is such that P will take place later’), cf. English be going to, be about to. This meaning is closely related to the future tense, and indeed a number of cases was documented where constructions originally expressing prospectivity shifted their meaning diachronically and became the basic means of expression of the future. The resultative aspect refers to the resulting stage of a situation (‘X is such that P took place earlier’), cf. Russian dver’ otkryta which would translate as something between ‘the door is open’ and ‘the door has been opened’; it is tightly connected with the perfect meaning (see below), into which it frequently evolves. The perfect aspect refers to a past situation with present relevance, cf. English sentence John has opened the door, which implies that the door is now open. In contrast to the resultative aspect, the emphasis is not on a particular result but rather on the past situation itself. This means that in addition to the aspectual component, there is a clear temporal meaning included in the semantics of perfect as well, which has raised doubts in many authors whether to classify it as aspect at all (Comrie, 1976, p. 52). The durative aspect refers to the middle of a situation, i.e. any interval between the starting point and the endpoint, cf. English he is writing. Naturally this aspect only makes sense for those situations where these two points do not coincide (i.e. the non- punctual ones). Sometimes the progressive is separated as a distinct aspect, referring to the middle stages of ‘dynamic’ situations, those that evolve over time. This meaning corresponds fairly well to the so-called continuous tenses in English: it is possible to

10 2. The notion of aspect and related concepts say e.g. he is running because the verb to run expresses an activity; on the contrary, *he is knowing is ungrammatical since to know refers to a state – a situation that does not change over time. If the durative progressive, durative non-progressive as well as habitual meanings can be expressed by a single form, we then call this aspect imperfective (Comrie, 1976, p. 25). This definition of imperfective, apparently different from the one given above (‘imperfective pays essential attention to the internal structure of the situation’), in fact corresponds well to the meaning of Slavic verb forms traditionally regarded as imperfectives (Plungjan, 2003, p. 300). Two aspectual grammemes refer right to the ‘critical points’ of a situation, i.e. its beginning and ending. The aspect expressing the beginning is called the inchoat- ive aspect, cf. Russian pobežat’ ‘to start running’. Conversely, the completive aspect expresses that the termination point of the situation has been reached, cf. Russian napisat’ ‘to write (down)’ or English ate up. When dealing with a durative situation that has both begun and ended within the reference time, it is possible to regard it as a single unit without considering its internal structure. This point of view is known as the limitative aspect and is typical for the past simple tense forms in English, cf. he ran or he sang. These three grammemes – inchoative, completive and limitative – are also known under the common name punctative, since they all ‘convolve’ the situation in ques- tion into a single point. In various languages, one of two ways of this ‘convolution’ is often preferred: either the inchoative/completive one (in languages of the Russian type) or the limitative one (in languages of the English type). If both meanings can be expressed by a single form (or in an analogous way), the corresponding aspectual grammeme is referred to as perfective. The third large category of aspectual meanings is linked to the phase, distinguish- ing between inchoative, continuative and terminative. However, since a number of authors does not consider these grammemes purely aspectual, I will not deal with them in more detail. Moreover, these concepts are not crucial for understanding the core ideas of this work.

11

3 Aspectual roles of verbal suffixes

In many books (and definitely in the most influential ones), the part on aspect discusses meanings of various verbal suffixes (Perevoščikov et al., 1962, p. 219–224; Kel’makov and Hännikäinen, 1999, p. 240–242; Kondrat’jeva, 2011, p. 220– 241; Alatyrev, 1983, p. 581–582). Suffixes do indeed play an important role in the aspec- tual system of Udmurt and should not be missing from any work with this focus. Aspect marking by means of suffixes will be the subject of this chapter. It would nevertheless be misleading to assume that there is nothing more to say about Udmurt aspect—the following two chapters will present other ways of expressing it. The most important aspectual opposition that can be expressed by Udmurt verbal suffixes falls into the category of frequentativeness or iterativeness. That is, it basically serves to distinguish between whether a situation took place only once or it was re- peated several times. In the following text, I will be using the term non-frequentative verbs or simply non- for verbs describing one-time events. The verbs de- scribing repeated or regular events will be referred to as frequentative verbs or frequen- tatives. There are two principal ways of expressing the above mentioned distinction in ver- bal morphology. The first way employs the suffix -i̮l-/-ľľa- which, when attached to a non-frequentative verb, produces its frequentative counterpart; cf. berti̮ni̮ ‘to return home’ ∼ berti̮li̮ni̮ ‘to return home regularly’, juani̮ ‘to ask a question’ ∼ juaľľani̮ ‘to ask questions’. The other way, restricted only to a limited set of lexemes, marks this distinction by means of the -i̮- and -(j)a- suffixes; cf. ǯuti̮ni̮ ‘to lift’ ∼ ǯutjani̮ ‘to lift re- peatedly’, ke̮li̮ni̮ ‘to sleep over’ ∼ ke̮lani̮ ‘to sleep over regularly’. The structure of the following text (sections 3.1, 3.2 and 3.3) is largely based on Kondrat’jeva (2007). I have also borrowed (and sometimes adapted) some example sen- tences from this article, coming ultimately from various fiction books written in Ud- murt; see the article’s bibliography for the comprehensive list of the original sources. The original Kondrat’jeva’s article has been recently expanded and used as the section on aspect in 2011’s book on Udmurt morphology (Kondrat’jeva, 2011); some example sentences in the following text have been borrowed from this publication as well.

13 3. Aspectual roles of verbal suffixes 3.1 -i̮l-/-ľľa- suffix

The suffixes -i̮l- and -ľľa-, when attached to verb stems, convey a frequentative mean- ing. They constitute the most productive means of derivation of frequentatives, as they can be attached to virtually any verb (Perevoščikov et al., 1962, p. 219; Kondrat’jeva, 2011, p. 224). These two suffixes are in complementary distribution; the choice de- pends on the conjugational class of the original verb. Namely, the -i̮l- suffix only at- taches to first conjugation verbs (i.e. those ending with -i̮ni̮ in the infinitive), whereas the -ľľa- suffix is restricted to second conjugation verbs (i.e. those whose infinitive ends with -ani̮). In this way, both -i̮l- and -ľľa- can be considered allomorphs of a sin- gle suffix rather than two separate suffixes. I will follow this approach inmythesisas well, referring to the suffix either as ‘the -i̮l-/-ľľa- suffix’ or sometimes more conve- niently as ‘frequentative suffix’. To get a better idea, let us consider some examples first:

1st conjugation 2nd conjugation berti̮ni̮ ∼ berti̮li̮ni̮ juani̮ ∼ juaľľani̮ leśti̮ni̮ ∼ leśti̮li̮ni̮ radjani̮ ∼ radjaľľani̮ ľaki̮ni̮ ∼ ľaki̮li̮ni̮ korani̮ ∼ koraľľani̮ ľuki̮ni̮ ∼ ľuki̮li̮ni̮ malpani̮ ∼ malpaľľani̮ dumi̮ni̮ ∼ dumi̮li̮ni̮ šonani̮ ∼ šonaľľani̮ vati̮ni̮ ∼ vati̮li̮ni̮ daśani̮ ∼ daśaľľani̮

The examples above illustrate how the infinitive forms of frequentative verbs are derived from their non-frequentative counterparts. In the first conjugation, this trans- formation is realized by means of the -i̮l- suffix attached at the end of the stem. Inmany works, this suffix is analyzed otherwise, e.g. as -l- (Perevoščikov et al., 1962), -l(i̮)- (Kon- drat’jeva, 2007, 2011) or -li̮- (Kel’makov and Hännikäinen, 1999). Without making any claims about which morphological analysis is the most appropriate, I will interpret the suffix as -i̮l-, in accordance with e.g. Karakulova (1997) or Saarinen (2002), since this analysis appears to be most suitable for practical purposes. In the second conjugation, on the other hand, it is widely agreed that the frequentative suffix has the form -ľľa-. The forms containing the second conjugation frequentative suffix -ľľa- should not be confused with superficially similar suffixes -ľľam and -ľľamte, which are used in

14 3. Aspectual roles of verbal suffixes certain non-wit-nessed past forms, as in example (1), and have nothing to do with frequentativeness in contemporary Udmurt (even though—as will be shown later—all these forms are likely to have descended from a single common ancestor). The non- witnessed past tense will be dealt with in Section 4.2, as it happens to be relevant for our discussion about Udmurt aspect as well.

(1) Alangasarlen das ni̮lpiosi̮z vordskiľľam. Alangasar-gen ten child-pl-px.3sg be_born-nwpast-3pl ‘It is said that ten children were born to Alangasar.’

In order to fully understand the meaning conveyed by the -i̮l-/-ľľa- suffix, it is im- portant to analyze not only the situations where it tends to be used, but also the cases where it is typically missing. Only thus is it possible to assess the semantic oppositions that are necessary for a grammatical category to exist. I will therefore focus on verbs not marked by the -i̮l-/-ľľa- suffix first, turning my attention to the marked onesonly afterwards.

3.1.1 Verbs not marked by the -i̮l-/-ľľa- suffix

As already indicated above, the verbs that are not marked by the -i̮l-/-ľľa- suffix gen- erally refer to situations that took place only once, cf. examples (2) and (3):

(2) Tańi pići pinaljos ni̮ri̮śse vami̮što klasse. here little child-pl for_the_first_time step_in-pres-3pl classroom-ill ‘The little children here are stepping in the classroom for the first time.’

(3) Ǯi̮taźe Geńa peśatajeni̮z munćoje mi̮niz. in_the_evening Genya grandfather-ins-px.3sg sauna-ill go-past-3sg ‘In the evening, Genya went to sauna with his grandfather.’

Verbs unmarked by the frequentative suffix are also used in sentences expressing a permanent state of affairs, i.e. statements that have been (or were) true for alonger time. This does not necessarily imply that the described events actually take place in every moment, though:

15 3. Aspectual roles of verbal suffixes

(4) Mitrej vit’eti etaži̮n ule. Mitrej fifth floor-ines live-pres-3sg ‘Mitrej lives on the fifth floor.’

(5) Eχ, ki̮če ćeber ki̮rǯá no gitarajen šude val so! oh how beautiful sing-pres-3sg and guitar-ins play-pres-3sg aux he ‘Oh, how beautifully he used to sing and play the guitar!’

(6) Kali̮k ušja tone, Nast’i. people praise-pres-3sg you-acc Nasti ‘People praise you, Nasti.’

The sentence in example (4) states that Mitrej’s place is found on the fifth floor, even though he may spend his time in other places as well. Example (5) refers to some- one’s ability to sing and play the guitar (in past), not saying he was singing and playing all the time. Finally, example (6) says that Nasti is often being praised by people, again not necessarily in every moment. All these situations correspond to what has been defined as habitual meaning in Chapter 2. Another case when non-frequentative forms are used are events that started at some point in the past and continue until the present moment. In English, this kind of situations is typically expressed with the tense and the corresponding aspectual meaning is called perfect. This use is illustrated by example (7):

(7) Pići di̮ri̮śeni̮m ńań budetiśjoslen školajazi̮ little time-egr-px.1sg bread grower-pl-gen school-ines-px.3pl di̮šetskiśko. learn-pres-1sg ’I have been going to grain-growers’ school since I was little.’

Non-frequentative forms can sometimes be used also to describe a repeated event, i.e. in situations where the frequentative forms would normally be used. In this case, the frequentativeness is expressed either by a plural-marked object or adverbial as in (8), or it is obvious from the context which contains other frequentative-marked verbs as in (9):

(8) Jablokpuos kot’kud are tros jablok śoto. apple_tree-pl every year-ill many apple give-pres-3pl

16 3. Aspectual roles of verbal suffixes

‘The apple trees bear many apples every year.’

(9) Še̮maśki̮sa berti̮li̮kuz, puni̮ze get_drunk-ger1 return_home-freq-ger2-px.3sg dog-acc-px.3sg ǯi̮gi̮rté val. hug-pres-3sg aux ‘When he returned home after getting drunk, he used to hug his dog.’

In example (8), the repeatedness of the verb śoti̮ni̮ ‘to give’ is implied by the adverbial kot’kud are ‘every year’. In example (9), the frequentative verb berti̮li̮ni̮ ‘to return home repeatedly’ implies the frequentative reading of the verb ǯi̮gi̮rti̮ní̮ ‘to hug’ as well.

3.1.2 Verb marked by the -i̮l-/-ľľa- suffix

The meaning of the frequentative suffix -i̮l-/-ľľa- is always connected to some kind of plurality. This plurality can be of various types, the most important of which will be explored in this section. First of all, the verbs marked by the frequentative suffix describe events that took place more than once, typically on a regular basis, i.e. habitual or frequentative mean- ing; cf. examples (10) and (11):

(10) Ńina ta vi̮ľľem veraśkonjosti̮ čem ki̮li̮liz. Nina this similar dialogue-pl-acc often hear-freq-past-3sg ‘Nina used to hear such dialogues often.’

(11) Berti̮li̮kuz aslaz korkaz mi̮ki̮rski̮sa return_home-freq-ger2-px.3sg his_own house-ill-px.3sg bend-ger1 pi̮ri̮le. enter-freq-pres-3sg ‘When he returns home, he enters his house with his head bent.’

The repeatedness of the described event can be emphasized by various adverbials of time indicating a regular action like čuknaosi̮ ‘in the mornings’, arli̮ bi̮de ‘every year’, kot’kud nunale ‘every day’, tolalte ǯi̮tjosi̮ ‘in the winter evenings’ etc.; cf. examples (12) and (13):

17 3. Aspectual roles of verbal suffixes

(12) Čuknaosi̮ Sergej sadaz pi̮ri̮sa puki̮le. morning-pl-ill Sergei garden-ill-px.3sg enter-ger1 sit-freq-pres-3sg ‘In the mornings, Sergei comes to his garden and sits there.’

(13) Udmurtjos arli̮ bi̮de busi̮ ve̮ś leśti̮lo. Udmurt-pl year-dat every field prayer make-freq-pres-3pl ‘Udmurts say a prayer for the field every year.’

The second case where the forms marked with the -i̮l-/-ľľa- suffix are used are events with multiple agents. In particular, the frequentative form expresses that the event took place separately for each agent rather than at once for all of them. Using the terminology introduced in Chapter 2, the -i̮l-/-ľľa- suffix forces a distributive reading:

(14) Jozjosi̮ tińi int’itutjosti̮ no bi̮dti̮lizi̮ ńi. peer-pl-px.1sg there institute-pl-acc and finish-freq-past-3sg already ‘My peers already graduated from those institutes.’

(15) Trosez ni̮ljos mone Volod’ali̮ bi̮źonleś ali̮lizi̮. many girl-pl I-acc Volodya-dat marriage-abl dissuade-freq-past-3pl ‘Many girls dissuaded me from marriage to Volodya.’

Similarly, the frequentative suffix is used with transitive verbs describing events that affect multiple objects. Like in the previous case, it is used especially for enforcing the distributive reading:

(16) Ki̮šnojezli̮ je̮lpi̮d leźiz, oti̮n sugon vandi̮liz. wife-px.3sg-dat soured_milk let-past-3sg there onion chop-freq-past-3sg ‘He left his wife soured milk and chopped some onions there.’

(17) Šuba kisi̮i̮śti̮z kampetjos pottiz no ni̮lpiosli̮ fur pocket-elat-px.3sg candy-pl take_out-past-3sg and child-pl-dat ľuki̮liz. distribute-freq-past-3sg ‘He took out candies from the pocket of his fur coat and gave them out to the children.’

Example (17) also illustrates the contrast between collective and distributive reading: the form pottiz ‘took out’ indicates that all the candies were taken out from the pocket

18 3. Aspectual roles of verbal suffixes at once, with a single hand grip. On the other hand, the frequentative-marked form ľuki̮liz ‘distributed, gave out’ expresses that the children received their candies one after another. A somewhat different meaning is conveyed by the -i̮l-/-ľľa- suffix in the case of verbs of movement. It often indicates an unorganized movement, lacking a clear di- rection or aim, as in example (18). This rule does not apply to certain verbs connected with sports, though.

(18) Puži̮mjos ulti tuli̮s vordskem kećpios bi̮źi̮lo. pine-pl under spring born young_hare-pl run-freq-pres-3pl ‘Young hares born in the spring run around under the pines.’

The frequentative suffix is also used with verbs describing an event that isgoingon simultaneously (or within a narrow time frame) in several places. In such cases, inan- imate nouns, in particular those referring to substances (vu ‘water’, keńi̮r ‘groats’, li̮mi̮ ‘snow’ etc.) or things in large quantities that are difficult to countji̮rśi ( ‘hair’, pispu ‘tree’, vajjos ‘branches’ etc.) are typically used as the sentence subjects. Naturally, ad- verbials of place are widely employed in this kind of sentences as well:

(19) Uli̮g inti̮osi̮n te̮d’i̮ kećśin śaśka birdi̮os no low place-pl-ines white snowdrop flower bud-pl and addźiśki̮lo. be_seen-freq-pres-3pl ‘In the lowlands, the white buds of snowdrop flowers can be seen too.’

(20) Ki̮źpulen guri̮osi̮z piľiśki̮lo ńi ke, ńań ki̮źon birch-gen catkin-pl-px.3sg crack-freq-pres-3pl already if corn sowing di̮r vuiz. time come-past-3sg ‘Once birch catkins are cracking open, the time for sowing corn has come.’

The above mentioned uses of the frequentative suffix can overlap to a certain ex- tent. Therefore it may not be always clear which function it fulfils in a particular sen- tence and the context may need to be considered in order to reveal the meaning. What is nonetheless common to all or most uses of this suffix is a plural meaning of some kind. This plurality may concern the event itself as in examples (10) through (13), some

19 3. Aspectual roles of verbal suffixes of its participants (subject, object) as in examples (14) through (17) as well as adverbial adjuncts (multiple places or directions) as in examples (19) and (20). The Udmurt -i̮l-/-ľľa- suffix has its cognates in a number of Finno-Ugric languages; their common ancestor is reconstructed as Proto-Finno-Ugric *l (Saarinen, 2002, p. 203). Some examples include Finnish puhua ‘to speak’ ∼ puhella ‘to chatter’, Northern Saami muitit ‘to remember’ ∼ muitalit ‘to narrate’ and Mari ə̑štaš ‘to do’ ∼ ə̑štə̑laš ‘to do (repeatedly)’. The situation in Mari is particularly interesting within the context of this work since it bears a number of similarities to Udmurt. In both languages, verb forms containing the frequentative suffix can express in particular (a) situation which took place more than once, (b) situation in which several subjects participated and (c) situ- ation affecting several objects. In other words, the Mari suffix -ə̑l- has plural meaning similar to that of Udmurt -i̮l-/-ľľa-. There is one important difference between these two languages, though. As we have seen in examples (14) and (15), the plurality of the subject is marked twice in Udmurt: by the nominal plural ending -(j)os on the subject and by the frequentative suffix -i̮l-/-ľľa- on the verb. The same holds for the marking of plural objects, as in example (17) (although not in (16), for certain reasons). In Mari, on the other hand, the plurality is marked by the frequentative suffix onlySaarinen ( , 2002, p. 206):

(21) Ćə̑βe munćə̑lə̑t ćə̑lan. hen lay_eggs-freq-pres-3pl all ‘Hens do all lay eggs.’

The form ćə̑βe ‘hen’ in the example above is strictly speaking singular (the explic- itly plural form would be ćə̑βe-βlak). In this particular sentence, however, it gains plural meaning from the verb munćə̑lə̑t, which contains the frequentative suffix -ə̑l-. This fea- ture is very typical for the Mari number marking in general: the plural suffix of a noun can be omitted if the plural meaning is evident from the context (Alhoniemi, 2010, p. 72–73; Riese et al., 2010–2012, p. 66). It is worth noting, though, that under the in- fluence of the Russian language, plural forms of nouns are nowadays commonly used in such situations as well (Saarinen, 2002, p. 206). One more interesting thing remains to be said about the Udmurt -i̮l-/-ľľa- suffix. As

20 3. Aspectual roles of verbal suffixes

I have mentioned earlier in this text, there is a striking resemblance between certain nonwitnessed past forms and forms containing the frequentative suffix. This is the case with second- and third-person plural forms of the second past tense, as can be seen from the paradigm table below. For a more detailed information about this tense, see Section 4.2.

1st conjugation 2nd conjugation 1sg mi̮niśkem daśaśkem 2sg mi̮nem(ed) daśam(ed) 3sg mi̮nem(ez) daśam(ez) 1pl mi̮niśkemmi̮ daśaśkemmi̮ 2pl mi̮niľľam(di̮), mi̮nemdi̮ daśaľľam(di̮), daśamdi̮ 3pl mi̮niľľam(zi̮), mi̮nemzi̮ daśaľľam(zi̮), daśamzi̮

In second- and third-person plural, two parallel forms exist: the original shorter one and the more innovative one with the -ľľa- suffix, the latter clearly dominating in contemporary use. Serebrennikov (1963, p. 264) explains the origin of these long forms as coming from the short forms plus the frequentative suffix. He notices the ability of this suffix to describe a situation with multiple subjects, which is basically whatboth second- and third-person plural verb forms do. The meanings of the long forms were originally restricted only to the distributive reading pretty much like in (14) and (15). Over time, these forms extended their meaning to the cumulative meaning too, thus semantically merging with the original short forms, and gradually displaced them. Saarinen (2002, p. 206) hypothesizes that the third-person plural present tense suf- fix -lo used with second conjugation verbs can have an analogous origin. This view is obviously motivated by the presence of the element -l- in the suffix which is—as in the previous case—limited to plural forms only (in fact just to one of them). While this idea is perfectly reasonable, diachronic evidence shows it to be highly improbable. Ac- cording to Serebrennikov’s (1963, p. 251) analysis, this -l- element was in fact originally part of the stem and was thus contained in all the forms of second conjugation verbs. In later development, this -l- was preserved only in intervocalic positions, whereas ev- erywhere else it disappeared. So, for example, the forms veralo ‘they say’, veralo ‘I will

21 3. Aspectual roles of verbal suffixes say’ or veraloz ‘he/she will say’ remained intact, while the forms *veralni̮ ‘to say’, *ver- alśko ‘I say’ or *veral ‘he/she says’ developed into verani̮, veraśko and vera, respectively. Traces of this -l- can still be found in Komi-Zyrian, where a class of verbs exists with the infinitive ending -avni̮ (in some dialects -alni̮), cognate to the Udmurt infinitive ending -ani̮.

3.2 -i̮- and -(j)a- suffixes

The method of deriving frequentative verbs by attaching the -i̮l-/-ľľa- suffix shown in the previous section is universal in that it can be applied to virtually any verb. There is also another way to express the contrast between frequentative and non- frequentative meaning, consisting in the opposition of the suffixes -i̮- and -(j)a-. Un- like the first method, it can only be used with a limited subset of verbs, some examples are given below (Kel’makov and Hännikäinen, 1999, p. 241; Kondrat’jeva, 2007, p. 28). The pairs listed in the first column display the opposition -i̮- ∼ -a-, while in the other column the opposition is -i̮- ∼ -ja-. The choice between -a- and -ja- is idiosyncratic and cannot be easily assessed using merely formal criteria.

poti̮ni̮ ∼ potani̮ bińi̮ni̮ ∼ bińjani̮ pi̮ri̮ni̮ ∼ pi̮rani̮ ǯuti̮ni̮ ∼ ǯutjani̮ tubi̮ni̮ ∼ tubani̮ ki̮škati̮ni̮ ∼ ki̮škatjani̮ bi̮ški̮ni̮ ∼ bi̮škani̮ leźi̮ni̮ ∼ leźjani̮ dongi̮ni̮ ∼ dongani̮ śoti̮ni̮ ∼ śotjani̮ iški̮ni̮ ∼ iškani̮ tupati̮ni̮ ∼ tupatjani̮

As can be seen from the examples given, each pair consist of two verbs derived from the same root that differ by their conjugation classes. In this case, the first conjuga- tion verbs, marked by the -i̮- suffix1, refer to non-repeated events, much like the verbs not marked by the frequentative suffix -i̮l-/-ľľa- (see Section 3.1.1). The second conju- gation verbs, marked by the -(j)a- suffix, on the other hand, describe events that hap- pened more than once, analogous to the -i̮l-/-ľľa-marked verbs (see Section 3.1.2). The following examples illustrate the difference between poti̮ni̮ ‘to come out’ and potani̮ ‘to come out repeatedly’ (Kondrat’jeva, 2010, p. 59):

1. This -i̮- is missing in certain inflected forms of the 1st conjugation verbs. 22 3. Aspectual roles of verbal suffixes

(22) Ke̮lan derem kože, kutćaśki̮tek, ki̮re potiz. sleeping shirt with put_on_shoes-ger3 freedom-ill go_out-past-3sg ‘She went outside wearing only a nightgown, without putting her shoes on.’

(23) Vi̮li̮ś no vi̮li̮ś potaz ki̮šnomurt kenos aźe. again and again go_out-past-3sg woman storeroom in_front_of ‘The woman was coming out to the hallway again and again.’

As already said before, the suffix -i̮l-/-ľľa- can be attached to virtually any verb. This applies in particular to both members of the -i̮- ∼ -(j)a- opposition. Thus, for ex- ample, the verb poti̮ni̮ ‘to go out’ has as its frequentative counterparts the verbs potani̮, poti̮li̮ni̮ and even potaľľani̮. The last one demonstrates that both ways of deriving fre- quentatives can be combined together (Kondrat’jeva, 2007, p. 28). It should be borne in mind that not all verb pairs displaying the opposition of -i̮- and -(j)a- express this kind of semantic contrast. For example the verbs keśi̮ni̮ and keśani̮, both with the general meaning ‘to tear’, differ in the duration of the action rather than in the number of repetitions. The same applies to the pair ti̮rmi̮ti̮ni̮ ∼ ti̮rmi̮tjani̮ ‘to fill up’. In certain verbs of movement, the -(j)a-marked forms are ambiguous with regard to their aspect. The first possible interpretation agrees with that of -(j)a-marked mem- bers of such oppositions in general, i.e. expressing a repeated situation. The second interpretation, restricted to verbs of movement only, is that the described situation lasted for a short period of time. In this case, both non-frequentative and frequenta- tive reading are possible and the context must be taken into consideration in order to figure out which meaning the speaker had in mind. Example (24) illustrates the latter meaning of the verb kožani̮ ‘to drop by, to pay a short visit’, as opposed to koži̮ni̮ ‘to come around, to visit’ in example (25) (Kondrat’jeva, 2007, p. 28):

(24) Ńikolaj og daso minutli̮ gine doraz kožaz. Nikolaj one ten minute-dat only home-ill-px.3sg drop_by-past-3sg ‘Nikolaj dropped by at home only for ten minutes.’

(25) Tińi ma verani̮ tatći̮ kožemed. here what say-inf here-ill come_around-nwpast-2sg ‘Here is what you have come around to say.’

23 3. Aspectual roles of verbal suffixes

Verbs marked by the -(j)a- suffix can also express situations lasting in time, contrasted with the immediate ones marked by -i̮-. Compare the following examples with the verbs keśi̮ni̮ ‘to tear off (at once), to snatch’ vs. keśani̮ ‘to tear (constantly)’ (Kondrat’jeva, 2007, p. 29; Perevozčikov and Petrova, 1991, p. 117):

(26) Noš Kľimova, ǯe̮kez dori̮ li̮kti̮sa, t’etrad’i̮ś listok but Klimova table-def towards come-ger1 notebook-elat leaf keśiz. tear-past-3sg ‘But Klimova came to the table and tore a leaf from the notebook.’

(27) Ki̮n muzjem piľi̮liśke, uźi̮mleś vi̮ži̮ze frozen ground crack-pres-3sg winter_cereals-abl root-acc-px.3sg keśa. tear-pres-3sg ‘The frozen ground cracks open, tearing the roots off the winter cereals.’

3.3 Other verbal suffixes with aspectual meaning

The oppositions I was dealing with so far, i.e. -∅- ∼ -i̮l-/-ľľa- and -i̮- ∼ -(j)a-, are sit- uated on the boundary between inflectional and derivational morphology. Many au- thors agree that at least the suffix -i̮l-/-ľľa- is inflectional rather than derivational and thus corresponds to a distinct grammatical category of aspect (Perevoščikov et al., 1962, p. 219; Kondrat’jeva, 2007, p. 26; Kondrat’jeva, 2010, p. 59; Kondrat’jeva, 2011, p. 223). Contrary to this view, Csúcs (1990, p. 60) holds that there is no such category in Udmurt—only particular forms with particular aspectual meanings. The suffixes that will be discussed in this section are quite clearly derivational— they are no longer productive in contemporary language and each of them is therefore limited only to a particular subset of verbs. To emphasize this fact, Kondrat’jeva clas- sifies their meanings as Aktionsart (karonamal in Udmurt) rather than aspect (vid or karontus). Once again can we see here the inconsistency in the use of the term Aktion- sart, the reason why I try to avoid it as much as possible. In her conception, this term basically means that the concerned suffixes express certain aspectual meanings but, in contrast to the suffix -i̮l-/-ľľa-, they are not fully productive.

24 3. Aspectual roles of verbal suffixes

The first pair of these suffixes is -ti̮- ∼ -(j)a-/-ľa-. Some examples of verbs marked in this way include šonti̮ni̮ ‘to give a hand wave’ ∼ šonani̮ ‘to wave one’s hand(s)’, or keľti̮ni̮ ‘to leave (at once)’ ∼ keľľani̮ ‘to leave (repeatedly of for an extended period of time)’. The -ti̮-marked members of these oppositions refer to one-time completed events, while their counterparts with the -(j)a-/-ľa- suffix denote events that either lasted for a longer time or were repeated several times. Using the terms defined in Chapter 2, verbs of the first type are , while verbs of the second type carry imperfective meaning. This contrast is illustrated in the following examples with the verbs ćerekti̮ni̮ ‘to exclaim, to cry out’ and ćerekjani̮ ‘to scream, to yell’ (Kondrat’jeva, 2007, p. 31; Dušenkova et al., 2008, p. 106):

(28) « Pije! » – ćerektiz so. son-px.1sg exclaim-past-3sg he ‘ “Son!” he exclaimed.’

(29) vandem atas kad’ ćerekjani̮ cut-pp cock like scream-inf ‘to scream like a cock whose throat is being cut’

What has been said about the opposition -ti̮- ∼ -(j)a-/-ľa- is true also for verbs marked by the suffixes -alti̮- vs. -a-. Some examples displaying this opposition include the pairs korani̮ ‘to chop’ ∼ koralti̮ni̮ ‘to chop (once)’, kurjani̮ ‘to scratch’ ∼ kurjalti̮ni̮ ‘to scratch (once)’ or sezjani̮ ‘to shake’ ∼ sezjalti̮ni̮ ‘to shake (once)’. The last pair is also used in the following examples:

(30) Pi̮čal i̮bem kuara ńulesez sezjaltiz. gun shoot-pp sound forest-acc shake-past-3sg ‘The sound of a gunshot rocked the forest.’

(31) Aľeksej Petrović ji̮rze sezjaz. Aleksej Petrovič head-acc-px.3sg shake-past-3sg ‘Aleksej Petrovič was shaking his head.’

Also the suffix -i̮šti̮-, which can stand in opposition to either -i̮- or -(j)a-, can fulfill the same role as the suffixes -ti̮- and -alti̮- above. In addition to this, it often expresses that the event took place only to a moderate degree (attenuative meaning). Compare

25 3. Aspectual roles of verbal suffixes the following examples with the verbs ćuti̮ni̮ ‘to limp’ ∼ ćuti̮šti̮ni̮ ‘to walk with a slight limp’:

(32) Mikta sultiz no, śeki̮t ćuti̮sa, doram vami̮štiz. Mikta stand_up-past-3sg and heavy limp-ger1 to-px.1sg step-past-3sg ‘Mikta stood up and stepped towards me, limping heavily.’

(33) Aľi noš taza, pi̮di̮z gine ćuti̮šte. now again healthy foot-px.3sg only limp-pres-3sg ‘He is now healthy again, walking only with a slight limp.’

Another aspectual opposition is formed by the suffixes -ǯi̮-/-ći̮-́ ∼ -i̮-/-(j)a-. The members marked by -ǯi̮-/-ći̮-́ generally bear perfective meaning (describe a one-time completed event), as in šokći̮ni̮ ‘to take a breath’ ∼ šokani̮ ‘to breathe’. Sometimes they can refer specially to the initial phase (inchoative meaning), as in gomǯi̮ní̮ ‘to catch fire’ ∼ gomani̮ ‘to flame, to blaze’. Finally, the suffix -ǯi̮-/-ći̮-́ sometimes carries attenu- ative meaning in the same way the suffix -i̮šti̮- does. The examples below illustrate the inchoative meaning of the suffix -ǯi̮-́ (Perevozčikov and Petrova, 1991, p. 13, 18):

(34) Šuši̮os uj pala lobǯi̮ní̮ daśaśko. bullfinch-pl north towards fly_away-inf prepare-pres-3pl ‘Bullfinches are preparing to fly away to the north.’

(35) Ľabez, ulijeti lobi̮sa, pispu śe̮ri̮ vatskiz. weak-def low fly-ger1 tree behind-ill hide-past-3.sg ‘The weak one was flying low and hid behind a tree.’

The suffix -gi̮-/-ki̮-, standing in opposition to either -i̮- or -(j)a-, also expresses a one- time completed event, e.g. paźgi̮ni̮ ‘to splash (at once)’ ∼ paźani̮ ‘to splash (for some time)’. This opposition can be compared to the classic Slavic contrast of perfective and imperfective, respectively. The last verbal suffix bearing aspectual meaning is -ji̮-, forming a pair with -i̮-. Also the -ji̮- suffix expresses a single completed event, while its counterpart emphasizes its duration, e.g. ki̮zji̮ni̮ ‘to give a cough’ ∼ ki̮zi̮ni̮ ‘to cough’; see examples (36) and (37). As in the previous case, also this relationship is close to the one between perfectivity and imperfectivity.

26 3. Aspectual roles of verbal suffixes

(36) Pereś ći̮rti̮jez ke̮saku śamen ki̮zjiz. old throat-acc go_dry-ger2 after cough-past-3sg ‘When his throat went dry, the old man gave a cough.’

(37) Šudbur kije aćiz uz pi̮ri̮, – pereś ki̮zi̮sa fortune hand-ill itself neg-fut-3sg go_in-conneg old cough-ger1 vatsa. add-pres-3sg ‘ “Fortune will not itself fall into one’s hands,” the old man added, coughing.’

To sum up, Udmurt derivational suffixes that can express aspectual meanings in- clude -(j)a-, -ti̮-, -alti̮-, -i̮šti̮-, -ǯi̮-/-ći̮-́ , -gi̮-/-ki̮- and -ji̮-. It is not uncommon for a single root to combine with several of them, thus yielding a number of verbs with basically the same semantic content but differing by aspectual meanings. For example the verb čogi̮ni̮ ‘to chop, to cut’ allows to derive the verbs čogjani̮, čogǯi̮ní̮ , čogi̮šti̮ni̮ and čogjalti̮ni̮. Moreover, each of these verbs can be in turn combined with the frequentative suffix -i̮l-/-ľľa-. Some examples of such ‘verb families’ derived from a single root using differ- ent suffixes are shown in Table 3.1. It is adapted from Kozmács (2008, p. 32), who com- piled this table following the terminology and classification suggested by Karakulova (1997). Karakulova makes a basic distinction between mnogokratnyje glagoly (marked with -i̮l-/-ľľa-) and nemnogokratnyje glagoly (all the other verbs); the latter being divided into nekratnyje and kratnyje glagoly (verbs forming the -i̮- ∼ -(j)a- oppositions), odnokrat- nyje glagoly (semelfactives derived by means of the nonproductive suffixes discussed above) and nejtral’nyje glagoly (verbs of either conjugation which do not have aspec- tual counterparts except for the -i̮l-/-ľľa-marked ones). The table illustrates several phenomena. First, we can see that the frequentative suffix is indeed universal: the column mnogokratnyje contains the counterpart of every single verb from the other columns. (Kozmács omitted the frequentative forms of some verbs; however, the dic- tionary Dušenkova et al. (2008) and also Karakulova’s article itself show that these forms do exist as well.) Second, it demonstrates that the capability of individual roots to combine with different (nonproductive) suffixes is highly idiosyncratic. In extreme cases, none of the nemnogokratnyje forms exists and the root occurs only in a frequen- tative verb. Both Karakulova and Kozmács give the verbs beraľľani̮ and ćepi̮ľľani̮ as ex- amples. Classification of ćepi̮ľľani̮ as mnogokratnyj glagol is questionable, though: it does

27 3. Aspectual roles of verbal suffixes

nemnogokratnyje mnogokratnyje nejtral’. nekrat. krat. odnokrat. -a-, -ja- -ǯi̮-́ , -alti̮-, -i̮l-, -ľľa- -i̮šti̮-, -ti̮- todi̮ni̮ todi̮li̮ni̮ iźi̮ni̮ iźi̮li̮ni̮ suredani̮ suredaľľani̮ bujani̮ bujaľľani̮ koži̮ni̮ kožani̮ koži̮li̮ni̮ ∼ kožaľľani̮ tubi̮ni̮ tubani̮ tubi̮li̮ni̮ ∼ tubaľľani̮ ke̮li̮ni̮ ke̮lani̮ ke̮li̮li̮ni̮ ∼ ke̮laľľani̮ poti̮ni̮ potani̮ poti̮li̮ni̮ ∼ potaľľani̮ gudi̮ni̮ gudǯi̮ní̮ gudi̮li̮ni̮ ∼ gudǯi̮li̮ní̮ kokćani̮ kokćalti̮ni̮ kokćaľľani̮ ∼ kokćalti̮li̮ni̮ śalani̮ śalǯi̮ní̮ śalaľľani̮ ∼ śalǯi̮li̮ní̮ verjani̮ verjalti̮ni̮ verjaľľani̮ ∼ verjalti̮li̮ni̮ vami̮šjani̮ vami̮šti̮ni̮ vami̮šjaľľani̮ ∼ vami̮šti̮li̮ni̮ uli̮ni̮ ulǯi̮ní̮ uli̮li̮ni̮ ∼ ulǯi̮li̮ní̮ mekalti̮ni̮ mekalti̮li̮ni̮ ćepi̮lti̮ni̮ ćepi̮lti̮li̮ni̮ beraľľani̮ ćepi̮ľľani̮ lobi̮ni̮ lobani̮ lobǯi̮ní̮ lobi̮li̮ni̮ ∼ lobaľľani̮ ∼ lobǯi̮li̮ní̮ zi̮ri̮ni̮ zi̮rani̮ zi̮rǯi̮ní̮ zi̮ri̮li̮ni̮ ∼ zi̮raľľani̮ ∼ zi̮rǯi̮li̮ní̮ šonti̮ni̮ šonani̮ šonalti̮ni̮ šonti̮li̮ni̮ ∼ šonaľľani̮ ∼ šonalti̮li̮ni̮

Table 3.1: Verbal derivation by aspectual suffixes (adapted from Kozmács, 2008, p. 32) not follow the typical pattern of frequentative verbs, as the -ľľa- suffix is appended to i̮-final stem (normally, -i̮l- would be used here instead). Therefore I find it more appro- priate to analyze this verb as kratnyj counterpart of ćepi̮lti̮ni̮, analogous to the opposi- tion of e.g. keľti̮ni̮ ∼ keľľani̮ discussed above. On the other hand, the nonexistence of its hypothetical mnogokratnoj counterpart *ćepi̮ľľaľľani̮ (as with *keľľaľľani̮) suggests that the verb exhibits certain behaviour characteristic of mnogokratnyje glagoly as well.

28 4 Aspectual meanings of tenses

In many languages including English, verb tenses may have complex semantic content that includes not only temporal information but often also aspectual meaning. In En- glish, this can be seen well in the opposition of the so-called simple (or non-progressive) and continuous (or progressive) tenses: compare I wrote a letter, referring to a completed past action without regard to its internal structure, to I was writing a letter, which refers to the very process of writing; see Comrie (1976, p. 32–40) for an in-depth analysis of progressivity. In Udmurt, the situation is analogous: at least some tenses seem to carry a clear aspectual meaning. In this chapter I will give a survey of these and analyze what aspect each of them expresses. When speaking about tense and aspect, terminological confusion may arise. Tra- ditionally, the English verb forms given above have been referred to as tenses (past simple tense, past continuous tense). However, certain works on aspect use the term tense in a narrower sense: for the relation between the time of the situation and some other time, typically the time of speaking (Comrie, 1976, p. 1). In this respect, both mentioned forms are of the same tense since both refer to a situation that preceded the moment of speaking; the distinction between the so-called past simple and past con- tinuous ‘tenses’ is purely aspectual and has nothing to do with the category of tense by this definition. In most of the following, I will nevertheless stick to the traditional ter- minology for convenience, keeping the tense-aspect distinction in mind and pointing out places where these terms are used otherwise. As Comrie (1976, p. 71) points out, aspectual distinctions can vary significantly be- tween tenses (in the narrow sense). The greatest diversity of aspectual meanings is characteristic for the past tense. For example, the distinction between aorist and im- perfect made in a number of Indo-European and other languages is restricted to the past and has no counterparts in present or future. Udmurt is no exception to this trend; indeed, all the tenses analyzed for their aspectual characteristics in Winkler (2001, p. 49) refer to past situations of a kind. I will therefore explore individual Udmurt tenses than can be regarded as past in some way and say a few words about the aspect they can express.

29 4. Aspectual meanings of tenses 4.1 First past tense

The least marked tense with past meaning is known as the first past tense (pervoje prošed- šeje vremja in Russian) or witnessed past tense (očevidnoje prošedšeje vremja)(Perevoščikov et al., 1962, p. 202); Winkler (2001, p. 47) uses the designation I. It is a synthetic tense formed by means of affixes attached to the verb stem. Examples of the first past tense paradigms are given below for the verbs mi̮ni̮ni̮ ‘to go’ and užani̮ ‘to work’:

1st conjugation 2nd conjugation 1sg mi̮ni užaj 2sg mi̮nid užad 3sg mi̮niz užaz 1pl mi̮nim(i̮) užami̮ 2pl mi̮nidi̮ užadi̮ 3pl mi̮nizi̮ užazi̮

This tense is indifferent with regard to aspect (Winkler, 2001, p. 47) and is therefore less interesting within the context of this work. Its importance lies in the relation to the other past tenses whose aspectual contents are more specific. In Slavic languages, for example, most verb forms are either imperfective or perfective, so the speaker is always faced with the dilemma of which aspect to choose. The Udmurt first past tense, in contrast, provides the opportunity to leave the aspect unspecified.

4.2 Second past tense

Another (and the last) synthetic past tense is called the second past tense (vtoroje prošed- šeje vremja in Russian), nonwitnessed past tense (neočevidnoje prošedšeje vremja) or non- witnessed-resultative past tense (neočevidno-rezul’tativnoje prošedšeje vremja)(Perevoščikov et al., 1962, p. 204). Winkler (2001, p. 49) calls this tense perfect and—contrary to the traditional view—regards its meaning as modal rather than aspectual/temporal. This innovative approach is nevertheless criticized by Vladimir Napolskih in his review of Winkler’s book (Napol’skih, 2003, p. 297–298). He argues that even though the second

30 4. Aspectual meanings of tenses past can express modality under certain circumstances, its most general meaning that is common to all its uses is clearly aspectual. The forms of the second past tense are shown in the following table:

1st conjugation 2nd conjugation 1sg mi̮niśkem užaśkem 2sg mi̮nem(ed) užam(ed) 3sg mi̮nem(ez) užam(ez) 1pl mi̮niśkemmi̮ užaśkemmi̮ 2pl mi̮niľľam(di̮) užaľľam(di̮) 3pl mi̮niľľam(zi̮) užaľľam(zi̮)

In contrast to the first past tense, the second past describes a situation which the speaker themselves did not take part in but for which there is evidence of a certain kind. Namely, the speaker might have been informed about it by somebody else who did witness the situation in person or some result of the situation suggests it took place before. In addition to this, the second past tense can also be used for describing a situation the speaker did take part in; in this case, the present relevance of the situation is emphasized, which corresponds to the perfect aspect as defined in Chapter 2. The latter meaning is illustrated by the following example (Perevoščikov et al., 1962, p. 206):

(1) Uknoi̮ś ti̮ljosti̮ adǯi̮sa,́ Śima šuiz: «Ben aśmeos vuiśkemmi̮ uk. Ki̮če ǯog.» ‘Seeing lights in the windows, Sima said: “Apparently, we have already arrived. How fast.”’

4.3 Analytic tenses with val/vi̮lem

The forms of all four Udmurt synthetic tenses (present, future, first past, second past) can be combined with petrified verb forms val ‘was’ or vi̮lem ‘reportedly was’, giving rise to a number of analytic constructions (compound tenses). All of them are used for referring to past situations, each tense moreover expressing particular aspectual

31 4. Aspectual meanings of tenses nuances. The difference between the tenses using the auxiliary val and those with vi̮lem can be compared to the contrast between first and second past tense. That is tosay, the constructions with val refer to situations witnessed by the speaker themselves, whereas their counterparts with vi̮lem describe such situations of which there is only indirect evidence. For simplicity, I will discuss only the val-type tenses; the meaning of the corresponding vi̮lem-type tense can then be obtained by adding the nuance of evidentiality.

4.3.1 Present tense + val

The first of these compound tenses consists of the present tense form of theprinci- pal verb and the auxiliary val. This tense is sometimes referred to as durative preterite (prošedšeje dlitelnoje vremja in Russian) or unfinished preterite (prošedšeje neokončennoje vremja)(Alatyrev, 1970, p. 119). Some examples of the forms of this tense follow:

1st conjugation 2nd conjugation 1sg mi̮niśko val užaśko val 2sg mi̮niśkod val užaśkod val 3sg mi̮ne val uža val 1pl mi̮niśkom(i̮) val užaśkom(i̮) val 2pl mi̮niśkodi̮ val užaśkodi̮ val 3pl mi̮no val užalo val

As the designation indicates, this tense is used for past situations with special re- gard to their duration: it emphasizes that they lasted for a certain time period and disregards their ending point or result. This semantic content corresponds to what has been designated as durative aspect in Chapter 2. An example from Alatyrev (1970, p. 119) illustrates its use:

(2) Ogpol ǯi̮t mi̮niśko val ńuleski̮ti. Ućkiśko — mon pala kwiń kion li̮kte. ‘Once upon a time in the evening, I was going through a forest. I take a look — three wolves are coming to me.’

32 4. Aspectual meanings of tenses

4.3.2 Future tense + val

Another compound tense is formed from future tense forms combined with the verb val. Alatyrev (1970, p. 119) does not use any particular designation for this tense; some authors including Winkler (2001, p. 48) refer to it as iterative preterite, although this term describes only one of its multiple meanings. Examples of how this tense is formed are given below:

1st conjugation 2nd conjugation 1sg mi̮no val užalo val 2sg mi̮nod val užalod val 3sg mi̮noz val užaloz val 1pl mi̮nom(i̮) val užalom(i̮) val 2pl mi̮nodi̮ val užalodi̮ val 3pl mi̮nozi̮ val užalozi̮ val

Generally speaking, this construction is used for ‘future in the past’, i.e. past situa- tions that were in future from the point of view of other past situations. Let us consider an example from Alatyrev (1970, p. 119):

(3) Anna Petrovna, pize voźmasa, urame potoz val. ‘Anna Petrovna, waiting for her son, used to come out to the street.’ ‘Anna Petrovna, waiting for her son, would come out to the street.’

There are at least three ways in which this sentence can be understood. First, it can describe a regular, systematically repeated process, e.g. Anna Petrovna came out to the street every day when her son was returning from the school. This meaning, which can be regarded as iterative and perhaps even habitual, is the reason why some authors call this tense iterative preterite; even though the other two meanings can hardly be considered iterative. The second possible interpretation is that the situation may have taken place a long time ago and the speaker is currently remembering it and narrating about it, often in a somewhat metaphorical meaning (regrettably, Alatyrev (1970, p. 119), whence this definition comes, does not specify what kind of metaphor he hasin

33 4. Aspectual meanings of tenses mind). Finally, it can refer to a situation that began in the past and extended to some point further in time which is in future with respect to the referential time but in the past with respect to the time of utterance.

4.3.3 Past tense + val

The third type of a compound past tense is formed using a past tense form of the prin- cipal verb followed by the verb val. The past tense form can be either first (witnessed) past or second (nonwitnessed) past, with hardly any difference in meaning (in the compound tenses, the contrast between witnessedness and nonwitnessedness is real- ized through the opposition of val and vi̮lem instead, respectively). The corresponding paradigms may look as follows:

1st conjugation 2nd conjugation 1sg mi̮ni val mi̮niśkem val užaj val užaśkem val 2sg mi̮nid val mi̮nem(ed) val užad val užam(ed) val 3sg mi̮niz val mi̮nem(ez) val užaz val užam(ez) val 1pl mi̮nim(i̮) val mi̮niśkemmi̮ val užam(i̮) val užaśkemmi̮ val 2pl mi̮nidi̮ val mi̮niľľam(di̮) val užadi̮ val užaľľam(di̮) val 3pl mi̮nizi̮ val mi̮niľľam(zi̮) val užazi̮ val užaľľam(zi̮) val

As regards the meaning, such constructions refer to a situation that took place in a distant past. This is a mere subtype of the general past meaning and does not express any particular aspect. The following examples borrowed from Alatyrev (1970, p. 120) illustrate that the notion of distant past can be fairly relative:

(4) Mon tolon ńuleski̮n užaj val. ‘I worked in a forest yesterday.’

(5) So ki̮lem ari̮n ńuleskaz val. ‘He was hunting last year.’

34 4. Aspectual meanings of tenses 4.4 Past participle + vań (e̮ve̮l)

There is yet another analytic construction that can be used for referring to past events. It consists of the past participle (ending with -em/-m) with a personal suffix, followed by the existential verb vań (in affirmative sentences) or e̮ve̮l (in negative sentences). This construction is characteristic of a number of Turkic languages including e.g. Tatar and Bashkir (Nasibullin, 1984, p. 40). The full paradigm (in affirmative meaning) may look as follows:

1st conjugation 2nd conjugation 1sg mi̮neme vań užame vań 2sg mi̮nemed vań užamed vań 3sg mi̮nemez vań užamez vań 1pl mi̮nemmi̮ vań užammi̮ vań 2pl mi̮nemdi̮ vań užamdi̮ vań 3pl mi̮nemzi̮ vań užamzi̮ vań

According to Winkler (2001, p. 48), this construction is used for a completed action in the past (i.e. perfective aspect). It typically bears an additional meaning, expressing that a situation of this kind has already taken place before (or hasn’t, if the sentence is negative), analogous to English constructions like have you ever done sth, I have never done sth etc.:

(6) Mami, mon soli̮ nim no śoti: Fram. Ki̮lemed vań-a si̮čenimo puni̮jez?— Vań Toľik, ki̮leme vań. ‘Mummy, I gave him the name Fram. Have you heard about a dog with such a name? — Yes, Tolik, I have already heard.’

Like the synthetic tenses, also this construction can be combined with the verbs val or vi̮lem, shifting the described situation further back in time. That is to say, the con- struction with val/vi̮lem expresses basically the same meaning as the one without it, emphasizing in addition that it took place in a distant past. The verb vań can be omit- ted; negative meaning can be expressed—in addition to the construction with e̮ve̮l val—

35 4. Aspectual meanings of tenses also by e̮j val; see Nasibullin (1984, p. 40) for further details. The following paradigms illustrate the use of this construction in affirmative meaning:

1st conjugation 2nd conjugation 1sg mi̮neme (vań) val užame (vań) val 2sg mi̮nemed (vań) val užamed (vań) val 3sg mi̮nemez (vań) val užamez (vań) val 1pl mi̮nemmi̮ (vań) val užammi̮ (vań) val 2pl mi̮nemdi̮ (vań) val užamdi̮ (vań) val 3pl mi̮nemzi̮ (vań) val užamzi̮ (vań) val

36 5 Paired-verb constructions

The formal devices expressing aspectual meanings discussed so far were either of mor- phological nature (in the case of suffixes discussed in Chapter 3) or on the edge be- tween morphology and syntax (in the case of the so-called tenses discussed in Chap- ter 4). Apart from these, there is a range of possibilities to specify aspectual character- istics by lexical means as well. In this chapter, I will describe one prominent method lying on the boundary between lexicon and syntax which makes use of the so-called paired verbs. Paired-verb constructions are basically participial constructions whose meaning has undergone a certain semantic shift over time. In order to understand this concept properly, it is worth learning a bit about Udmurt and participial construc- tions first. Udmurt has a rather rich inventory of non-finite verb forms includingfive adjectival participles (sometimes called simply participles) and five adverbial participles (also known as gerunds). The latter behave like adverbs from the syntactic point of view, serving as convenient mechanisms to express the meanings of certain types of subordinate clauses in a compact way. Since an in-depth analysis of Udmurt partici- ples is not among the priorities of this thesis, I am not going toexplore them one after another here; see Perevoščikov et al. (1962, p. 257–293) for further information. One of the adverbial participles does deserve special attention, though. It is formed from a verb stem by means of the suffix -i̮sa (in 1st conjugation verbs, e.g. mi̮n-i̮ni̮ > mi̮n-i̮sa) or -sa (in 2nd conjugation verbs, e.g. ki̮rǯa-ní̮ > ki̮rǯa-sá ). Generally speaking, its function is to express an additional situation occuring simultaneously to the main one expressed by the sentence predicate or preceding it, cf. the following examples borrowed from Winkler (2001, p. 59):

(1) So ki̮rǯasá porjaz. he/she sing-ger walk-past-3sg ‘He/She walked singing.’

(2) Kima, korka pi̮ri̮sa, ǯe̮k śe̮ri̮ pukśiz. Kima house-ill go_in-ger table behind sit_down-past-3sg ‘Having gone into the house, Kima sat down at the table.’

37 5. Paired-verb constructions

Both of the given sentences contain two verbs referring to two different actions; the ‘main’ one being expressed by a finite verb formporjaz ( ‘walked’, pukśiz ‘sat down’), the ‘additional’ one by a gerund (ki̮rǯasá ‘singing’, pi̮ri̮sa ‘going in, having gone in’). The meaning of the resulting phrase can be derived compositionally from the lexical mean- ings of both verbs included. There are, however, certain cases where only one verb contributes its lexical meaning to the resulting phrase, the other one serving rather as an aspectual modifier. To get a better idea, see the following examplesWinkler ( , 2001, p. 60):

(3) žugiśki̮sa ki̮ľľi̮ni̮ fight-ger lie-inf ‘to fight (often, constantly)’ (literally ‘to lie fighting’)

(4) ki̮škasa koški̮ni̮ be_frigtened-ger leave-inf ‘to become frightened’ (literally ‘to leave while being frightened’)

(5) gožti̮sa vutti̮ni̮ write-ger deliver-inf ‘to complete the writing’ (literally ‘to deliver while writing’)

With each example, I gave both the literal word-by-word paraphrase and the ac- tual meaning. Comparing these two in each case, striking differences between them can be spotted: despite the word ki̮ľľi̮ni̮ ‘to lie’, no actual lying takes place in exam- ple (3); similarly, examples (4) and (5) do not imply that anybody would leave or de- liver something, respectively. This is in sharp contrast to examples (1) and (2) where both actions described take place (singing and walking in (1), going inside and sitting down in (2)). In other words, the verbs ki̮ľľi̮ni̮, koški̮ni̮ and vutti̮ni̮ seem to lose a sub- stantial part of their lexical meanings in certain contexts. In a sense, this situation can be compared to the English construction be going to, which refers to a forthcoming sit- uation without entailing any kind of movement. Such a semantic attenuation indicates that the concerned verbs have undergone grammaticalization to some degree, hence it is legitimate to regard the verbs like ki̮ľľi̮ni̮, koški̮ni̮ and vutti̮ni̮ as auxiliary verbs of a kind. Verbs that can behave like ki̮ľľi̮ni̮, koški̮ni̮ and vutti̮ni̮ under certain circumstances

38 5. Paired-verb constructions are known as paired verbs. They are characteristic of a number of languages in the Volga-Kama region, from both Turkic (whence this phenomenon originally comes) and Finno-Ugric language families: in Chuvash, there are 26 verbs of this kind, in Tatar about 20, in Mari about 36, in Udmurt 20–30. There is a substantial variability between individual Udmurt dialects: in the so-called peripheral southern dialects, they are used most frequently; in the northern dialects, by contrast, paired verbs are much rarer (Horváth, 2012, p. 11–12). Considering that Udmurt has probably borrowed these con- structions from Tatar (Rédei, 2009, p. 41), such variability is no surprise: the frequency of usage of paired verbs is proportional to the geographical closeness of each dialect to the Tatar-speaking area. Looking at the examples above, it could seem that the difference between paired- verb constructions and regular participial constructions is fairly clear. However, in certain cases it is nearly impossible to decide how to classify them, particularly when both verbs belong to the same domain and it is thus impossible to tell whether a se- mantic attenuation of the inflected verb took place orWinkler not( , 2001, p. 60). For this reason, opinions on the total number of Udmurt paired verbs and their classifica- tion vary significantly. Alatyrev (1970, p. 136–137) lists the verbs koški̮ni̮ ‘to go away’, kušti̮ni̮ ‘to throw, to drop’, leźi̮ni̮ ‘to let’, poni̮ni̮ ‘to put’, vui̮ni̮ ‘to come, to get to’, poti̮ni̮ ‘to go out’, baśti̮ni̮ ‘to take’, śoti̮ni̮ ‘to give’, oskalti̮ni̮ ‘to try, to taste’, ućki̮ni̮ ‘to look’ and utćani̮ ‘to look for’. Kondrat’jeva (2011, p. 246) mentions—again without attempting to make any classification—the following 20 verbs: bi̮desti̮ni̮ ‘to finish’, bi̮dti̮ni̮ ‘to finish’, bi̮ri̮ni̮ ‘to end’, keľti̮ni̮ ‘to leave’, koški̮ni̮ ‘to go away’, ki̮ľľi̮ni̮ ‘to lie’, ki̮ľi̮ni̮ ‘to stay’, leźi̮ni̮ ‘to let’, li̮kti̮ni̮ ‘to come’, mi̮ni̮ni̮ ‘to go’, ortći̮ni̮ ‘to pass, to go by’, poti̮ni̮ ‘to go out’, puki̮ni̮ ‘to sit’, pi̮ri̮ni̮ ‘to go into’, śoti̮ni̮ ‘to give’, ti̮ri̮ni̮ ‘to pay’, uli̮ni̮ ‘to live’, vetli̮ni̮ ‘to walk’, vutti̮ni̮ ‘to deliver’ and vui̮ni̮ ‘to come, to get to’, emphasizing that the list may not be complete. Winkler (2001, p. 60) divides the paired verbs into three classes according to the Aktionsart they mark; some paired verbs are not included due to difficulties with their categorization. The Aktionsart classes are: non-transformative (uli̮ni̮ ‘to live’, puk- i̮ni̮ ‘to sit’, ki̮ľľi̮ni̮ ‘to lie’ and vetli̮ni̮ ‘to walk’), initial-transformative (koški̮ni̮ ‘to go away’, leźi̮ni̮ ‘to let’ and keľti̮ni̮ ‘to leave’) and final-transformative (vui̮ni̮ ‘to come, to get to’, vutti̮ni̮ ‘to deliver’, bi̮dti̮ni̮ ‘to finish’, baśti̮ni̮ ‘to take, to buy’, śoti̮ni̮ ‘to give’, poni̮ni̮ ‘to

39 5. Paired-verb constructions put’ and kušti̮ni̮ ‘to throw, to drop’). Here I will follow the more detailed classification by Horváth (2010, p. 6–8). On the top level, she makes the distinction between paired verbs with imperfective vs. perfective meanings; further subclassification is based on the ‘Aktionsart’ meaning (following the author’s terminology for now):

1. paired verbs with imperfective meaning

(a) paired verbs expressing a pure imperfectivity: uli̮ni̮ ‘to live’ (viśi̮sa uli̮ni̮ ‘to live in permanent ill condition’), ki̮ľľi̮ni̮ ‘to lie’ (žugiśki̮saki̮ľľi̮ni̮ ‘to fight [of- ten, constantly]’), mi̮ni̮ni̮ ‘to go’ (bi̮źi̮sami̮ni̮ni̮ ‘to run’), vetli̮ni̮ ‘to walk’ (arasa vetli̮ni̮ ‘to harvest’), puki̮ni̮ ‘to sit’ (ćirdi̮sa puki̮ni̮ ‘to be engaged in singing’), voźi̮ni̮ ‘to hold’ (ut’alti̮savoźi̮ni̮ ‘to guard, to watch’), si̮li̮ni̮ ‘to stand’ (veraśki̮sa si̮li̮ni̮ ‘to talk [standing]’), ortći̮ni̮ ‘to pass, to go by’ (gi̮ri̮saortći̮ni̮ ‘to plough’), bi̮źi̮ni̮ ‘to run’ (ujiśki̮sa bi̮źi̮ni̮ ‘to chase after’); (b) imperfective paired verbs with additional Aktionsart meaning: voźi̮ni̮ ‘to hold’ (žugi̮sa voźi̮ni̮ ‘to beat [constantly]’), bi̮źi̮li̮ni̮ ‘to run around’ (utćasa bi̮źi̮li̮ni̮ ‘to snoop around’);

2. paired verbs with perfective meaning

(a) resultativite paired verbs: vutti̮ni̮ ‘to deliver’ (leśti̮sa vutti̮ni̮ ‘to do, to make up’), bi̮dti̮ni̮ ‘to finish’ (śii̮sa bi̮dti̮ni̮ ‘to eat up’), bi̮desti̮ni̮ ‘to finish’ (nulli̮sa bi̮desti̮ni̮ ‘to carry, to fetch’), bi̮ri̮ni̮ ‘to end’ (vijasa bi̮ri̮ni̮ ‘to pass, to elapse’), bi̮dmi̮ni̮/bi̮tmi̮ni̮ ‘to end’ (izi̮li̮sa bi̮dmi̮ni̮ ‘to grind up’), kušti̮ni̮ ‘to throw, to drop’ (vii̮sa kušti̮ni̮ ‘to kill’) baśti̮ni̮ ‘to take, to buy’ (li̮dǯi̮sá baśti̮ni̮ ‘to read [whole]’), keľti̮ni̮ ‘to leave’ (gožti̮sa keľti̮ni̮ ‘to write down’), i̮ši̮ni̮ ‘to vanish’ (te̮lǯi̮sá i̮ši̮ni̮ ‘to dissolve, to melt down’); (b) terminative paired verbs: śoti̮ni̮ ‘to give’ (ki̮rǯasá śoti̮ni̮ ‘to sing [a song]’); (c) inchoative paired verbs: leźi̮ni̮ ‘to let’ (ki̮rǯasá leźi̮ni̮ ‘to begin to sing’), koški̮ni̮ ‘to go away’ (poti̮sa koški̮ni̮ ‘to go out’); (d) delimitative-deminutive paired verbs (expressing a lower degree than usu- al): baśti̮ni̮ ‘to take, to buy’ (iźi̮sa baśti̮ni̮ ‘to sleep a bit’);

40 5. Paired-verb constructions

(e) intensive paired verbs (expressing a higher degree than usual): bi̮ri̮ni̮ ‘to end’ (śiśki̮sa bi̮ri̮ni̮ ‘to overeat’); (f) directional paired verbs: li̮kti̮ni̮ ‘to come’ (ujasa li̮kti̮ni̮ ‘to reach by swim- ming’), vui̮ni̮ ‘to come, to get to’ (mi̮ni̮sa vui̮ni̮ ‘to arrive’), poni̮ni̮ ‘to put’ (oši̮sa poni̮ni̮ ‘to hang [something]’), kušti̮ni̮ ‘to throw, to drop’ (iškalti̮sa kušti̮ni̮ ‘to pull out’), poti̮ni̮ ‘to go out’ (bi̮źi̮sa poti̮ni̮ ‘to run out’), potti̮ni̮ ‘to take out’ (uľľasa poti̮ni̮ ‘to expel’), pi̮ri̮ni̮ ‘to go into’ (bi̮źi̮sa pi̮ri̮ni̮ ‘to run into’), pi̮rti̮ni̮ ‘to take into’ (uľľasa pi̮rti̮ni̮ ‘to drive [someone/something] into’), vaśki̮ni̮ ‘to come down’ (lobǯi̮savaśki̮ní̮ ‘to fly down’), gi̮lǯi̮ní̮ ‘to slither’ (ujasa gi̮lǯi̮ní̮ ‘to swim away’), sulti̮ni̮ ‘to stand up’ (tetći̮sa sulti̮ni̮ ‘to jump up’);

In the classification above, I made one important change to Horváth’s original pro- posal: in her work, the verb koški̮ni̮ ‘to go away’ is ranked among directional paired verbs, whereas I decided to classify it as an inchoative paired verb. This corresponds to the classification by Winkler (2001, p. 60), who ranks this verb among initial-transfor- mative verbs, which is apparently just a different name for inchoative verbs. More- over, this view is supported also by examples Horváth and other authors mention: in poti̮sa koški̮ni̮ ‘to go out’, the directional meaning is fully contained in the principal verb poti̮ni̮ ‘to go out’, while the paired verb koški̮ni̮ serves as a mere aspect modifier. Another example, given by Winkler (2001, p. 60), ki̮škasakoški̮ni̮ ‘to become frightened’, demonstrates that a paired-verb construction with koški̮ni̮ need not carry a directional meaning whatsoever.

41

6 Conclusion

In my thesis, I analyzed aspectual features that exist in Udmurt verbs and outlined the most important methods how they can be expressed formally. Of these, I explored three ways in more detail. The first one makes use of various verbal suffixes, the second takes notice of aspectual peculiarities of certain tenses and the third way expresses individual aspectual meanings by suitable paired verbs. As regards the aspects expressed by suffixes, we have seen that the most produc- tive suffix -i̮l-/-ľľa- carries multiple meanings—frequentative, habitual or distributive; moreover, in certain contexts, the meaning does not have to be aspectual at all. Other suffixes are each restricted only to a closed subset of verbs, the most important being -i̮-, -(j)a-, -ti̮-, -alti̮-, -i̮šti̮-, -ǯi̮-/-ći̮-́ , -gi̮-/-ki̮- and -ji̮-. The aspects they can express include the frequentative, semelfactive, imperfective and perfective. Aspectual distinctions expressed by tenses are best developed in tenses referring to past situations, i.e. various ‘past tenses’ according to traditional terminology. These include two simple tenses (first and second past), several compound tenses combining synthetic forms with the auxiliary verb val or vi̮lem and one construction with the past participle and the auxiliary vań or val. The aspects which individual tenses can express include the perfect, durative and iterative. As with the suffixes discussed above, the meaning can often contain a non-aspectual component, e.g. distant past. The third way discussed in my thesis makes use of paired-verb constructions, con- sisting of the -sa participle of an arbitrary verb together with an inflected form of a paired verb. There is about 20–30 paired verbs in Udmurt, each connected with a par- ticular aspectual meaning. The most important of these meanings are the imperfec- tive, perfective, resultative, terminative and inchoative. In addition to this, paired-verb constructions are often use to express the direction of a movement. We have seen that Udmurt is endowed with a rather rich inventory of ways to ex- press aspectual meanings. In fact, for most of the aspectual grammemes described in Chapter 2 there is a way (or more) to express it, even if not with the same ease for ev- ery verb and/or tense. Such a richness creates a space for a more detailed research in any of the three areas examined.

43

Bibliography

Agrell, S. (1908). Aspektanderung und Aktionsartbildung beim polnischen Zeitworte: ein Beitrag zum Studium der indogermanischen Praverbia und ihrer Bedeutungsfunktionen, Ohlsson, Lund.

Alatyrev, V. I. (1983). Kratkij grammatičeskij očerk udmurtskogo jazyka, in V. M. Vahrušev (ed.), Udmurtsko-russkij slovar’: okolo 35000 slov, Russkij jazyk, Moskva, pp. 561–591.

Alatyrev, V. I. (ed.) (1970). Grammatika sovremennogo udmurtskogo jazyka. Sintaksis pros- togo predloženija, Udmurtija, Iževsk.

Alhoniemi, A. (2010). Marin kielioppi, 2nd edn, Suomalais-Ugrilainen Seura, Helsinki.

Brugmann, K. (1904). Kurze vergleichende Grammatik der indogermanischen Sprachen, Trübner, Strassburg.

Comrie, B. (1976). Aspect: an introduction to the study of verbal aspect and related problems, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Comrie, B. and Corbett, G. G. (eds) (1993). The Slavonic Languages, Routledge, London and New York.

Csúcs, S. (1990). Chrestomathia Votiacica, Tankönyvkiadó, Budapest.

Dowty, D. R. (1979). Word Meaning and Montague Grammar. The Semantics of Verbs and Times in Generative Semantics and in Montague’s PTQ, Reidel, Dordrecht.

Dušenkova, T. R., Jegorov, A. V.,Ivšin, L. M., Karlova, L. L., Kirillova, L. J., Titova, O. V.and Šibanov, A. A. (2008). Udmurtsko-russkij slovar’: okolo 50 000 slov, Rossijskaja akademija nauk. Ural’skoje otdelenije. Udmurtskij institut jazyka, istorii i literatury, Iževsk.

Filip, H. (2011). Aspectual class and Aktionsart, in C. M. Klaus von Heusinger and P.Port- ner (eds), Semantics: An International Handbook of Natural Language Meaning, Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin and New York, pp. 1186–1217.

45 Greč, N. I. (1827). Prostrannaja russkaja grammatika, Vol. 1, Greč, Sankt Peterburg.

Horváth, L. (2010). Az úgynevezett páros igék aspektuális szerepe, grammatikalizációja az udmurt (és a mari) nyelvben, in A. Parapatics (ed.), Doktorandusok a nyelvtudományi útjain. A 6. Félúton konferencia, ELTE BTK, 2010. október 7–8, ELTE Eötvös Kiadó, Budapest.

Horváth, L. (2012). Az imperfektív aspektus az udmurtban, in A. Parapatics (ed.), FÉLÚ- TON: A 7. Félúton konferencia (2011) kiadványa, ELTE Nyelvtudományi Doktori Iskola, Budapest.

Karakulova, M. K. (1997). Kategorija vida v udmurtskom jazyke, Permistica 4: 43–51.

Kel’makov, V. and Hännikäinen, S. (1999). Udmurtin kielioppia ja harjoituksia, Suomalais- ugralainen seura, Helsinki.

Kondrat’jeva, N. V. (2007). Tuala udmurt ki̮li̮ś karontus kablen pe̮rmemez no kutiśke- mez, Vestnik Udmurtskogo universiteta 2007(5/I): 25–34.

Kondrat’jeva, N. V. (2010). Mežkategorial’nyje svazi glagol’noj i imennoj količestven- nosti v udmurtskom jazyke, Vestnik Permskogo universiteta. Rossijskaja i zarubežnaja filologija 2010(6): 58–64.

Kondrat’jeva, N. V. (2011). Vid, in N. N. Timerhanova (ed.), Udmurt ki̮llen ki̮lkabtodosez (morfologijez): todosli̮ko-di̮šetskon izdanije, “Udmurt universitet” knigapotonni, Iževsk, pp. 220–241.

Kozmács, I. (2008). Az -śk- képző az udmurt (votják) igeképzés rendszerében, 1st edn, Közép- európai Tanulmányok Kara, Konstantin Filozófus Egyetem, Nyitra.

Młynarczyk, A. K. (2004). Aspectual Pairing in Polish, LOT, Utrecht.

Napol’skih, V. (2003). Review on [Winkler, E (2001). Udmurt. Languages of the World/Materials 212. Lincom Europa, Muenchen. 85 pp.], Linguistica Uralica 39(4): 289–303.

Nasibullin, R. Š. (1984). O nekotoryh analitičeskih formah glagola v udmurtskom jazyke, in V. M. Vahrušev (ed.), Voprosy grammatiki udmurtskogo jazyka, Naučno- issledovatelskij institut pri Sovete Ministrov Udmurtskoj ASSR, Iževsk, pp. 38–44.

46 Perevozčikov, G. K. and Petrova, P. N. (eds) (1991). Arlen ni̮lpiosi̮z: di̮šetiśjosli̮ posobije, 2nd edn, Udmurtija, Iževsk.

Perevoščikov, P. N., Vahrušev, V. M., Alatyrev, V. I., Pozdejeva, A. A. and Tarakanov, I. V. (1962). Grammatika sovremennogo udmurtskogo jazyka. Fonetika i morfologija, Ud- murtskoje knižnoje izdatel’stvo, Iževsk.

Plungjan, V. A. (2003). Obščaja morfologija: Vvedenije v problematiku, 2nd revised edn, Editorial URSS, Moskva.

Riese, T., Bradley, J., Jakimova, E. and Krylova, G. (2010–2012). Oŋaj marij jə̑lme: A Compre- hensive Introduction to the Mari Language, University of Vienna, Department of Finno- Ugric Studies, Vienna.

Rédei, K. (2009). Vnutrennije i vnešnije innovacii v udmurtskom jazyke (dopolnenija k areal’nym svjazjam jazykov volžsko-kamskogo regiona), Linguistica Uralica 45(1): 36– 43.

Saarinen, S. (2002). Frekventativnost’ (mnogokratnost’) v marijskom i udmurtskom jazykah, Permistica 5: 203–208.

Serebrennikov, B. A. (1963). Istoričeskaja morfologija permskih jazykov, Izdatel’stvo Akademii nauk SSSR, Moskva.

Vendler, Z. (1957). Verbs and times, The Philosophical Review 66(2): 143–160.

Winkler, E. (2001). Udmurt. Languages of the World/Materials 212, Lincom Europa, Muenchen.

47