افعال آینده در گذشته در زبان فارسی (مقاله علمی وزارت علوم)
درجه علمی: نشریه علمی (وزارت علوم)
آرشیو
چکیده
نویسندگان مقاله حاضر پس از بررسی مسئله زمان در افعال فارسی، به بازنگری کارکرد افعال معین و افعال وجهی می پردازند ونشان می دهند که تعداد افعال معین در زبان فارسی بیشتر از آن چیزی است که در کتب دستور آمده است. بنابراین با طرح و نقد اقوال نویسندگان دستور زبان در این باره، تمایز این دو نوع فعل را رد و شباهت های آن ها را در زبان بیان می کنند و نشان می دهند که افعال وجهی و معین کارکرد همسانی دارند؛ سپس با معرفی فعل «خواست» به عنوان فعل معین (و نه فعل وجهی) در افعالی نظیر «خواست برود و می خواست برود و ...»، وجود زمان «آینده در گذشته» را در زبان فارسی مطرح می سازند و آن را با زمانی به همین نام در زبان انگلیسی مورد مقایسه قرار می دهند. نویسندگان اعتقاد دارند که زمان «آینده در گذشته» یکی از زمان های موجود در زبان فارسی است و در ترکیب با زمان های دیگر نیز می تواند زمان های جدیدی را در زیرمجموعه خود به وجود آورد.The “Future in Past” Verbs in the Persian Language
After examining the issue of tense in Persian verbs, this article's authors review the function of what they term 'definite verbs' and 'modal verbs,' demonstrating that the number of 'definite verbs' in Persian is greater than typically acknowledged in grammar books. By presenting a critique of existing grammatical statements, they reject the traditional distinction between these two verb types, asserting their functional similarities and demonstrating that modal and 'definite verbs' operate identically. Subsequently, by introducing the verb 'khāstan' (to want/will) as a 'definite verb' (rather than a modal verb) in constructions like 'khāst boravad' (wanted to go), they propose the existence of the 'future in the past' tense in Persian, drawing comparisons with its English equivalent. The authors argue that the 'future in the past' tense is a legitimate tense in Persian, capable of forming new compound tenses when combined with other verb forms.
1. Introduction
The verb is one of the parts of speech in Persian, distinguished by features such as denoting action, expressing person, and conveying tense. "The presence of tense" is a defining characteristic that sets verbs apart from other word classes. As is known, authors of grammar books classify Persian verb tenses into three main categories:
Present
Past
Future
Each of these is further divided into subtypes, though there is disagreement among grammarians about the exact number and variations. Most cite 3 structures for the present tense, 9 for the past, and 1 for the future. Here, "structure" refers to the subcategories under each primary tense.
In this paper, we aim to examine the role of auxiliary and quasi-auxiliary verbs in Persian, identifying and proving the existence of the "future-in-the-past" tense (and its derivatives) in constructions like "khāst boravad" (خواست برود) and "mikhāste boravad" (می خواسته برود). To achieve this, we must analyze the tense-marking elements in Persian verbs.
Grammarians recognize two tense-marking components:
Morphological markers (e.g., "mi-" [می], "be-" [ب])
Auxiliary verbs (e.g., "bud" [بود], "ast" [است])
These appear in verbs
like "mikhoram" (می خورم), "bokhoram" (بخورم), "khorde budam" (خورده بودم), and "khorde ast" (خورده است). To lay the groundwork, we first examine auxiliary verbs—their number and function in Persian—and then analyze quasi-auxiliary (or "modal") verbs, which share functional similarities. By demonstrating their parallel roles in tense formation, we approach our goal.
2. Literature Review
No existing grammatical works or articles discuss the "future-in-the-past" tense explicitly. Only Mohammad-Javad Mashkoor’s Dasturnāmeh briefly alludes to it.
While earlier Persian grammars (e.g., Panj Ostād, Homayounfarrokh) omit the "continuous past" (māzi mostamar) and "continuous present" (mozāre’ mostamar), later works (Anvari-Givi, Vahidian-Kamyar, Farshidvard, etc.) include them, marking "dāsht" (داشت) as an auxiliary for these tenses.
Verbs like "khāstan" (خواستن) and "tavānestan" (توانستن) are termed modal verbs, double auxiliaries, or quasi-auxiliaries (Momeni, 2015, p. 82). Notably, this study operates independently of linguistic theories, focusing solely on proving the "future-in-the-past" in Persian.
3. Auxiliary Verbs
Auxiliary verbs accompany main verbs, enabling their conjugation across various tenses and moods, and facilitating the formation of passive constructions.
4. Modal Verbs
Most grammarians typically limit the number of auxiliary verbs to 5–6, yet they implicitly acknowledge other verbs that, while unable to function as main verbs (as they obligatorily require another verb), are not formally classified as auxiliaries. These are often labeled differently, such as "modal verbs."
5. Function of Auxiliaries and Quasi-Auxiliaries
Some grammarians claim auxiliaries lose their meaning when paired with main verbs. However, closer analysis reveals they retain and augment the main verb’s meaning. For example:
"dāshtam miāmadam" (داشتم می آمدم): Both the auxiliary (dāshtam) and main verb (miāmadam) conjugate.
"rafte budam" (رفته بودم): Only the auxiliary (budam) conjugates.
6. Modal Verbs vs. Auxiliaries
Recent grammars recognize "dāshtan" (داشتن) as an auxiliary in constructions like "dāram miāyam" (دارم می آیم). Unlike traditional auxiliaries, both verbs in these structures conjugate.
7. The Verb "Khāstan" (خواستن)
As an auxiliary, "khāstan" generates nuanced tenses and meanings, distinct from established classifications. Investigating this opens new avenues for understanding Persian verb structures.
8. Conclusion
This study questions whether traditional Persian grammars fully capture the tenses used by native speakers. The "future-in-the-past" (e.g., "khāstam boravam" خواستم بروم) is one such overlooked tense. Key findings:
Persian auxiliaries extend beyond "budan, shodan, khāstan, dāshtan"; their syntactic behavior warrants deeper study.
Modal verbs (e.g., "tavānestan") share syntactic dependency with auxiliaries—they cannot stand alone.
Just as "khāham raft" (خواهم رفت) expresses future intent, "khāstam boravam" (خواستم بروم) reflects past intent, proving the "future-in-the-past" exists. Comparable structures in related languages (e.g., English) support this.
The "future-in-the-past" behaves like other Persian tenses syntactically (e.g., allowing separation between auxiliary and main verb).
It can form compound tenses (e.g., "khāste ast boravad" خواسته است برود).
Thus, Persian speakers employ tenses beyond those codified in grammars, necessitating revised frameworks.
تبلیغات
