Now I’ll tell you about a thing in our language that seems to exist, but which at the same time doesn’t seem to be there. These are future participles.
In general, communion is not only an unhygienic church procedure, but also a part of speech - a verbal adjective. There is a verb “groan”, and there is a participle formed from it “groaning”.
Participles are of the present tense - “breaking” - and there are of the past - “broken”. In the first case, the action is happening now, in the second - in the past. And now attention: what is not there. The future participle would be "breaker". If the “breaker” is the one who breaks, and the “breaker” is the one who broke, then the “breaker” is obviously the one who breaks. Quite a meaningful meaning. “The athlete who reaches the finish line first will receive a gold medal.”
Why can we say that this form does not exist in the language? If you are a prescriptivist, then look at Rosenthal's reference book, it has all the answers. If you are a descriptivist, then try to find the form “breaker” in the literature or at least fix it in oral speech. I found five crazy things all over the Internet, although now this post will also be based on this word. The word is not in dictionaries, it does not appear in literature. Nobody says that, and it wouldn’t occur to you to say that.
Why can we say that this form exists in the language? Firstly, because the mechanism, surprisingly, is productive. You can easily form the future participle of any verb (in the perfect form). Try: draw - draw, jump - jump, say - say, take and do - take and do. Secondly, because you know what each of these words means, you can use them in a sentence and understand sentences with these words.
For example, I will be very grateful to readers who correctly use any future participle in the comments. This sentence is absolutely true. In addition, it is an example of communication between native speakers using this form: you understand what I meant, and to which readers I will be very grateful. The word successfully served as a conductor of thought from the author to the reader.
It is interesting that the only participle of the future tense that is actually used in the Russian language is the word “future”, formed according to the same scheme from the verb “to be”.
Maybe the word “finder” does not exist, but it does not exist in some other sense, not in one in which the word “vozgurk” does not exist. There really is no such word. None of us even know what it could mean. And the mysterious participles of the future tense are, as it were, “almost there.” And you must admit, they even have some kind of ugly charm.
In short, I am in favor of using future participles. First of all, it's always fun to troll the guardians of language purity. Secondly, we will then have the only language among our neighbors that has such a feature. There is no such thing even in English, with its system of tenses: doing - willing to do? Thirdly, it’s a pity that such a serviceable mechanism in the language is idle.
What do you think of the idea? Is there anyone among you who will develop the topic in the comments?
Verbs in the future tense show that the action will take place after the moment of speech.
The future tense has two forms: simple and compound. Shape of the future composite imperfective verbs consists of the future tense of the verb be and the infinitive form of the imperfective verb. The future tense is formed from perfective verbs simple, from imperfective verbs - future tense composite.
Morphological analysis of the verb
I. Part of speech. General meaning.
II. Morphological characteristics:
1.
Initial form (indefinite form).
2.
Constant signs:
a) view,
b) conjugation,
c) transitivity.
3.
Variable signs:
a) inclination,
b) number,
c) time (if any),
d) number (if any),
e) gender (if any).
III. Syntactic role.
Participle
Participle- a special form of a verb that denotes an attribute of an object by action and answers the questions what? which? which? which?
Note.
Some scientists consider participles to be an independent part of speech, since they have a number of features that are not characteristic of the verb.
Like verb forms, participles have some of their grammatical features. They are perfect and imperfect; present and past; returnable and non-refundable.
The participle has no future tense form.
There are participles active and passive.
Denoting the attribute of an object, participles, like adjectives, grammatically depend on nouns that agree with them, i.e. become the same case, number and gender as the nouns they refer to.
Participles change by case, by number, by gender. The case, number, and gender of participles are determined by the case, number, and gender of the noun to which the participle refers. Some participles, like adjectives, have a full and a short form. Initial participle form- nominative singular masculine. All verbal features of the participle correspond to the initial form of the verb - the indefinite form.
Like an adjective, a participle in its full form in a sentence is a modifier.
Participles in short form are used only as a nominal part of a compound predicate.
Active and passive participles
Active participles denote a sign of the object that itself produces the action. Passive participles denote a sign of an object that is experiencing action from another object.
Formation of participles
When forming participles, the following verbal features are taken into account:
1. Transitivity or intransitivity of a verb(both active and passive participles are formed from transitive verbs; only active participles are formed from intransitive verbs).
2. Verb type(perfect verbs do not form present participles. Imperfect verbs do not form real present and past participles; most imperfective verbs do not form passive past participles, although these verbs have corresponding forms of present passive participles).
3. Verb conjugations(both active and passive present participles have different suffixes depending on the conjugation of the verb).
4. Reflexivity or non-reflexivity of the verb(passive participles are not formed from reflexive verbs). Active participles formed from reflexive verbs retain the suffix -sya at all times, regardless of what sound (vowel or consonant) is located before this suffix; The suffix -sya appears at the end of the participle.
When forming participles with present tense suffixes -ush- (-yush-), -ash- (-box-), -eat-, -im- and past tense -vsh-, -sh-, -nn-, -enn-, -t- masculine, feminine and neuter singular endings are added ( -y, -y, -aya, -ee) or plural endings ( -s, -s).
From a number of verbs are formed Not all types of participles.
Note.
Most transitive imperfective verbs do not have a passive past participle form.
Morphological analysis of the participle
I. Part of speech (special form of a verb); from which verb is the general meaning derived?
II. Morphological characteristics:
1.
The initial form is the masculine nominative singular.
2.
Constant signs:
a) active or passive;
b) time;
c) view.
3.
Variable signs:
a) full and short form (for passive participles);
b) case (for participles in full form);
c) number;
d) birth
III. Syntactic role.
Participle
Participle- a special form of the verb, which denotes an additional action with the main action expressed by the verb, and answers the questions what is doing? what did you do?
As a form of a verb, the gerund has some of its grammatical features. Participles come in perfect and imperfect form. They retain the form of the verb from which they are derived.
The gerund retains the verb feature - transitivity.
Note.
A gerund, like a verb, can be returnable and non-refundable.
A gerund, like a verb, can be qualified by an adverb.
In a sentence, the adverbial participle is an adverbial adverbial clause.
Note.
Some scientists consider gerunds to be an independent part of speech, since they do not have many grammatical features characteristic of a verb.
Imperfect participles
Imperfective participles indicate unfinished additional action, which occurs simultaneously with the action expressed by the verb - predicate.
Imperfect participles are formed from the stem present tense of the verb using a suffix -and I).
After sibilants the suffix is used -A, and in other cases - -I.
From the verb to be, the imperfective participle is formed using the suffix -teach.
Notes
1. From imperfective verbs with a suffix -va- in an indefinite form (to give, to recognize, to get up, etc.), the gerund is formed from the base of an indefinite form: to give out (give out) - giving out.
2. Some verbs do not form imperfective participles:
o from verbs whose roots consist of only consonants:
beat - beat, tear - tear, sew - sew, burn - tourniquet, etc.
Exception:
rush - rush - rushing;
o from verbs with a present tense stem g, k, x: to protect - take care, to be able - they can, etc.;
o from most verbs with the base of the present tense to hissing: write - write, whip - whip, etc.;
o from verbs with suffix -Well-: fade - fade, get wet - get wet, pull - pull, go out - go out, etc.
Perfect participles
Perfect participles indicate completed incremental action, which, as a rule, occurs before the action begins. expressed by the verb - predicate.
Perfect participles are formed from the stem of the indefinite form or past tense (which, as a rule, coincide) with the help of suffixes -v, -lice, -shi. From reflexive verbs, perfect participles are formed with the suffix - lice (s), -shi (s). Participles with a base on a consonant are formed with a suffix -shi.
Notes
1. From some verbs it is possible to form double forms: from the stem of the indefinite form and from the stem of the past tense (when they do not coincide).
2. To suffix -to reflexive suffix -xia doesn't join.
Some verbs form perfect participles using a suffix -and I) from the basis of the future tense.
Notes
1. Some verbs have preserved forms with suffixes -v, -lice, -shi(returning, getting ready, coming, bringing, bringing, saying goodbye, acquiring, seeing, seeing, hearing, hearing). if double forms exist, gerunds with the suffix are used more often -and I) as less bulky.
2. Sometimes participles with suffixes -v, -lice are formed on imperfective verbs, but they are rarely used (having been, having eaten, not having).
Morphological analysis of gerunds
I. Part of speech (special form of a verb). General meaning.
II. Morphological characteristics:
1.
Initial form (indefinite verb form)
2.
View.
3.
Immutability.
III. Syntactic role.
Adverb- a part of speech that denotes a sign of an action, a sign of an object and another sign.
An adverb can refer to a verb, to its special forms - participle and gerund, as well as to a noun, adjective and other adverb.
Adverb means sign of action, if attached to a verb and a gerund.
Adverb means attribute of an object, if attached to a noun.
Adverb means sign of another sign, if attached to an adjective, participle or other adverb.
The adverb does not change, i.e. does not bow or conjugate.
In a sentence, adverbs are most often adverbs.
Note.
Some adverbs can be predicates.
Adverbs are divided into the following groups according to their meaning:
o Adverbs of manner- How? how? - fast, good, to pieces
o Adverbs of time- When? since when? How long? how long? - today, now, in winter
o Adverbs of place- Where? Where? where? - away, above, home
o Adverbs of reason- why - rashly, blindly, involuntarily
o Adverbs of purpose- For what? - on purpose, out of spite
o Adverbs of measure and degree- How many? at what time? how much? in what degree? to what extent? - very, quite, extremely
A special group consists of adverbs that do not name signs of an action, but only indicate them. In addition to their main purpose, they are used to connect sentences in the text.
o Demonstrative adverbs(here, there, here, there, from there, then)
o Indefinite adverbs(somewhere, somewhere, somewhere)
o Interrogative adverbs(how, why, where)
o Negative adverbs(nowhere, never, nowhere, nowhere)
Degrees of comparison of adverbs
Adverbs on -o(s), formed from qualitative adjectives, have two degrees of comparison: comparative and superior.
The comparative degree of adverbs has two forms - simple and compound. The simple form of the comparative degree is formed using suffixes -ee(s), -e, -she from the original form of adverbs, from which the final ones are discarded -o(-e), -ko. The compound form of comparative adverbs is formed by combining adverbs and words more and less.
The superlative degree of adverbs usually has a compound form, which is a combination of two words - a comparative degree of an adverb and a pronoun everyone (total).
Morphological analysis of the adverb
I. Part of speech. General meaning.
II. Morphological characteristics:
1.
An unchangeable word.
2.
Degree of comparison (if any).
III. Syntactic role.
Morphology Lesson 11. System of parts of speech in Russian (§ 6)
Goal: updating knowledge about the system of parts of speech in the Russian language; improving the ability to recognize independent and auxiliary parts of speech; the belonging of a word in meaning, morphological properties and syntactic function to one or another part of speech.
Lesson progress: I. Development of the ability to restore the logic of a text, updating knowledge about the system of parts of speech in the Russian language. Exercise 37, referring to the section “Advice from a Helper.” II. Improving the ability to recognize independent and auxiliary parts of speech; the belonging of a word in meaning, morphological properties and syntactic function to one or another part of speech. Exercise 38 - development of skills to determine the basis for classification from the point of view of morphology: V.V. Vinogradov in [Vinogradov 1947] and others) note the presence in the language of so-called future participles, derived from SV verbs according to the model of formation of present participles and being “a deviation from the literary norm; for example: hundreds of excerpts from Greene’s books that will excite everyone (Paust.); examples of headlines that can attract attention (gas.)" [Shvedova (ed.) 1980].
2. Proposals have been repeatedly put forward to introduce future participles into the participial paradigm of the Russian language. The first of these attempts (which dealt with the Church Slavonic language) should be considered the grammar of M. Smotritsky [Smotritsky 1619], which provides active and passive participles of the future tense, such as pobgoshsh (active) - beaten / pobgoshshs# (pass.) and etc. [Smotritsky 1619: 182]. However, this grammar was more focused on the translation of texts from ancient Greek (which contains participles of all times, including the future), rather than on living spoken language, for which it was criticized, in particular, by Yu. Krizhanich, who wrote in 1666 that “...single verbs do not have a present participle,” and “Smotritsky gives a lot of perverse words as an example” [Kpgats 1984: 144].
1 The study was supported by the Russian Humanitarian Foundation grant No. 09-04-00264a “Grammar of attributive secondary predications (relativization in the Russian language).”
In recent years, future participles have also attracted the attention of researchers more than once, however, all the articles and notes on them known to us are mainly aimed at resolving the issue of their status in literary Russian, see, for example, [Epstein 2000; Shapoval, manuscript]. We set ourselves the task of analyzing the use of future participles based on texts found on the Internet by the Google search engine (www.google.com), as well as assessing their acceptability based on an experiment with native speakers.
3. For the study, 100 frequency SV verbs were selected that had no morphonological “contraindications” to the formation of future participles, and the first important result can be considered that for some of these participles (losing, going out, writing, finding, opening, saying) Google finds more than a hundred uses, and the person who comes for the communion finds more than five hundred.
To resolve the issue of independence (independence of context) of future participles, we analyzed 312 cases of their use from different points of view. We tracked in which cases they are most often used, whether they are necessarily part of a participial phrase, how often they are found in pairs with participles of the same root (drunk and drinking, sang and singing), and compared the data obtained with the data for participles allowed by normative grammar.
The results speak in favor of the usefulness of the forms under consideration. For example, the case distributions of uses of future participles SV and past participles SV2 do not demonstrate statistically significant differences (p >> 0.10), i.e., from this point of view, future participles behave exactly the same as "full" past participles.
From the point of view of inclusion / non-inclusion in the turnover, between the participles of the future and past tense (for comparison, we analyzed 312 examples of past participles
2 The distribution for past participles was calculated for contexts found in the National Corpus of the Russian Language (www.ruscorpora.ru) in the subcorpus with removed grammatical homonymy.
SW time) quite significant differences are observed. Thus, in our materials we found only 13 sentences with single future participles (4.17%), while single past participles make up 30.13% of uses (94 examples). However, these differences, in our opinion, are quite understandable if we take into account the “repressed” status of future participles and their rarity in the Russian language: a fairly large proportion of the single past participles we examined are fully or partially adjectival participles, such as past (grown by 6% for the past year) or sunken (moves with sunken lips), and adjectivation, as is known, occurs as a result of prolonged use of a word and a gradual change in its meaning, see [Lopatin 1966: 47].
An important parameter allowing us to make an assumption
about the reasons for the appearance of future participles in speech is their position in the participial phrase: they are almost 6.5 times more likely than the past participles of the SV from our sample to occupy a non-initial position in the participial phrase (46.15% versus 7.34% for past participles).
It can be assumed that it is precisely these kinds of cases that are “extreme”, forcing the carrier to fill in a cell that is usually not filled in in the participle paradigm. Indeed, the most successful replacement for the phrase with the future participle in the Russian language, as we will show below, is the relative clause, see (1):
(1) Thus was born a form with its own personality and originality, a happy combination of functionality and aesthetics that will not lose its appeal for many years. (Google)
However, since in relative clauses the member expressed by the relative pronoun always (with the exception of some special cases associated with the “pied catcher effect”) moves to the left periphery, starting dependent predication with any phrasal category that does not dominate the allied word (adverbs of time, etc.) etc.), the speaker can no longer use the “allowed” way of expressing the required meaning and is forced to use a non-literary form, see (2):
(2) I remember at the time when I wrote this, I considered myself a Great Writer, sooner or later who would write / *who would write a work of genius... (Google)
The last assumption that could indicate the lack of independence of future participles was that they are used exclusively or predominantly in pairs with past participles, see (3), or present participles, see (4), formed from a verb of the same aspect couples:
(3) We present to your attention a catalog of literary works published or published under the label “Neue Partisanen”. (Google)
(4) Poland is generally a unique, eternally dying, but not dying phenomenon in world history. (Google)
However, although such uses occur, they account for only 3.8% (12 cases), which, of course, cannot serve as a strong argument in favor of the lack of independence of the forms in question.
However, realizing that the examples found on the Internet could well have been generated by people who do not speak Russian well, we considered it necessary to conduct an experiment with literate native speakers, which would allow us to assess the acceptability of future participles from the point of view of speakers.
4. For the experiment, we selected 8 sentences from those discussed earlier, diverse in terms of actional characteristics and the argument structure of the verb from which the participle is formed, the structure of the participle phrase, etc. For each of the examples, we selected unique “analogues”: two sentences, if possible, repeating all the above characteristics of the original, but differing from it in that in one, instead of a future participle, there was a past participle SV with the same taxic meaning, and in the other, a relative clause3.
All proposals included in the questionnaire were found by us in the NCRC or on the Internet using the Google system, some of them underwent minimal editing before being presented to the public.
Here is an example of such a trio of sentences:
(5) But without respect there is no love, do not believe women who say otherwise! (Google)
(6) And I tell you right away: the person who has declared his candidacy will need to undergo an interview.
(7) And I will gladly laugh in the face of anyone who reports the presence of corruption at Moscow State University or MIPT.
During the experiment, respondents4 were asked to rate proposals on a four-point scale from absolutely acceptable (3) to absolutely unacceptable (0). For each sentence, the average score was calculated based on the results of the experiment, which was subsequently used for comparison.
As expected, the future participles prohibited by the norm turned out to be the least acceptable of the three options (average score - 1.26), however, since, for one reason or another, the two grammar-allowed options did not score the maximum number of points (average score for past participles was 2.15, and according to the most acceptable option - relative clauses - 2.39), we can say that the assessment by speakers of future participles is 53% of the recorded maximum, which, of course, is not much, but not so much that it can be neglected .
5. Thus, although in the Russian language the actual participles of the future tense SV are prohibited by grammar, but, being allowed structurally, they periodically occur in texts (especially when replacement is impossible, i.e., first of all, in a non-initial position in the participial phrase) , demonstrate noticeable similarities in behavior with “full-fledged” participial forms and are not perceived as completely marginal by native speakers.
4 For the experiment, 20 people aged from 18 to 43 years old who had received or were receiving higher education were selected. Schoolchildren and people with a philological education were not allowed to participate (these two groups of people, as it seemed to us, could be guided in their assessments primarily not by a sense of language, but by knowledge of normative grammar that prohibits the forms being studied).
Literature
Vinogradov 1947 - V. V. Vinogradov. Russian language. Grammatical doctrine of words. M.: Uchpedgiz, 1947.
Lopatin 1966 - V.V. Lopatin. Adjectivation of participles in its relation to word formation II Questions of Linguistics 5, 1966. pp. 37-47.
Shvedova (ed.) 198G - N. Yu. Shvedova (ed.). Russian grammar. T. 1-2. M.: Nauka, 198G.
Smotritsky 1619 - M. Smotritsky. Slavonic grammar correct Syntagma. Evye, 1619. Reprint: Kiev, 1979.
Shapoval, manuscript - V.V. Shapoval. There's a prize for whoever draws the house! (Future participles in our speech). (http:IIwww.ruscenter.ruI 73G.html)
Epstein 2GGG - M. N. Epstein. Participles of the future tense (doing) II Projective Lexicon of Mikhail Epstein. Issue 17. 2GGG. (http:IIold.russ.ruIantologIintelnetIdar17.html)
Krizanic 1984 - J. Krizanic. Gramaticno izkazanje ob ruskom jeziku. Sabrana djela Jurja Krizanica. Knj. 2. Zagreb: Jugoslavenska akademija znanosti
Future participle in Russian.
Do we have future participles? Despite the prohibitions of academic and school grammar, they exist. “He who does, who can, who wishes, who sees, who reads...” Relation to the future is an important sign of the present. Future participles are organic to the Russian language, and only conservative linguistic morality prevents their use.
Looking into modern textbooks of the Russian language, we will find such firm formulations: “participles have forms of present and past tense, they do not have forms of future tense”; “unlike verbs, participles do not have a future tense”; "there is no future participle form."
In modern literary language, the forms of real participles are not used - -schy from verbs of the perfect form (with the meaning of the future tense), "he who decides to compose ", "trying to assure", "able to explain". (D. E. Rosenthal)
However, no convincing arguments are given against future participles. I will be grateful to grammarians who can explain why this cannot be said.
Perhaps this is the logic of the ban. The participle combines the properties of a verb and an adjective: the action performed by an object acts as a sign of this object. “Reader” is the person whose sign is the action “read”. You cannot define an object by what it does not do or has done, but only what it will do.
But this logic is extremely vulnerable, especially taking into account the fact that the Greek language, on the model of which the grammar of Old Slavic was largely created, has future participles. There are participles of the future tense in Sanskrit, and Latin, and in Esperanto, and in Ido, and in the language of the Avesta (beginning of the 1st millennium BC). Why can’t a future action serve as a sign of an object, since potential signs are just as important as actual ones? Culture, as a unity and interaction of times, cannot do without potential signs as determinants of the phenomena of the present. The very word "culture", Latin " culture" is the future participle of the verb colere, “cultivate”, “process”, “look after”, “take care”, “nurture”, “educate”.
We all carry the marks of our future, our possibilities. The fact that a student will read a book, even if only presumably, sets him apart from those who will not read it. The fact that a politician will fulfill his promises, even if only presumably, distinguishes him from those who will not fulfill them.
- Student, reader Vinogradov's entire textbook will easily pass the exam.
- Politician, performing what he promises will be able to count on the trust of the people in the next elections.
- Leader, again calling us into the bright future, will most likely turn out to be a new dictator.
- Soldier, first bringing news of the victory, he will be promoted to officer.
- Ecofascism is cruel but fair: to people breaking tree branch, your hand will be cut off.
- Brave man, capable defeat the dragon and receive a princess as a reward.
- Young woman, loving Such an experienced heartthrob is unlikely to be happy with him.
How to replace the future participle in these examples? They could only be replaced by qualifying subordinate clauses ("the brave man who can...", "the girl who will love..."), which add cumbersomeness to the speech. For that matter, then in general it is possible to remove subordinate clauses from use by replacing them with subordinate clauses. But if the language still needs subordinate clauses, then there is no reason to exclude future participles from them...
Comparison with Esperanto
Russian past participles can be of the perfect and imperfect forms: “come” - “the one who came” and “coming” - “the one who came”, while future participles can only be of the perfect form: “coming” - "he who will come"; there is no participle corresponding to the form “he who will come.” In Esperanto, such participles are freely formed:
| perfect view | imperfect species |
|---|---|
| past vr. veninta - who came | venadinta - who came |
| present vr. venanta - coming (now) | venadanta - coming (often) |
| bud.time venonta - coming (who will come) | venadonta - who will come) |
Examples
- Blessed coming in the name of the Lord! (Psalms, 117:26) (also Mat.21:9; Mark.11:9; Luke 19:38) (in previous translations - “the one who is coming”).
- God gave me a wonderful house in such a beautiful place that many rich people would envy, those who wish have one for relaxation. (Elder Paisios)
- ...How pitiful is a man who cannot hold back the power of light that has already visited him capable! (Saint Philaret of Moscow)
- But in many places folklore is no longer preserved; unless he ended up in the non-moving departments of a museum and only by chance a musician or writer stumbles upon him, willing bring these parchments and scrolls to life. (Nikolai
- an unconjugated verbal form expressing a characteristic of a person or object that arises as a result of an action: comrade(Which?), arrived from Moscow(comrade who came from Moscow);
book(which?), read by me(the book I read).
The participle combines the grammatical features of a verb and an adjective. In it, as in the verb, the difference is , ; The participle controls the same case as the verb; the same adverbs can be attached to the participle as to the verb. But at the same time, the participle is declined and agrees with the noun in gender, number and case, like an adjective.
Participles are divided into valid And present and past passives. There is no future participle tense.
Active participles
Active participles denote a characteristic of a person or object that arises as a result of the actions of that person or object: reading student book, standing there is a table in the room.
Active participles are formed from transitive and intransitive verbs and retain the control characteristic of the verb; active participles of reflexive verbs retain the particle (meeting, met, met).
Formation of active participles
Active present participles are formed only from imperfective verbs by adding the present tense to the stem (for the first conjugation) or -ash-/-box-
push-ut - push-ushch-y (writing, writing, writing),
know - knowing (knowing, knowing, knowing),
knock-at - knock-ash-y (knocking, knocking, knocking),
pageó -yat - pageó -box (pageó building, building, building).
Active past participles formed from imperfective and perfective verbs by adding a suffix to the past tense stem -vsh-(after a vowel) or -sh-(after a consonant) plus generic endings of the adjective: wrote(nonsov.) - pisa-vsh-y, wrote-l(owl) - writing, carried(nonsov.) - brought it, brought it(owl) - brought it.
Passive participles
Passive participles denote a sign of a person or object undergoing some action: book, read comrade(a book that a friend read); house, built workers(the house that the workers built). Passive participles are formed only from transitive verbs.
Formation of passive participles
Passive present participles formed from imperfective verbs by adding a suffix to the present tense stem -eat-(for the first conjugation) or -them-(for the second conjugation) plus generic endings of the adjective:
read - read-e-th (readable, readable, readable),
vúd-im - vúd-im-y (visible, visible, visible).
Many imperfective transitive verbs do not form passive present participles (for example, from protect, beat, shave, bend, heat, hold, fry, measure, wash, crush, drink, heat, clean, sew and so on.).
Passive past participles are formed from transitive verbs of the imperfect and perfect forms by adding suffixes to the past tense stem -nn- , -enn- , -T- plus generic endings of the adjective: read-l - chúta-nn-y, brought - brought-y, closed-l - closed.
Suffix -nn- joins past tense stems ending in a vowel and I, Sometimes e:sow-l - sow-nn-y, uvúde-l - uvúde-nn-y.
Suffix -enn- (or -yonn- ) is added to stems ending in a consonant (see example above) or vowel And , which drops out (in this case, an alternation of the final consonants of the base occurs, similar to the alternations in the formation of the 1st line of the present or future simple tense): purchased - purchased(cf. I'll buy), asked - asked(cf. I'll ask).
Suffix -T- joins the stems of verbs ending in the indefinite form with -no, -no, -here , and to monosyllabic stems (the prefix is not taken into account): took it out(from take out) - take it out,number(from prick) - colo-th, wiped(from wipe off) — wiped it, bi-l(from beat) — bú-t-y(similar to: nailed down, broken).
The most common are the passive past participles of perfective verbs.
Declension of participles
Participles are inflected like full adjectives: real participles are inflected like adjectives with stems on sch, sh(For example, general, good), passive participles - modeled on adjectives with a base on a hard consonant (for example, new): reading, reading it... reading, reading it..., hú tann-y, hú Tann-oh etc.
Passive participles of the present and past tenses have a short form, which is formed similarly to the short form of adjectives: masculine - without ending, feminine - with ending -A
, neuter - with ending -O
, plural - with ending -s
(for all genera): from darling - love, darling, darling, darlings; from brought - brought, brought. brought, brought.
In a sentence, short participles, like short adjectives, are used as a predicate (in combination with or without an auxiliary verb): Shop closed; Window was closed;
Books will be purchased
.
- ← Communion →
