English
n other respects the Colloquial constructions are mu* h like the Examples : or / did not tenon' that ht had marrtei When h had ( /ant. (/) Future. The Literary construction of this tense is either with the plain Future Root (if any) of the verb, or with the Present Infinitive in the Terminative case combined with the auxiliary verbs become, or be ; g*-T To become or do : and S^T, or 3' To come. The construction with g'^* is Intensive. There is also another con¬ struction with the Present or Future Root combined with and the auxiliary verb To be. This carries the meaning I am to, or / have to. All these constructions, save the last, are used with all persons. Examples : 1 1 | ^ / shall send thee the book 282 TIBETAN GRAMMAR. c^Hrs-^g^’or^c-q^-SJc-1 ] w^e}-*^-gY s r e T5c-B > c-1 J \ I shall send thee the book . >0 Cx / am (or have) to send thee the book. Thou art {or hast) to send me the book. He is (or hath ) to send thee the _ book. In the Colloquial the Simple Future is formed either with Sjc (for all persons) annexed to the Perfect Root (or probably more correctly to tbe Future Root), or with the Present Root combined with the Present Indicative of f%5T To he. the link between them being ^ ’ 5 ’ ° r 3 acoord,n F to rule with reference to the last letter of tbe Root. KSAMPLES:- / shall send thee the book. Thou init send me the book. He will send thee the book. t^r=rpc=T| - ;£te j B , v5*r q ?£*r*S I p-rqpc-g-^ | I shall send. Thou wilt sentl. He tedl send. Ihe other Future tenses, as known to Tibetan, are onlv found in connection with the Subjunctive and Conditional Moods. The first is similar to the Perfect tense. Thus :_ 'O pvrqSC-q-5^-, or Q^J I WO u Id send. Thou would d send He would send. TIBETAN GRAMM AH 2X3 However, with this the Simple Future may also be used. The second is formed with the Perfect Participle combined with the Indicative Present of Thus: — I would have sent. or •V^l NO Thou wouldst have sent. or qtjCq'a^*, n3 He would have sent. or 1 Or even thus:— csr -v / would have sent. Thou wouldst have sent He would have sent. „ k- or a*\=n’ i IS 8 ^ [ 1 ^ „ \ or qc'1 ( pjST J 3 ^ .V.B.—The Future Hoot is seldom used in the Colloquial, unless, in the case of verbs like ^RZ'q'j it really lurks in the sound of ^ as said to be sometimes used in the Future tense, and in the Participles, etc. Even in Literary Tibetan it is not met with verv much. G.—Subjunctive or ('audit tonal. When the sentence consists of a conditional clause dependent upon a preceding hypothetical ctause in the Present IVuse wi th //, or alone, the cond tional clause take-i the Indefinite Future in Literary orC olh quial ^IZ for all persons. In this Literary and •VP Colloquial Tibetan are the same. Examples :— ira* cm- Z' op EJ|S$r <3j* CQ/ Stc W If t/t lore me ye will ket /> my com tna ndments. 284 TIBETAN GRAMMAR, (or If thou askest him he will give, ) i When the preceding clause is in the Past Tense, and the eon- ditionai clause signifies /, Thou , lie, etc., would ... this last clause, both in Literary and Colloquial Tibetan, takes the Perfect Participle, com- % biued with ’C]’ in the Present Indicative, which, it will he reraem- bered, is not quite the same in the two languages. Thus, in Literary Tibetan ;■— CPt’ If ye knew me ye would know my '3 ' > 'd' 1 Father also. (John xvi. 7.) ysiq-njc-c^ or C^\R\ | cv -v —- II ue loved me ue would rejoice |B^5rC-qiS*rq*,-qaC-3j | (ie ./ >e glad.) (John xiv. 28.) This construction may also apparently be used when the condi¬ tional clause signifies Would hove,, .d, o-g. -£| ^ Would not have died (John xi 21); Would not have crucified, (1 Cor. ii. 8) ; but the construction in t,to which we shall come presently) is better. The Colloquial is much the same as the above. Examples : ^c^^rera^* or 'O Or, for all persons :— If you knew me you would also know wy Father, I would kru w. rfgtfe.m-q,OT, or T hall I could s know O or Q^l He would know * TIBETAN ORAM MAR. *JH5 But, when tlu* preceding clause is in the Past Tense, and the conditional clause signifies Would hare. . . .d, then, both in Literary and Colloquial Tibetan, this last clause ought to be constructed with the Perfect Participle combined with the appropriate forms of in the Present Indicative. Thus, in Literary Tibetan } ■rr If it trere not so, / would nav> told you. (John xiv. -.) I would have told . or Offf, or Thou uouldst hare told Ur would have told. The Colloquial construction is similar Exampi.es : W5^ ,y s ,a i ,a f C9 r|3 "\ 1 or or Wl I csrpynr 5^r y gySjcsr cr \ Were it not so / ivould hare told you . msf or etc, l If I had asked you y would you l have come ? or *r<V^=n* i or tfK-q'ST^* or etc. \ He would not hare asked me. //,— Potential. In the Colloquial this ts formed by adding the auxiliary Sp’CT To he able t properly conjugated, to tin* Present Boot of the \* ib it governs. Thus: — O 28 fi TIBETAN GRAMMAR. Present. ( C3T) (for all persons). ] Or : )</> Can send. ( (for all persons), j Or - csrq^r^q-'Tj'y^ | / ran send. Thau canst sewi psr^C'5jq or Q \^ q r or He can send . ^ I Past. (CSTv I ( for a11 P er " >* sons). Or :—- (/) could send. / could send . B^' £ TfF^' c r e VS q |' or ^*n Thou couldst send. or wi >o E r V3 5 >' = TT c 'S s, ^ q ll He could send . psr^C’^q-q-y^-or O^ay ^ -o nr 35^-q* | I or (for all persons). } or I could have sent. Thou couldst have sent He eoukl have sent The Literary construction with £|q*q* is as follows :_ Present. c.*r * v FZ’%T J r / CO H Thou canst y se , u/ H e ca n TIBETAN GRAMMAR. 2 X 7 Past. zsr | I could =rjs^q*5z : z-1 Thou cotildst > se jSezSjsr | He could > Or :— I could send. *o Thou couldst end. pz ■ qprqj^z-^q -q'tS^ 1 He could send 1 _ | * I could have s ent. (And so on as in the Colloquial.) But the Literary construction may also be with the auxiliary To be able, which, unlike governs th^ Infinitive put in the _ _ > '■S’ Terminative case. Thus : — Present. (And so throughout.) Past. I can send, I could send. Thou could st S' n d or S^\S | pr'^M'^-z-q-'^rq'W'X 7 V or Q^Ej|*=f[’ or 3fc*q*cqa:'T| He could send. I rou hi ha ve sept. Thou couIdst have st nt. \ II e could have sent. 288 TIIiKTAN GRAMMAR. Xjj _it, i s important to remember that both in Literary Tibetan and the Colloquial, is annexed to the Root of the verb it governs. /.— Probability, etc. Phrases expressive of the likelihood or possibility of doing any thing are. in Literary Tibetan, rendered by means of the auxiliary verb Jfc’CJ* To be possible, or by the expression Who knmos? —Jlfay be. Bxamrlks C^rcrpc:* (or even ( or ( or I <o or 3k*l^| WETj^c-g^-wT^'i or | The auxiliary Q^s^'CJ’ To be Infinitive, put in the Terminative I may go ; perhaps , possibly , prob¬ ably 1 shall go. I may send. Thou mayest sen/I. He may send. t / m ight se nd. Thou mightest send. He might send. / might have sent. Thou mightest have sent. He might have sent. combined with the Root or the case, also conveys the idea of probiddl>t v of likelihood. Thus TIBETAN GRAMMAR. 289 SJ gsj-crwqprg^^oi I Thin man is probably going. 2 shall jrrobably have to give it. That bottle is likely to crack. aries In the Colloquial or Perhaps } or the Cv Cv -s~ ^ or may be used instead of g^*q| auxili — N.B .— is sometimes written Q^^TJ" Which of these two is the more correct form is somewhat uncertain. Examples :— Sj-^rc^qpi, or Wl / may go, or be going. Probably thou wilt go. It is likely he will go. Perhaps I shall go. (And so on, as above.) CCQcjj 7 5yuk'q’ 0^’ 5 or | / may be going. (And so throughout.) or 1 1 might be going. (And so throughout.) or ug~0] 1 / might have been going. (And so throughout.) might go. ri|5CTj*q^*8j'jg^*?fc’Cra N Cv c I|’ J or | Thou mightest go. ■O ° r < w*ii He might go. I might have gone. 37 200 TIBETAN GRAMMAB. ^tqj-g^-pStCqvj'V, or (Wf or Stf^-sr^] Thou mightest have gone. He might have gone. J. — Hortative. In the Colloquial thiB is rendered by or vulgarly To need , To be nectary, To be obliged or compelled ; also where we use Must, Ought, Should, Have to. Like To be able , it is annexed to the Root, not to the Infinitive, and is used with or without the auxiliaries and <S}afCT With this verb the subject should be put in the Nominative or Dative (not the Agentive) case. Examples :— ^•co^Srpr, or ^Sf&rS^i or 3^1 or ^PT 3^1 Now I must start. I have to send him the book . I had to send him the book. I shall have to send him the book. / want to go to Darjeeling. You ought to come with me. In Literary Tibetan the construction for all persons is in not added to the Root, but to the Infinitive put in the Tenninative case. Thus :— j^'^£}orq*;^Sjsr§ j He must increase but J must decrease. (John iii. 30). There ib, however, another construction for all persons in J or (Future Root of 3V*r ), added to the Infinitive in the Terminative case, or to the Root, but sometimes used by itself. TIBETAN GRAMMAR, 291 Examples :— qar er erar g-q-g*^ ^'3^1 ■$rqir*q-fpl5rS | ^3 £ T wv^’g^r I Vol 3f leaf 174). (Dulva, Vol. 5, Leaf 30). Let ns not (i.e. tee should, ought, must not) be weary in well-dot ng (Gal. vi. 9).