Modelling of the analytical development of the Gothic future tense form

Аннотация. Целью данного исследования является создание модели, демонстрирующей развитие форм будущего времени в готском языке. Начальной стадией моделирования развития будущего времени является описание составляющих согласно их базовым признакам. Это дает возможность проследить процесс постепенной аналитизации соответствующих грамматических форм и осуществить поиск скрытых признаков, характерных для дифференцированных грамматических форм, которые создают и выстраивают систему германских будущих времён. Предметом исследования являются особенности и механизмы формирования темпоральных глагольных форм, проецирующих действие в будущее. Для описания будущего действия готский язык использовал формы настоящего времени, вовлекая фразовый или надфразовый контекст. В пределах форм настоящего времени была выделена префиксальная модель. Греческое будущее время переводилась в готских текстах с использованием префиксальной модели и форм настоящего времени. Будущее время передавалась с помощью готского желательного наклонения (оптатива). Формы настоящего времени приобретали значение будущего времени под влиянием видовременной спецификации, которая определялась как обобщающий футурализирующий фактор. Функции футурализирующего фактора (а фактически, видовременной спецификации) могут реализоваться во фразовом или надфразовом контекстах и соответствующих синтаксических структурах с чётко очерченный семантикой. Выделенные конструкции для обозначения настоящего времени формируют первичный основной стержень, который служит фундаментом для дальнейшего развития городских форм, обозначающий будущее время. Готские аналитические структуры на основе причастия или инфинитива были сформированы путём вовлечения инхоативных, сильных и претерито-презентных глаголов. Эти структуры определяются как составные глагольные сказуемые. Аналитические конструкции покрывают, охватывают основной стержень, формируя как социальные цилиндры. В общем плане модель может быть определена как дивергентно-ротационная. Представляя формы готского будущего времени, сама модель "движется" вдоль временной оси. Многоуровневая структура модели демонстрирует тот факт, что аналитические формы меняются в поле притяжения стержня. Сравнение компонентов дивергентно-ротационный модели и особенности их развития указывают на каузальный характер трансформации форм будущего времени в готском языке. Тенденции, обнаруженные и квалифицированные как инициальные, исходные, первичные в готском языке происходят в процессе развития древнегерманских языков. Эти же тенденции прослеживаются в современных германских языках.

Ключевые слова: аналитическая форма, видо-временная особенность, инхоативный глагол, претерито-презентный глагол, сильный глагол, синтетическая форма, футурализирующий фактор.

Информация об авторах:

Боцман Андрей Васильевич - кандидат филологических наук, кандидат химических наук, доцент; доцент кафедры английской филологии и межкультурной коммуникации; Учебно-научный институт филологии; Киевский национальный университет имени Тараса Шевченко.

Дмитрук Ольга Викторовна - кандидат филологических наук, доцент; доцент кафедры английской филологии и межкультурной коммуникации; Учебно-научный институт филологии; Киевский национальный университет имени Тараса Шевченко.

Бондаренко Валерия Валериевна - кандидат филологических наук, доцент; доцент кафедры английской филологии и межкультурной коммуникации; Учебно-научный институт филологии; Киевский национальный университет имени Тараса Шевченко.

The creation of the model which demonstrates the development of the Future tense forms within the cognate Germanic languages enables to find out the status and functional semantic specificity of the constituents distinguished, and peculiarities of their interaction and substitution. It demonstrates the necessity of differentiating, describing, classifying the components according to their constituent features. This action may be recognized as the primary, initial stage of modelling the future tense development. The main benefit of the model creation is the possibility of tracing, outlining, the appropriateness of external and internal aspects, which may be found in the diachronic comparison of the Germanic languages against the background of gradual analytization of corresponding grammatical forms.

The aim of the research is to describe the process of modelling, which caused the formation of different analytical form variants for representing Germanic future tense. The objective of this investigation is to find out latent features, which are characteristic of differentiated grammatical forms creating and building up the corpus of Germanic future tenses. The topicality of the research is connected with the fact that the investigation is not focused on the reconstruction of "archetype system", however, there is an attempt to reconstruct the order of stages connected with the formation of structures representing future tenses. The novelty of the present study is the attempt to restore the process order of forming the structures for future tense representation. Analytical forms demonstrate features of anaplasia and the whole process of the future form development looks caudal. The object of the investigation is a set of facts of the Gothic language compared with the corresponding Greek language patterns. This comparison helps to single out initial grammatical forms used for representing Germanic (Gothic) future, understand their functional stress and distinguish the most productive patterns. The subject of the investigation is the peculiarities, formation mechanism of temporal verb forms for projecting the action into the future and inner cooperation of the specified structures.

Publication analysis. The research of the Germanic languages is carried out comparing the East, West and Northern areas. It is believed that some isoglosses unite the Goths with the Scandinavians according to their character of genetic resemblance, other more numerous glosses unite the old Scandinavian dialects (except Gothic) with the West Germanic dialects. This common character appeared because of contacts between Scandinavian and West Germanic tribes. These contacts were possible using narrow channels and islands of the Jutland archipelago (it happened later when the Goths left that area and the Angles and Saxons did not leave for Britain, between I and V cent. A.D. [1, p. 430]). The attempt at reconstructing the peculiarities of Germanic future tense development (as any grammatical phenomena) should take into consideration the fact that any grammatical description, synchronic or diachronic, will be incomplete or one-sided if it is restructured with frames of classical lexical patterns involving flexion as it was in the XIX and at the very beginning of XX century. The investigation will be incomplete of the paradigmatic patterns grasp only analytical forms. Only the comprehensive and detailed selection of all completely or partly grammaticalized complex forms that exist in the language and observed in its development enable us to give complete and exhaustive notion about the language system as a dynamic and changeable formation.

The analytical construction development in the language is a movable and flexible process, which needs stage analysis and investigation in the diachronic and synchronic development. From the linguistic point of view, it means the refusal from separate and segregated investigation into synchronic and diachronic aspects. The language should be studied as a movable system which constantly changes in its separate parts and the whole. Dynamic approach indicates different levels of grammaticalization in analytical constructions. It calls for special attention to the intermediate forms which reflect the dynamic specificity of language in its development [8, p. 14].

Aspect-tense system of the Old Germanic languages is represented only with grammatical category of tense, where there is the opposition past tense :: present tense (preterite :: praesent). From the typological point of view this elementary system is in opposition to the developed systems of the modern Germanic languages with their new analytical verb forms. It constitutes the biggest part of flexion forms [2, p. 20-21].

According to the common and general tradition the initial stage, which needs no further explanation, of the Germanic aspect-tense system is the stage which is reflected in the oldest Germanic languages, first of all the Gothic language. Within the limited chronological frames of research all the changes that occurred in the Germanic aspect-tense system are represented as a one-way process with broadening and complication of morphological opposition. It to emphasize that this process occurs under the conditions of relative stability of the old type of word-forming markers which were involved in the aspect-tense system [5, p. 146-147]. Analytical formulas (if we compare the diachronic mutual relations of case forms and prepositional phrases) are involved into the paradigm [2, p. 22]. That is why researchers' attention is focused on the semantic structure of the inherited system. It is the sphere where researchers should find out common for the Germanic languages' morphological evolution conditions, which caused the parallel development of basic lines [6, p. 231].

Elements, which are used more regularly, such as Gothic compositions, correlate with simple verb forms not only involving direct simple positional contacts. It is not the task of a researcher to try to understand systemic non-obligation of using the peripheral element as arbitrariness of simple and marked form divisions in texts. There was an attempt to formulate rules about the usage of ga-composita and simplicia in different syntactical context [10, p. 30]. When the language has elements containing aspect-tense feature, it causes the narrowing of the simple form sphere usage. All that indicates the potential possibilities of fixing the morphological opposition [2, p. 29]. All the facts mentioned above should be taken into consideration when the model of the Germanic future tense is built up.

The main point which is worth mentioning is the fact that tense forms of the Greek and Gothic languages don't coincide when the Gospel texts are compared. There is a complex system of different correlations. There was a conventional correlation when every correlative unit obtained known principal meaning (dominant meaning), but the same meaning occurred in other competitive forms. All these correlations looked very unstable and fragile [9, p. 168]. Difficulties of comparison are connected with the fact that within all Germanic languages the Gothic language had the least developed system of tenses except separate individual and very specific cases. There were no tendencies of translation to the precise tense indication as it occurred in the manuscripts of Old High German, Old Saxon and Anglo-Saxon [7, p. 120].

Main information presentation. In order to represent the future action, the Gothic language used forms of the present tense (Vpraes. ind.). The concretization of the future meaning of these present forms was provided involving phrase on upper-phrase context. That context contained either specific lexico-semantic indicators or indirect indicators - indications of aspect-tense process peculiarities: in pizai ustassai, pan ussatandand harjamma ize w airpip qens? (Mk. XII, 23)" in the resurrection therefore whose wife shall she be?" Within the present tense forms there is a prefixal word formation model ga + Vpraes. Verbs belonging to that model are identified according to W. Streitberg's ideas as go-composita [6, p. 41], and that prefixal structure is used for the Greek future tense representation in the Gothic language: ik qimands gahailjai ina (M. VIII, 7) "[and said to him,]" I shall come and heal him." Qipanu izwis patei gedaupnip in frawaurhtim iz waraim (J. VIII, 24) "I said therefore to you, that you shall die in your sins." qipandan ina, patei ik gataira alh po handuwaurhton (Mk. XIV, 58) "Him say, "I shall destroy this temple made with hands." ip gaggip swinpoza mis, pizei ik ni im wairps and bindan skaudaraip skohis is; sah izwis daupeip in ahmin weihamma jah funin habands winpiskauron, in handau seinai jah gahra ieip gaprask sein jah briggip (simplex tantum) kurn in bansta seinamme (L. III, 16-17) "One is coming who is mightier than I, and I am not fit to untie the thong of His sandals; He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire. And His winnowing fork in His hand to thoroughly clear His threshing floor, and to gather the wheat into His barn." Simple forms gahraineips are recognized as imperfect, but their temporal correlation may be different. It may coincide (daupeip) or not coincide (im, gaggip) with ga-composita correspondence. The Greek future tense may be translated involving ga-composita and present form (Vpraes) simultaneously (ga-Vpraes = Vpraes): saei bigitip saiwaa, seina, fraqisteip izai (M. X, 39) "He who has found his life shall lose it." This correlation may be fixed in the equation ga + Vpraes = Vpraes ind. It is necessary to take into consideration that Gothic verb lexical meaning proper (its "aspectual distinction semantics") is weakly differentiated and lacks the ability to limit the aspect-tense correlation of verb forms.

In the Gothic language there is an opposition between two classes of verbs: non-conclusive class and neutral class not indicating the non-conclusiveness. There are no durative verbs here. All hon- conclusive verbs may describe processes represented with the context devices as continuous without approaching their aim, goal (in particular, simultaneously to the moment of speaking [2, p. 30]: sai qimifr h/eila jah nu qam, ei distahjada h/arjizuh duseinaim (J. XVI, 32) "Behold, an hour is coming, and has already come, for you to be scattered, each to his own home." The word building model ga + Vpraes is the leading structure among aspect-tense elements. Correlation ga-composita/simplicia (ga + Vpraes / Vpraes ind) grasps the biggest portion of verb corpus (244 verbs with preverb gain 2516 usage cases. It promotes the preverb semantic differentiation and testifies to the existence of general grammatical meaning. Structures ga-composita are known not to be qualified as special forms of verb paradigm [11, p. 205]. Their paradigmatic status contradicts two facts. The first one is connected with the verbs which don't correlate to ga-composita. The second one demonstrates the dependence of that upon the meaning of lexical groups including simple verbs (simplicia) [4, p. 217].

The Gothic optative synthetic structure (Vopt praes) has the same grammatical meaning as analytical structures in other Germanic languages. These analytical structures are discrete morphemes spanning modal (preterite-present) verbs and verbals. They may be used in contrast with the present tense forms of the Indicative mood (Vpraes ind): ik im Gabriel sa standands in andwaitfrja gudis... jah sai sija is frahands jah ni magands rodjan (L. I, 19--20) "I am Gabriel, who stands in the presence of God;. and behold, you shall be silent and unnable to speak... " There are cases of contrast using the synthetic structures with the form of participle I (Vp) which indicates the action simultaneous to the moment of speech: appan sa drobjands izwis sa bairai po wargipa (Gal. V, 10) "but the one who is disturbing you shall bear his judgment."

The Gothic future action is represented by three synthetic present forms: Vpraes ind, ga-Vpraes, Vopt praes. Present tense forms gain future meaning under the influence of apect-tense specificity. In this case it is recognized as a futurelizing factor. Functions of the aspect-tense specificity may be performed with phrase or upper-phrase context and syntactical structures with definitely represented semantics. At first it is seen in the Adverbial Subordinate Clauses of time / condition where the verb-predicate having future meaning is used in the present tense form: ik skal waurkjan waurstwa... unte dags is (J. IX, 4) "I shall work as long as it is day." jah jabai qepjau patei ni kunnjau ina, sijau galeiks izwis liugnja (J. VIII, 55) "and if I say that I do not know Him, I shall be a liar like you." The same phenomenon occurs in the Adverbial Clauses of place: padei ik gagga, jus ni magup quiman (J. VIII, 21): "where I am going, you cannot come."

Stability and constancy of using the present forms with explicit future meaning in the Adverbial Clauses of condition is confirmed by the Modern West Germanic and North Germanic languages where this specific usage may be observed till now. It confirms the fact of the aspect-tense specificity influence on the tense form of the verbpredicate till how. The semantic influence of the Adverbial Subordinate Clauses is enough for representing future meaning, therefore the present form remains unchangeable.

Distinguished present tense constructions create a primary pivot which is a basis for further development of Germanic future tense forms (Fig. 1). This pivot is formed along the temporal axis and consists of three basic segments Vpraes ind, ga-Vpraes, Vopt praes, all three are closely connected with one another creating stable thorough structure. Pivotal forms show certain resistance to the usage of analytical forms in Adverbial Clauses of Condition and Time. Reciprocity and correlation of the three identified components enable the formation of that monolithic pivotal construction which may be characterized as futuralistic synthetical present.

The use of the Gothic mediopassive (which was only in the present form [3, p. 195]) for representing Greek future tense may be observed from two different points of view. From the first point of view Gothic mediopassive may be recognized as broadening the synthetic form devices (synthetic forms include Vpraes, Vopt). From the opposite point of view the mediopassive usage for future action description may be recognized as the first step to the gradual transition from synthetical to analytical forms. It is explained by the fact that in order to represent the passive meaning the Gothic language had synthetic mediopassive and periphrastic constructions: ip afar patei atgibans warp Johannes = Мета дє тд парада vqvi Imavvqv (Mk. I, 14) "and after John had been taken into custody." daupips was = 'EfanTiavq (Mk. 1, 9) "andwas baptized."

The use of the opposition Vactive / Vmediopassive is very demonstrative to the preference of Vmediopassive when the future meaning is described: jah ni stojid, eini stojandau, ni afdomjaid, jah ni afdomjanda, fraletaid, jah fraletanda (L. VI, 37) "and do not judge and you will not be judged; and do not condemn, and you will not be condemned; pardon, and you will be pardoned. " Sense structure of mediopassive having the future tense projection gains clear outline when the doer is mentioned: saei ubil qipai attin seinamma aippau aipein seinal, daupau afdaupjaidau (Mk. VII, 10) "He who speaks evil of father or mother, let him be put to death." The same sense structure occurs in the context without naming the doer: gibaid, jah gibada izwis (L. VI, 38) "Give, and it will be given to you." ip atgaggand dagos, pan afnimada af im sa brupfaps (M. IX, 15) "But the days will come when the bridegroom is taken away from them, and then they will fast." all bagme ni taujandane akran god usmaitada jah in fon altagjada (M. VII, 19) "every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire." This fact shows that the Gothic present tense is a colony forming unit. The outline of that unit broadens because there are two constituents involved, the first is the present tense, active voice form and the second is mediopassive. The present form boundaries broaden as the pluripotential (temporal) precursor [3 p. 64], because the mediopassive involvement means its usage for representing present and future tense.

In the case of opposition Vpraes / Vmediopas, the last form is preferable for rendering Greek future tense. As Gothic mediopassive is a synthetic form, it gravitates towards the structure of synthetic pivot, but Vmediopas is not the segment pivotal constituent, it creates cylindrical cover over the pivot. This cylindrical cover is not complete solid, but discrete, "semi-transparent" (Fig. 1). In a very formal way, it demonstrates the belonging of Vmediopas to the synthetic forms; but simultaneously underlines its indefiniteness, approximateness for rendering the future tense meaning. This indefinite position in the formal structure underlines the fact of the equivalent analytical form existence for rendering passive and future meaning. Among all Germanic languages Gothic had the biggest number of forms for representing subject inactivity (latent passive). These forms include mediopassive (Vpraes mediopas), which was only in the present tense, verbs of the IV class that competed with particular constructions in representing future meaning [9, p. 224]. It explains the very rare usage of participial constructions with the present form of wairpan. Those constructions had very definite future projection wairpan + Vp: jah wairpand allai laisidai gudis (J. VI, 45) "and they shall be taught of God." This analytical structure may be recognized as a combined element. It has separate features of perfect and duration. The common meaning of the construction is inchoative, it indicates the intersection of the initial point of the durative process-state.

Combinations of present form wairpan + Vp are synonymous to combinations duginnan + Vinf, in the formal way it is shown as wairpan + Vp. = duginnan + Vinf: saurgandans wairpip (J. XVI, 20) "you will weep and lament." faginon duginna (Ph. I, 18) "and I will rejoice." It testifies to the fact that this lexical syntactical mode as a certain type of the compound predicate gains some polyfunction. This polyfunction is revealed in the passive meaning (the subject's inactivity is indicated) that approximates the model to the Gothic mediopassive (duginnan + Vinf. =^Vpraes mediopas). Both structures belong to the elements with future action indication. Comparing all the data and adding structural elements on the pivotal model makes visible the of the unit wairfran + Vp, which indicates the Gothic future action. This unit cannot belong to the pivot (where Vpraes ind, ga- Vpraes, Vopt praes occur) or gain the position of Vpraes mediopas. This unit belongs to the analytical form and cannot be connected with the synthetic pivot. Units with analytical forms cover the pivot creating coaxial cylinders. The unit wairfran + Vp creates which is a coaxial cylinder next to the pivot, which is covered with the "semi-transparent" cylindrical cover Vpraes mediopas. These two units having different structural nature have common passive meaning. Analyzing these two units with some approximation and conditional character, it is possible to notice a subtle transition of future elements from synthetic form Vpraes mediopas to the prototype of perspective analytical forms wairfran + Vp. The latter form has the synonymic combination duginnan + Vinf, approaching it to the inchoative structures.

Analytical structure formed with the infinitive and phase (inchoative) verb (duginnan + Vinf) occurs only two times and in the contrast position: wai izwis, jus hlahjandans nu, unte gaunon jah gretan duginnid (L.VI, 25) "Woe unto you that laugh now! for ye shall mourn and weep," compare also (Ph. I, 19). Incoherence of future tense elements along with minor importance of their tense function are seen in their ability of combining. The final meaning of a combined element (as in other cases wairfran + Vp) is summarized from the meaning of elements, which are involved into the analytical form. It is noticeable in the comparison of the models use ga- Vpraes + Vopt in the position of contrast with the simple element Vopt: jah jabai sijai jainar sunnus gawairfrijfr, gaheilaifr sik ana imma gawairfri izwar (L. X, 6) "and if a man of peace is there, your peace will rest upon him." Similar meaning is rendered with the combination wairfran + Vopt (L. I, 20).

Against the background of instability there is an intermediate structure, which may be qualified as a transitional element between synthetical and analytical temporal forms. The germs of that transition are seen in the Gothic mediopassive, which was an isolated synthetical form and was sporadically used for indicating future action. Taking into consideration the fact that the Gothic mediopassive did not have any corresponding synthetical reflection in other Old Germanic languages, this transitional connection is very subtle and conventional. The identified primary forms of analytical passive of the Old Germanic languages were sporadically used to represent future meaning. It is possible to speak about the semantic approximation of the Gothic mediopassive, but the structural unity (from one point synthetical, from the opposite point analytical) is out of consideration.

Returning to the pivotal model, it is possible to represent the structure with the inchoative verb as a coaxial cylinder that has the combination duginna + Vinf (Fig. 1). As the units wairfran + Vp and duginna + Vinf have semantic resemblance, the distance between their formal coaxial cylinders (their sides) should be minimal. Analytical forms, which were created involving infinitive and strong or preterite-present verbs (Vstrong + Vinf; Vpraet praes + Vinf; haba+ Vinf; skal + Vinf), are rare and their meaning is indicated to Vopt praes. Maybe, these analytical forms are more expressive. In three cases out of six ones (all of them correspond to the Greek future tense) temporal contrast of processes (which are indicated with the word combination and non-marked tense form) is underlined with the similarity of both verbs haba = skal: fratei jah rodja du izwis, manag skal bi izwis rodjah jah stojan (J.VIII, 25) "what have I been saying to you from the beginning I have many things to speak and judge concerning you." The same example with haban is in (th. II, 4). The following example demonstrates the parallel usage of analytical structure haban + Vinf, with synthetical structure Vopt: jah fra re i im ik, fraruh sa andbahts meins wisan habaifr; jah jabai has mis andbahtheifr swerjaifr ina atta (J. XII, 26) "and where I am, there shall My servant also be; if anyone serves Me, the Father will honor him."

gothic language temporal verb forms future