ON TENSES IN GENERAL.
§ 293. The nature of tenses in general is best exhibited by reference to
the Greek; since in that language they are more numerous, and more strongly
marked than elsewhere.
_I strike_, _I struck_.--Of these words, the first implies an action taking
place at the time of speaking, the second marks an action that has already
taken place.
These two notions of present and of past time, being expressed by a change
of form, are true tenses. If there were no change of form, there would be
no change of tense. They are the only true tenses in our language. In _I
was beating_, _I have beaten_, _I had beaten_, and _I shall beat_, a
difference of time is expressed; but as it is expressed by _a combination
of words_, and not _by a change of form_, no true tenses are constituted.
§ 294. In Greek the case is different. [Greek: Tuptô] (typtô) = _I beat_;
[Greek: etupton] (etypton) = _I was beating_; [Greek: tupsô] (typsô) = _I
shall beat_; [Greek: etupsa] (etypsa) = _I beat_; [Greek: tetupha] (tetyfa)
= _I have beaten_; [Greek: etetuphein] (etetyfein) = _I had beaten_. In
these words we have, of the same mood, the same voice, and the same
conjugation, six different tenses; whereas, in English, there are but two.
The forms [Greek: tetupha] and [Greek: etupsa] are so strongly marked, that
we recognise them wheresoever they occur. The first is formed by a
reduplication of the initial [tau], and, consequently, may be called the
reduplicate form. As a tense it is called the perfect. In the form [Greek:
etupsa] an [epsilon] is prefixed, and an [sigma] is added. In the allied
language of Italy the [epsilon] disappears, whilst the [sigma] (s) remains.
[Greek: Etupsa] is said to be an aorist tense. _Scripsi_ is to _scribo_ as
[Greek: etupsa] is to [Greek: tuptô].
§ 295. Now in the Latin language a confusion takes place between these two
tenses. Both forms exist. They are used, however, indiscriminately. The
aorist form has, besides its own, the sense of the perfect. The perfect
has, besides its own, the sense of the aorist. In the following pair of
quotations, _vixi_, the aorist form, is translated _I have lived_, while
_tetigit_, the perfect form, is translated _he touched_.
_Vixi_, et quem dederat cursum Fortuna peregi;
Et nunc magna mei sub terras ibis imago.--_Æn._ iv.
Ut primum alatis _tetigit_ magalia plantis.--_Æn._ iv.
§ 296. When a difference of form has ceased to express a difference of
meaning, it has become superfluous. This is the case with the two forms in
question. One of them may be dispensed with; and the consequence is, that,
although in the Latin language both the perfect and the aorist forms are
found, they are, with few exceptions, never found in the same word.
Wherever there is the perfect, the aorist is wanting, and _vice versâ_. The
two ideas _I have struck_ and _I struck_ are merged into the notion of past
time in general, and are expressed by one of two forms, sometimes by that
of the Greek perfect, and sometimes by that of the Greek aorist. On account
of this the grammarians have cut down the number of Latin tenses to _five_;
forms like _cucurri_ and _vixi_ being dealt with as one and the same tense.
The true view is, that in _curro_ the aorist form is replaced by the
perfect, and in _vixi_ the perfect form is replaced by the aorist.
§ 297. In the _present_ English there is no undoubted perfect or
reduplicate form. The form _moved_ corresponds in meaning not with [Greek:
tetupha] and _momordi_, but with [Greek: etupsa] and _vixi_. Its sense is
that of [Greek: etupsa], and not that of [Greek: tetupha]. The notion given
by [Greek: tetupha] we express by the circumlocution _I have beaten_. We
have no such form as _bebeat_ or _memove_. In the Moeso-Gothic, however,
there was a true reduplicate form; in other words, a perfect tense as well
as an aorist. It is by the possession of this form that the verbs of the
first six conjugations are characterized.
_Moeso-Gothic._ _Moeso-Gothic._
_English._ _English._
1st. Falþa, _I fold_ Fáifalþ, _I have folded_,
or _I folded_.
Halda, _I feed_ Háihald, _I have fed_,
or _I fed_.
Haha, _I hang_ Háihah, _I have hanged_,
or _I hanged_.
2nd. Háita, _I call_ Háiháit, _I have called_,
or _I called_.
Láika, _I play_ Láiláik, _I have played_,
or _I played_.
3rd. Hláupa, _I run_ Hláiláup _I have run_,
or _I ran_.
4th. Slêpa, _I sleep_ Sáizlêp, _I have slept_,
or _I slept_.
5th. Láia, _I laugh_ Láilô, _I have laughed_,
or _I laught_.
Sáija, _I sow_ Sáisô, _I have sown_,
or _I sowed_.
6th. Grêta, _I weep_ Gáigrôt, _I have wept_,
or _I wept_.
Téka, _I touch_ Táitôk, _I have touched_,
or _I touched_.
In Moeso-Gothic, as in Latin, the perfect forms have, besides their own, an
aorist sense, and _vice versâ_.
In Moeso-Gothic, as in Latin, few (if any) words are found in both forms.
In Moeso-Gothic, as in Latin, the two forms are dealt with as a single
tense; _láilô_ being called the præterite of _láia_, and _svôr_ the
præterite of _svara_. The true view, however, is that in Moeso-Gothic, as
in Latin, there are two past tenses, each having a certain latitude of
meaning, and each, in certain words, replacing the other.
The reduplicate form, in other words, the perfect tense, is current in none
of the Gothic languages except the Moeso-Gothic. A trace of it is said to
be found in the Anglo-Saxon of the seventh century in the word _heht_,
which is considered to be _hê-ht_, the Moeso-Gothic _háiháit_, _vocavi_.
_Did_ from _do_ is also considered to be a reduplicate form.
§ 298. In the English language the tense corresponding with the Greek
aorist and the Latin forms like _vixi_, is formed after two modes; 1, as in
_fell_, _sang_, and _took_, from _fall_, _sing_, and _take_, by changing
the vowel of the present: 2, as in _moved_ and _wept_, from _move_ and
_weep_, by the addition of -d or -t; the -d or -t not being found in the
original word, but being a fresh element added to it. In forms, on the
contrary, like _sang_ and _fell_, no addition being made, no new element
appears. The vowel, indeed, is changed, but nothing is added. Verbs, then,
of the first sort, may be said to form their præterites out of themselves;
whilst verbs of the second sort require something from without. To speak in
a metaphor, words like _sang_ and _fell_ are comparatively independent. Be
this as it may, the German grammarians call the tenses formed by a change
of vowel the _strong_ tenses, the _strong_ verbs, the _strong_ conjugation,
or the _strong_ order; and those formed by the addition of d or t, the
_weak_ tenses, the _weak_ verbs, the _weak_ conjugation, or the _weak_
order. _Bound_, _spoke_, _gave_, _lay_, &c., are _strong_; _moved_,
_favoured_, _instructed_, &c., are _weak_.
* * * * *