Ćwarmin has three different ways of forming conditional sentences. The first way is fairly similar to the English way, and are used whenever there is a difference in tense between the protasis and apodosis.
uś [...] ćen xaukunc (bec) keləmce
it [...] if read-2sg(past) you know-recentpast
if you had read it, you would know/have known
Ćen is the conditional particle, pretty similar to English 'if' in function. It can also be used with a verb phrase as such to indicate irrealis mood - with second person verbs, it tends to be a mild imperative, with first and third person it conveys an optative sense. It usually goes before the verb, or as the final word in the conditional subclause. It can go in the wackernagel position from the other end of the subclause as well:
uś ćen [...] xaukunc bec keləmce
There is no word that would serve as a "then ...", so the apodosis cannot be introduced by any particle. Often, the apodosis will be introduced by its subject or the verb, which is somewhat unusual as the verb usually goes last.
The two other constructions are each other's opposites. In the one, the verb of the protasis is an infinitive marked with the genitive, and the apodosis has any tense whatsoever. The subject of the conditional verb too is in the genitive.
bacak xaukutoś (bec) keləmce
you-gen reading-gen you knew
In the other, the conditional is a regular finite clause, and the apodosis is subordinate - and formed likewise, but with the verb in the singular reflexive accusative - again, the subject of the infinitive in the genitive (if it's the same as the subject of the main clause, it can be omitted):
bac xaukunc (becək) kelsin
you read(past) your (own) knowing
This construction doesn't really have a good English analogue - the closest would perhaps be
you have read it, so you know (it)
But unlike the English construction, it's not indicative - it is parsed just as "irrealisly" as it would have been, had it been the previous construction instead.
The tense of both of the verbs are parsed as the same as that of the finite one in both of these constructions.
No comments:
Post a Comment