Latin tenses (semantics)#Future

In Latin, a process may have one of three primary tenses: future, present and past. Each primary tense is described in a separate section below.

The primary future is the future relative to the time of speech. For most verbs, the future is usually construed by a 'future indicative' verb as in {{lang|la|faciam}} ('I will do'). In Early Latin, there was the 'sigmatic future indicative' {{lang|la|faxō}} (also 'I will do').{{efn-lr|The sigmatic future has a remarkable pattern of distribution. In main clauses only the fossilized faxō occurs, while in subordinate clauses we find forms belonging to different verbs and persons. In main clauses the meaning is that of a simple future (‘I shall do’), whereas in subordinate clauses the forms could be replaced by future perfects (‘I shall have done’). The perfective, but non-anterior meaning in main clauses is original. The anterior meaning in subordinate clauses is the result of reanalysis. – De Melo, 2007a.}}

For verbs of recalling such as {{lang|la|meminī}} ('I remember'), {{lang|la|ōdī}} ('I hate'), {{lang|la|nōvī}} ('I know') and some verbs of states such as {{lang|la|mortuus est}} ('is dead') and {{lang|la|dīvīsum est}} ('is divided'), inflections and periphrases that usually construe a past-in-future as in {{lang|la|agerō}} ('I will have done') have their meanings reduced to a primary future: there is {{lang|la|meminerō}} ('I will remember') evolved from {{lang|la|meminerō}} ('I will have memorized') and there is {{lang|la|mortuus erit}} for either the future state ('he will be dead') or the past-in-future event {{lang|la|mortuus erit}} ('he will have died').

The primary present is the present relative to the time of speech. Most often the present tense is construed by a 'present indicative' verb. For verbs of recalling such as {{lang|la|meminī}} ('I remember'), {{lang|la|ōdī}} ('I hate'), {{lang|la|nōvī}} ('I know') and verbs of resulting states such as {{lang|la|mortuus est}} ('is dead') and {{lang|la|dīvīsum est}} ('is divided'), inflections and periphrases that usually construe a past-in-present as in {{lang|la|ēgī}} ('I have done') have their meanings reduced to a primary present: there is {{lang|la|meminī}} ('I remember') evolved from {{lang|la|meminī}} ('I have memorized') and there is {{lang|la|mortuus est}} for either a present state ('he is dead') or a past-in-present event ('he has died').{{efn-lr|Haverling (2002), p. 155.}}

Similarly, the 'present indicative' auxiliary in "habeō" perfect periphrasis as in {{lang|la|habeō subōrnātum}} may represent either a present ownership of placed objects ('I own that clock placed over there') or the placement of owned objects with focus on the placement ('my clock is placed over there').{{efn-lr|[The "habeō" perfect periphrasis] is not a mere circumlocution for the Perfect, but lays particular stress on the maintenance of the result, Gildersleeve & Lodge (1895), p. 160.}} In contrast, the 'present indicative' in "teneō" perfect periphrasis ('hold' or 'keep') represents the process of actively keeping an object in a given state while one speaks.

The primary past is the past relative to the time of speech. In biographies, past events are usually represented by 'perfect indicative' verbs.{{efn-lr|Schlicher, 1931, pp.58-59}} In contrast, in narrative prose and poetry, past events are most often represented by 'present indicative' verbs as if these events were taking place at the time of narration.{{efn-lr|Pinkster, 1990, p.224}} In particular, past speech events are often represented by 'present indicative' verbs when reporting what other people said: e.g. {{lang|la|fidem dant}} ('they gave a pledge') or {{lang|la|ōrant}} ('they begged'). More than half the 'present indicative' verbs for past events in Caesar's books are of this kind.{{efn-lr|Viti, 2010}}

However, in recounts of events long past at the time of narration, the 'imperfect indicative' is used instead of 'perfect indicative' or 'present indicative' as if these events were being vividly remembered by a story-internal observer in distress.{{efn-lr|The most important value of occurrēbant and petēbant should be looked for on the interpersonal level: the story-internal character Caesar is surveying the battles in the different parts of the battlefield, and these are presented through his “perception”. Unsurprisingly, the problems of the Roman soldiers are causing their commander considerable psychological distress. Aerts, 2018, pp.126-129}}{{efn-lr|Latin speaker Aulus Gellius says that the use of the 'imperfect indicative' {{lang|la|caedēbātur}} rather than the 'perfect indicative' {{lang|la|caesus est}} creates a 'drawn-out vivid description' ({{lang|la|diūtīna repraesentātiō}}) in Aulus Gellius 10.3.12; cf. Ker, 2007, p. 345}}{{efn-lr|For past events, according to Pinkster, the 'present indicative' paradigm is interchangeable with not only the 'perfect indicative', but also the 'imperfect indicative'. Pinkster, 1990, p.240}} As for word order, in Caesar's books, when a verb for a past event is placed initially in the sentence, as in the example below ({{lang|la|videt imminēre hostēs}}), it is very frequently 'present indicative'.{{efn-lr|Devine & Laurence, 2006, p.159}}

For verbs of recalling such as {{lang|la|meminī}} ('I remember'), {{lang|la|ōdī}} ('I hate'), {{lang|la|nōvī}} ('I know') and verbs of resulting states such as {{lang|la|mortuus est}} ('is dead') and {{lang|la|dīvīsum est}} ('is divided'), inflections and periphrases that usually construe a past-in-past as in {{lang|la|ēgeram}} ('I had done') have their meanings reduced to a primary past: there is {{lang|la|meminī}} ('I remembered') evolved from {{lang|la|meminī}} ('I had memorized') and there is {{lang|la|mortuus erat}} for the past state ('he was dead') and the past-in-past event ('he had died').

In some contexts, the '"habeō" perfect periphrasis with present indicative auxiliary' is often interchangeable with 'perfect indicative' verbs. In later Latin the compound past with {{lang|la|habeō}} became progressively more common, though still less common than the simple past with a 'perfect indicative' verb.{{efn-lr|Haverling, 2012, p.373}}

In Latin, represented events and states may be related to the time of another event in discourse, which in turn has a primary tense. Such events are said to have a secondary tense, of which there are three in Latin: namely, secondary future, secondary present and secondary past, each of which is described in a separate section below.

The secondary future is the future relative to a primary tense, which can be future, present, or past. Most often, the secondary future is realized by the periphrasis facturus + erō, sum, eram, fuī.

If applied to actions, the compound 'future in present' (e.g. {{lang|la|factūrus sum}}, ‘am [going] to do’) represents a person's action that is future at an ongoing process other than the speech event such as tē absente ("while you are absent"). Similarly, the compound 'future in future' (e.g. {{lang|la|factūrus erō}}, 'I will do') represents a person's action that will happen after a given future event. In contrast, the future periphrasis with an ‘imperfect indicative’ auxiliary (e.g. {{lang|la|factūrus eram}}, ‘was about to do’) represents a person's past plan of action. Although less common than the future periphrases with {{lang|la|eram}}, future periphrases with a ‘perfect indicative’ auxiliary such as {{lang|la|fuī}} are also found.{{efn-lr|Gildersleeve & Lodge (1895), p. 164.}}

The secondary present is the present relative to a primary tense, which can be future, present or past. From these, 'present in present' is the rarest one. Theare are two secondary presents in Latin: the simple secondary present is realised by verbs with īnfectum aspect such as faciam,{{efn-lr|The simple future, which is not restricted in any way, is [the future perfect's] non-anterior counterpart. There is only a limited overlap of usage in that, in certain contexts, either tense is possible. - De Melo, 2007b.}} faciō, faciēbam and the compound secondary present is realised by the periphrasis facere + coeperō, coepī, coeperam.{{efn-lr|[In translations from Greek to Latin, auxiliaries such as the] inceptive ἄρχεσθαι, conative ἐπιχειρεῖν and prospective μέλλειν do occur [in source texts], yet the critical mass [of equivalents] in the source language is constituted of durative forms, six times the imperfect. Rosén, 2012, p.193}}{{efn-lr|One of the many reasons for the popularity of 'coepi' in narrative prose was the possibility of expressing a durative process through the perfect. [...] This suggestion gains support from the fact that in the majority of the cases the focus seems to be not on the initial moment of the action expressed by the infinitive but on its duration (cf. Wölfflin and Miodoński 1889: 69; Kurzová 1992: 214–17). Significantly, in late Latin the periphrasis is sometimes transmitted as a variant reading of imperfect tenses (Rosén 2012a: 133; 2012b: 372). – Galdi, 2016, p.254-255}}{{efn-lr|[...] coepisse 'begonnen haben' [...] Denn diese Morpheme sind keine echten Verballexeme [...] Es sind grammatische Morpheme, die man 'Auxiliare' nennen kann, Morpheme die der Eirweiterung eines Verballexems ein Verb bilden. ([...] coepisse 'have begun' [...] These morphemes are not real verbal morphemes [...] They are grammatical morphemes that can be called 'Auxiliaries', i.e. morphemes that make up a verb by extending a verbal lexeme.) Touratier, 2013, §532''}} The verb group is often accompanied by spatial and temporal adjuncts such as {{lang|la|ibī}} 'there', {{lang|la|tum}} 'then', and {{lang|la|eō tempore}} 'at that moment'.

The secondary past is the past relative to a primary tense, which can be future, present or past. There are three secondary pasts in Latin: 1. the simple secondary past is realised by verbs with perfectum aspect such as fēcerō, fēcī, fēceram; 2. the compound secondary past with "sum" is realised by the periphrasis factus + ero, sum, eram or fuī; and 3. the compound secondary past with "habeō" is realised by the periphrasis factum + habēbō, habeō, habēbam or habuī. In the secondary past, imperfect indicative auxiliaries such as eram and habēbam are more frequent than their perfect indicative counterparts such as fuī and habuī.{{efn-lr|Gildersleeve & Lodge (1895), p. 161, note 2.}}

If the secondary past applies to an event that had happened prior to a past point in time, the tertiary past applies to a third event that had happened earlier than that. The tertiary past is realised by a 'pluperfect indicative' auxiliary in either the "sum" perfect periphrasis or the "habeō" perfect periphrasis. Both the compound tertiary past with {{lang|la|fueram}} and the compound tertiary past with {{lang|la|habueram}} are uncommon tenses.{{efn-lr|For a similar use of a double perfect tense in indirect speech in German see :de:Doppeltes Perfekt.}}

• De Melo, Wolfgang David Cirilo (2007a), The Sigmatic Future in Archaic Latin. in De Melo, Wolfgang David Cirilo, The Early Latin Verb System: Archaic Forms in Plautus, Terence, and Beyond Oxford: Oxford University Press. p. 171–190
• De Melo, Wolfgang David Cirilo (2007b), Simple Future and Future Perfect in Archaic Latin. in De Melo, Wolfgang David Cirilo, The Early Latin Verb System: Archaic Forms in Plautus, Terence, and Beyond Oxford: Oxford University Press. p. 21–50
• Devine, Andrew M. & Laurence D. Stephens (2006), Latin Word Order. Structured Meaning and Information. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Galdi, Giovanbattista (2016). On 'coepi'/'incipio' + infinitive: some new remarks. Chapter in Adams, James Noel and Vincent, Nigel. Early and late Latin: continuity or change? Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, p. 246-264
• Haverling, Gerd V.M. (2002). [https://brill.com/view/book/edcoll/9789004409057/BP000012.xml "On the semantic functions of the Latin perfect"]. Amsterdam Studies in Classical Philology, Volume 10.
• Pinkster, Harm (1987). [https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/9783110856910.193/html "The Strategy and Chronology of the Development of Future and Perfect Tense Auxiliaries in Latin"]. In Martin Harris and Paolo Ramat (eds.) Historical Development of Auxiliaries (Trends in Linguistics. Studies and Monographs, 35). De Gruyter Mouton.
• Rosén, Hannah (2012). [https://books.google.com/books?id=OE_jCgAAQBAJ&dq=coepi+latin&pg=PA189 "The late Latin {{lang|la|coepī}} + infinitive construction: evidences from translated texts"]. in Classica et Mediaevalia, vol. 63, pp. 189–215
• Viti, Carlotta (2010). [https://www.zora.uzh.ch/id/eprint/43735/1/carlotta_viti_doc.pdf "The non-literal use of tenses in Latin, with particular reference to the praesens historicum"]. Revue de linguistique latine du Centre Alfred Ernout. (Posted at Zurich Open Repository and Archive, University of Zurich).

• Aerts, Simon (2018). [https://www.researchgate.net/publication/321340052_Tense_Aspect_and_Aktionsart_in_Classical_Latin_Towards_a_New_Approach "Tense, Aspect and Aktionsart in Classical Latin: Towards a New Approach"]. Symbolae Osloenses 92(1):107–149.
• Haverling, Gerd V.M. (2012). "Actionality, tense, and viewpoint". In Baldi, Philip; Cuzzolin, Pierluigi (eds.) (2012). Constituent Syntax: Adverbial Phrases, Adverbs, Mood, Tense. {{ISBN|978-3110205633}}, pp. 277–524.
• Schlicher, J. J. (1931). [https://www.jstor.org/stable/264681 "The Historical Tenses and Their Functions in Latin"]. Classical Philology Vol. 26, No. 1 (Jan., 1931), pp. 46–59.

• Touratier, Christian (2013). "Lateinische Grammatik - linguistische Einführung in die lateinische Sprache". WBG: Darmstadt
• Gildersleeve, B. L. & Gonzalez Lodge (1895). Gildersleeve's Latin Grammar. 3rd Edition. (Macmillan)
• Guerreira, Augustín Ramos (2021), “Tiempo y Aspecto” in José Miguel Baños Baños, “Sintaxis Latina”, Vol. I, Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Cientificas, Madrid. ISBN 978-8400108250
• Pinkster, Harm (1990), [https://artflsrv03.uchicago.edu/philologic4/Monographs/navigate/4/table-of-contents/ Latin Syntax and Semantics]. [https://artflsrv03.uchicago.edu/philologic4/Monographs/navigate/4/12/ Chapter 11: The Latin tense system.]
• Rubenbauer, Hans & Hofmann, J.B. (2018) Lateinische Grammatik. Oldenburg Schulbuchverlag GmbH, Munich. ISBN 978-3-63706940-4

{{reflist|20em}}

{{notelist-lr|20em}}

Tenses (semantics)

Category:Grammatical tenses