The Past Tenses of The Mongolian Verb. Meaning and Use

The Past Tenses of the Mongolian Verb
Empirical Approaches to
Linguistic Theory
Managing Editor
Brian D. Joseph
The Ohio State University, USA
Editorial Board
Artemis Alexiadou, University of Stuttgart, Germany

Harald Baayen, University of Alberta, Canada
Pier Marco Bertinetto, Scuola Normale Superiore, Pisa, Italy
Kirk Hazen, West Virginia University, Morgantown, USA
Maria Polinsky, Harvard University, Cambridge, USA
VOLUME 1
The titles published in this series are listed at brill.nl/ealt
The Past Tenses of the

Mongolian Verb
Meaning and Use
By
Robert I. Binnick
LEIDEN BOSTON
2012
This book is printed on acid-free paper.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Binnick, Robert I.
The past tenses of the Mongolian verb : meaning and use / by Robert I. Binnick.
p. cm. (Empirical approaches to linguistic theory; 1)
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN 978-90-04-21429-3 (alk. paper)
1. Mongolian languageVerb. 2. Grammar, Comparative and generalTense. I. Title. II. Series.
PL473.B56 2012
494.2356dc23
2011035786
ISSN 2210-6243
ISBN 978 90 04 21429 3
Copyright 2012 by Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Koninklijke Brill NV incorporates the imprints Brill, Global Oriental, Hotei Publishing,
IDC Publishers, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers and VSP.
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, translated, stored in
a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical,
photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior written permission from the publisher.
Authorization to photocopy items for internal or personal use is granted by Koninklijke Brill NV
provided that the appropriate fees are paid directly to The Copyright Clearance Center,
222 Rosewood Drive, Suite 910, Danvers, MA 01923, USA.
Fees are subject to change.
For Sodnomdorj Gongor

and for all those who have
in one way or another
through the years
encouraged my interest
in the Mongolian language,
not least:
James Bosson
Lucia Hammar
John Krueger
Nicholas Poppe
Wayne Schlepp
Tserenchunt Legden
Yidamjab Meng
CONTENTS
Editorial Foreword ............................................................................
Preface .................................................................................................
Acknowledgments ..............................................................................
Conventions and Transcription ......................................................
Abbreviations .....................................................................................
ix
xi
xv
xvii
xxi
I. The Problem of the Mongolian Past Tenses ...........................

1. The Mongolian Past Tenses ..................................................
1.1. The Verbal Systems of the Mongolic Languages ......
1.2. The Problem of the Past Tenses ..................................
2. Semantic Theories ..................................................................
2.1. Theories Based on Tense and Aspect .........................
2.2. The Finite Indicative Verbs ..........................................
2.3. The Participles ................................................................
2.4. Metric (Degrees of Remoteness) Theories of the
-jee and -lee Tenses ........................................................
3. Toward A Pragmatic Theory ................................................
3.1. Discourse Functions ......................................................
3.2. The Evidential .................................................................
3.3. The Modality of -v .........................................................
3.4. The Inferential ................................................................
3.5. Chuluus Critique ..........................................................
1
1
1
10
14
14
20
25
33
37
37
40
46
50
54
II. Use and Interpretation of the Past Tenses in the Spoken

Language .......................................................................................
1. Evidential and Inferential .....................................................
1.1. The Opposition of Evidentiality and Inferentiality ...
1.2. Inferential -jee ................................................................
1.3. Evidential -lee .................................................................
1.4. -sen in speech .................................................................
2. Distal and Proximal ...............................................................
2.1. Distal and Proximal .......................................................
2.2. Future -lee .......................................................................
2.3. The Pragmatics of Immediacy .....................................
2.4. Spoken -v and the Past Tenses in Questions ............
61
61
61
62
70
74
79
79
82
88
92
viii
contents
3. Deictic and Anaphoric ........................................................
3.1. Reference Times ...........................................................
3.2. Definite, Deictic, and Anaphoric Tenses .................
3.3. An Implicative Hierarchy ...........................................
102
102
105
108
III. Use and Interpretation of the Past Tenses in the Written

Language .....................................................................................
1. Spoken and Written Language ...........................................
1.1. Competing Grammatical Systems .............................
1.2. The Non-equivalence of the Written Tenses ..........
1.3. The Language of the Internet and Levels of Usage
2. The Past Tenses in Writing ................................................
2.1. Written -v ......................................................................
2.2. -sen and -sen baina ......................................................
2.3. -jee and -sen baina .......................................................
2.4. Distal -lee .......................................................................
113
113
113
116
122
132
132
138
140
145
IV. The Discourse Functions of the Tenses .................................

1. The Functions of the Tenses in Discourse and Text ......
1.1. The Functions of Utterances ......................................
1.2. The Three Levels of Discourse Coherence ...............
2. The Functions of the Past Tenses ......................................
2.1. Past Tenses and Temporal Reference .......................
2.2. Past Tenses and Grounding .......................................
2.3. Past Tenses and The Topics of Threads ...................
2.4. The Paragraph ...............................................................
3. The Functions of the Past Tenses in Various Genres ....
3.1. Meaning, Use and Genre ............................................
3.2. Diegetic and Mimetic Genres ....................................
3.3. Genre and Tenses ........................................................
3.4. Past Tenses in the Various Genres ...........................
147
147
147
149
161
161
171
188
195
198
198
202
207
209
Remarks in Lieu of a Conclusion ...................................................
215
Appendix .............................................................................................
List of Works Cited ...........................................................................
Index ....................................................................................................
221
223
229
EDITORIAL FOREWORD
The present volume, The Past Tense of the Mongolian Verb. Meaning
and Use, by Robert Binnick, inaugurates a new series by Brill, entitled
Empirical Approaches to Linguistic Theory. I am proud to be the
managing editor of the series, and am joined in this enterprise by a
strong team of editorial board members: Artemis Alexiadou, Harald
Baayen, Pier Marco Bertinetto, Kirk Hazen, and Maria Polinsky.
The goal of this series is to offer contributions to our understanding of language in generalthe key desideratum of linguistic theory
through highly empirically based studies. The series is eclectic as to
theory and does not privilege any particular theoretical framework
over any other. We editors expect that each volume will advance our
knowledge of how human language works through solid theoretically
sophisticated description and through empirical testing of theoretical
constructs and claims.
Dr. Binnick is particularly well known for decades of work on tense
and on Mongolian, so this study represents a joining of these two areas
of his expertise. In this case, Mongolian provides the empirical basis,
and the realization and value of temporal reference constitute the theoretical constructs that are tested by the Mongolian data.
We envision that the series will consist mainly of monographic
research studies, but do not rule out the possibility of volumes that
are focused collections of papers on a common theme.
We look forward to seeing many volumes appear under this imprint
in the years to come.
Brian D. Joseph
EALT Series Managing Editor
Columbus, Ohio USA
1 August 2011
PREFACE
One of the interesting features of the Mongolian language is the
existence of four different past tense forms of the verb. To translate
came, for example, one can choose (in the written language based
on Khalkha Mongolian) between irev, irlee, irjee,
and irsen. Textbooks and reference grammars have contained
various accounts of the differences between these endings, generally
vague, sometimes mutually contradictory, and ultimately inadequately
informative concerning this significant topic. The question, naturally,
is why Mongolian has four different past tense endings, and how their
meanings and/or uses differ from one another.
This question may be illustrated by a couple of passages from Erdene
bulsan aral, the Mongolian translation of R. L. Stevensons novel Treasure Island. In the novel, when both time and his former shipmates
finally catch up with the old pirate Billy Bones, the mysterious lodger
at the Admiral Benbow Inn, one of the pirates enters the inn to call
on Bones, only to come running out almost at once to inform his
fellows that Bill xixjeeBills dead! It turns out that old Bill has
left a treasure map and soon the hero of the tale, Jim Hawkins, finds
himself a member of the crew of a vessel sent to seek out that treasure.
When the crew lands on the treasure island of the title, Jim encounters
Ben Gunn, marooned there years before by the cruel Captain Flint.
Panicked at the sight of Jims ship, Gunn asks him, Thats not Flints
ship, is it? At which Jim assures him that it isnt, and, furthermore,
that Flint xixsenFlint is dead.
But why is it that the pirate declares that Billy Bones xixjee, when
Jim tells Gunn that Captain Flint xixsen? Is the choice of different
tenses simply fortuitous, or merely a matter of style, or does it reflect
some real difference in meaning and/or use?
Until the last two decades the grammatical literature was at best
unhelpful, and at worst misleading, where the past tense endings of
Mongolian are concerned. Binnick (1979) was an early attempt at posing, and pointing towards a solution for, the problem. More than a
decade later, Binnick (1990) termed the differentiation of the tenses
pragmatic, thereby claiming that the difference between the past
tenses was not, as previously thought, semantic, and did not have to
xii
preface
do primarily with their literal, context-free meanings in terms of tense

and aspect, but rather with how they are used in context. In the early
90s, when editorial pressure forced me to provide simple labels for
the endings -jee and -lee in a contribution on Mongolian, I chose, on
what seems now to have been insufficient evidence (albeit following
the approach of my 1990 article), to term them inferential and evidential respectively.
Unknown to me at that time, a similar suggestion had been published in the meantime by Svantesson (1991), and in the next few
years a number of scholars put forward similar analyses of the Mongolian past tense system, based on essentially the modal opposition
of evidentiality and inferentialityWu (1995, 1996), Kullmann and
Tserenpil (1996), Song in 1997 (and 2002), Ujeyediin Chuluu (1998),
Nelson et al. (1998), Sanders and Bat-Ireedi (1999), and Tserenchunt
and Luethy (2000)but as of the mid-90s, no one but Svantesson
and myself had suggested anything of the sort. (A different, though
insightful, approach appears in Dugarova 1991.)1
And while by the beginning of the present century the idea that
Mongolian might have a past tense system based at least in part on
an opposition of evidentiality and inferentiality was no longer novel,
the proposal was based largely, if not entirely, on native-speaker intuition, and moreover was so vague and general as to provide little, if
any, guidance to the non-native-speaker wishing to properly use and
interpret the various past tense endings. Nor did it clarify the roles of
the so-called neutral endings -v and -senhow they differed from
the non-neutral endings -lee and -jee, as well as from one another
though there are useful, albeit limited, suggestions in a number of the
works mentioned above.
The intention in the present work is to construct an argument for,
and to flesh out the details covered by, the labels of evidential and
inferential, and as well to provide an account of the neutral past
tenses. If this goal has been fulfilled it is due principally to the assistance of a native speaker, Sodnomdorj Gongor, and to a lesser extent to
the advent of the World Wide Web, which has provided easy access to
samples of a wide range of genres in contemporary Mongolian. I have
1
My less than adequate Russian has unfortunately not allowed me to profit from
Dugarovas work as much as I might have done.
preface
xiii
also profited greatly by the insightful work, and the generous responses
to my queries, of another native speaker, Tserenchunt Legden.
It would have been useful to have known, before I completed my
research, of the 1998 article by Nelson et al., which anticipates many of
my conclusions.2 Their article is perhaps the most insightful work on
the Mongolian past tenses to come out of the twentieth century.
Many of the questions raised by the Mongolian past tenses are far
from fully resolved, but hopefully the present work has, at the very
least, provided a more reliable and useful guide to usage than has hitherto existed, and laid the foundation for further investigation into a
number of aspects of this fascinating language.
2
There are some significant differences between our conclusions, however, and
some methodological differences; while there is concern in their brief article for the
distribution of the past tense endings, there is still primary dependence on subjective
judgments on the part of speakers. Moreover, some of their conclusions are quite
general, so that on the whole the article strikes one as programmatic. For all that, it
constitutes a milestone in our understanding of the Mongolian tenses.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I would above all like to thank Sodnomdorj Gongor for letting me
make use of his native speaker knowledge of, and intuition for, the
Khalkha Mongolian language; for his toleration of my minimal and
truly execrable spoken Mongolian; for his numerous interesting and
useful observations, both spontaneous and in response to my questions; and for his comments on the final manuscript and corrections
of numerous errors, which I have sometimes silently corrected in the
manuscript. Without his assistance, this research would literally have
been impossible.
I would also like to thank Tserenchunt Legden for her encouragement; for her communications, which have been invaluable and from
which I have benefited greatly; and for both the fine textbooks she
produced with Sharon Luethy, and the Web site (http://www.indiana
.edu/~celcar/intermediate/mongolinter.html) to which she contributed useful grammatical comments. As regards the past tense endings,
her works are amongst the most insightful published, and I regret that
I only became aware of the Web site (and through it, her textbooks)
when I had with much travail independently re-discovered what she
had already written about the spoken language. I would like to thank
her, too, for her comments on the final manuscript, her observations
on a number of errors, which I have sometimes silently corrected, and
for kindly providing translations for a dozen or so colloquial examples
taken from the Internet.
I would similarly like to thank Diane Nelson for providing me with
a copy of the 1998 Nelson et al. article, which proved, alas, to have
been a very significant piece of work, which I much regretted somehow failing to find in my earlier bibliographic searches.
Also due thanks are six former or present colleagues at the University of Toronto. From the Scarborough campus: Harald Ohlendorf,
who checked most of my translations from the German; Michal Schonberg, who provided some of the translations from Dugarova with the
assistance of Mr. Anatoly Oleksiyenko (whom I also wish to thank);
Corrine Beauquis, who lent me her intuitions as a native speaker of
French; and Yoonjung Kang, who arranged for Kenji Oda (whom I
also gratefully thank) to provide me with a prcis of the 1993 article by
xvi
acknowledgments
Hashimoto (which, despite its title, is in Japanese, and accompanied

by a wholly inadequate summary in English). From the St. George
campus, I wish to thank Christina Kramer and Wayne Schlepp, the
former for arranging for Jan Schallert (whom I also hereby thank) to
provide the translation of one of the passages from Dugarovas book,
and the latter for his helpful responses to various queries.
Acknowledgment is also due to the anonymous reviewers whose
numerous suggestions have gone far to helping to improve the final
version of this book, and to all those at Brill who have worked so hard
to transform the manuscript into this volume, especially to Mirjam
Elbers, its production editor.
Finally, I would like very much to thank my friends and loved ones
for understanding, and in the main forgiving, my neglect of them during the writing of this book, and for their support throughout.
The research upon which this work is based was partly funded, and
largely made possible, by a grant from the University of Toronto. Much
of the work on this book was done while on a sabbatical research leave
in the Winter session of 2008.
CONVENTIONS AND TRANSCRIPTION

Conventions
Unattributed glosses and comments in italics are those of Sodnomdorj
Gongor, the native speaker of Khalkha Mongolian who gave me the
benefit of his native-speaker intuitions. Where glosses both in English
and some other language such as French or German are given, the
English gloss is mine and the other gloss is that of the source.
Unless otherwise noted, all the word analyses and detailed glosses
accompanying the examples (as in example 8 below) are mine. In
some cases it is impossible to provide a unique and precise English
equivalent and the glosses should accordingly be taken as purely nominal. I have separated affixes from their stems using a dot, so: bai.na,
and have arbitrarily assigned the -g- used to separate long vowels to
the verb stem rather than to the suffix (thus baig.aa be-impfvn). In
examples drawn from other works, a hyphen indicating a morpheme
boundary (e.g., nom-un) has been replaced with a dot (nom.un).1
8. n gl
bi zurgaan tsag.t
boso.v.
this
morning I
six
hour-dat
get up-past
This morning I got up at six oclock. (Street 1963: 122)
In the glosses, the terms and abbreviations following the hyphens

(e.g., dat and past in example 8 above) represent grammatical categories. (See the table of abbreviations.) The -x form is simply glossed
in this work as ifvn infinitive/future verbal noun but the -sen form
is glossed as past when it is a predicate and as pfvn (perfective verbal
noun or participle) when it is a modifier or noun; precedes an auxiliary verb (as in example 3a below), a copula, postposition, or the question particle be/ve; or follows another verbal noun affix (as in examples
1
It should be noted that in the vertical-script language, case (and some other)
affixes are generally (though not in all contexts) written as separate words from their
stems, so that nom.un, for example, actually is written as nom un. A hyphen is conventionally used (as in nom-un) to indicate the connection between the two. See Grnbech and Krueger (1955: 20), Poppe (1964: 30), and the examples in Kullmann and
Tserenpil (1996: 84100).
xviii
conventions and transcription
3739). Although somewhat arbitrary, these labels generally reflect its

use in the various types of examples in question. The non-past (present-future) tense affix simply has been labeled pres (present), as in
(3a). Ta, the plural/polite second person pronoun similar to French
vous has uniformly been glossed you (plural). In contrast, singular i
is glossed simply as you.
3a. Xugar.san
bai.na.
Break-pfvn
be-pres
Its broken. (Sanders and Ireedi 1999: 191)
The affix -ix- has not been glossed. It likely has no counterpart or
adequate gloss in English, but in any case no completely satisfactory,
definitive statement of its meaning or use has appeared, published
accounts tending to be brief and vague.2
Translations (in single quotes) placed to the left of the name, date,
and page of the source publication (as in examples 8 and 3a above) are
those of the source publication; translations to the right of (i.e., below)
the source name (as in example 16 below), are mine.
16. Dadorjiin Natsagdorj 1906 on.d
tr.jee. (Yatskovskaya 1976: 8)
Dashdorjiin Natsagdorj 1906 year-dat be born-past
Dashdorjiin Natsagdorj was born in 1906.
In the present work, affixes containing vowels are represented by their

written form containing e, e.g., -lee.
Transcription
Examples in the literature are sometimes cited in phonetic or phonemic transcription. When such examples are used here, the transcription used in the source (e.g., Ramstedt 1902) is employed, with some
modifications, which have been noted. On the Internet, Mongolian
2
Thus Street (1963: 83) simply labels it perfective, and in a similar vein, Kullmann and Tserenpil (1996: 133) call it a marker of [fully] completed action, with a
slight perfect meaning and gloss ted duusixjee as theyve finished (it) (from duusfinish). Sanders and Bat-Ireedi (1999: 87), however, say it forms intensive verbs
(terminology echoing Poppe 1951: 51), indicating that the action is complete and
unexpected, and contrast bosov got up with bosixov sprang up.
xix
is not infrequently written in the Latin alphabet and such examples

have been noted, and presented as they originally appeared. Examples
written in the old vertical script have been transliterated using a fairly
standard transliteration. Where such examples are already transliterated in the source from which they have been taken, that transliteration is generally used here.
Mongolian examples written in the Cyrillic alphabet are transliterated in this book into the Latin alphabet. Standard schemes of transliteration have been followed, especially those employed by Street (1963),
Vietze (1974), Sanders and Bat-Ireedi (1995, 1999), and Kullmann
and Tserenpil (1996). The letters for which there is some variance
between transliteration schemes are shown in Table 1 below.3
Table 1
Cyrillic
Street
ye, y
yo
j
i
x
c
e
yu, y
ya
Vietze
Sanders
(popular
and
transliteration) Bat-Ireedi
je
jo
dsch
j
ch
ts
tsch
sch
y
j
e
ju
ja
y
yo
j
i
kh
ts
ch
sh
y
(or i)
e
yu, y
ya
Kullmann
and
Tserenpil
This book
ye
yo
j
i
o
u
ye, y
yo
j
i
x
ts
ii
e
yu
ya
ts
ch
sh
ii
e
yu
ya
3
Tserenchunt points out (p.c., October, 2008) that Now Professor George Kara
and other scholars use w for Mongolian <> and it has been accepted by many
people. So w is better than v . . .: yavaad > yawaad, yavj > yawj. The use of the letter
<v> is so well established in the grammatical literature, however, that I have chosen
not to use <w> here in its place. Similarly, it has become common to transliterate
Cyrillic <> as <h>, as in the name (Narmandah) of one of the authors of Nelson
et al. (1998), but this book continues the tradition of using Latin <x>.
xx
Where Russian is concerned (for example, names and titles in the references), the transliteration employed here is a fairly standard one.
The Cyrillic letter <>, transliterated as <j> in the case of Mongolian,
is given as <> in that of Russian. Also, in the Russian transliterations,
<> is represented as <y> (and <> as <j>). There are a few other
differences in the transliterations, reflecting differences between the
Cyrillic alphabets of the two languages, but none should cause any
trouble for the reader.
ABBREVIATIONS
ABL
ACC
AGVN
CAUS
COM
CONDC
CONTC
COPP
DAT
EMPHP
GEN
HABVN
IFVN
IMP
IMPFC
IMPFVN
INFERP
INSTR
IPA
MODC
MODP
ablative case
accusative (object) case
agentive verbal noun
causative affix
comitative case
conditional converb
continuative1 converb
copular particle2
dative case
emphatic particle
genitive case
habitual (frequentative, generic) verbal noun
infinitive/future verbal noun
imperative
imperfective converb
imperfective verbal noun
inferential particle
instrumental case
International Phonetic Alphabet
modal converb
modal3 particle
1
As with many aspects of the grammar, even though there is general agreement as
to the meaning of this form, there is no standard terminology. Poppe (1951: 89) calls
it the Konverbum abtemporale and describes it as meaning eine Handlung, seit deren
Eintritt bereits die Haupthandlung ausgebt worden ist (an action, since the beginning of which the main action has been performed). Vietze (1974: 140) says similarly
that as the predicate of a subordinate clause it can be translated seit [since]. With
an auxiliary verb such as bai- be, he notes, it conveys a fortdauernden Zustand bzw.
eine (immer noch) andauernde Handlung (continuous state or a (still) continuous
action). Similarly, Sanders and Bat-Ireedi (1999: 105) call it the continuous converb. They note that with bai- it can be translated keeps on; hence Kullmann and
Tserenpil (1996: 168) call it the progressive converb.
2
Yum, mn, and bii are identified in the present work as copular particles (COPP).
Kullmann and Tserenpil (1996: 337ff.) label them modal particles.
3
This is the term used by Sanders and Ireedi (1999: 83) for the particle . This
particle has a wide range of uses, described by Kullmann and Tserenpil (1996: 3468),
who call it a focus particle. (Cf. note 29 on p. 206 on l.)
xxii
NEG
NOM
PASS
PAST
PFC
PFVN
PL
PRFUT
QP
RP
TERMC
VOL
abbreviations
negative affix
nominative (subject) case
passive affix
past tense
perfective converb
perfective verbal noun
plural
present/future (non-past) tense
question particle
reflexive-possessive affix
terminal converb
voluntative (first-person imperative)
CHAPTER ONE
THE PROBLEM OF THE MONGOLIAN PAST TENSES

1. The Mongolian Past Tenses
1.1. The Verbal Systems of the Mongolic Languages
The problem of the past tenses of the members of the Mongolic (or
Mongolian) language family is one of the most challenging puzzles
in the study of that family and has long resisted solution. From a certain point of view, the problem is easily stated. Some members of the
family have three or more different affixes which seem to be markers
of the past tense, so that in Khalkha, for example, irev, irjee, irlee, and
irsen all can translate, and be translated by, the English past tense verb
came. The question is how these forms differ in meaning and/or use,
assuming that they do differ in some way (or ways).
From another point of view, however, the problem of the Mongolian past tenses is not so easily stated, first because of the complexities
of the term Mongolian, and secondly because of the complexities of
the type of verbal system typical of these languages. The reader may
find some background information on both these topics helpful in
understanding the problem of the Mongolian past tenses.
The issue of what precisely is meant by Mongolian is relevant
here because the puzzle of the multiple past tenses found in Khalkha
extends not only to the majority of spoken Mongolic dialects and all
of the corresponding written languages today, but goes back to the
very beginnings of the recorded history of the members of the family.
To discuss the problem purely within the context of Khalkha dialects
and/or the Mongolian language written in the Cyrillic alphabet is to
deprive oneself of insights from other members of the family and to
artificially limit the scope of the inquiry at the outset. To a certain
extent there is only a terminological issue involved here, for it is often
easier (but not necessarily precise) to refer to aspects of a Mongolian
grammatical system than to specify a more specific language or languages. The problem with this is that the term Mongolian has been
used to refer to many different spoken and written languages, that the
status of various members of the family as independent languages or
chapter one
as mere dialects is by no means clear, and the historical and classificatory relationships of the members of the Mongolic language family
remain controversial.
At present the Mongolic dialects spoken in Inner Mongolia, Mongolia (the former Mongolian Peoples Republic, at an earlier time Outer
Mongolia), the adjacent Buriat Republic in Russia, and nearby parts
of China and Asiatic Russia, form the bases for four different written
languages. Spoken Khalkha, the language of the vast majority (some
80% or more) of the inhabitants of Mongolia, is the basis for written Khalkha (also referred to as Mongol or Modern Mongolian),
which utilizes the Cyrillic alphabet. The Buriat language, written in
a slightly different Cyrillic script, differs from written Khalkha more
than the corresponding spoken languages differ from one another,
partly due to different spelling conventions and partly to the much
greater effect of Russian on Buriat than on Khalkha, especially where
vocabulary is concerned.
The various Khalkha and Buriat dialects are fairly close to many,
perhaps most, of the Mongolic dialects spoken in Inner Mongolia,
such as Chakhar. In Inner Mongolia, a somewhat modernized version
of the old vertical script language is used, but is read as if representative of the modern spoken language, much as English-speakers write
straight but read the word as the spoken equivalent, strate (phonetically, something like [strejt]).
The verbal systems of these various dialects and languages are for
the most part essentially the same, though the endings are spelled differently, pronounced somewhat differently, and consequently appear
here in different transliterations.
It is a different matter where the dialects which have variously been
called Oirat or Kalmuck are concerned. Historically, they formed the
basis for a written language in a modified version of the Mongolian
vertical script. This written language still has currency amongst the
Oirats of China, though the Kalmucks in Russia today use a written
language with a Cyrillic alphabet. Both the spoken and written languages differ quite a bit from Khalkha and the dialects of Inner Mongolia, and clearly form a distinct language (or languages) from them.
At the same time, there are sufficient similarities in the verbal systems
of Khalkha, Buriat, and Inner Mongolian on the one hand, and Oirat
and Kalmuck on the other, for the grammars of the two groups of
languages to be mutually enlightening. What Blsing (1984) has to say
about the finite indicative verb forms of Kalmuck, for example, bears
the problem of the mongolian past tenses
on the analysis of the corresponding verb forms of the languages in

the former group, though to be sure there are important differences
between the grammars of the two.
Finally, there are those Mongolic languages whose verb systems are
sufficiently different from the preceding as to render their analysis
quite distinct from the systems of the first two groups. This group
includes the Mongolic languages of China outside of Inner Mongolian: principally Dagur (Daur) in the former Manchuria and in Xinjiang; and in the province of Gansu, Tu (Monguor), Bonan (Baoan)
and Dongxiang (Tunghsiang). The verbal systems of the members of
this third group require entirely separate treatment, and are ignored
here. Monguor and Moghol (a now defunct language of Afghanistan)
differ from Mongol in much, much more than the pronunciation of
their names.
Discussion of the Mongolic languages also raises the issue of their
relationship to the other members of the Altaic group of languages.
Aside from the Mongolic languages, this group also includes the
Turkic and Tungusic language families, the best-known members of
which are, respectively, Turkish and Manchu. While formerly there
was largely a consensus that these three families formed branches of
an Altaic super-family, possibly along with Korean and/or Japanese,
many, perhaps even most, scholars today believe the Altaic languages
to be a group of genetically unrelated families which have converged
within a language union (Sprachbund).1 For present purposes it really
does not matter which is the case. Despite the paucity of cognates and
hence systematic sound correspondences linking the three familieslet
alone the three together with Japanese and/or Koreanthere are significant structural similarities common to all five, which, despite real
differences between them, justify speaking, at least in some regards, of
an Altaic type of language.2
Thus while the present work largely restricts itself to a discussion
of, and principally draw its data from Khalkha and relatively closely
1
Poppe (1965)following Ramstedt (195256), Menges (1975) and most strongly,
Miller (1971, 1991, 1996) represent the school of thought believing in a genetic relationship between most or all of the five; this view is criticized by Clauson (1956),
Doerfer (1963, 1985) and Vovin (2005).
2
Where the verb is concerned, the formation and use of aspectual, tense, and
other markers of verbal categories show remarkable similarities across the Altaic
languages.
chapter one
related Mongolic languages, we have occasion as well to refer to at

least one other Altaic language, namely Turkish.
The Mongolic languages, like the other Altaic languages, are noteworthy for their extraordinarily rich and complex verb systems, some
facets of which should be pointed out, especially for the reader unfamiliar with languages of this type.
They have numerous auxiliary verbs and copular particles, which
can be strung together, along with content verbs, often to form long
strings of verbs, such as those italicized in the examples in (1) below.
(The italicizations in the examples are mine.)
1. a. aardlag.iig
Demand-acc
arai amai
with great difficulty
xanga.j
provide-impfc
amji.j
bai.na.
succeed- impfc
be-pres
[The restaurant] is just barely able to satisfy the demand . . . (lit. is
succeeding satisfying) (Street 1963: 149)
b. Ter
ene tuxai med.sen
bai.j
taar.na.
That this about know-pfvn
be-impfc
match-pres
He must have known about this. (Kullmann and Tserenpil 1996: 209)
c. . . . bid nar.t
yar.j
tusal.j
g.x.gi
yuu?
We
pl-dat speak-impfc help-impfc give-ifvn-neg qp
will you please tell us . . .
(http://www.mongolianoralhistory.org/samples/transcriptions/
TR060402.xml; http://www.mongolianoralhistory.org/samples/
translations/EN060402.xml)
d. Ter
nada.d
exel.j
zaxia bii.x.gi
bol
That me-dat
begin-impfc
letter write-ifvn-neg
if
bi
I
tn.d
that-dat
zaxia
letter
bii.x.gi
write-ifvn-neg
bai.saar
be-contc
bai.x
be-ifvn
bol.no.
become-pres
If he does not write me a letter first, I wont write a letter to him.
(Kullmann and Tserenpil 1996: 199)
Combinations of auxiliaries or copulas with other verbal forms mark

various distinctions of tense and aspect. In (2a) the continuative converb (-seer) combines with the copular verb baix to be to form a
continuative perfect (have been waiting). In (2b) the imperfective
verbal noun (-ee) combines with the copula to form a kind of progressive not unlike the English progressive construction, though if the
sentence is positive (without the -gi not), the imperfective converb
(-j) is used instead of the corresponding verbal noun, as in (2c).
2. a. Bi tn.iig
xlee.seer
bai.na.
I that-acc wait-contc
be-pres
I have been waiting for him. (Sanders and Bat-Ireedi 1999: 105)
b. Yuu
xiig.ee.gj3
bai.na.
What modp
do-impfvn-neg
be-pres
(Im) not doing anything. (Sanders and Bat-Ireedi 1999: 63)
c. Yuu
xii.j
baina
ve?
What do-impfc
be-pres
qp
What are [you] doing? (Sanders and Bat-Ireedi 1999: 63)
Mongolian verbs today have at least four different verbal nouns or

participles (in Khalkha, those marked with the affixes -sen, -ee, -x,
and -deg) and a dozen converbs, differentiated mostly by temporal
relationships; for example, the perfective or perfect verbal noun
formed with -sen and the corresponding perfect(ive) converb in -eed
contrast with their imperfective or imperfect counterparts in -ee
and -j as perfective aspect to imperfective, or sometimes as past tense
to present.4
The deverbal, non-finite verb forms entering into these combinations have other uses as well. As is typical of Altaic languages, in the
Mongolic languages there are three different types of deverbals(1)
nominalizations like itgel faith, belief from itgex to believe and idee
food from idex to eat; (2) verbal nouns (essentially participles) like
the perfect or perfective suusan (having) sat and imperfect or
imperfective xiigee doing; and (3) converbs like the perfective
yavaad having gone and imperfective yavj going.
Verbal nouns can be used just like any other noun, but they also
can serve as the predicates of sentences, with (3a) or without (3b)
accompanying copulas. Both verbal nouns, like the non-past one or
infinitive in (3c), and converbs, like the terminal or terminative
converb in (3d), are used as the main verbs of subordinate structures
which function syntactically as phrases, but semantically as clauses.
Converbs can also occur on their own as adverbs (3e). Converbs
are also the etymological sources of conjunctions such as bgd and
in (3f), which is the perfective converb of an obsolete verb (b-)
3
I have arbitrarily assigned the -g- used to separate long vowels to the verb stem
rather than the suffix. The root of xiigeegi is xii-.
4
Traditionally perfective aspect and imperfective aspect are considered to contrast
as marking complete action vs. incomplete. Thus the verb in the English sentence I
went home would be considered to be perfective, while the progressive construction,
e.g., I was going home, would be imperfective. This pre-theoretical understanding of
the aspects is unsatisfactory, but should suffice for present purposes.
chapter one
meaning be. Bolon as well as (3g), too, has the form of a converb
the modal converbof a verb, namely bolox to become. (The italizations in (3) are mine.)
3. a. Xugar.san
bai.na.
Break-pfvn
be-pres
b. Ter
ajil.d.aa
yav.san.
That
work-dat-rp
go-past
He has gone to work. (Street 1963: 207)
c. n.iig
marta.x.aas.aa
mn xii.
This-acc
forget-ifvn-abl-rp
before do-imp
Do it before [you] forget. (Altangerel 1998: 33)
d. Namar
bol.tol
ted
end
ajilla.na.
Autumn become-termc
those here work-pres
Theyll work here until [it becomes] autumn. (adapted from Sanders
and Ireedi 1999: 106)
e. Namaig
bitgii irte.n
xar!
Me-acc
dont stare-modc
look-imp
Dont stare at me! (Kullmann and Tszerenpil 1996: 158)
f. Minii naiz
German.d
sur.
baig.aa
My
friend Germany-dat
study-impfc
be-impfvn
bgd
uda.x.gi
ir.ne.
and
delay-ifvn-neg
come-pres
My friend studies in Germany and will come soon. (Kullmann and
Tserenpil 1996: 299)
g. Ter
oros
bolon xyatad
xel.eer
sain
That Russian and
Chinese language-instr
well
yar.dag.
speak-habvn
He speaks Russian and also Chinese well. (Kullmann and Tserepil
1996: 300)
In addition to these complexities, there are those presented by the

tense/aspect morphology of the content verbs. The topic of the present volume comes from the fact, already noted above, that Altaic
languages typically have, in addition to their present tense or tenses,
more than one past tense. In the case of the Mongolic languages, this
multiplicity of past tenses presents a real problem, as it has never been
made precisely clear in what manner of meaning and/or of use these
tenses differ, assuming that they do. While every textbook and grammar necessarily comments on the various tense endings, we shall see
that there has been a wide divergence in opinions, often based on little
more than nave speaker intuitions and sometimes on mistaken comparisons with the quite different verbal systems of other languages. It
is only in the last couple of decades that linguistic research focused on
this problem has seriously advanced its solution.
To be specific, members of the Mongolic language family typically
contain three different past tense suffixes, as in the vertical-script
example (4) below.5 For the sake of convenience, these are referred to
here, respectively, as the past tenses in -v, -lee, and -jee.
{}
ba
la
jai
you (plural) book read-past
you read a book (Wu 1995: 94)
4. ta
nom
ungsi-
Because of vowel harmony, each ending in a typical modern Mongolic

language potentially appears in between two and eight different forms,
because the vowels in the endings generally adjust themselves to the
vowels of the stems as regards rounding and a feature until recently
called palatality or backedness. In the old written language in vertical
script, the letters represented in transliteration as g and reflect velar
sounds which obey vowel harmony, g occurring with front vowels,
with back ones. The importance of this for present purposes is
simply that in written Khalkha, for example, the -lee ending and the
-sen ending have four different forms each (table 2):
Table 2
Stem
ava- take (back, unround)
deve- wave (front, unround)
oro- enter (back, round)
g- give; do for someone else (front, round)
-lee form
-sen form
avlaa
devlee
orloo
gl
avsan
devsen
orson
gsn
5
The past tense endings and their uses are, with some noteworthy exceptions,
very similar in most Mongolian dialects and languages. For surveys of the forms, see
Poppe (1955) and Wu (1996). For example, Blsing (1984: 38) says, Sieht man einmal
ganz ab von Partizipialeinheiten (z.B. - . . .), so konkurrieren im Kalmckischen und
Khalkha-Mongolischen . . . drei Formen auf der Zeitstufe der Vergangeheit miteinander
(klm. -, -, -; xlx. -, -, -). Aside from participial units such as -, in
Kalmuck and Khalkha there compete three forms in the past tense: Kalmuck [-la],
- [-v], - [-j]; Khalkha - [-laa], - [-av], - [-jee]. (My translationrb)
chapter one
The -jee ending is unusual in not undergoing vowel harmony. Thus

avjee took but also irjee came and gjee gave. Both -jee and -lee
also have short, vowelless variants, for example in questions before
the question particle uu/: Bag xd yavj uu? Did the teacher go
to the countryside? (Kullmann and Tserepil 1996: 186). As well, the
ending -jee also has variants in - following certain consonants, e.g.,
zogs(ee) stopped.
In written Mongolian in the old vertical script, the three endings called
here -v, -lee, and -jee, are usually transliterated as, respectively, -ba/-be,
-lua/-lge (modern -la/-le), and -uqui/-ki/-uqui/-ki (modern
-ai, -ei, -ai, -ei).6 In written Khalkha in Cyrillic script, the corresponding forms are - (-v), -/-/-/- (-laa/-lee/-loo/-l),
and -(), () (-j(ee)/-(ee)).7
As noted in the section on Conventions, in the present work, affixes
containing vowels are referred to by their written form containing e,
e.g., -lee. (It is quite common in the literature, however, to refer to the
affixes using their back-vocalic forms, e.g. -laa.)
In addition to the three finite indicative past tense endings, there are
two verbal nominal (participial) forms that belong in any discussion
of the past tenses. The first of these, the verbal noun whose ending
in vertical-script Mongolian is transliterated as -gsen/-san (= written
Khalkha -/-/-/-, -san/-sen/-son/-sn), usually termed the
perfect or perfective (sometimes the past) verbal noun,8 often functions
as a predicate bearing some sort of past meaning. As a participle it
often bears a relative past (i.e., anterior) meaning (e.g., yavsan gone,
having gone). The second is the verbal noun formed with the affix
At various times there also occurred the forms -bei/-bai and -lgei/-luai,
-legei/-laai, -luqa, -luqai (Poppe 1955: 265f.; Weiers 1969: 149, 153f.). Wu (e.g., 1996:
77) cites the modern forms -la/-le. Other forms include -k/-uqu (Poppe 1955:
265f.; Weiers 1969: 158f.). Wu (e.g., 1996: 73) cites the forms -ei/-ai/-ei/-ai for the
modern language. As in the Cyrillic script, the consonants j and vary according to
the final sound of the stem the ending.
7
Depending on the final sounds of the stem the ending -v is added to, there may
be a (harmonizing) linking vowel, as in -- (ol-o-v) found. Cf. oro-v entered. In
the present work, this linking vowel is assigned in analyses to the stem.
8
Sanders and Bat-Ireedi (1999: 25) refer to it as the perfective verbal noun, a practice generally followed here. This is more accurate than perfect, but the latter term
is traditional and hence familiar, is shorter, and should occasion no confusion as long
as the actual meaning and use of the form are borne in mind.
-ge/-a (= Khalkha -/-/-/-, -aa/-ee/-oo/-).9 This is usually

called the imperfect or imperfective (also the present) verbal noun.10
As with any other verbal nouns in the Mongolic languages, these
participles may serve, without any accompanying copular particle or
copular auxiliary verb, as the main predicate of an independent clause
or sentence, as uilsan does in example (5). In such sentences, there is
little or nothing to distinguish these participles from finite verbs.
5. Tseren
ii.sen.d.ee
uil.san
Tseren
be ashamed-pfvn-dat-rp
cry-past
When he was ashamed, Tseren cried. (Poppe 1970: 134)
Consequently, following the lead of some grammarians, the perfective

verbal nominal (participial) form is referred to in the present work as
the past tense in -sen, since there is ample reason to regard the -sen
suffix as a fourth past tense marker, alongside the finite tense endings
-jee, -lee, and -v. (It is also, however, referred to as the perfective participle, and when, as in example (3a), it is functioning as a participle,
it is labeled pfvn rather than past.)
3. a. Xugar.san
bai.na.
Break-pfvn
be-pres
There is little reason, however, to similarly label the -ee ending a past
tense marker, since it is debatable whether it really functions as a pasttense ending, as it only does so when negated; compare the sentences
in (6).
6. a. Minii sar.iin
temdeg . . . sar
ir.ee.gi.
My
month-genitive mark
. . . month come-impfvn-neg
I havent had my period for . . . months. (Sanders and Bat-Ireedi
1995: 128)
9
Mongolian regularly inserts g between two long vowels (including diphthongs);
hence the -ee ending appears as -gaa, -gee, -goo, or -g immediately following a long
vowel (as in nuugaa hiding, concealing) or diphthong (as in baigaa being). As has
already been noted, here this linking consonant is, however, arbitrarily assigned in
analyses to the stem, as in baig.aa.
10
In Sanders and Bat-Ireedi (1999: 63), the imperfective verbal noun. As with the
perfective (see note 8 on p. 8), we generally follow their practice, while not excluding
use of the term imperfect so long as the actual meaning of the form is borne in mind.
10
chapter one
b. Mongol
uls
ix
xgji.j
baig.aa.
Mongolia(n) nation greatly develop-impfc
be-impfvn
Die Mongolei entwickelt sich sehr. (Vietze 1974: 84)
Mongolia is being greatly developed.
1.2. The Problem of the Past Tenses

Although there is general (though not universal ), agreement that the
various past tense forms of Mongolian differ in meaning and/or use
after all, there must be some reason why a language would have the
different past tense forms found in example (4)it remains debatable,
and, to this day, much debated, how they so differ.11
{}
ba
la
jai
you (plural) book read-past
4. ta
nom
ungsi-
There has been a wide divergence of opinion regarding almost every

aspect of the meanings and uses of these forms. As Chuluu puts it (in
chapter 4 of his doctoral thesis, Ujeyediin 1998),12
. . . it is clear that any of the four morphemes [-v, -jee, -lee, -sen] can be
chosen by the speaker to indicate the past tense and the choice of suffix is perhaps up to the speaker. There is no doubt that they can be all
regarded as past tense markers, the question is, however, why Mongolian
has four different morphemes for the same past tense. . . . It has been generally concluded that these morphemes are distinct in certain ways but
attempts to establish clear and reliable criteria for distinguishing them
are not conclusive.
Until the last twenty years or so almost all scholars accepted some form
of the theory, first articulated by Ramstedt (1902), but having its roots
11
Saneev (1973: 92) states that the differences between [the three past tense]
forms, which are almost imperceptible, are still debated by students of Mongolian.
(Oddly enough, he also says, the three past tenses are used interchangeably.) It is
interesting, and suggestive, that while Sodovs Foreign Literature Reader (1967: 60) uses
trjee in yekspir 1564 ond . . . trjee Shakespeare was born in the year 1564, Altangerels English-Mongolian dictionary (1998: 40) uses trsn in yekspir 1564 ond trsn.
12
His name is given in his thesis as Ujeyediin Chuluu. He has published also under
the name Chaolu Wu (i.e., in the Chinese style, Wu Chaolu). I generally refer to him
as Chuluu, but refer to the various works by the name of the author given in each
case.
11
at least as far back as the grammar of Schmidt (1831), that the distinctions between the endings have to do with time.13 I call this account
the semantic theory. Few if any scholars other than the ones noted
in the preface had, prior to the mid-to-late 1990s, suggested a different
type of account, one based on modal distinctions, a type of account
characterized here as a pragmatic theory. In the last decade or so,
elements of essentially such a modal account have been presented, for
example, in the grammar by Kullmann and Tserenpil (1996), works
by Song (1997, 2002), the thesis of Ujeyediin Chuluu (1998), and the
textbook of Tserenchunt and Luethy (2000) (as well as on a Web site
with grammatical notes by Tserenchunt).14
However, there are a number of inadequacies shared by these various works. None of them presents much (if any) evidence other than
sheer native speaker intuition to support their accounts; none presents a sufficiently detailed account to allow the non-native-speaker to
properly use and interpret the various forms;15 and none of them make
clear that, as in the case of French, the tense/aspect systems of spoken
13
Already in Schmidt (1831) something approaching Ramstedts theory is present,
if only in embryo. The -ba (-v) past he calls (p. 56) the Prteritum imperfectum (i.e.,
imperfect past). Schmidts Perfectum (perfect, p. 57) includes both the -lua (-lee)
and -uqui (-jee) forms, which he glosses using the German present perfect:
i. bi ar.iyar
bari.lu-a
I hand-instr
take-past
ich habe es mit der Hand ergriffen
(I have seized it with my hand)
ii. qola aar.aa
ire.ki
far
land-abl
come-past
er ist vom fernen Landen gekommen (he has come from a distant country)
14
As noted in the preface, I only became aware of this Web site (which at the present time is available at http://www.iub.edu/~celcar/intermediate/mongolinter.html)
and, through it, the Tserenchunt/Luethy textbooks, at the point at which my research
on the spoken language with a native speaker, Sodnomdorj Gongor, was almost complete, and I had just realized that the written language was a distinct problem from
that posed by the spoken language. I had read Kullmann and Tserenpils grammar,
but obviously had not taken in what they had to say on this topic, since their account
came as news to me when I referred to their grammar while reading Tserenchunts
textbook. Whether their grammar (unconsciously) influenced my research, I cannot
say. As I noted in the preface, too, I only became aware of Nelson et al. (1998) after
completing my research and the drafting of this book.
15
Interestingly enough, the Mongolian phrasebook in the popular Lonely Planet
series (Sanders and Bat-Ireedi 1995) simply omits any mention of the verb endings
-lee and -jee in its grammatical sketch, despite the fact that these are amongst the
most commonly used endings in the language. (These authors 1999 textbook does,
however, discuss these affixes.)
12
chapter one
Mongolian and written Mongolian are not identical.16 Also, from the
theoreticians perspective, most of these works fail to deal with Mongolian tense/aspect in terms of contemporary theories of semantics
and pragmatics.
Accordingly, the present study aims to present a new and comprehensive account of the meaning and use of the past tense endings in
spoken and written Khalkha, which holds true (at least in broad outline) as well for the closely allied Mongolic languages (such as Inner
Mongolian, Buriat, and to a large extent even Kalmuck/Oirat), and
thereby provides implicit suggestions for new directions in the study
of yet other members of the family, such as Dagur (Daur) and Monguor (Tu).
The main points I argue for here are these:
a) The Khalkha verbal system is fundamentally an evidential/inferential system. That is, apart from tense (past vs. non-past), perhaps
the most important distinction marked in the verb is between what
the speaker personally can vouch for (evidential) and what the
speaker cannotwhat he or she is merely reporting or inferring
(inferential), or has freshly discovered (mirative).
b) The system also makes a fundamental distinction between the distal and the proximal. Thus -lee can be used as a presentor even
a futuretime marker, as well as a past time one, so long as the
situation recounted is in some way part of the speech act situation
(situation of utterance), that is, part of what is happening when
16
When I finished the first draft of this book, I discovered that Nelson et al. (1998)
did state that Mongol has grammaticalised . . . stylistic features related to spoken vs.
written discourse (p. 115) and generally anticipated my conclusions regarding the
distribution of the forms and their different uses in spoken and written language. To
sum up what they have to say regarding spoken and written use (pp. 11718):
/-jee/ . . . appear[s] in both spoken and written Mongol. It [is] particularly prevalent in spoken storytelling, particularly when setting the scene or introducing
a new event in the discourse.
/-laa/ . . . occurs in both spoken and written language, especially to convey a sense
of immediacy.
/-v/ . . . appears in written, rather than spoken, language. . . .
. . . [/-san/] as a finite verb affix is extremely prevalent in spoken language.
In conclusion, two of the affixes, /-jee/ and /-laa/, occur in both spoken and written language . . . . . . . /-v/ and [/-san/] . . . are largely confined in their distribution to
written and spoken Khalkh Mongol, respectively.
We see below, however, that some of their conclusions are not quite correct, and others do not tell the full story.
c)
d)
e)
f)
13
and where the speaker is uttering the sentence in question.17 When

talk is of an occurrence separatedand especially when distantin
time from the time of utterance, the -jee form is generally used
instead.
The past tenses marked by -jee and -lee are essentially deictic and
indefinite (they simply indicate that some occurrence happened
some time in the past, without necessarily relating it to any particular contextual time), while those in -sen and -v are anaphoric
(relating the occurrence recounted in their clause to a contextual
time) and definite (relating it to a particular time).
When, for some reason, neither the evidential, proximal -lee, nor
the inferential, distal -jee is appropriate to use, a neutral form is
used instead, -sen in the spoken language, -v in the written. At least
some of the contexts triggering use of these latter tense markers are
specifically those in which definite, anaphoric tenses are appropriate.
Within a topical thread (a passage or string of passages sharing
a common subject or theme), -lee may indicate a new subject or
theme, or may suggest further information to come, while -jee may
mark the conclusion of the thread.
In texts and extended discourses, past tense use depends on genre.
In narration, the tenses are anaphoric; -jee indicates an occurrence
preceding the reference time (roughly, the current time defined by
the context), -lee one which follows it, and the neutral -v (-sen)
indicates one occurring at the reference time, which allows its use
to foreground narrative material (that is, to mark it as part of the
main events of the narrative). In non-narration, the tenses are deictic and function like metric tenses, that is, tenses marking degrees
of remoteness18 from the present time: -jee is a distant past, -lee a
recent past, and -v is neutral in this regard.
17
Nelson et al. (1998: 121) propose that -lee does not mark past tense per se, but
rather signals the relative proximity of the speaker with the situation being related,
which may include the past or future, from which they conclude that [i]n most
cases, -/laa/ is a discontinuous tense that includes past or future but excludes the
present, which they compare (p. 122f.) to a discontinuous tense reported by Comrie
(1985: 8889) in an Australian aboriginal language, Burera. (They mistakenly date
this to 1976.) However, they later note (p. 125) that [t]here are some types of predicates where a present tense interpretation for /-laa/ is possible, or more precisely,
where a state is interpreted as continuing into the present, so that (p. 126) [i]n these
examples, /-laa/ is not a discontinuous tense. The upshot would seem to be that, as
proposed in the present work, -lee is not a discontinuous tense.
18
That is not to say that the tense systems of the Mongolic languages are remoteness or metric systems of the kind typified by the Bantu languages.
14
chapter one
g) The meanings of the various endings and their functions in discourse are mutually determinant. Not every tense can be used in
every context, nor in every context can every temporal relationship
be expressed. Meaning and use are not independent.
h) The uses of the tenses in written language differ from those in
spoken language. Formal speech approximates the usages found
in writing, while informal writing approximates that of speech.
Speech and writing alike range over a variety of usages, from the
most colloquial and informal to the most formal and standard. The
evolving language of the Internet and non-traditional media exhibits many of the usages of each of writing and speech, and in some
regards, its usage is unique.
2. Semantic Theories
2.1. Theories Based on Tense and Aspect
For almost a century and a half, the correct analysis of the tense/aspect
system of Mongolian largely eluded even the greatest scholars. This
is not at all surprising, given that their accounts of the semantics of
the verb were nearly all based on a false assumption, namely that the
grammatical tenses of the Mongolian verb marked by the affixes -jee,
-lee, and -v are differentiated primarily by tense (time of the occurrence or state relative to the present, or some other, time) and aspect
(roughly, completeness of the occurrence). While such theories have
been superseded by more adequate ones, such as the accounts presented in Kullmann and Tserenpil (1996), Sanders and Ireedi (1998),19
and Tserenchunt and Leuthy (2000), their prevalence in older works
still widely consulted today and perpetuation in some recent works
requires their review, particularly as it serves to provide a background
to the development in the last two decades of more satisfactory theories.
The various accounts of the meanings and uses of the forms given in
the older, and much of the recent, literature are often vague and sometimes contradictory. Scholars do not agree with each other, and some,
such as Poppe, even differ with themselves. For example, Poppes 1951
19
Their characterizations of the tenses are not as satisfactory as those in the Tserenchunt/Leuthy textbook or the Kullmann/Tserenpil reference work, but still mark an
advance on the accounts in the older textbooks.
15
grammar has it that the -jee ending marks a witnessed or certain past
occurrence (which is how he characterizes the -lee ending in his 1970
Handbook), then his 1954 grammar calls -jee a pluperfect marker,
while the Handbook calls it an extended past. (This last characterization also is to be found in some Russian and Mongolian works, for
example Kasyanenko 1968 and Janivdorj and Ragaa 1967). At various times Poppe terms the -v ending an indicator of a completed past
occurrence or a perfect (1951), a marker of the recent past (1954), or
just the simple past (1970).
But it is -jee which is called a recent past by Street (1963)as is -lee
by evernina (1958) and by Kasyanenko (1968). evernina characterizes -jee as a distant past (as does Schlepp 1983). The sense that -jee
marks a distant past, even a pluperfect (the time of the occurrence is
earlier than a given past time), may be due to its marking a regress, a
concept applied by Dugarova (1991: 55), a superficial regress being
marked by the form -lee, a profound one by -jee. Dugarova writes:20
- - ,
, , ,
, -
.
, ,
,
. - ,
, ,
. [1962 387], ,
, ,
, .
(
) , , (
).
-, -.
(The forms -laa and -jee relate situations, which are occurring at the
stage which has (already) been achieved in the narration, back to earlier stages, and are in some sense deictic within the framework of the
chronology of the artistic world of the narrative. These verbal forms
express something similar to precedence, although, in keeping with
definitions accepted in the present work, are technically not temporal.
Thus the forms -laa and -jee serve to denote regression, if one is to use
E. Koschmiders term [1962: 387], a turning backwards, to previous
events which have provided conditions for the situation that exists in
20
Extended quotations in translation here are mine, unless otherwise noted.
16
chapter one
the present moment, and to which point the story has progressed. The
regression can be shallow (a return to events immediately preceding
this moment) or, on the contrary, it can be deep (a return to more
remote events). Shallow regression is marked by the form -laa, and
deep regression by the form -jee.)21
What Dugarova is suggesting is that these markers form part of

the background, rather than of the narrative foreground. Instead of
advancing narrative time, they may halt it or even send it backwards.
An illustrative example from English is (7a), where the explanatory second sentence involves an event that precedes in time the
event recounted in the first sentence. This contrasts with a narrative
sequence, such as Caesars boast (7b), in which each sentence recounts
a later event than the one before. In such examples, all of the sentences
are equally on the main narrative line and form part of the foreground
of a narrative.
7. a. The Titanic sank. It hit an iceberg.
b. I came, I saw, I conquered.
The present perfect tense has sometimes been identified with a recent
past, and the term present perfect has been applied both to -jee
Street (1963: 122) says it may emphasize the present result of a past
action or of a state that existed in the past (and may continue into the
future)and to -lee (by Ramstedt, and following him, by Poppe 1951,
1955, 1970 and Saneev 1964).
In light of this (brief and unsystematic) survey, Chuluus
already-quoted conclusion (Ujeyediin 1998) that attempts to establish
clear and reliable criteria for distinguishing them are not conclusive
seems an understatement.
Several scholars indeed have suggested that there is no temporal or
semantic distinction between the endings, but their suggestions are on
the whole vague, generally lack adequate supporting evidence, and do
not point toward definite alternative analyses.
Ramstedt, in his pioneering (1902) study, already warned against a
simple account of the endings as tenses, though his warning proved
inadequate to prevent subsequent authors from taking too seriously
the labels he assigned the endings. Although he (on p. 21) calls the
21
Translation by Jan Schallert, thanks to Christina Kramer.
17
endings -ne (the present-tense, i.e. the non-past or present-future),

-lee, -jee, and -v tempora indicativi (tenses of the indicative), he
warns that kann man auch hier den namen tempora nur mit vorsicht
gebrauchen (one can use the name tempora only with care); apart
from certain objective temporal distinctions, [d]ieser khalkhassischen verbalformen bezeichnen nmlich in der that, ausser gewissen
objektiven zeitunterschieden, auch verschiedene zeit- und aktionsarten
(action imperfecta & actio perfecta) (these Khalkha verb forms indicate in reality besides certain objective temporal distinctions also various kinds of time and aspect (actio imperfecta & actio perfecta).22
A number of scholars have stated something similar to Poppes
observation (1954: 163, noted by Blsing 1984: 37) that there is no
temporal difference between various present (or past) forms, but only
a difference of the point of view of the person speaking and the latters subjective attitude. Similarly, evernina (1958: 39) warns that the
various forms are often used for one another and are not definite.23
Even Ramstedt himself, despite his use of terminology based on
tense and aspect, does not fully subscribe to the view that the Mongolian tense forms are simply markers of tense and aspect, but implicitly presents another, non-temporal, perspective. He notes that the
past tenses often have uses that he characterizes as modal. He writes
(1902: 21), albeit somewhat obscurely, that
In vielen fllen tritt bei den tempora die aktionsart deutlicher als die
relative zeitstufe hervor, und wir sollten dann von modi, nicht von
tempora reden. So, wenn die -w-bildung zu hypothetischen annhamen gebraucht wird. So auch die -l-bildung, wenn durch sie etwas
als sicher geschehend oder als demonstriert bezeichnet wird. Die
-n-bildung dagegen hat eine so allgemeine bedeutung, dass sie eher die
hundlung ganz tempuslos als auf eine bestimmte zeit hinweisend aussagt. Die gegenseitigen verhltnisse der khalkhasischen tempusformen
entsprechen also, trotz ihrer hier gegebenen namen, nicht denjenigen
der objektiven zeitstufen.
(In many cases aspect comes out more clearly in the tenses than relative
time, and we should then talk of modi, not of tempora. Thus when the
[-v]-form is used for hypothetical suppositions. Thus too the [-lee]-form,
when through it something is indicated as clearly happening or as
22
The translations here from Ramstedt are mine. I wish to thank my colleague,
Professor Harald Ohlendorf, for his help with the translations from German given in
the present work, though ultimate responsibility for them remains mine.
23
To use Blsings (1984: 37) term.
18
chapter one
demonstrated. The [-ne]-form on the contrary has such a general meaning, that it expresses the action entirely atemporally (timelessly) rather
than as referring to a definite time. The reciprocal relationships of the
Khalka tense forms thus do not correspond, despite the names given
them here, to those of the objective times.)
Ramstedt suggests designating them not tempora (tenses), but rather

modi (moods). But as Blsing (1984: 37) comments, Ramstedt does
not provide us with an elucidation or precise definition of such
terms as modus and actio. Nor is it entirely clear in the end whether
Ramstedt views the endings as modal, aspectual, or temporal, or some
combination thereof.
But notwithstanding Ramstedts warnings, most scholars through
the end of the 1980s took the distinctions between the past tense markers to be semantic ones involving both tense and aspect. Ramstedts
terminology (given in table 3 below) suggests a theory in which the
four24 finite, indicative tenses of Mongolian are semantically defined
by the temporal (i.e., tense) opposition of past versus non-past, and
the aspectual distinction of perfective (i.e., complete) and imperfect
(incomplete).25
Table 3
Ending
-ne
-v
-lee
-jee
Label
Imperfektivisches prsens, Prsens Imperfekti
imperfective present, present of the imperfect
Perfektivisches prteritum, Prteritum perfekti perfective preterite,
preterite of the perfect
Perfektivisches prsens, Prsens Perfekti
perfective present, present of the perfect
Imperfektivisches prteritum, Prteritum Imperfekti
imperfective preterite, preterite of the imperfect
24
Some Mongolian languages show more than one present tense, however. For
example, the vertical script language has a second present tense ending, -y/-yu (Poppe
1954: 92). For the forms and uses of the present tense endings in the Mongolian languages, see Poppe (1955: 261ff.), Weiers (1969: 13146), and Wu (1996: 5868).
25
Although the terms perfect and imperfect are often used in this connection in the
Mongolistic literature, the aspectual distinction in question is actually that of perfective and imperfective.
19
Thus, following Ramstedt, the -v past, referred to simply as the past

tense by Hangin (1968: 24) and as the definite past by Bosson (1964: 27),
is called by many scholars the past perfect or past of the perfect;26 while
the past in -jee, termed the narrative past by Hangin (1968: 114), is on
the contrary called the past imperfect or past of the imperfect, reflecting
a purelyif perhaps only nominalaspectual contrast between the
two.27 The -lee past, on the other hand, is considered by some scholars
not to be a true past tense at all.28 Instead, they term it a present perfect,
which differs from the past perfect in tense (i.e., time) and from the
present imperfect in aspect.29 The contrasting present imperfect is for
Ramstedt and those following him the form in -ne;30 this marks the
non-past (present-future) tense.31 These contrasts are summarized in
table 4 below.
Table 4
tense\aspect
past
non-past
perfect
imperfect
-v
-lee
-jee
-ne
26
Poppe, following Ramstedts prteritum perfekti (1902: 19), has Prteritum perfecti (1951: 80), Praeteritum perfekti (1955: 266), and past of the perfect (1970: 131).
Ramstedt also writes of the perfektivisches prteritum (p. 24). In Russian this is perfektnyi preterit (Saneev 1964: 193), hence Mongolian ngrn tgssn tsag, nggeren
tegsegsen ca, past perfect tense (as in Beffa and Hayamon 1975: 81).
27
Poppe, again following Ramstedt (1902: 18), who has prteritum imperfekti, writes
of the Prteritum imperfecti (1951: 80), Praeteritum imperfekti (1955: 265), and past
of the imperfect (1970: 131). Ramstedt also has imperfektivisches prteritum (p. 24).
In Russian, this is imperfektnyj preterit (Saneev 1964: 190).
28
Strangely enough, some scholars who refer to it as the present perfect list it as one
of the three past tenses. Thus Poppe (1954: 92), who consistently calls it the present
perfect, includes it in the three forms of the past.
29
Poppe, following Ramstedts prsens perfekti (1902: 17), has Prsens Perfecti
(1951: 80), Praesens perfekti (1955: 265), and present of the perfect (1970: 130). Ramstedt writes of the perfektivisches prsens (p. 24). In Russian this is perfektnyj prezens
(Saneev 1964: 188). Oddly enough, Sanders and Bat-Ireedis textbook (1999: 39)
calls this form the past perfect tense.
30
Ramstedt calls this the imperfektivisches prsens (1902: 24) or prsens imperfekti
(p. 15), following which come Poppes Prsens imperfecti (1951: 79), Praesens Imperfecti (1955: 260) and present of the imperfect (1970: 130), and, in Russian imperfektnyj
prezens (Saneev 1964: 185).
31
Similarly in Mongolian ( Janivdorj and Ragaa 1967: 113) it is the odoo ba
ireedi tsagiin dagavar present and future tense suffix. Beffa and Hayamon (1975:
80) call it the effectif non pass (i.e., non-past), in Mongolian edge/odu-a a ziaqu
khelber, odoo tsag zaax xelber form indicative of present time.
20
chapter one
As has already been suggested, Ramstedt explains these labels poorly

and indeed warns the reader (p. 22) against taking them too seriously:
Die gegenseitige verhltnisse der khalkhassischen tempusformen entsprechen also, trotz ihrer hier gegebenen namen, nicht denjenigen der
objektiven zeitstufen. Die bedeutung und verwendung jeder einzelnen
form grndet sich, unabhngig von denen der anderen, nur auf ihre
historische unterlage, und man hat nur mit einer gewissen freiheit des
redenden zu rechnen unter den vorhandenen ausdrucksmitteln die fr
seine zwecke passendsten zu whlen.
(The reciprocal relationships of the Khalka tense forms do not correspond . . . to those of the objective times, despite the names given to them
here. The meaning and use of each particular form is based, independent
of those of the others, only on its historical base, and one has but to
reckon with a certain freedom of the speaker to choose amongst the
available means of expression that serves his purpose.)
Nonetheless there has been a tendency by later scholars to elaborate

on, and to attempt to justify, Ramstedts labels in terms of various
semantic distinctions.
2.2. The Finite Indicative Verbs
The name past perfect suggests that the past tense in -v refers to
past and perfected action as Hangin (1968: 24) puts it, that is, to an
event completed in the past, as in (8, 9).
8. n gl
bi zurgaan tsag.t
boso.v.
this
morning I
six
hour-dat
get up-past
This morning I got up at six oclock. (Street 1963: 122)
9. i
igdr
nom
uni.v
uu?
you yesterday book read-past qp
Hast du gestern ein Buch gelesen? (Vietze 1974: 44)
Did you read a book yesterday?
The term past imperfect, in parallel with the label past perfect,
should suggest an event not completed in the past. But in fact incompletion as such does not usually enter into characterizations of this
form, which is more properly the present of the perfect, to translate
Ramstedts term.
Rather than the incompleteness of the action, some writers emphasize prolongation in time, so that past imperfect means little more
21
than extended past.32 Poppe (1970: 131), for example, says that the
past tense verb formed with -jee denotes an action that took place in
the past and lasted for some time, and he offers the examples numbered (10, 11) below:33
10. rgelj
ndes
t.j.
all the time
roots
collect-past
all the time he collected [edible] roots
11. Tiim
sain
x
bai.jee.
such
good
boy
be-past
there was such a good lad
Beffa and Hayamon (1975: 82) claim that the action may extend into
the present, saying this form indicates an action commenced in the
past, and which is prolonged or repeated in the present. They offer
the examples (12, 13):
12. Mongol.iin
Mongolia-gen
bx
whole
nutg.iin
country-gen
dundaj
middle
ndr
height
1550
metr
a.j.
1550
metres be-past
laltitude moyenne de toute la Mongolie est de 1550 mtres
(the mean altitude of all of Mongolia is 1550 metres)
13. xor
two
baildag
combatants
naadam.d
Naadam-dat
barilda.x
wrestle-ifvn34
ge.j
zodog
uudag.tai
ir.jee.
say-impfc
wrestlers-jacket wrestlers pants-com come-past
les deux combattants sont arrivs avec leur costume de lutter aux jeux
(au Naadam) (the two combatants have come with their fighting suits
to the games [to the Naadam])
32
Beffa and Hayamon (1975: 82) call this the pass prolong ou aoriste prolonged
past or aorist, in Mongolian, ngrn rgelilsen tsag, nggeren rglzilegsen ca passing extended time. Similarly Kasyanenko (1968: 20) says this expresses prolonged
past time (proedee dlitelnoe vremya).
33
The translations are Poppes.
34
The form sometimes called the infinitive is the so-called future participle or
verbal noun, the nomen futuri. Besides an infinitive, it also functions as a presentfuture or non-past form.
22
chapter one
As a matter of fact, the -jee past, supposedly imperfective in aspect, can

serve to mark completed past actions (1416):
14. xaa
oi.j?
where
go-past
kuda poel? (Kasyanenko 1968: 20)
where did s/he go?
15. nar
gar.
sun
come out-past
the sun rose (Poppe 1970: 131)
Although Ramstedt (1902: 16) calls the -lee past the present of the
perfect (prsens perfekti), he does not justify this name. His statements
(p. 17) about the form, indeed, are a bit confusing, for though he calls
it the present of the perfect, he observes that it is a kind of preterite
(past tense), though it can also serve as a present or a future:
Diese form wird angewendet in stzen, wo eine handlung als sicher abgeschlossen oder ein zustand als sicher erreicht angegeben wird. Sie giebt
nicht nur eine bestimmte zeitstufe, die gegenwart des vollendeten, sondern auch die sicherheit des ausgesagten an. Es wird dadurch eine handlung auf etwas, was fr die richtigkeit der aussage irgendwie eine sttze
giebt, miteinbegriffen. Der redende kann sich entweder auf die persnlichen erinnerungen des ausgeredeten (es war ja od. wie bekannt) oder
auf die zeitlichen verhltnisse berufen (schon, jetzt). So angewendet
entspricht diese form unseren prteritis (imp., perf. und plusqupf.).
Es kann aber die rightigkeit der aussage auch aus der usseren situation im momente des sprechens (sieh da, sich doch) oder als logische
konsequenz aus dem vorher gesagten hervorgehen (es wird ja, es versteht sich). In solchen fllen mssen wir bei dem bersetzten das prsens oder futurum gebrauchen.
(This form is used in sentences, where an action is represented as firmly
concluded or a state as firmly achieved. It indicates not only a certain
tense, the present of the perfect, but also the firmness of the statement. It
includes thereby a reference to an indication of something that somehow
supports the correctness of the statement. The speaker can refer either to
the personal recollections of the addressee (it was, as you know or as
is well known) or to the temporal relationships (already, at present).
Used thus, this form corresponds to our preterite (imperfect, perfect,
and pluperfect).
23
The correctness of the statement can also arise however out of the
external situation at the moment of speech (look at that!, do look!) or
as a logical consequence of what has been said before. In such cases we
must use the present or future in the translation.)
Accordingly he glosses example (17) below thus: (er) stirbt schon,

od. ist ja schon gestorben, i.e., he is already dying or you know,
hes already dead. Poppe (1951: 80) glosses it as ist ja tot, i.e., is
already dead, dont you know.35
17. xe.lee.
die-past36
Others,37 however, have viewed the form, in contrast to Ramstedts

present perfect as an imperfective, i.e., an uncompleted, past, indicating an action which has been started but is still unfinished.38 Thus
in (18), that person has already started to come here, but has not yet
arrived (Wu 1995: 95).
18. tere
kmn
ire.le.
that
person
come-past
That person is coming.
Chenggeltei (1981: 298, in Wu 1995: 97) sees the form as indicative of

a bounding point, rather than of a period of time:39
(a) the moment when an action is about to start; (b) the moment when
an action just started; (c) the moment when an action is about to finish;
(d) the moment when an action is just finished or has already finished.
35
By using ja, Ramstedt and Poppe are trying in their glosses to capture a certain
nuance of the -lua (= -lee) form, namely a sense that the fact is well-known to, or
should be recalled by, the addressee. You know and dont you know are my attempts
to capture the sense of German ja.
36
For the sake of consistency, all the past tense forms are glossed here using the
tag past, even where this is not entirely felicitous, as in the case of this example.
37
For example, Dobu (1983: 52), cited in Wu (1995: 97).
38
Dobu (1983: 52), in Wu (1995: 95).
39
Wu (1995: 95) notes that Dobus explanation partially coincides with Chenggelteis who suggests that -la/-le refers to an action which is either about to start or
about to finish (1981: 298). By such an explanation, one may understand that [example (18)] refers to an action that has already started and is going to be completed in
the near future. Therefore the [translation of the sentence] can also be: . . . That person
is about to arrive.
24
chapter one
Thus -lee can be used for the imminent future, as in (19) below, or the
recent past (20), or for either (21, 22).40
19. Batu
aru.ad
yabu.la.
Batu
go out-pfc41
go-past
Batu is about to go out.
20. tere
sayiqan
Kkeqota.aa
he
just
Huhhot-abl
He just arrived from Huhhot.
ire.le.
come-past
21. nom.ini
una.la
book-your
fall-past
Your book is about to fall down. or Your book has just fallen down.
22. irig
ire.le
soldier
come-past
The soldier is just now coming or The soldier has just arrived.
Wu points out (1995: 98) that the interpretation of -lee depends on

the Vendlerian (i.e., aspectual) class of the verb.42 With verbs denoting
activities (and processes) and so-called achievements (such as die),
-lee refers mainly to the imminent future, whereas with stative verbs
such as be it refers principally to the recent past; with accomplishment verbs (e.g., climb) it may refer to either, presumably because
accomplishments essentially combine an activity phase with a final
achievement. However, this correlation of tense with Aktionsart (kind
of action) is only a tendency, for Wu (p. 99) observes that with some
activity verbs, -lee may nonetheless refer to either imminent future or
recent past, as in his examples (23, 24). He points out (p. 99f.) that
adverbs such as sayi just, udaqu soon, and gedr yesterday will
disambiguate such sentences.
23. Bi nom
ungsi.la
I
book
read-past
I am about to read some books or I have just read some books (finished
a moment ago)
40
Examples from Wu (1995: 97).

This is the perfective converb, not to be confused with the perfect verbal noun.
42
Vendler (1957) classified verbs as activities like run and read, states like feel and
seem, achievements like find and notice, and accomplishments like climb (climb the
mountain). These categories of verbs differ in numerous semantic and syntactic properties. Although Vendler was not the first to propose such an aspectual classification
(indeed, the essence of his proposal is to be found already in Aristotle), his name has
come generally to be associated with it. For discussion see Binnick (1991: 1708).
41
25
24. bi ger
bari.la
I
house build-past
I am about to build a house or I have just built a house (finished a
short time ago)
Further, with verbs of motion, -lee generally refers to the imminent

future (19, 25):
19. Batu
aru.ad
yabu.la.
Batu
go out-pfc
go-past
Batu is about to go out.
25. Tere
yabu.la
he
leave-past
he is about to leave (Wu 1995: 100)
Wu concludes (p. 100) that the [-lee] suffix does not actually have
one core meaning as usually suggested in previous research; rather, it
can have various meanings depending upon the type of verb to which
it is attached.
To the extent that the forms labelled as perfect by Ramstedt do
not necessarily refer to completed action, nor those labelled imperfect to incomplete action, and the so-called present perfect is often
neither present nor perfect, Ramstedts terminology is not very
revealing and clearly cannot form the basis for a sound account of the
Mongolian past tenses.
2.3. The Participles
The ending -v has been labelled the past of the perfect. It is usually considered the unmarked43 or normal past tense, and is usually
43
In the present context, unmarked is a technical term roughly equivalent to
basic or usual, whereas marked means special, unusual. Most definitions
revolve around the notion that the unusual requires an explicit indicator, whereas
the usual does not. Thus languages often have a marker like English -ling (duckling,
gosling) referring to the young of a species, but require no explicit marker to refer
to members of the species as a whole, nor to adult members (compare duck, goose).
Markedness is a confusing concept, since it has been used to refer to formal, distributional, and semantic properties, which do not necessarily accord with one another,
and has been defined in different ways by different schools of linguistics. The three
things relevant to the present discussion regarding markedness are (1) that the existence of the marked member of an opposition implies the existence of the unmarked
(as terms like duckling imply the existence of terms like duck), (2) that the marked
member, but not necessarily the unmarked, requires explicit marking as by the addition of an affix, and (3) that the extension (membership in the real world) of the
26
chapter one
glossed by, and in turn oftenbut not alwaysserves as the translation of, the preterites (simple past tenses) of other languages. However, in Mongolian there are restrictions on its use and it is largely in
alternation with the perfect participle (perfect verbal noun, nomen
perfecti)44 formed with the variants of the ending -sen.
The verbal nouns can serve as nouns, adjectives, or adverbs. As a
noun, a participle may take a plural form (as -sen does in example
26). In such uses the perfect participle refers to action completed at,
or prior to, the contextual time. Thus in (26) the verbal noun is effectively pluperfect because the main verb of the sentence is itself past;
in (27) the same verbal noun is past, however, because the context is
present; but in (28) there is no defined contextual time and all one can
say, contrary to the past tense used in Streets gloss, is that the event
in question is relatively past, i.e. anterior to the contextual reference
time: it could, for example, mean the thing you had requested, the
thing you will have requested, etc.
26. yav.sa.d
ir.lee
go-pfvn-pl
come-past
those who had gone have come (Poppe 1970: 133)
27. Bi bas
ene
gazar
ine
ir.sen
I
also this
place
newly come-pfvn
Im a new-comer here too. (Street 1963: 206)
xn.
person
28. inii
zaxi.san
yum
your
request-pfvn
thing
the thing you asked [me] to buy (Street 1963: 207)
The distinction between -sen and -ee is nominally aspectual, that is,
perfect(ive) vs. imperfect(ive), rather than temporal (anterior vs. cotemporal), so perfect (or perfective) and imperfect (or imperfective) are
marked member is included in that of the unmarked member (ducklings are ducks)
but its intension (conceptual definition) includes that of the unmarked member (the
definition of duckling contains more content, provides more information, than does
that of duck). These properties play a crucial role in deciding which categories are the
marked members of their oppositions.
44
Ramstedt (1902: 27), Poppe (1951: 81). In Mongolian, ngrn tgssn tsagt ilt
ner/nggeren tegsegsen ca-tur ilet ner-e past perfective verbal noun, i.e., verbal
noun of the completed past tense (nom verbal du pass fini) (Beffa and Hayamon
1975: 99, Vietze 1974: 58).
27
better names for the participles that they form than are terms like past
participle and present participle.
When used with stative expressions, the state referred to by the perfective participle leads us to infer, but the verb itself does not refer to,
prior action. Thus in (5) the state denoted by the -sen participle, that
of being ashamed, is co-temporal with (that is, overlaps) the action of
the main verb of the sentence. With other types of predicates, however, -sen indicates anteriority (29) and -ee co-temporality (30). Hence
the names perfective, referring to completed action, and imperfective,
referring to incomplete action.
5. Tseren
ii.sen.d.ee
uil.san.
Tseren
be ashamed-pfvn-dat-rp
cry-past
when he was ashamed, Tseren cried (Poppe 1970: 134)
29. i
tn.ii
yav.sn.iig
med.sen
?
you that-gen
go-pfvn-acc
know-past
qp
Did you know that he (had) left? (Kullmann and Tserenpil 1996: 143)
30. Ta
you (plural)
ter
that
ir.j
come-impfc
baig.aa
be-impfvn
xn.iig
tani.x
uu?
person-acc
be acquainted with-ifvn
qp
Do you know that person who is coming? (Kullmann and Tserenpil
1996: 146)
The perfective verbal noun, like any other verbal noun, can also serve
as the main predicate of a sentence, with (as in 31) or without a copula
(32, 33), and it may be negated (34). As a main predicate, it may also
appear in a question (35, 36). Sometimes the appropriate gloss is present perfect (31, 32, 36), sometimes past (3335). One, central, issue
that must be considered is whether a form in -sen, when employed as
the main predicate of the sentence, differs from the past tense finite
forms in meaning and/or use, and if so, in what way(s) it does. It must
also be considered whether, and in what way, -sen without a copula
differs from -sen with a copula.
31. i
n.iig
duul.san
yum
uu?
you
this-acc
hear-pfvn
copp
qp
Hast du schon davon gehrt? (Vietze 1974: 58)
Have you heard this?
28
chapter one
32. Ter
ajil.d.aa
yav.san.
that
work-dat-rp
go-past
He has gone to work. (Street 1963: 207)
33. Bi xot.oos
ir.sen.
I
city-abl
come-past
I came from the city. (Hangin 1968: 32)
34. Bi oilog.son.gi.
I understand-pfvn-neg
I did not understand. (Hangin 1968: 32)
35. Bat
xezee
ir.sen
be?
Bata when
come-pfvn
qp
When did Bata come? (Poppe 1970: 134)
36. Yar.j
duus.san
uu?
talk-impfc
finish-pfvn
qp
Have you finished [talking]? (Sanders and Ireedi 1995: 78)
In keeping with the agglutinative character of the Mongolian language,

a different ending -sen (labeled pfvn here though it is actually a short
form of asan, the -sen form of the obsolete verb a-, which also provides the root of ajee was) may be added, amongst others, to the
non-past participle (ifvn, 37), to the perfect participle (38), and to the
frequentative (habvn) in (39):
37. Za, neg
saixan xuuuur
ide.x.sen.
oh a
fine
khuushuur eat-ifvn-pfvn
How Id like to eat Khuushuur [sic] again! (Kullmann and Tserenpil
1996: 339)
38 xar
xainag
bol.son.son
black khainag become-pfvn-pfvn
war zu einem schwartzen Yakbastard geworden jedoch . . . (Poppe
1951: 84)
. . . had become a black khainag.
39. end
neg ail
bai.dag.san
here a
yurt be-habvn-pfvn
hier pflegte eine Jurte zu stehen (Poppe 1951: 84)45
Here there used to be a yurt.
45
The transcription in Poppes examples (3739) has been adjusted slightly to fit
the transliteration used in the present work.
29
In these forms, the additional ending acts like a past tense marker,
taking the rest of the proposition within its scope,46 so that (39), for
example, means something like it used to be the case that [a yurt was
usually here], where the affix immediately preceding the final perfect
noun ending functions aspectually; thus in (39) -deg, the so-called frequentative verbal noun, marks usualness, and the proposition within
the scope of san is literally a yurt is usually here. Similarly the included
proposition in (38) is . . . has become a black khainag, which is within
the scope of the perfective affix meaning it was the case that.
In addition to the perfect(ive) participle, amongst the past tense suffixes found in Mongolic languages Wu (1996) lists the imperfect(ive)
participle or verbal noun (nomen imperfecti) formed using -ee.47 Wu
was quite possibly the first scholar, in the West at least, to label the
form a past tense ending.48 Above, it was commented in regard to the
examples in (6) that -ee cannot be considered a past-tense marker in
the way that -sen can. In and of itself, the imperfective participle used
as a predicate is not a marker of past tense, but rather a kind of present, conveying (as in 6b) the sense of something begun in the past
and continuing at the present time: something which is still the case.
It is consequently often glossed using a present tense, as in (6b), so its
labeling by Wu as a past tense marker requires some qualification.
6. b. Mongol uls ix
xgji.j
baig.aa.
Mongolia
greatly develop-impfc
be-impfvn
Mongolia is being greatly developed.
46
By the scope of a semantic category such as negation is meant how much of the
proposition (or other unit) the category in question applies to. For example, John
doesnt want Sue to leave is ambiguous, depending on the scope of the negation.
If the negation applies to the whole propositionin which case we say it has wide
scopethe meaning is that John has no desire for Sue to leave, but doesnt necessarily want her to stay, either: he can be quite indifferent. If the negation applies to
just the object of want, if the negation has narrow scope, the meaning is that John
positively desires that Sue not leave. Syntactically, any element which governs another
may be said to have it within its scope. Thus in John doesnt want Sue to leave, there
is no structural scope ambiguity on the surface level, though in a transformational
syntactic theory there may be a syntactic scope ambiguity, depending on whether the
underlying structure is something like John does want [Sue not to leave], associated
with narrow semantic scope, or it is John does not want [Sue to leave], associated with
wide semantic scope.
47
Ramstedt (1902: 25ff.), Poppe (1951: 81).
48
What Wu says (p. 81) of the -san ending could equally well be said of -a:
[This] suffix is normally not identified as a past tense marker in grammars, but . . . the
suffix can be used to indicate past tense in all Mongolian languages. . . .
30
chapter one
Like any other verbal noun, the imperfective may serve as a noun,
adjective, or adverb. In such uses, and as the main predicate of subordinate structures, this ending is cotemporal with the context time, as
(40): despite the present-tense gloss, the reference is to the contextual
time, not (directly) to the present. Thus in (41), yavaa refers to past
time because xellee is past, whereas in (42) iree refers to present time
because the question is (implicitly) in the present tense; and in (43)
baigaa again has no inherent time reference because there is no temporal context.
40. . . .
xii.j
baig.aa
xn
...
do-impfc
be-impfvn
person
the man (who is) doing . . . (Sanders and Ireedi 1999: 63)
41. Minii xajuu.d
suu.j
yav.aa
zaluu xel.lee.
my
side-dat
sit-impfc
go-impfvn
youth speak-past
The young man who was riding at my side spoke. (Street 1963: 207)
42. Ter naa
ir.ee49
xn
xen be?
the this way come-impfvn
person who qp
Who is the person who is coming this way? (Hangin 1968: 93)
43. ireen deer baig.aa
tom ar
tsag
table
on
be-impfvn
big
yellow clock
the big yellow clock [which is] on the table (Street 1963: 207)
As the main predicate of a sentence, this participle occurs both within

(6b, 44) and without (6a, 45) the scope of an auxiliary verb or copular
particle, and in this role it commonly occurs negated in either case (6a,
45). It can also appear in questions (45).50
6. a. Minii sar.iin
temdeg . . . sar
ir.ee.gi.
My
moon-gen
mark
I havent had my period for . . . months. (Sanders and Bat-Ireedi
1995: 128)
b. Mongol uls ix
xgji.j
baig.aa.
Mongolia
greatly
develop-impfc
be-impfvn
Mongolia is developing greatly.
49
Sodnomdorj calls iree here a mistake and comments that he would say irj yavaa.
(This may reflect a difference in dialects.)
50
I have not found any unnegated examples in questions, however.
31
44. Bid . . . reg

av.
ajilla.n
yav.aa
yum.
We . . . responsibility take-impfc work-modc go-impfvn
copp
We are working along with the responsibility of . . . (Street 1963: 207)
45. Nada.d
xn
yum
xel.l.ee.gi
Me-dat person something speak-caus-impfvn-neg
Has anyone left me a message? (Sanders and Ireedi 1995: 70)
y?
qp
In the modern, colloquial language, finite verbs are not negated, but
are replaced within the scope of negation by participles, to which a
reduced, cliticized form of the negative postposition gi without,
-less, not is added, e.g., the various past tense forms meaning went
become yavsangi didnt go, and both yavna goes, will go and yavj
baina is going, goes become yavaxgi isnt going, doesnt go.
It would seem that the participial predicates of sentences would
likewise simply be negated by the addition of -gi, so that yavsan when
negated would be yavsangi. While this is generally the case with other
participles (as in 46), it is, as recent works by native speakers point out,
not precisely the case where -sen is concerned.
46. Ta
end amdar.dag
uu?
You (plural) here live-habvn
qp
Do you live here?
gi, bi end amdar.dag.gi.
No I
here live-habvn-neg
No, I dont live here. (Sanders and Irredui 1995: 52)
Tserenchunt writes, Some scholars say that the negative -aagyi

(awaagyi, ireegyi) and -sangyi (awsangyi, irsengyi) endings have no
difference.51 But it is not true in my opinion. (Personal communication, June 1, 2007).
Tserenchunt and Luethy (2000: 62) say
[The form -sen] is made negative by placing the [-eegi] ending on the
main verb. This is the general past tense form. The expected form [-sengi] is only used when expressing not doing some thing as planned and
is only used for the recent past.
51
The phrasebook by Sanders and Ireedui (1995: 28) glosses no (he hasnt [gone])
by yavsangi or yavaagi. (Tserenchunts -gyi = my -gi.)
32
chapter one
And they offer the example (47).

47. Bid nom un.aa.gi.
Bid sonin un.san.
We book read-impfvn-neg
We news read-past
We didnt read a book. We read the newspaper. (Tserenchunt and
Luethy 2000: 62)
Kullmann and Tserenpil (1996: 184f.) similarly say that

For negation [-sen] should only be used if the action happens against
ones assumption. Otherwise . . . - with the negative particle [-gi] is
used [-eegi], which then indicates that the expected thing could still
happen [48, 49].52
48. He didnt go out. (He hasnt gone out.)
Ter gar.san.gi.
(gar.aa.gi.)
that go out-pfvn-neg
go out-impfvn-neg
49. I didnt see her. (I havent seen her.)
Bi
tn.iig
xar.san.gi.
(xar.aa.gi.)
I
that-acc
see-pfvn-neg
see-impfvn-neg
In predicative use with the negator gi (-gi), this imperfect affix

largely acts like a present perfect, and is often glossed as such, as in
(50) below; it may, however, receive a past tense gloss (51):
50. Ter
iid.ee.gi.
That decide-impfvn-neg
He hasnt decided (yet). (Kullmann and Tsedenpil 1996: 146)
52
The form -eegi baina is glossed hasnt -ed in the Sanders/ Bat-Ireedi phrasebook. Thus:
i. Minii rlg tseverl.ee.gi
bai.na
My
room
clean-impfvn-neg
be-pres
My room hasnt been cleaned. (p. 70)
ii. Minii sar.iin
temdeg . . . sar
ir.ee.gi.
My
month-gen
mark
I havent had my period for . . . months. (p. 128)
Sentence (iii) is glossed there No, Im not [married], but given that (iv) is Are you
married?, (iii) clearly means I havent gotten married. Cf. the entries from Luvsanjav
et al. (1988: 99) (vvii).
iii. gi, bi uraglaagi. (p. 48)
iv. Ta uraglasan uu? (p. 48)
v. Are you married? Ta gerlesen ?
vi. Im not married. Bi gerleegi.
vii. Ive just got married. Bi sayaxan gerlesen.

51. Bi tiim sanaag.aar
xel.ee.gi
I
such thought-instr
say-impfvn-neg
I didnt mean that. (Luvsanjav et al. 1988: 48)
33
yum.
copp
With negation, however, its sense (as in 52, 53) is basically that of
something which has not yet happened, as Hangin (1968: 93) and Vietze
(1974: 84) state.
52. Ter
ire.v
?
Ir.ee.gi.
that
come-past
qp
come-impfvn-neg
Did he come?Not yet.53 (Hangin 1968: 93)
53. Bi ene
nom.iig
un.aa.gi.
I
this book-acc
read-impfvn-neg
Ich habe dieses Buch noch nicht gelesen. (Vietze 1974: 84)
I have not yet read this book.
So Ramstedt (1903: 26) glosses ireegi ist bis jetzt noch nicht [gekommen], i.e., up to now has not yet [or still not] come.
2.4. Metric (Degrees of Remoteness) Theories of the -jee and
-lee Tenses
As regards the pasts in -jee and -lee there exists an alternative to the
two-tenses/two-aspects theory, in which the distinction of the pasts is
seen as temporal, but not as having to do with the difference between
the time spheres of past and present. Instead, what is purportedly
involved is a kind of metric tense distinction or distinction of degrees
of remoteness.54 In this alternative theory, the past in -lee represents a
recent or immediate past,55 and that in -jee a remote past.
53
Poppe (1970: 132) glosses ireegi has not come.

What have sometimes have been called, as here, metric tense systems and today
are more usually called remoteness systems, are tense systems in which grammatical
tenses mark relative distance from the present time and usually include both more
than one past tense and more than one future tense. The most comprehensive study
to date is that of Botne (to appear). For example, Kikuyu, a Bantu language, has three
past tenses and three futures, defined respectively as recent/immediate, intermediate, and distant. In many languages without metric tense systems there are ways of
expressing recency in the past (e.g., she just ate, French elle vient de manger) or immediacy in the future (shes about to eat, French elle est sur le point de manger).
55
Hangin writes of the immediate past (1968: 99, 1976: 17) and similarly Beffa and
Hayamon of the parfait immdiat immediate past, in Mongolian sayaxan tgssn
tsag, sayiqan nggeregsen a, literally, time not long passed (Beffa and Hayamon
54
34
chapter one
Thus Kasyanenko (1968: 20) writes that the verbal form in [-lee]
properly expresses past time concluded not long ago: garlaa went
out. . . . Hangin similarly says (1968: 99), The immediate past denotes
an action just completed. Hangin offers the example (54). The gloss
its gotten late would have been more appropriate to his comment
that this form represents recently completed action.
54. Oroi
bol.loo,
odoo
yava.x.gi
y?
late
become-past,
now
go-ifvn-neg
qp
Its getting late, arent you going? (Hangin 1968: 99)
As has been pointed out by Hangin (1968: 99) and Wu (1995: 95),
amongst others, -lee can also be interpreted as a near or immediate
future. Thus example (55) (from Nasunbayar et al. 1984: 310) Wu also
interprets, depending on the context, as meaning The signal for the
army to leave is about to be given.
55. irig
mordo.qu
dokiya
talbi.la
army
leave-ifvn
signal
release-past
The signal for the army to leave was given.
If -lee is a recent past, the -jee past is a distant or remote past. Wu

(1995: 86f.) cites the examples in (56) in criticizing this view, which
was presented by Nasunbayar et al. (1984: 308):
56. a. Bold.un
mal
neliyed s.ei
Bold-gen
livestock quite
increase-past
Bolds livestock increased quite a lot.
b. tere
nidonon
mori.ban gege.ei.
that
last year
horse-rp
lose-past
He lost his horse last year.
Hashimoto (1993) generalizes this into a theory in which three of the

four tenses differ principally in their relationship to the present time.
The verb form with the -v ending represents (p. 16) a past tense which
is distal, cut off altogether from the present, while the form in -jee is
proximal, and takes as its scope the past up to the present moment;
1975: 82). Wu (1995: 94f.) cites Nasunbayar et al. (1982: 310) as saying that -lua
indicates the recent past tense.
35
Present
Past
Future
-v
-jee/-ee
-laa
Diagram 1
the form in -lee adds to this the near future. Diagram 1 above is after
Hashimotos diagram (21).
Wu is critical of at least the traditional type of metric analysis,
pointing out that, out of context, (56a) says nothing of how distant
the event is in the past, while the remoteness evident in (56b) is due to
the adverb last year. Wu further observes (p. 87) that -jee can be used
with an adverb of recent time, as in (57), to indicate a recent event.
57. bi
sayiqan
tegn.tai
I
just
that-com
I just met him.
auli.ai.
meet-past
Indeed, perhaps anticipating an analysis such as Hashimotos, Street

(1963) views the -jee form as a kind of present perfect, indicative of
recent past time, writing (p. 122f.) that it either has the meaning of a
recent past, or emphasizes the present result of a past action or of
a state that existed in the past (and may continue into the future). A
variety of English translations are required. He offers the examples
(5860):
58. Baga
Baga
toirg.oor
Toirog-instr
...
...
3 km
3 km
boxir
drain
usn.ii
water-gen
tv
ugam
barigda.j
duus.jee.
main
line
build-impfc
finish-past
They have just finished building a main sewer line 3 km. long along the
Baga Toirog.
36
chapter one
59. Mongol orn.iig

toir.j
ze.x.eer
ir.jee.
Mongol country-acc tour-impfc see-ifvn-instr
come-past
He has come to visit around Mongolia. (Street 1963: 122: Street explains,
the person has just arrived at the airport.)
60. . . . odoo arvan
. . . now ten
xoyor
two
myanga
thousand
axam
nearly
mal.tai
cattle-com
bayan
aj axui
bolo.n
xg.jee.
wealthy
farm
become-modc
grow-past
. . . has now grown into a wealthy farm with nearly 12,000 cattle. (Street
1963: 122)
But examples such as (16, 61) show that -jee cannot, pace Street and
Hashimoto, (simply) constitute a recent past.
16. Dadorjiin Natsagdorj
1906 on.d
tr.jee.
Dashdorjiin Natsagdorj
1906 year-dat
be born-past
Dashdorjiin Natsagdorj was born in 1906. (Yatskovskaya 1976: 8)
61. Ene e.d
this period-dat
Lir Van (1605),
King Lear
Gamlet (1601),
Hamlet
Makbet (1606)
Macbeth
Otello (1604),
Othello
zereg
sort
jjg.d
play-pl
n
the
gar.ee.
(Sodov 1967: 62)
come out-past
In this period were produced the plays Hamlet (1601), Othello
(1604), King Lear (1605), Macbeth (1606), etc.
Ujeyediin (1998)56 is critical also of the view that -lua represents a

recent past:
In [certain] examples . . ., the suffix does refer to the recent past because
the speaker is talking about what he has done just before the present
moment of speech. However, this use is not unique nor the sole feature
of the suffix, but it is one of many uses the suffix expresses as pointed out
by Chenggeltei (1981: 298) and there are cases in which it can be used
for situations that occurred a long time ago, if the speaker remembers
them clearly (Svantesson 1991: 193). For instance, in [the examples in
(62)], the speaker uses the [-lee] suffix to express this sense.
62. a. ene nom.ibi
baa.un
ye.degen
this book-acc
small-gen
period-dat/rp
I read this book during my childhood.
ongsi.la
read-past
56
No pagination is given here for quotations from Ujeyediin (1998), which derive
from a draft computer file.

b. tos
glel.i
arban jil.un
this article-acc ten
year-gen
(I) wrote this article ten years ago.
emne
before
37
bii.le
write-past
Accordingly, he concludes that degree of remoteness is derived from

context and that the past tense marker does not by itself distinguish
it. To distinguish these past tense morphemes by the degree of the
remoteness is a problematic solution, since none of the past tense
markers in Mongolian distinguish recent or remote past without the
help of a certain context.
3. Toward A Pragmatic Theory
3.1. Discourse Functions
Clearly a semantic theory, based on differentiating the various past
tense endings by their temporal and/or aspectual meaning, cannot
provide an adequate solution to the puzzle of the Mongolian past
tenses. But there have been clues in the works of a number of scholars,
including even Ramstedt himself, that the correct solution involves
essentially what is termed here a pragmatic theory.
A number of authors have made suggestions that characterize the
various past tense endings, and distinguish them from one another,
in terms of their functions in discourse, though this necessarily raises
the interesting question of what distinctions in meaning or use, if any,
underlie these discourse-functional differences.
For example, Blsing (1984: 47) distinguishes narration in the -v
(his - [-v]) past and that in -jee (his - [-j] past), saying:
Die --basierte Erzhlung ist wohl der hufigste und am strksten differenzierte Diskurstyp; in ihm treten mehr oder weniger alle Inventareinheiten auf, was eine sehr fein nuancierte Darstellungsweise gewhrleistet
und optimale Bedingungen fr eine kontrastive Betrachtung bietet. Die
meisten Romane und Kurzgeschichten sind --basiert. Dementsprechend wird dieser Typ auch der Kernpunkt der vorliegenden Untersuchung sein zur Feststellung der funktionalen Eigenschaften der einzelnen
Einheiten.
Die Diskursebene wird neben der Basiseinheit - durch die Segmente
-,57 - und auch zuweilen durch - vertreten, whrend die relative
Anterioritt durch die --Form ausgedrckt wird. Soweit -- und
57
Blsing (1984: 48, 51, 71f., 80) characterizes -jana as a present tense, an actual
present (p. 74) in opposition to the general present in -na, and expressive of the
38
chapter one
--Einheiten vorkommen, signalisieren sie eine postterminale Betrachtungsweise. . . .
(The story based on -v is certainly the most frequent and most strongly
differentiated type of discourse; more or less all inventory units appear
in it, which ensures a very finely nuanced method of representation
and offers optimal conditions for a contrastive view. Most novels and
short-stories are -v-based. Accordingly, this type will also be the quintessential point of the present investigation for the establishment of the
functional properties of the individual units.
Apart from the basic unit v, the discourse level is represented by the
segments -jana, -na and also at times by -dg, while relative anteriority is
expressed by the -la form. As far as -sn- and -j-units occur, they signal
a post-terminal viewpoint.)
Die --basierte Erzhlung ist weniger gebruchlich als --basierte Erzhlungen. Dieser Diskurstyp tritt in erster Linie in Mrchen, d.h. in der
mndlichen Literatur auf . . . und scheint auch hier hauptschlich auf die
einleitenden Stze und Passagen beschrnkt zu sein. Dadurch kommt
eine mehr stilistische Nuancierung zum Ausdruck, die dem Geschilderten zunchst einen betont fiktiven, nacherzhlenden Charakter verleiht;
spter knnen die Mrchen dann in einem anderen Diskurstyp (meist
dem --basierten) weitererzhlt werden. . . .
(The -j-based story is less frequently used than the -v-based story. This
type of discourse occurs in the first place in oral literature (folk tales)
and appears also here to be confined mainly to the introductory sentences and passages. Through that comes a more stylistic nuance to the
expression, which bestows to what is described first of all an emphatically fictive, reproductive character; later the story can be continued in
a different discourse type (mainly the -v-based one).)
We have seen above that Dugarova, too, relates temporal relations to

discourse functions. She notes that -lee marks a superficial regress, and
-jee a more profound one, in narrative time, as clauses headed by these
forms form part of the background to the narrative and not part of the
foreground, that is, of the narrative proper. She offers (1991: 55f.) an
instructive example (63):
durative Aktionsart (p. 68). As such, it roughly translates the present progressive,
as in the example (i):
i. tsasn orjana , es schneit (it is snowing).

63. Neelttei
Open
baig.aa
be-impfvn
salxi
wind
gegeev.eer
window-instr
sevelee.j,
gently blow-impfc
namr.iin
autumn-gen
39
xongor
pleasant
tsaivar yagaan xogii n

whitish pink
curtain the
dervelz.l.ne.
flutter-caus-pres
Tsonxn.ii
window-gen
suu.jee.
sit-past
deer
on
derged
beside
Dulmaa
Dulmaa
Badar,
Badarch
Badar.iin
Badarch-gen
Dulmaa
Dulmaa
xor
two
d ds
end-on
tsagaan pansan
white
jaconet
zuusen [sic]58 xex [sic]59 tenger zangia.g

hung
blue
sky
tie-acc
tsamts
shirt
tegle.n
smooth-modc
zas.laa.
adjust-past
Tege.xe.d
Do thus-ifvn-dat
Dulmaag.iin
Dulmaa-gen
torgon
silk
tuyaa
glow
deel.iin
dress-gen
xurts
bright
nge.tei
colour-com
ulaan
red
yer
general
busiin
extraordinary
xgjti
enlivened
jav.aa
Badar.iin
nr
go-impfvn Badarch-gen face
deer
on
tusa.x
n
reflect-ifvn the
tn.iig
that-acc
ulam
still more
bgd
and
modp
bayasaltai
happy
zemtei
attractive
bolgo.no.
make-pres
(Tsog 1976 3.101)

The gentle autumn wind blows [literally, is blowing] in the open window and rustles white-pink curtains. Badarch and Dulma sit [literally,
have been sitting] beside the window and look [literally, have been
looking] at each other. Dulma adjusts [literally, is adjusting] a tie
of celestial color on the white shirt of Bardach. Then, on the unusually
lively face of Bardach, there appears a reflection of the bright red silk
dress of Dulma and makes him even happier and more attractive.60
58
Should read zsen.

Should read xx.
60
The gloss is actually a translation by Michael Schonberg and Anatoly Oleksiyenko of Dugarovas Russian gloss of the passage:
(. )
. (. )
(. ) .
(. )
.
59
40
chapter one
About (63) she comments (p. 56):

-
:
, ,
,
.
- ( )
,
,
, ,
.
(In the preceding fragment the form [-jee] designates a situation before
the described events: we find the heroes of the narration already sitting together at the window, [before?] the situation, designated by the
verb suujee they sat, it is conceived of as taking place long before the
situations described by the verbs dervelzlne flutters, flaps [transitive]
and bolgono does. A verb with the form [-lee] (zaslaa straightened)
conveys the designated situation also back relative to the situations, designated by verbs in the present, but represents it as taking place immediately before that, as they take the place of situations named by present
forms.)
The question, then, is what kind of functions differentiate the past

tense endings, and how these functions relate to the meaning or meanings borne by the endings.
3.2. The Evidential
If a number of authors observe distinctions of discourse functionality
in the sundry past tenses, even more have commented upon different
modal uses of the past tense forms. Even in Ramstedt (1902: 21) there
are hints of a modal account of the tenses, though it is not clear just
what Ramstedt meant by modi modes.
As I noted in the preface, in the early 1990s, searching for simple
labels for the past tense endings, I chose, based on such observations
of modal uses, to call -lee the evidential. Although I had already
-
.
Dugarovas parenthetical observations are intended to convey the precise meanings
of the various verb forms, as opposed to their translations in context. By using the
present tense for the translations, Dugarova indicates that the passage is descriptive,
not essentially narrative. Nonetheless the verb forms used are, with the exceptions of
dervelzlne rustles and bolgono makes, not present tense forms.
41
suggested an implicitly evidential characterization of this form (and a

similar treatment of -jee as inferential) in Binnick (1979), as of 1994
I still had little evidence to support such a labeling.
Meanwhile, the thinking of a few other writers was heading in the
same direction. Although Street did not connect the tenses with modal
functions, he did (1963: 129) use the term inferential, albeit in regard
to the particle biz, offering the example (64):
64. Ter ir.sen
biz.
that come-past
inferp61
He must have come.
In 1997 Song proposed a modal treatment and in 2002 further investigated comparisons with the system found in Korean. As has been
noted above, Tserenchunt and Luethy (2000) contrasted the endings
-jee and -lee essentially in modal terms, though without using the
terms evidential and inferential. Nelson et al. (1998: 115, 118) did
explicitly label -lee evidential (though treating -jee as unmarked for
evidentiality, rather than as inferential, a term they do not use.)
These terms, evidential and inferential, are familiar to Altaicists
from the grammars of languages of the Turkic family ( Johanson and
Utas 2000; Johanson 2003; Johanson 2006), for example Turkish, in
which there are two different past tenses, obligatorily marking a distinction between evidentiality (65a) and inferentiality (65b).62 (The
61
The detailed gloss is my modification of Streets.

The Wikipedia article on evidentiality says (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
Evidentiality) that
[Iranian, Finno-Ugric, and Turkic languages] indicate whether evidence exists for
a given source of informationthus, they contrast direct information (reported
directly) and indirect information (reported indirectly, focusing on its reception
by the speaker/recipient). Unlike the other evidential type II systems, indirectivity marking does not indicate information about the source of knowledge: it is
irrelevant whether the information results from hearsay, inference, or perception
(however, some Turkic languages distinguish between reported indirect and nonreported indirect . . .).
What is called direct here is what is usually termed the evidential, and indirect, the inferential. As in Turkic, the Mongolian inferential does not distinguish
the types of sources, and thus includes all three sources noted abovehearsay (e.g.,
example i), perception (either recall, as in ii, or a fresh discovery, as in example iii
below), and inference. In this last regard, Schlepp (1983: 38) says that -jee, what he
calls the distant past, signifies action in the past, often in the mood that it is a fitting
or logical consequence, sometimes contrary to expectation, as in his example (iv).
62
42
chapter one
examples in (65) are from http://www.cromwell-intl.com/turkish/

verbs.html.)
65. a. Dervi.ler.i
gr.d.m.
Dervish-pl-acc
see-evidential past-first person singular
I saw dervishes.
b. Dervi.ler.i
gr.m.m.
Dervish-pl-acc
see-inferential past-first person singular
I saw dervishes (so they say).
Traditionally, however, the grammars of the languages of the Mongolian family have not been viewed as incorporating a similar modal
system, despite the presence of evidential/inferential markers in the
Turkic languages, the Tungusic languages, and both Japanese and
Korean.63
Nonetheless, even before the 1990s there had been indications in
the writings of various grammarians that -lee might be some sort of
evidential marker, and -jee equally some kind of inferential marker,
for example the statement by Ramstedt (translated in the passage just
before example 17 above) that -lee indicates the firmness of the statement, or that its use may arise from the external situation or a
logical consequence of what has already been said.64
Ramstedt offers the examples (17, 6668).
17. xe.lee.
die-past
(er) stirbt schon, od. ist ja schon gestorben
(i.e., he is already dying or you know, hes already dead)
i. Ter yav.ix.jee.
That leave-ix-past
He has left already. (as I found out)
ii. bi saqilaa
gei
keked bayi-ai
I
discipline without child
be-past
I used to be an undisciplined child. (the speaker recalling something)
iii. Bill xixjee! Bills dead! (Stivenson 1975: 28; chapter 5 of Treasure Island;
described as immediately following a cry of surprise)
iv. qarin imadur
edkr oru.uqui
but
you-dat
devil
enter-past
On the contrary, the devil has entered thee.
63
On Japanese, see, e.g., Itani (1994), Mushin (2001, 2001a), Tenny (2006),
McCready and Ogata (2007); on Korean, Song (2002), Kim (2005), Chung (2006,
2007, 2007a). On Manchu-Tungusic, see Nedjalkov (1997), Malchukov (2000).
64
These suggestions of Ramstedts were apparently not pursued by later scholars,
however.
43
66. bol.loo
become-past
has become or enough! (es ist schon geworden od. genug!)
67. noya.d
ir.lee
prince-pl
come-past
the princes have come (die frsten sind schon gekommen)
68. bid
odoo
xool idlee
we
now
food eat-past
we have now eaten (wir haben jetzt gegessen)65
Poppe (1970: 130) similarly says that the form expresses an action
which has taken place, and which has either been witnessed or is commonly known, and is therefore regarded as an indisputable fact.66 This
form may be used of present and future as well as of past events, as
Ramstedt (p. 17) notes (as we have seen); in this case, too, the action in
question is certain (Poppe 1951: 80). Poppe offers the example (69):
69. bi yav.laa
I
go-past
Im going67
Street (1963: 121) comments that the example below (70) might be
said as when one looks out a window and sees the person entering
the building.
70. ter
ir.lee
that come-past
hes coming
Hangin (1976: 17) notes that -lee implies first hand knowledge on the
part of the speaker. . . . It is possible for a narrator of a tale to throw in
this form of the past to enliven his tale as if he himself were involved
in the action.
65
Sodnomdorj comments that this is incorrect; odoo now renders the example
future, not present perfect or past, and for the indicated sense, the modifier should
instead be saya just now.
66
Cf. Street (1963: 121).
67
Ich gehe; Vieze (1974: 45) translates this example ich gehe jetzt, i.e., Im going
now.
44
chapter one
Chuluu (Ujeyediin 1998) similarly observes that
Street (1963: 121) concurs that [-lee] is used mainly when the speaker
or writer has first-hand knowledge of an event or state described, or
when he is otherwise willing to vouch for the accuracy of a statement.
This is revised in Binnick (1979: 5-6) to state that the suffix is used, if
the event is something the speaker is vouching for, or is information
which is well-known and stated not to convey new information but for
another purpose. Recently, it is called evidential past (Binnick 1990:
53) and indirect past and defined as showing that the speaker has witnessed the situation himself (Svantesson 1991: 193).
Schlepp (1983: 37) refers to the -lee past as the past assertive, since it
asserts matters of speakers experience or expresses contention, admiration or matter of fact: also signals coming into being of (a) new state
or situation, as in the examples (7173):
71. (matter of fact) erte
nigen a-tur
early one
time-dat
once upon a time there was a master
72. ene edr
neliyed qola
this day
rather
far
weve gone rather far today
73. (change of state)
nigen
a
bagsi
master
b.lge
be-past
yabu.lu-a
go-past
ire.lge!
come-past
(he, she, it, etc.) is coming!
As already noted here, the treatments of -lee and -jee in the textbook
by Tserenchunt and Luethy and in the grammar of Kullmann and
Tserenpil are especially suggestive in this regard. The former book
(2005: 108) calls the -lee ending the Known Past Tense and notes
that it is mostly used to express something that happened in the
recent past that the speaker observed, as in (74).68 And as in this
example, recency is often reinforced through use of the adverb saya,
or of sayaxan recently.
74. Bat
dngj saya
Bata barely
just now
Bat[a] came just now.
ir.lee.
come-past
68
Kullmann and Tsedenpil (1996: 187f.) say similarly that [t]his suffix expresses
an action that one witnessed and that happened in the recent past.
45
Consequently, the -lee form may tentatively (and approximately) be

identified with the evidential past tense of Turkish. If the -lee form is
some kind of evidential marker, one would expect to find, as indeed
one does, some peculiar restrictions on its use. For example, Beffa and
Hayamon (1975: 82) point out that -lee is used only in the affirmative.
Although in the more literary language this form may be negated with
one of the negators l (vertical-script l) or es (ese), in the colloquial language negation is expressed by the combination of a participle
with -gi. Here, however, Tserenchunt and Luethy, and Kullmann and
Tserenpil do not agree, the former citing the form -sengi (75a), but
the latter citing -eegi (75b).69
75. a. Avtobus ir.sen.gi.
bus
come-pfvn-neg
The bus didnt come. (Tserenchunt and Luethy 2005: 108)
b. Ter
gar.aa.gi
bai.na.
that
go out-impfvn-neg
be-pres
He hasnt gone out. (Kullmann and Tserenpil 1996: 145)
The ending -lee is likewise uncommon in questions. The only interrogative examples cited by Street (1963: 122) are like those in (76), and
involve the word bilee was, is:70
76. a. Yuu
bilee?
what was
What was it? (the person wracks his brain trying to remember
something)71
b. Jamts? Xen bilee,
bi marta.j
bai.na.
Jamts? who was
I
forget-impfc
be-pres
Jamts? Who is it: I forget.
69
Although Kullmann and Tserenpil dont offer an example with -eegi, the example (75b), taken from their discussion of -ee, is possibly an example of what they have
in mind here.
70
Street, in discussing -lee, offers numerous examples containing bilee (verticalscript blge). This particle is commonly treated by others as a monomorphemic
copula, i.e. as not consisting, synchronically, of bi- plus the ending -lee. In different
contexts, it is translated is or was. It contrasts with bailaa is, was, the regular -lee
form of bai- be. It is not clear whether bilee is a unique formation that should be
distinguished from examples in -lee.
71
Street comments (p. 122), regarding bilee in examples like those in (76), When
occurring in questions (as it does only rarely), this particle implies personal involvement of the questioned in the matter being discussed.
46
chapter one
Once again, regarding the interrogative, Tserenchunt and Luethy do

not quite agree with Kullmann and Tserenpil. The former say (2005:
108) that in questions about recent actions, the -v form is used, the
question particle /uu being retained (77), though be/ve is dropped
(78). Kullmann and Tserenpil (1996: 187), however, say that [i]nterrogation is only possible with the shortened form [-l] in colloquial
language to express that one cant remember, although one usually
witnessed the action, and offer example (79), but also note that usually interrogation is with -sen, as in (80).
77. Talx
ava.v
uu?
bread
buy-past
qp
Did you just buy bread?
78. Ta
xaan.aas
ire.v?
You (plural) where-abl come-past
Where did you just come from?
79. i
ter
sonin
medee.g
sonso.v
you that interesting news-acc hear-past
Have you heard the interesting news?
uu?
qp
80. i ter sonin medeeg sonsson uu?
As one would expect of an evidential, too, it is rare with a second

person subject, though very common with the first. In example (81)
below, it occurs within the scope of the quotative auxiliary verb geand hence is really a kind of quoted first person:
81. mart.ix.laa
ge.j
?
forget-ix-past say-impfc
qp
You mean you dont remember? (Street 1963: 121)
If -lee is an evidential, it would seem likely that there is in Khalkha

Mongolian and other Mongolic languages, as in Turkish, an inferential
counterpart. In light of this presumption, the next two sections take a
look at the modality of the other two finite past tense endings, -v and
-jee, first to inquire whether -jee does indeed constitute an inferential
counterpart of -lee, and secondly to inquire into the meaning and use
of the other past tense affix, -v.
3.3. The Modality of -v
The form -v has been called modally neutral, for example by Song
(1997: 193204, 2002: 149), and colorless (Street 1963: 122), not with-
47
out reason. But then it is paradoxical to discover that -v can replace

only the [-lee] ending, while the [-jee ending] cannot be replaced by
it, the reason being that for sure the written [-v] ending is used when
the speaker observed the action. That is, -v would appear to be evidential, like -lee. Sodnomdorj has also commented that the difference
between baiv and bailaa is just stylistic, adding that in a certain text
baiv could have been [the] same as bailaa. And regarding texts such
as that in (82), he said that alternating [-v] and [-lee] forms avoids
repetition and hence is stylistically preferable. The question, then, is
whether -v is evidential or modally neutral. It is a question explored
below (and which turns out to be considerable more complicated, and
more interesting, than Sodnomdorjs comments alone suggest.)
82. Tereer
he
ger.t.ee
house-dat-rp
ire.x.d.ee
come-ifvn-dat-rp
vd.sn
bai.laa.
fall ill-pfvn be-past
ix
great
x
effort
erge.j
return-impfc
yadar.,
be tired-impfc
Namaig
me-acc
or.j
enter-impfc
biye
body
n
his
yangina.n
ache-modc
ire.xe.d
ter
come-ifvn-dat that
garga.sn.aas
bas
put out-pfvn-abl also
xet
excessive
ix
great
xet
excessive
sanaa
thought
tav.sn.aas
zrx.eer
n xatguula.n
vd.j
bai.v.
put-pfvn-abl heart-instr his feel pain-modc fall ill-impfc be-past
(www.lds.org/library/display/0,4945,5381287412,00.html)
He returned to the house exhausted and in pain. When I arrived, he
was experiencing heart pain from overexertion and stressful anxiety.
(http://www.lds.org/library/display/0,4945,538128741,00.html)
Even apart from evidentiality, however, -v has a modal dimension, as

Ramstedt notes (p. 20): Like the preterite in many other languages,
this preterite is also used in Khalkha in order to indicate a hypothetical
fact [supponiertes faktum], as in (83).72
72
Ramstedts transcription has been slightly modified. xw = xiivee, an emphatic
form of the past tense of xii- do, make.
48
chapter one
83. egs
This way
xw
do-past
u
gor-ug
,
without working
tegs
xw,
that way do-past
bas
also
u
gor-ug
.
without working
mache ich es so, so geht es nicht, mache ich es wieder anders, so geht
das auch nicht.
(if I do it this way, it doesnt work, and if I do it that way, it also does
not work.)
Such modal, non-past-time uses of the -v past tense are in line with
ones examined by James (1982) in a wide range of languages. However, Wu (1995: 102) points out a rarely-commented-upon future
hypothetical use of the -v ending, saying that the suffix:
can also be used to indicate that something may happen at some time
in the future; e.g., hypothetical states or conjectures about the results
of certain actions that are felt by the speaker to occur in the future are
usually marked with [-v].
He offers the following examples (8485):

84. ta
mori.aa.ban
qayada.ba aa!
you (plural) horse-abl-rp
fall-past
emphp
Be careful, you might fall down from the horse.
85. kiiyel.ee.ben qoor.ba
aa!
class-abl-rp
be late-past
emphp
Be careful, youll be late for class!
He draws (p. 110) similar Dagur examples from Engkebatu (1985: 35)
and Yellow Uygur ones from Bulchuluu (1988: 37f.), and points out
that Poppe (1955: 266f.) remarks on similar usages in Buriat and Kalmuck, calling them a form of warning. He further notes (Ujeyediin
1998) that this use of the suffix is only associated with the second person subject and it cannot be used with the first and third persons.
However, Wu (p. 103) also offers some examples (8687) in which
-v has future value without a hypothetical reading. He attributes such
future meaning to the semantics of the auxiliary verb in each case.
Here, unlike the hypothetical-future examples, the non-past -ne cannot in fact be substituted for -v, he says.
86. nara unu.qu
siqa.ba
sun
fall-ifvn be close-past
The sun will set very soon. [Roughly, the sun setting is close.rb]
49
87. tere
kr.
ire.k
oyirta-ba
that
arrive-impfc
come-ifvn
be close-past
He will arrive soon.73 [His arrival is close.rb]
He comments upon different attitudes and intentions on the part of

the speaker associated with the -v and -sen pasts. Thus in the -v sentences in (88), the speaker [is] trying to be polite or wishing someone
well. Although one can replace [-v] with [-sen] as in [89], the resulting
sentences lack the meanings implied by the [-v] suffix as in [88].
88. a. ta
sayin
sau-ba
uu?
you (plural) good
stay-past
qp
Are you keeping well?
b. ta
sayin
unta-ba
uu?
you (plural) good
sleep-past
qp
Did you sleep well?
c. ta
amur
ire-be
?
you (plural) peaceful
come-past
qp
Did you have a good trip?
89. a. ta sayin sagu-san uu?
b. ta sayin unta-san uu?
c. ta amur ire-gsen ?
He then offers examples (9091), with -v and -sen respectively, saying

(1995: 101) that a sentence like those in (90)
is used when the speaker is mainly concerned with whether or not the
event is accomplished and with indicating that he knows, or at least supposes, that the event should have been done.
Thus in (90a) below,

the speaker is concerned with whether or not you have finished reading
the book that you are supposed . . . to have finished reading . . . and, by
implication, questions why you havent. . . . Therefore the proper translation should be something like You finished reading the book, didnt
you?.
90. a. ta
nom.iyan ungsi.ba
you (plural) book-rp
read-past
Did you read your book?
uu?
qp
73
Wu offers the literal glosses the sun was close to setting or the sun is setting and
he was close to arriving.
50
chapter one
b. ta
aaar.iyan
you (plural) yourself-instr
Did you come by yourself ?
c. ta
ger.tegen
you (plural) home-dat rp
Did you go back home?
ire.be
come-past
?
qp
qari.ba
return-past
uu
qp
Examples like those in (91) lack such an implicit meaning and are simply normal interrogatives. There clearly is far more to the colourless
-v than most grammars have indicated.74
91. a. ta nom.iyan ungsi.san uu?
b. ta aaar.iyan ire.gsen ?
c. ta ger-tegen qari.san uu?
[Did you read your book(s)?]

[Did you come alone?]
[Did you return home?]
Before looking further at -v, let us turn to -jee and the issue of whether
it forms the inferential counterpart of -lee.
3.4. The Inferential
If the -lee past is evidential, it would be natural to expect the -jee past
to be something similar to the Turkish inferential. But the meanings attributed to it can only be called inferential to the extent that
they represent knowledge acquired in various ways, not necessarily
directly through observation, and the stress is not on the inferentiality, but rather on the acquisition. Scholars emphasize the coming into
awareness.
Thus Hangin says (1968: 114), The past tense [in -jee] . . . expresses
an action which took place in the past and of which the speaker has
now become aware. He comments on the example (92), as I found
out.
92. Ter
yav.ix.jee.
That
left-ix-past
He has left already.
Similarly, Tserenchunt and Luethy (2005: 92) note that the [-jee] ending can be used by anyone who is just now recognizing something that
74
Questions formed with -v and -sen, and the differences between them, are discussed in chapter II.
51
happened in the past. They gloss their example Bat yavixjee Oh,
Bat[a] has left, and observe that this affix is often used with -ix, when
it has this meaning.
Hangin states (1976: 17) that [The -jee form] usually indicates that
an action which took place in the past was not necessarily witnessed by
the narrator. That is, it is inferential. In line with the concept of coming into awareness, Tserenchunt and Luethy call it the unknown past
tense, by which they mean, similarly, a past action that the speaker
did not observe. Kullmann and Tserenpil (1996: 185) similarly say
that [its] always used for actions that one hasnt observed.
If this coming into awareness is indeed the core meaning of this
suffix, to express an event which the speaker has just realized, it would
explain why the first and second person are uncommonspeakers are
relatively unlikely to be surprised by anything concerning themselves
or their interlocutors.
The ending -jee is indeed rarely used in the second person, except in
questions; even there, however, nearly all the examples cited in the literature involve the complement-marking verb ge- say, intend, think,
as in (81, 9394), and hence are really a kind of quoted first person:
81. mart.ix.laa
ge.j
?
Forget-ix-past
say-past
qp
you mean you dont remember? (Street 1963: 121)
93. Ir.ne
ge.j
?
Come-pres
say-past
qp
Sagte er, da er kommt? (Poppe 1951: 80)
Did he say that he is coming?
94. bi amaig
xlee.ne
ge.j
?
I
you-acc
wait-pres
say-past
qp
Do you mean I am going to wait for you? (cf. Street 1963: 124, Poppe
1970: 131).
However, Kullmann and Tserenpil (1996: 185) present example (95),

though they flatly state that such questions in -j, the short form of
-jee, are only possible in the colloquial language and in the third person, and that This kind of question is used when one is sure that the
person being asked can know the answer. Tserenchunt and Leuthy
(2005: 92) offer a similar example, too: ter xd yavj uu? Did he go
to the countryside?, and Wu (1995: 93) the example (96).
52
chapter one
95. ndr.iin sonin

gar.
uu?
today-gen
newspaper go out-past qp
Was todays newspaper released? (Kullmann and Tserenpil 1996: 186)
96. ta
gedr ire.i
you (plural) yesterday come-past
Did you come yesterday?75
?
qp
The -jee past occurs more rarely in the first person than in the second
(9798):
97. yag
marta.j
orxi.jee
just
forget-impfc
do completely-past
I just completely forgot (Street 1963: 123).
98. bi anduur.ee
I
be mistaken-past
I was mistaken (Hangin 1968: 14).
Tserenchunt and Luethy (2005: 92) say that in the first person -jee is
used for unplanned actions, particularly with the verbs martax forget
(99) and untax fall/be asleep.
99. Bi nom.oo mart.ix.j(ee).
I
book-rp forget-ix-past
I forgot my book.
Wu (1995: 93), however, offers declarative examples in the first person

that do not involve these verbs (100101):
100. bi
gedr
ire.ei.
I
yesterday
come-past
I came yesterday.
101. bid
nom
ungsi.ai.
we
book
read-past
We read a book.76
75
Tserenchunt comments (p.c., October, 2008) that this example is practically

impossible. This may reflect a dialect difference. On the other hand, while a Google
search for irj found 169 examples, a search for igdr irj found none.
76
Tserenchunt declares this sentence, too (cf. ex. 96) practically impossible.
Again, this may reflect a difference between dialects.
53
As regards the restrictions on the second person in declarative sentences, Wu argues (pp. 93-4) that this restriction is not distinctive to
-jee; in certain declarative sentences, none of the past tenses may be
used (102), while in others (4) any of them may be:
{}
ba
la
jai
you (pl) book read-past
4. ta
102. *ta77
nom
ungsi-
gedr
you (pl) yesterday

you came yesterday
ire-
{ }
be
le
come-past
Accounting for some first-person examples essentially in terms of

coming-into-consciousness, Galsang (1981: 13) views -jee as involving the speaker recalling something or someone.78 Examples include
these (103104):
103. bi saqilaa
gei
keked
I
discipline without child
I used to be an undisciplined child.
bayi.jai
be-past
104. baa
bayi.qu.daan bi kgim.d
small be-ifvn-rp
I
music-dat
I really liked music when I was a child.
yeke
very
duratai
like
bayi.ai
be-past
Ujeyediin (1998) comments that in these examples, as the adult is

recalling something in their childhood, the event time expressed in
the sentences is certainly quite distant from the time of speech act,
but that in Galsangs interpretation, the emphasis is on the speakers
recall, not on the past situation. Here -jee is preferred: other past
tense markers seem not to make any difference in terms of the remoteness or of someones recalling a past event.
He posits partial correctness for the hypothesis that -jee has the
meaning of suddenly acquired knowledge of a past or unexpected past
77
78
The asterisk indicates an unacceptable, ungrammatical, sentence.

Reported by Chuluu (Ujeyediin 1998).
54
chapter one
event, noting that the ending expresses an action which took place
in the past and of which the speaker has now become aware (citing
Hangin 1968: 114) or an event which the speaker has just realized
(Binnick 1990: 52). He prefers, however, to characterize it as denoting, in Galsangs terms (Galsang 1981: 13) an action that took place
without being known by anybody or an event that has been done mistakenly.
By Galsangs account, Wu says, the examples in (105) involve a lack
of prior knowledge on the part of the speaker (in [a], the speaker has
only now discovered that he made mistakes, or how many he made;
in [b] the speaker has just found out who took the book; and in [c]
Dorjs coming is news to the speaker); it is this which has led scholars
to see the ending as expressive of a sudden occurrence or unexpected
action, which he sees as not the only function that it has but a part
of its various functions.
105. a. egei.ber
biig
bii.ged
bi tabu alda.ai
heard-instr writing write-pfc I five lost-past
I made five mistakes when doing a dictation.
b. nom
abu.ad
yabu.san kmn Dorji bayi.ai
book take-pfc go-pfvn
person Dorj
be-past
The person who took away a book was Dorj.
c. Dori ire.ei
Dorj
come-past
Dorj came.
3.5. Chuluus Critique

Wu (1995: 96) is critical of modal characterizations of the endings
-lee and -jee. As regards -lee, he says that the evidential reading of
examples such as (69) needs the [context] which shows the condition given in the brackets, [otherwise] [-lee] can be understood in
other ways.
69. ter
ir.lee
that come-past
hes coming (as when one looks out a window and sees the person
entering the building).
He cites examples such as those in (106), in which [t]he verbs in the

[-lee] form are in an indirect quotation, where they refer to the event
stated not as the speakers first-hand knowledge but as acquired either
55
through somebody else or through other means and about which he

is uncertain, and further claims that if -lee were replaced in these
examples by one of the other past tense endings, the sentences would
lose the uncertainty which is implied by [-lee].
106. a. bi tan.u
I you-gen
aqa.yi
older brother-acc
ger.tegen
home-dat rp
ire.le
come-past
ge
sonus.ai
that
hear-past
I heard that your elder brother came back home.79
b. tan.yi
Kkeqota.du
yabu.la
ge surugi.nar
you-acc
Huhhot-dat
go-past that
student-pl
kele.
bayi.san
say-impfc
be-past
The students said that you had gone to Huhhot.
c. tere adaadu.du aru.la
ge ali.u
that abroad-dat go out-past that boast-impfc
He boasted that he had been abroad.
bayi.san
be-past
He is equally critical of the view that -jee is used to refer to suddenly

acquired knowledge of a past or unexpected event, while [-lee] is used
to indicate a well-known past event. . . . He cites in this regard A. D.
Rudnevs view that -lee or the decisive form is used when speaking
of already known facts or when the perfect is expressed, while the
79
Nelson et al. (1998: 119) are quite correct when they respond that in example
(106a) the interpretation of the verb with /-laa/ is evidential in that the event in the
lower clause is interpreted as having been witnessed by someone who saw the elder
brother returning. Their statement (idem) that [t]he first person speaker is actually the syntactic subject of the matrix verb sonus, not the embedded verb, which is
inflected with the . . . affix /-jee/ may require some explication. Wu seems to take the
position that -lee in (106a) cannot be evidential because the speaker is in no position
to have witnessed the return of the older brother. However, the speaker is simply the
subject of the verb sonus- hear. The object, what is heard, is expressed by an embedded clause, tan-u . . . gej. Semantically, gej is equivalent of the English complementizer
that. Nelson et al. take this to be the main verb of the embedded clause, which in turn
governs its own complement clause, tan-u . . . ire-le your elder brother came home.
Whatever the syntax, and whether we take gej to be a verb or a complementizer,
the subject of the ire-le clause is tanu-u aqa-yi your elder brother, and the utterer of
that clause is, on Nelson et al.s analysis, if I understand them correctly, understood
to be the subject of ge- say. On my analysis, the verb sonus- presupposes a source
for the information that your older brother came home. In either case, there was a
presumed witness, from whose point of view the evidential -lee is justified. Therefore,
the fact that the subject of the verb sonus- (and utterer of the sentence) could not have
witnessed the return of the brother is evidence that -lee here is not evidential.
56
chapter one
-jee or accidental form is used for a sudden occurrence without

expectation.
Further, he is critical (1995: 90) of the characterization of -jee in
Svantesson (1991) as inferential or quotational:
. . . based on the speech of a Khalkha Mongol informant, Svantesson
(1991: 193) concludes that the speaker prefers to use the [-jee] suffix when
he speaks of a past situation which he has not personally experienced
but has witnessed its consequences and infers what has occurred, or has
heard about it from someone else. Ultimately, Svantessons explanation
has something to do with the result of a past action. Once again, emphasizing the present result or referring to the indirect past is, we suspect,
a dialectal variant or even personal preference. The Street (1963) and
Svantesson (1991) studies are based on Khalkha Mongol data.80 Furthermore, although he distinguishes the past tense morphemes, as indirect
past ([-jee]), direct ([-lee]), and the plain ([-sen]) Svantesson (1991: 193)
notices that the use of indirect and direct past forms are not obligatory,
and the plain form is a possible alternative in most contexts, depending on whether or not the speaker wants to stress how he obtained his
knowledge of the situation. Quite to the contrary, after analyzing the
classical Mongolian data, Poppe (1954: 93) remarks this suffix is used
when the speaker indeed claims to have witnessed the action and the use
in this sense is still found in some dialects of modern Mongolian. For
instance, Wu (1996: 19) analyzed two sentences in which the speaker has
direct knowledge of past situation. See the following examples ([107]).
107. a. tere urinun
yeke surauli.du oro.ai
that year before last big
school-dat
enter-past
He entered university year before last.
b. batu.yin
aqa.ni
gedr ire.ei
Batu-gen
elder brother-possessive81 yesterday come-past
Batus elder brother arrived yesterday.
He claims that [i]n the above examples, the [-jee] suffix is not used
to indicate a past situation inferred from the present result of a past
action, but it is the direct knowledge of the speaker derived from his
past experience and thus the suffix expresses the meaning of the direct
past.
80
Chuluu is a native speaker of an Inner Mongolian dialect.

Although formally a possessive, this marker functions here as an indicator of
definiteness.
81
57
In some cases, he finds a difference in discourse function between

the various endings, and specifically one having to do with focus, that
is, what part of the sentence conveys the most important information.
Contrasting the examples in (108) and (109), he says that in (108),
the speaker is calling attention to the existence of a horse or of an
animal that might be a horse. But in (b) and (c), the speaker confirms
a known fact to the listener, namely that there was a horse there.
Similarly, (109a) indicates only the fact of the brothers having gone
and if adverbial qualifiers such as the destination are added, these are
not the focus of attention. But in (109b) and (c), he says, it is this
additional information which is most important. Accordingly, the
examples in ([109]) . . . may differ as to how appropriate they are in
discourse which focuses on elements other than the action itself.
a. bayi-san
b. bayi-ai
108. tende nige mori c. bayi-ba
there
one horse be-past
There was a horse.
a. yabu-san
b. yabu-ai
109. aqa-ini
c. yabu-ba
older brother-your leave-past
Your older brother left.
He also observes (Ujeyediin 1998) a preference for -v in narrative, previously observed by Street (1963: 122) and Chenggeltei (1981: 294).
He connects this use in narration with the first person subject: when
someone makes a statement about what he has done in the past, he
tends to choose the [-v] suffix instead of the others. He expresses
doubt that this use is a distinctive characteristic of the suffix, noting
that according to [his] own speech, preference is in fact for the [-v]
suffix when narrating something [he has] done in the past. He offers
the examples in (110):
110. a. bi doloan ag.tu
nom.un
I seven
oclock-dat book-gen
I went to the library at 7 oclock.
b. bi tabun nom igele.be
I five
book borrow-past
I borrowed five books.
sang.du
treasury-dat
oi.ba
go-past
58
chapter one
Correspondingly, he finds that with other subjects (as in 111), preference is for one of the other past tense endings. But he sees the
choice as just a matter of preference, not an explicit distinction of
the suffixes.82
111. a. ta
doloan ag.tu
nom.un sang.du odi.ai
you (plural) seven
hour-dat library-dat83
go to-past
You went to the library at 7 oclock.
b. Dori tabun nom igele.gsen
Dorj
five
book borrow-past
Dorj borrowed five books.
He argues (1995: 107) that the attempt to make a separate definition for each form of the past tense suffixes is inadequate, since it
leaves questions about other possible uses of the suffix unanswered,
and is insistent on the role of context: the meaning of the suffix is
not the only consideration; instead context becomes a major factor in
describing function, concluding (Ujeyediin 1998), instead of having
one core meaning [each], they may have meanings that vary in different contexts.
Thus his work, however interesting, leaves unanswered the question
of whether the sundry endings do have unique meanings, and if so,
what those meanings might be. As he himself recognizes, while his
work introduces several new perspectives, it leaves significant questions unanswered.
In particular, when the speaker or writer is confronted at a given
point in a discourse or text by the need to make a choice of one of
the four past tense endings, how does the speaker or writer do so? On
precisely what factors is the choice based, and how does the value for
each parameter enter into the calculus of choice? Or again, what different inferences does the listener or reader draw from the past tense
endings at particular points in discourse or text, and on what basis
does the listener or reader do so?
The present work argues, with Nelson et al. (1998: 117), that Chuluu is wrong, that the occurrence of the various past tense verb forms
82
We share Nelson et al.s conclusion (1998: 117) that, pace Wu (1995), the distribution of the four past tense affixes in Khalkh Mongol is determined by systematic
differences in style, semantics, and pragmatics, and that the interpretation of verbs
with these elements is to a certain extent predictable out of context.
83
Literally book-gen treasury-dat.
59
in different contexts is not in principle optional, but depends by

and large on the inherent meaning of each particular ending. The discourse functions of the forms are further argued to follow from their
modal uses.
To be sure, he is correct in writing (Ujeyediin 1998) that [i]n practice, the distinction between these past tense morphemes is vague and
difficult to apply with any degree of precision, but it is questionable
that it does not lead to clearly distinct categories. Nor is it necessary
to accept his counsel of despair to the effect that [t]he real problem
with the use of the morphemes . . . is not just that there is great variation in meaning in contexts, but that they have no clear basic or core
feature.
At the same time, it is clear that while terms like evidential and
inferential serve as convenient labels for categories into which to put
the endings, such broad characterizations are far from adequate in an
account of their meanings and uses, as is argued in the next chapter.
CHAPTER TWO
USE AND INTERPRETATION OF THE PAST TENSES IN THE

SPOKEN LANGUAGE
1. Evidential and Inferential
1.1. The Opposition of Evidentiality and Inferentiality
At this point, it seems fairly well established that Mongolian makes a
distinction of evidential and inferential.1
However, even if the Mongolic languages do exhibit a distinction of
evidential and inferential, there is much more that needs to be investigated regarding the meaning and use of the Mongolian past tense
endings, and especially of -lee and -jee.
For while Turkish has just two past-tense forms, Mongolian has at
least three. Even if it is indeed the case that -v is modally neutral (at
least as regards evidentiality and inferentiality), and that -sen is, too (if
this is regarded as a past tense ending), it is less easy to say under what
conditions evidentiality and inferentiality are optionally or obligatorily
marked, that is, when the speaker or writer must (or can) use -v (or
-sen), as opposed to either -lee or -jee.
The usage of -sen raises several questions. While -sen regularly
replaces both -v and the other endings within the scope of negation,
or in questions, it does not invariably do so. Conditions on its use in
both positive and negative statements, and on the contexts in which it
is either optional or obligatory with the meaning of -v (or any other
past ending), remain to be specified. Yet a further question concerns
the difference in meaning or use between predicative -sen (112) and
-sen with a copula (113).2 In Mongolic languages, these are not synonymous, despite the claims to the contrary in many books. But it
remains to specify the differences in use and meaning between the two
1
Tserenchunt, a native speaker, writes, I completely agree with your conclusion
about the inferential and evidential past tenses in Mongolian as in Turkic languages
(personal communication, June 1, 2007).
2
Apparently, -sen baina is nearly synonymous with -jee. Cf. note 14 on p. 68.
62
chapter two
constructions: for example, what difference, if any, would it make if

(112) ended with unsan baina, or (113) with just xojson?
112. Bid
nom
un.san.
We
book
read-past
We read a book. (Tserenchunt and Luethy 2000: 62)3
113. Ter
main
xoj.son
bai.na.
That auto
win-pfvn
be-pres
He has won a car.4 (Tserenchunt and Luethy 2005: 92)
Complicating such questions is the fact that, as regards the meaning and use of the past tense endings, there are significant differences
between spoken and written Mongolian.
Significant differences between the grammatical systems of spoken
and written languages are certainly not unknown, and one can cite in
this regard numerous aspects of both English and French grammar,
particularly where the verb is concerned, as in the notorious case of
the French perfective past tense, which uses the simplex pass simple
in writing (e.g., elle chanta she sang) but the complex pass compos
in speech (elle a chant), which also serves as the present perfect (she
has sung).
Not only may Mongolian similarly utilize different forms for the
same meaning in written and spoken language, but the same form may
have different uses in the two types of language, as we shall see.
Thus while it is a starting point to recognize that the Mongolian past
tenses principally differ not in tense or aspect, but rather in modality (and specifically, in evidentiality), it is only a starting point. The
remainder of the present work is devoted to attempting to provide an
adequate account of the meaning and use of the past tense endings in
both colloquial speech and written language.
1.2. Inferential -jee
The -jee ending has been characterized as a perfect as well as a past
tense, for example by Street (1963: 1224), who says that it either has
3
Cf. example (4):
{ }
ba
la
jai
4
Tserenchunt and Leuthy comment (p. 92) that -sen and baina together . . . create
the sense of just now finding out about a past action.
4. ta nom
ungsi-
past tenses in the spoken language
63
the meaning of a recent past, or emphasizes the present result of a

past action or of a state that existed in the past. . . . Poppe (1951: 80)
similarly characterizes it as a recent (nahe) past.
But for most grammarians, in contrast, where the -lee ending has
been identified with the present perfect tense or as a recent past tense,
the -jee ending has been connected with an action or state which is
completed in a past time removed from the present, possibly quite distantly so. It has also been connected with extension, sometimes with
extension over time in the past, hence the label Prteritum imperfecti
(Ramsted 1902: 24, Poppe 1951: 80), that is, past of the imperfect
(Poppe 1970: 131), sometimes with extension to the present.5 Hence
the Mongolian term ngrn rgeljilsen tsag6 past extended time
(Beffa and Hayamon 1975: 82) and Kasyanenkos (1968: 20) Russian
equivalent proedee dlitelnoe vremya.
This ending has also been defined in both discourse-functional and
modal terms. Hangin notes its narrative use (1968: 114, 1976: 17)
and calls it the narrative past (1968: 114); cf. Beffa and Hayamon
(1975: 83).
At the same time, Grnbech and Krueger (1955: 36) say it is objective about the state of affairs. Bosson (1964: 73) and Vietze (1974: 45)
refer to unexpected or sudden, and unobserved, occurences.7 Hangin
(1968: 114) notes that it expresses a past action of which the speaker
has now become aware; in his 1976 book (p. 17) he says it indicates
5
As was noted in connection with examples (12, 13), Beffa and Hayamon (1975:
82) say that [c]e suffixe indique quil sagit dune action commenc dans le pass, et
qui se prolonge ou se rpte dans le presentthis suffix indicates that it concerns an
action begun in the past and which is prolonged in or is repeated in the present.
12. Mongol.iin
bx
nutg.iin
dundaj ndr
Mongolia-gen whole country-gen middle height
1550
metr
a.j.
1550
metres
be-past
laltitude moyenne de toute la Mongolie est de 1550 mtres
(the mean altitude of all of Mongolia is 1550 metres)
13. xor
two
6
7
baildag
combatants
naadam.d
Naadam-dat
barilda.x
wrestle-ifvn
ge.j
zodog
uudag.tai
ir.jee.
say-impfc
wrestlers-jacket wrestlers-pants-com come-past
les deux combattants sont arrivs avec leur costume de lutter aux jeux (au
Naadam)
(the two combatants have come with their fighting suits to the games [to the
Naadam])
Vietzes (1974: 45) urgelmilsen is apparently a typo for rgeljilsen.
Vietze: Ereignesse, die sich pltzlich und unbeabsichtigt ereignet haben.
64
chapter two
a past action which was not necessarily witnessed by the narrator.

Vietze (1974: 45) writes that one of the uses of the form is for generally known facts.8
Descriptions of the form are obviously much more diverse than in
the case of -lee, considering -jee as they do from a number of different
points of view. Certainly, as regards modality, its meaning would seem
to be the unmarked member of the opposed categories indicated by
-lee and -jee; that is, it might best be considered, in contrast to -lee, as
the non-evidential. But in an evidential/inferential system of the Turkish type, the non-evidential is simply the inferential.
Native speaker intuitions support these rough definitions of the two
endings.9 Thus -lee is described in terms of evidentiality:
a) Regarding witnessing: Witnesses cant use [-jee]; they must use
[-lee]. Non-witnesses could use either.
b) left. In the near past; the speaker is a witness or has to
definitely know.
c) Ter javixjee. He has already left. (Hangin 1968: 114) This would
be used if [the speaker] wasnt here and didnt know [the subject
had left] and that yavixsan would be used by the speaker instead,
if he left when I was here and I saw it. On ter javixlaa: in uttering
it, the speaker is indicating I saw it, he just left, he was with me.
The ending -jee is just as clearly described as non-evidential. In particular, in many cases, stress is on the recency of discovery. In regard
to examples (114, 115), Tserenchunt has commented (personal communication, May 31, 2007),
allgemein bekannte Tatsache.

Except where otherwise noted, native speaker judgements (usually presented in
italics and in quotes) are those of Sodnomdorj Gongor, who is a native speaker of
Khalkha. Whether, and to what extent his judgments would be shared by other speakers of Khalkha, of speakers of other dialects of Mongolian, and to what extent the facts
cited here hold likewise for Kalmuck and for such more distant relatives of Mongolian
as Dagur, Monguor, etc., are interesting, but at the present time open, questions.
9
65
Id like to try to explain the difference between uexchixjee and

uexchixsen.10 In the first case [example (114)] the pirate just realized
that Billy Bones [had died]. The pirate did not observe the action, but
he is realizing now that past action. So the pirate uses uexchixjee.
Another example: last night when you were sleeping it snowed and you
just woke up and see the snow and you say: Uengursun shuenue tsas
orjee (orchixjee). When you say orchixjee your emotion of surprise is
expressed. In the next case [example (115)] Jim says: Flint uexchixsen
because Jim already knows that Flint is dead. That is not any more new
information for Jim.
114. Bill
x.ix.jee.
Bill
die-ix-past
Bills dead. (Stivenson 1975: 45).
115. Flint
x.ix.sen.
Flint
die-ix-past
Flint is dead. (Stivenson 1975: 85).
Sodnomdorj similarly has remarked that the use of -jee in example

(114) is not due to the death being recent, but rather that it has just
now been discovered.
Because of the inferential nature of -jee, it cannot readily be used
with the first or second person. However, an amnesiac who cannot
remember the circumstances of his or her birth can use the -jee form
when learning about themselves from their birth certificate, as in
example (116). However, this form could not normally be used, for
example, in the kind of statement given in (117). Even though the fact
that the addressee, A, was born in Mongolia (and therefore could be
expected to know something about the country) is a new fact in this
context, it is a fact already known to the speaker, B, and accordingly
the -jee form cannot be used.
116. Bi Nyu-York xoto.d
tr.jee.
I
New York city-dat
be born-past
I was born in New York City.
10
The transliteration here utilizes the kind of orthography widely used when writing Mongolian in the Latin alphabet. Uexchixjee = xixjee and uexchixsen = xixsen.
Uengursun shuenue tsas orjee represents ngrsn n tsas orjee last [passed] night
snow fell.
66
chapter two
117. A: [I dont know anything about Mongolia.]

B: Gev ta
tend tr.sn
But
you (plural) there be born-past
But you were born there!
modp
dee!
modp
In support of a modal analysis of the Mongolian past tense endings,

Song (2002: 158f.) cites restrictions on the co-occurrence of verb endings and the various persons of the subject,11 noting that cross-linguistically, languages do not exhibit incompatibilities between tense/aspect
and person (e.g., where the past tense or the imperfective aspect is
unable to occur with the first or second person) but that such incompatibility is often found in the case of modality, especially evidentiality:
It was seen in section (2) that Mongolian has three past suffixes differing in their evidential meaning. . . . Among the three past suffixes, the
Indirect Knowledge Past -jee is hardly used with a first person subject
(Jae-mog Song 1997: 193204).
Examples (34a and 35a) with a third person subject allow all the three
past suffixes. By contrast, examples (34b and 35b) with a first person
subject allow the Direct Knowledge Past -laa and the Neutral Past -v,
but not the Indirect Knowledge Past.
. . . It is self-evident why the Indirect Knowledge Past suffix -jee is not
used to refer to these situations. The event of [the speakers coming to
Prague] in (34b) and that of [the speakers making a phone call to Dorj]
in (35b) cannot be outside the speakers direct knowledge, unless he was
unconscious at the event time.
Interestingly, Mongolian also has exceptions to this subject restriction. Verbs like unt- sleep, sogt- get drunk, mart- to forget, and uxaan
ald- to lose consciousness allow the Past suffix -jee with the first person
subject, as exemplified in (3638). They refer to situations about which
the speaker may not be in the position of having direct knowledge.
Though the speaker went through the situations himself/herself in
examples (3638), he/she was not aware of the situations at the event
time. The speaker finds himself/herself having been in those situations
later on. The speaker was not a conscious participant in the situations,
therefore the first person subject is allowed with the Indirect Knowledge
Past -jee in (3638). Examples (34b and 35b) with the suffix -jee, which
are labeled as unacceptable, may become acceptable when the speaker is
an amnesic patient who has heard about his past event/situation from
someone else.
11
The analyses accompanying Songs examples are as in the original publication,
except the ones in square brackets, which are mine.
67
(34) a. Bat
igdr
Prague.d
ir.lee/ev/jee.
Bata yesterday Prague-[dat]12 come-past
Bata came to Prague yesterday.
b. Bi igdr
Prague.d
ir.lee/ev/*jee.13
I
yesterday Prague-[dat] come-[past]
I came to Prague yesterday.
(35) a. Bat igdr
Dorj.d
uts.aar
xel.lee/ev/jee.
Bat yesterday Dorj[-dat]
phone-[instr] speak-[past]
Bat made a phone call to Dorj yesterday.
b. Bi igdr
Dorj.d
uts.aar
xel.lee/ev/*jee.
I
yesterday Dorj-[dat] phone-[instr] speak-[past]
I made a phone call to Dorj yesterday.
(36) Bi ngrsn
n
I
pass-[pfvn]
night
I slept deeply last night.
nam
deeply
unt.jee.
sleep-past
(37) Bi
igdr
niilleg deer uxaan ald.jee.
I
yesterday party
in
mind
lose-past
I lost consciousness at the party yesterday.
(38) Bi igdr
surguul deer malgaig.aa
I
yesterday school
at
hat-[rp]
I forgot my hat yesterday at school.
mart.jee.
forget-past
While restrictions on the use of the various past tense endings with the
different persons do support the evidential analysis, what Song says
cannot be quite correct. For one thing, the -jee ending does occur with
the first person with verbs other than those cited, one example being
(118). And there are restrictions on its use with the second person, as
we shall see.
118. Tuxai.n
je.d
bi guravdugaar angi.d
Occasion-gen time-dat I
third
class-dat
At that time, I was in the third grade.
(http://mongol.cri.cn/21/2007/04/20/43@86531.htm)
bai.jee.
be-past
Because of the inferential nature of -jee, it cannot readily be used with

the first or the second person: [You] cant use -jee with the first or second person, nor in questions [with first or second person subjects]. This
12
Song calls this the locative.

An asterisk before a form indicates that it is unacceptable (ungrammatical) in
the given sentence, assuming the given meaning.
13
68
chapter two
claim is something of an over-generalization, and it is only under certain conditions that it fails. For example, in the sort of context found in
the case of example (116), in the case of the amnesiac learning details
about him- or herself from a document such as a birth certificate, -jee
is certainly possible with the first person. But when someone who has
forgotten details of their own experience recalls them, in which case it
might be argued that the information is a new discovery on their part,
the speaker nonetheless cannot use -jee (119) to talk about their newly
recalled personal experience.
116. Bi Nyu-York xoto.d
tr.jee.
I New York city-dat be born-past
I was born in New York City.
119. A:How long did you live in Mongolia?
B:I dont recall. [Thinks.] Oh, I remember now. I lived [*amdarjee]
there for three years.
But this is clearly a matter of nuance and depends on the specifics of

each situation, for while Sodnomdorj rejected -jee in (119), he accepted
it in (120), commenting that the speaker forgot and now [realizes or
notices] the fact.14
120. Bi baga.d.aa
ene nom.iig
I small-dat-rp
this book-acc
I read this book when I was small!
un.jee.
read-past
One type of situation, however, in which a speaker may use -jee to

relate their own experience is when they are in effect commenting on
it, as if offering a third-person opinion. Some examples include these
(121124):
121. Busad
je.d
bi parazit
bai.jee.
for another thing time-dat I
parasite
be-past
(http://otgonpurew.blogspot.com/2006/08/21.html)
For another thing, at the time I was a parasite.
14
Of unsan baina, Sodnomdorj commented that it has almost the same meaning
as unjee.
69
122. Bi tedn.ii
l
negen adil bodo.j
yav.jee.
I they-gen modp one
like think-impfc continue15-past
(http://www.unen.mn/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=336
2&catid=53; at the present time no longer available on-line)
I thought as if I was one of them.
123. Bi tege.xe.d
I do thus-ifvn-dat
riig er
myself
male
xn.d
person-dat
tootso.j
yav.jee.
consider-impfc
continue-past
That time I considered myself a strong man.Talking about oneself
to another.
124. Vasya bi amaig
buruu bod.jee.
Vasya I you-acc
wrong think-past
(http://www.ulaanbaatar.mn/index.php?option=com_content&task=vie
w&id=134&Itemid=218)
Vasya, I had the wrong idea about you. (I got you wrong.)
Interestingly enough, any of the following forms (in 125) seem to be

acceptable here (in 124), except *bodson.
125. Vasya bi amaig buruu {bodoj baisan baina/bodoj baisan/bodoj baina/
*bodson}.
had been thinking/was thinking/am thinking/*thought
Like Song, Tserenchunt has noted in regard to certain verbs, One

interesting example of the usage of this tense is the verbs martax [forget] and untax [fall asleep]: the speaker uses [these] verbs with [the]
jee/chee ending even about him or her self (personal communication, June 1, 2007). As has been noted above, Tserenchunt and Luethy
(2005: 92) connect use of these verbs in the first person and -jee with
the reporting (as in 100) of unplanned actions.
100. Bi nom.oo
mart.ix.jee/mart.ixa.j
I
book-rp forget-ix-past
I forgot my book.
15
Literally, go.
70
chapter two
The following example of this usage occurs early in the play Xuvia
Bodogid by L. Vangan (Vangan 1967: 8) (126):
126. Boldoo
Xxd.d.ee bi yum mart.ixa.j.

Child-pl-rp
I
thing forget-ix-past
Children, I forgot something.
(I just realized I forgot something.)
In the second person, -jee may be used in reminders (127).

127. Tiimee 11-r
Yes
11th
sar.iin
month-gen
17-nd
17th
gej
that
ta
zv
you (plural) correct
bod.jee.
think-past
(www.inforadio.mn/html/pages/hotlogchid/ichinhorloo.htm)16
Right, you have calculated correctly that it is the 17th of November.
Two conclusions follow from these facts. First, -jee is indeed some
kind of marker of inferentiality. But second, the uses of the inferential
past tense marker -jee are numerous and complex, and require to be
delineated with further precision.
1.3. Evidential -lee
As a first approximation to a definitive characterization, -lee is simply
labeled the evidential past tense, in contrast to -jee, which serves as the
inferential past tense.17
In contrast to -jee, the main issue in regard to -lee arises not from
what the speaker can be expected to know, but rather the addressee.
Third-person subjects, as we have seen, are quite acceptable and normal, as in (70): waiting for someone, you see him coming.18
16
No longer available.
Nelson et al. (1998: 126) note that -lee is the only past tense morpheme in Mongol which consistently encodes evidentiality. We argue here, however, that spoken
-v is essentially the form -lee takes in ordinary interrogative sentences and hence is
evidential, as opposed to written -v.
18
Tserenchunt (p.c., October, 2008) comments that Ta irlee is acceptable and
offers the example (i). I suspect that this and similar examples do not constitute a
counter-example to the claim, since they are probably examples like (120) and following, in which the first person is permissible with -jee because there is content which is
new; with the second person, there is content which is new to the addressee.
17
71
70. ter
ir.lee
that
come-past
hes coming
In contrast, the second person strikes the native speaker as unacceptable; (128) evoked the comment from Sodnomdorj that he couldnt
see any situation where youd say this and that for sure you cant
use it in this way. (This is not completely true, however.)
128. Ta
You (plural)
You came.
ir.lee.
come-past
The first person is better: (129) is better than [(128)], as, presumably,
is (130).
129. Bi ir.lee.
I come-past
I came.
Better than [ta irlee]; Im already here. (You see me, its true.)
130. Bid ir.lee.
we come-past
We came.
You can see the group of us; we all came here.
The -lee ending can certainly be used for the first person more readily
than can -jee. A Google search on the World Wide Web, for example,
found 258 examples containing the phrase bi irlee I came, but just
one with bi irjee. Because of its evidential nature, -lee cannot readily
be used with the second person, however. A search for the phrase i
irjee you came did not find any pages, and i irlee found just ten. The
reason, presumably, is that the addressee is in the same speech situation as the speaker, and can be assumed to know (in regard to that
situation) what the speaker knows. That does not mean, of course,
that the addressee knows (or experiences) everything that the speaker
i. Nadad
To me
tusla.h [tusla.x]
help-ifvn
hun [xn]
someone
heregtei [xereg.tei]
necessary
Ashguei [agi]
dee.
Ta
ir.lee.
Wonderful
modp
You come-past
I needed someone to help me. Wonderful! You came.
bai.san
be-pfvn
yum.
copp
72
chapter two
does, but with a second-person subject, a sentence in -lee is telling

the addressee something about themself or -selves. Since the whole
point of such a sentence is to bring the matter to the attention of the
addressee, it obviously cannot freely be used in such a case, apart from
certain unusual exceptions. These exceptions, however, only serve to
underline the evidentiality of the form.
For example, the form may be used in a reminder, stating something that (presumably) the addressee has forgotten, or is ignoring,
as in (131). In this particular instance, the reminder is either preclusory or simply for the record, since it occurs in the first set of
utterancesin fact, it is the second sentenceof the interview. The
interviewer starts by saying Well, Divaasambuu guai, we are now in
your home, near the Gandan monastery, we came with an intention
to interview you. You agreed.
131. Ta
zvr.l.
You (plural) agree-past
You agreed.
(TR/EN060402Gandan Interview, Person 1. Mongolian Oral History,
at http:// www.mongolianoralhistory.org/samples/transcriptions/
TR060402.xml; the translation is at http://www.mongolianoralhistory
.org/samples/translations/EN060402.xml)
Similar to the use of -jee to make comments about oneself, -lee may be
used to make observations (132), complaints (133), and other expressions of the speakers feelings, or the like, regarding the addressee.
These are things that the addressee presumably does not know, and/
or may need to have brought to their attention, and they function in
discourse in some respects very much like reminders.
132. Dortmund.iin
xnd
xets
ye.d
ir.lee. . . .
Dortmund-gen
difficult difficult time-dat come-past
(http://sport-tsonh.net/forum)
Observation: you came when we needed you. [I.e., at a difficult time
for Dortmund.RB]
133. Neg muu jijig baiguullaga gej ta
xel.lee. (sonin.mn)
One bad small organization that you (plural) say-past
You said that it is one19 small bad organization.
19
Or a?
73
Where the focus is not on the occurrence of the event as such but is on
some modifier expressing some aspect of the event that the addressee
is unaware of, even expressions which in another context would be
odd or unacceptable, such as ta irlee you (plural ) came, are perfectly
fine. For example, consider (134), which is O.K. because they dont
know how long Ive been waiting.
134. Azaar
Fortunately
xleeg.ee.gi
wait-impfvn-neg
bai.xa.d
be-ifvn-dat
ta
you (plural)
ir.lee.
come-past
Fortunately, you came while I was not waiting a long time.
The addressee(s) know(s) very well that he himself/she herself/they

themselves came, and most likely know they came while the speaker
was waiting. But the speaker is either informing them for the first time
that it was fortunate that they came when he or she had not been
waiting for a long time, or else the speaker is commenting on this, or
reminding the addressee of it.
Another function of the -lee ending with the first person is to situate
the speaker in the event being reported. For example, in the case of
(135), Gavrilash asked the writer; if he asked someone else gev [would
be] O.K.; *gejee [is unacceptable] (manai naiz requires -lee).
135. Neg dr manai naiz
Gavrila
One day
our
friend Gavrilash
(Sadovyanu 1967: 13)
One day our friend Gavrilash said. . . .
...
...
ge.lee.
say-past
Nor can the -lee ending be used in second-person questions: there

it is replaced by -v (the question form of [-lee] is [the -v] ending,
says Tserenchunt),20 as in (136); but in the reply the addressee-turnedspeaker uses the evidential -lee (137):
20
Tserenchunt, p.c., June 1, 2007. Many textbooks and grammars have examples
of -v questions in the second person with -lee replies in the first person, but few
comment explicitly on the issue. Kullmann and Tserenpil (1996: 187) offer -sen as an
optional alternative to -l, the short form of -lee, as in (i):
i. Ta
uudan
{javal/javsan}
uu?
You (plural ) post office go-past
qp
Have you been to the post office?
74
chapter two
136. Ta
{xezee, xaan.aas}
You (plural) {when, where-abl}

When/from where did you come?
*ir.l ?21
ire.v
come-past
137. Bi delgr.ees ir.lee.

I
store-abl
come-past
I came from the store.
An interesting question involves the use of the various endings in firstperson questions. A Google search for questions such as Bi xen bailaa?
Who was I?, Bi xaanaas irlee? Where did I come from? failed to
find any examples. Sodnomdorj judged Bi xen bailaa impossible, and
commented that Bi xaanaas irlee could only be used under special
circumstances in which the speaker had been unaware while traveling, as when they had been asleep and therefore were ignorant of the
route taken.
1.4. -sen in speech
The ending -v occurs in written language in contexts in which it is not
found in speech, and while -sen also occurs in writing, and competes
with -v in all contextsin positive (138) and negative (139) statements, and both positive (140141) and negative (142) questions
these record, or imitate, speech.22
138. Aav
yav.san.
Father go-past
Father went. (Kullmann and Tserenpil 1996: 78)
139. Yuu
ge.j
nerle.x.ee
med.sen.gi.
what
say-impfc
name-ifvn-rp
know-past-neg
(http://hawk87.blogspot.com/2007/11/blog-post_17.html)
I didnt know how to name [it/them/etc.].23
21
Sodnomdorj offers as the proper form in this question irlee. He comments
that irl (the short form of irlee combined with the question particle) is used in
verification questions such as Ta Ulaan Baataraas irl? You came from Ulaan
Baatar? In real questions with question words, either irlee or irev may be used,
though there is a preference for irlee when the occurrence was long ago and irev when
it is recent.
22
The occurrence of the -sen baina complex, however, is a different matter.
23
Thanks to Tserenchunt for providing the correct translation.

140. Ta
You (plural)
manai
our
sait.iig
site-acc
anx
beginning
75
xaan.aas
where-abl
med.sen
be?
know-pfvn
qp
(http://www.biirbeh.com/modules.php?name=Surveys&pollID=5)
Where did you learn of our site originally?
141. Med.sen
?
know-past
qp
(http://medsenuu.blogspot.com/)
Do you know? (i.e., have you learned?)
142. Minii oxin angiinxan.taig.aa
yav.san.gi
yuu?
My
girl
classmate-com-rp
go-past-neg
qp
(http://www.biirbeh.com/ modules.php?name=News&file=print&sid=1
481; at the present time no longer available)
My daughter, didnt you go with your classmates?24
To the native speaker, -sen seems a spoken form and -v a written one,
as many comments reveal (viz., those below on 143144). The minutes
of the January 7th, 2003 meeting of the Mongolian Parliaments Standing Committee on Nature, Environment, Food, and Agriculture25 consists of a series of statements in -v, a segment of which is reproduced
in (145). These minutes evoked the comment that here -sen would
not [be] good, because [it is] a spoken form. Such comments are not
incompatible with Kullmann and Tserenpils (1996: 184f.) observation
that the -sen suffix . . . is clearly the most commonly used past tense
suffix in colloquial language.
143. Mandaliin Biibi
nada.d
yar.san.
Mandaliin Biibish me-dat converse-past (Luvsantseren 1972: 14)
Mandaliin Biibish spoke to me.
[-v would be] too written a form.
144. Baljin ovog.toi
Baljin surname-com
Narantsetseg n
1965 on.ii
Narantsetseg topic marker 1965 year-gen
10
sar.iin
24-nd
Ulaanbaatar xoto.d
tr.sn.
10
month-gen 24-dat Ulaanbaatar city-dat be born-past
(www.naraafoun-dation.org.mn/index.php?action=namtar)
B. Narantsetseg was born on the 24th of the 10th month in the year
1965.
-sen [is] spoken style, -sen [is] not good because [its] a spoken form
24
25
Again, thanks to Tserenchunt for providing the correct translation.

At the present time this is no longer available on-line.
76
chapter two
145. Baigal orin,

xdg.iin xgjl.iin
nature environment land-gen
development-gen
xoroo.nii
committee-gen
dr.iin
day-gen
2003 on.ii
2003 year-gen
(Myagmar garig)
Tuesday
tr.iin
state-gen
ordn.ii
palace-gen
1 dgeer sar.iin
1 st
month-gen
xuraldaan
meeting
V
B
baingiin
standing
10 tsag
10 hour
tanxim.d
hall-dat
7n.ii
7gen
10 minuta.d
10 minute-dat
exle.v.
begin-past
Xuraldaan.iig baingiin xoroo.nii

darga
. Gungaadorj
meeting-acc standing committee-gen chairperson . Gungaadorj
nee.j,
irts,
open-impfc attendance
xeleltse.x
Xuraldaan.d ir.vel
meeting-dat come-condc
asuudl.iig
agenda-acc
zoxi.x
18
be fitting-ifvn 18
taniltsuula.v.
present-past
gin.ees
member-abl
17 gin ir.j,
94.4 xuviin
irts.tei
bai.v.
17 member come-impc 94.4 individual attendance-com be-past
The January 7th, 2003 (Tuesday) meeting of the Standing Committee on
Nature, Environment, and Rural Development began at 10:10 in Hall
B of the State House. . Gungaadorj, chairperson of the Standing
Committee, opened the meeting and presented attendance and the
agenda. 17 of the 18 members attending, attendance was 94.4%.26
Despite the fact that -lee is evidential and therefore generally used in
first-person statements, oral autobiographical accounts regularly utilize instead the -sen form, as in (146147), selections from long autobiographical accounts. (Example (147) forms part of example (320).)
146. Bi Xyatad.iin
I China-gen
xotn.oo
city-rp
8-n.d
8th-dat
andun
muj.iin
Shandong province-gen
1897 on.ii
1897 year-gen
tr.j,
be born-impfc
8
8
ef
Chefu
sar.iin
month-gen
tendx.iin
of there-gen
Angli
English
sm.d
zagalmailuul.san.
church-dat
baptize-past
(
26
The whole text of (145), with analysis, is example (321) below.
77
[14- ],27 http://www.maranata.mn/index.php?option=com_

content&task=view &id=2533&Itemid=127)
I was born in Chefu city in Shantung province of China on the 8th of
August of [the year] 1897 and was baptized in the English church.
147. Ingeed
So
. . . 1943
. . . 1943
on.ii
year-gen
8
8
Sxbaatar.iin
Sxbaatar-gen
neremjit
named
deer
to
Ter
that
o.son.
go-past
odoog.iin
now-gen
baig.aa.
be-impvn
tal
n
side its
iim
such
xoyor
two
yagaan
pink
surguul
school
aa . . . odoog.oor
uh . . . today-instr
Texnikum
College
xor,
two
23-d
23-dat
n
the
ge.j
say-impfc
Baruun tal n xoyor

west
side its two
zn
east
Tn.ii
That-gen
Ofitsyer.iin
officer-gen
surguul
school
Gandan deer,
Gandan in
. . . Barilg.iin
. . . Construction-gen
sar.iin
month-gen
drvn
four
baiin
building
...
...
davxar,
storey
davxar,
storey
tend
there
bai.san.
be-past
zaxiral xurandaa Erdendamba ge.j

director colonel
Erdendamba say-impfc
xn
person
bai.san.
be-past
(http://www.mongolianoralhistory.org/samples/transcriptions/
TR060101B.xml)
On 23 August, 1942 I went to the School of Officers. That school was
situated in recent-time Gandan, aa . . . there is the Construction College now. There was a two-story building on its right and there were
two-story and four-story pinkish buildings on its left. Its director was
[a man named] Colonel Erdenedamba. (http://www.mongolianoral
history.org/samples/translations/EN060101B.xml)
In speech, -sen often contrasts with -jee. When they do, -jee is inferential and -sen is evidential. For example, faced with the example (148),
Sodnomdorj declared that unsan was the best form. Version (b) is
27
Memoires of the famous Mongolist scholar, Nicholas Poppe (chapters 14).
78
chapter two
possible, according to him, if I forgot and now I realize/notice the

fact. He declared version (a) impossible.
148. Bi
I
baga.d.aa
small-dat-rp
ene
this
nom.iig
book-acc
{ a.b. un.laa.
un.ee.}
read-past.
I read this book when I was small.28
In the case of Poppes example (15), if the speaker actually witnessed

the sunrise but the occurrence is distal, the form is again garixsan.
If the speaker witnessed the event but it occurred just nowit is
proximalthe form used is garlaa.
15. nar
gar.
sun
rise-past
the sun rose (Poppe 1970: 131)
If asked How long did you live in Mongolia?, to reply that he or

she lived there for three years, the speaker will say (149), with -sen, as
the experience is distal and, naturally, witnessed. Sodnomdorj rejected
amdarjee even in the case where the speaker replies that he or she
cant recall, thinks a moment, and then exclaims, Oh, I remember
now! I lived there for three years. But in light of other examples we
have seen of bi with -jee, it is likely that that there are contexts in
which amdarjee could be used to recount the speakers own experience, but presumably only if they were not previously aware of it.
149. Bi tend gurvan jil
amdar.san.
I
there three
year live-past
I lived there for three years.
28
Cf. examples (62a, 120):

62. a. ene nom.ibi
baa.un
ye.degen
ongsi.la
this book-acc small-gen period-dat rp read-past
I read this book during my childhood.
120.
Bi baga.d.aa
ene nom.iig
un.jee.
I small-dat-rp this book-acc read-past
I read this book when I was small!
79
If someone is asked when a meeting was held, looks on a schedule,

and replies that apparently the meeting was yesterday, they will use
bolixjee or bolixsan baina.
The example (150) elicited the comment that he had already gone,
the speaker did not witness [his going], with both yavav and yavlaa
ruled out in this context.
150. Aimg.aas
Aimag-abl
namaig
me-acc
ire.xe.d
come-ifvn-dat
Bold
Bold
ax
younger brother
bai.san.gi,
tv
r
yav.jee.
be-pfvn-neg
centre towards go-past
(www.biirbeh.com/modules.php?name=news&file=article&sid=182)
When I came from the aimag, my older brother Bold wasnt there; he
went29 to the centre.
It would appear that in speech the ending -sen can be used as an evidential past tense. The apparent evidentiality of spoken -sen raises
three questions:
is evidentiality merely an option, or is spoken -sen always evidential?
does -sen when used in writing work the same way it does in speech?
if -lee is evidential, why is -sen used as an evidential past, and does
it differ from -lee?
2. Distal and Proximal
2.1. Distal and Proximal
If the opposition of evidential and inferential is a primary distinction
in the tense system of the Mongolian verb, equally important is an
opposition of distal and proximal. But we shall have to be careful here
about using these terms, which easily lend themselves to various interpretations and hence confusion.30
29
As in English, the verb is literally past tense (javjee = went) but is interpreted as
pluperfect, and could be translated had gone. The difference is a question of perspective and discourse function.
30
Nelson et al. (1998: 122), claim, insofar as /-laa/ signals that an event is temporally, conceptually, or physically close to the speaker, that the tense system of Khalkh
Mongol . . . encodes a degree of metricality. Here we interpret proximity rather differently, and would argue that if Mongol has a metric tense system, it is not limited to
80
chapter two
UTTERANCE TIME
(now)
Tom eats
time
Diagram 2
The primary distinction between -lee and -jee is that of evidential and
inferential. But, as we have seen, many accounts of the -lee past tense
centre on recency or immediacy, so that this form has often been
called by some variant of Hangins (1968: 99, 1976: 17) immediate past
or Beffa and Hayamons (1975: 82) parfait immdiat. Similar characterizations occur in Russian (Kasyanenko 1968: 20: vyraaet nedavno
zaveriveesja proedee vremja it expresses past time completed not
long ago) and Mongolian (sayaxan ngrsn tsag time just passed in
Beffa and Hayamon 1975: 82; odoo tgssn tsag time finished [just]
now in Vietze 1974: 44).
Here we term the quality of immediacy borne by -lee proximality
and call it the proximal past tense, while the contrasting quality of -jee
we term distality and call -jee distal. What we mean by these terms is
a difference in temporal distance from the deictic centre, that is, from
the time of the speech act (i.e., the time of utterance).
The past tense endings, with the exception of -lee, are all distal, in
that the nominal (and normal) use of each is to mark a situation as
removed from (distant from) the presentas a situation which ended
at some time in the past, and has not obtained or occurred in the immediate past. Thus, as illustrated in diagram 2, there is a gap between the
past eventuality (e.g., that reported by Tom ate) and the present.
The ending -lee, however, is proximal. As a past tense it refers to
something that has just occurred, as a present to what is still occurring,
and as a future to that which is just about to occur, that is, in any case
to something which is not completely sundered from the present situation; there is no gap between the eventuality and the present.
Thus (151a) is better in the past, while (151b) is better if [the
speaker] has just arrived; (151c) is used when the speaker just came
-lee, and is not a metric tense system (i.e., system of degrees of remoteness from the
time of utterance) as that term is usually used, as, for example, for the system found
in the Bantu languages.
81
and in a setting such as an airport to which the speaker has just arrived.
Compare (151d), which does not assume such recency.
151.
a. ir.sen
Bi galt terg.eer
b. ir.lee .
I fiery wagon-instr
come-past
I came by train.
c. Bi Angli.as
ir.lee.
I England-abl come-past
I came from England.
d. Bi Angli
uls.aas
ir.sen.
I England country-abl come-past
Im from England. (Sanders and Bat-Ireedi 1995: 43)
With adverbs that refer to times that are in the past and therefore
wholly separated from the present, -sen is more acceptable than -lee.
With igdr yesterday (152a), uulzsan met sounds better than
uulzlaa, but the reverse is true with ndr today (152b). Uulzlaa
invites the inference that I just met with him, hes [still] here. With
ndr, nor are either -sen baina or -sen yum acceptable (152c).
152. a. igdr
bi tn.tei
uulz.san.
Yesterday I
that-com
meet-past
b. ndr bi tn.tei
uulz.laa.
Today
I
that-com
meet-past
c. igdr /ndr bi tn.tei
uulzsan
Yesterday/today
I that-com meet-past
Yesterday/today I met with him.
{*bai.na, *yum}.
be-pres, copp
Sodnomdorj consistently contrasted -jee as referring to long ago

(or in the distant past at a given time in the past) with -lee as just
now or just recently (possibly at a given past time), or now.
Regarding (153), for example, he commented that msjee means that
he already had it on, while msl means that he was putting it on
while riding.
153. Ter
xn
savxin tsamts, saravtai malgai
That person leather shirt
visored
hat
(Baast 1962: 9)
That person put on a leather shirt and a visored hat.
ms.l.
put on-past
It would appear that while quite often, perhaps even in general, proximality accords with evidentiality and distality with inferentiality, the
82
chapter two
two oppositions are by no means co-dependent, but rather are to some

extent independent of one another.
2.2. Future -lee
Even in its present and future uses -lee contrasts with the presentfuture (non-past) ending -ne, which is essentially distal in that even
when used as a present tense, it principally functions as a generic, but
not as an actual, present, in a way remarkably similar to the simple
present tense of English. While it is possible, as in English, to use the
present tense with stative predicates in an actually present sense (so
that medexgi in ter mongol xel medexgi he has no Mongolian [language] [Altangerel 1998: 197] means doesnt know), with other types
of predicates, for example ones denoting actions or processes, it can
only be generic or future, just as in English.31 Thus present-tense
butsana is used as a future in (154),32 but present-tense gesne thaws
is generic in (155).
154. Bi margaa
butsa.na.
I tomorrow return-pres
Im returning tomorrow. (Sanders and Bat-Ireedi 1995: 70)
155. Xavr.iin
Spring-gen
sl
tail
sar.aar
month-instr
tsas
snow
xail.j
melt-impfc
gazar
earth
ges.ne.
thaw-pres
Toward the end of spring the snow melts and the ground thaws. (Street
1963: 120)
And, as a future, -ne removes the situation from the immediacy of the
present, in contrast with both -lee in its future use, and the predicative
participle -x.
Something should be said here regarding this latter form. It is usually called the infinitive or the future verbal noun: Ramstedt (1902:
31
One difference between the languages is that performative utterances in English
generally employ the simple present tense, whereas in Mongolian they use the progressive, just like non-performative utterances. (Performative utterances are those, like
I agree, which are intended to perform a speech act, in this case that of agreeing, rather
than simply to communicate information.) Thus where an English-speaker says I think
that . . ., the Mongolian-speaker says Bi . . . gej bodoj baina I am thinking that. . . . (Viz.,
Altangerel 1998: 483).
32
Cf. Street (1963: 120), Poppe (1970: 130).
83
29), and following him, Poppe (1951: 82), use the term nomen futuri.
The Mongolian equivalent is ireedin tsagt ilt ner participle [verbal
noun] of the future (Vietze 1974: 56). Kasyanenko (1968: 22) calls it
the priastnaya forma nastoyaego-buduego vremeni the participial
form of present-future time, while Sanders and Bat-Ireedi (1999: 25)
call it the present-future verbal noun. Kullmann and Tserenpil (1996:
147) call it the future participle.
Kasyanenko would seem closest to an accurate description. Semantically, it is equivalent to the non-past -ne, and substitutes for it in
syntactic positions that do not allow the finite endings,33 for example
under negation (156158). That it is not simply a future, but rather a
non-past, is suggested, amongst other things, by the fact that it also
replaces the present progressive (159), as Kullmann and Tserenpil
point out (1996: 147). Kullmann and Tserenpil also point out (p. 147)
that it requires some kind of copula and does not appear (in statements) as the main predicate without one, though it does in questions (160163). Like the -ne ending, it is interpreted as a present with
stative expressions (156157),34 but as a future with active and eventive
predicates (158, 160163):
156. Odoo xii.x
ajil
bai.x.gi.
(Vietze 1974: 57)
Now
do-ifvn work
be-ifvn-neg
(Kullmann and Tserenpil [1996: 147] gloss this example as Now there
is no work to do.)
157. Bi n.iig
mede.x.gi.
I this-acc know-ifvn-acc
Ich wei nicht. (Vietze 1973: 57)
(I dont know.)
158. Bi yava.x.gi.
I go-ifvn-neg
Ya ne poyedu. (Kasyanenko 1968: 22)
(I shall not go.)35
33
As Kullmann and Tsrerenpil (1996: 147) say: it replaces the [future tense -ne].
But Sanders and Bat-Ireedi (1999: 25) have an example, (i), with a stative predicate that is nonetheless glossed as future.
i. Ta
end bai.x
uu?
You (plural ) here be-ifvn qp
Will you be here?
35
Poppe (1970: 135) similarly has bi irexgi I shall not come. Ramstedt (1902: 29)
has bi yavax ich werde (soll ) gehenI will/shall [should] go.)
34
84
chapter two
159. Bi odoo
bii.x.gi
bai.na.
I now
write-ifvn-neg be-pres
Im not writing.36 (Kullmann and Tserenpil 1996: 147)
160. Ongots
xezee ire.x.iig
ta
mede.x
Airplane when come-ifvn-acc you (pl) know-ifvn
Wissen Sie, wann das Flugzeug kommt? (Vietze 1973: 57)37
(Do you know when the airplane is coming?)
?
qp
161. Ava.x
uu?
Take-ifvn
qp
soll ich [er, man] nehman? (Ramstedt 1902: 29)
(should I (he, one) take [it]?)
162. Ta
tsai .x.
You (pl) tea drink-ifvn-qp
werden Sie Tee trinken? (Poppe 1951: 82)
(will you drink tea?)
163. i
odoo yaa.x
ve?
You
now
do what-ifvn qp
What will you do? (Kullmann and Tserenpil 1996: 147)
Kullmann and Tserenpil (p. 147) try to convey something of the difference between the two futures by their glosses for (164166). They
are clearly indicating a modal difference, but it is difficult from their
glosses to discern quite what it is.
164. a. Minii naiz
uda.x.gi
My
friend delay-ifvn-neg
My friend will really come soon.
b. Minii naiz
uda.x.gi
My
friend delay-ifvn-neg
My friend will come soon.
ire.x
come-ifvn
yum.
copp
ir.ne.
come-prfut
165. a. Bi xd
yava.x
yum.
I countryside go-ifvn copp
Surely Ill go to the countryside.
36
Tserenchunt (p.c., October, 2008) comments that this is a strange sentence.
The present continuous negative would be [bieegi baina]. I suspect that what was
intended originally was the futurate sense of the English present progressive, corresponding to the future sense of the non-past participle. That is, something similar to
refusals like I dont care what you say, Im not writing that letter or statements about
arrangements such as Im not leaving till June.
37
Kullmann and Tserenpil (1996: 148) gloss the same example as Do you know
when the plane will come?

b. Bi
xd
I
countryside
Ill go to the countryside.
85
yav.na.
go-pres
166. a. i
uda.x.gi
xorin nas
You delay-ifvn-neg 20
age
Soon youll really be twenty years old.
b. i
uda.x.gi
xorin nas
You delay-ifvn-neg 20
age
Soon youll be twenty.
xre.x
reach-ifvn
yum.
copp
xr.ne.
reach-prfut
While -x, like -ne, marks the future, it is -lee which is like the English
futurate38 construction be going to in connecting a future situation
with that of the present, though -lee is not always to be translated
be going to. An interesting contrast is that between (167) and (168)
below. Example (167) is glossed [leave it with me,] I will read it and
described as being used when someone offers a book. Example (168)
might, on the contrary, form part of the response to the question have
you read that book?. Although the example is glossed with going to,
the speaker cant use [-lee] here. However, the addressees promise I
will read the book, in the situation in which someone offers it on condition that the addressee read it, was translated as (168), with unna.
167. Bi ter
I that
nom.iig
un.laa.
book-acc read-past39
168. Bi ter
I that
nom.iig
un.n.aa.
book-acc read-pres-emphp
Tentatively, the data suggest two differences between the two. First,
-lee is a near or even immediate future, while -ne is distal, temporally
separating the event in question from the present. It is important to
note that while -lee connects the future eventuality with the present
situation, so that often it can be translated with be going to, it does
not function quite like English be going to. It simply indicates nearness
38
Futurate expressions are those which refer to future time but are semantically
present, e.g., is to, is about to, is going to, even the simple present and progressive present in their future use. Futurate expressions generally presuppose or implicate that the
future occurrence is already under way or is already certain, for example, planned or
arranged. Ill leave at noon could be a prediction or statement of intention, but I leave
at noon, Im leaving at noon, and Im going to leave at noon are usually statements of
something already scheduled.
39
This example actually translates as I will read a book (or books). A marker of
definiteness is required to convey the sense of the book or that book.
86
chapter two
to the present, nominal immediacy, as when the waker utters (169).40

It is not inherently indicative of intentionality, though in (169) it does
imply an intention. But, as (170) shows, the future use of -ne can also
translate be going to. Since this example concerns natural phenomena,
there is no question of intentionality (notwithstanding the fact that gex
often conveys intentionality); but the sense is simply that the prediction is based on the present conditions.
169. Za
eej.ee,
odooxon
bos.loo.
OK mom-rp
just a moment get up-past
O.K., mom, Ill get up in just a moment.
170. Duu.tai
boroo oro.x
ge.j
bai.na.
Noise-com
rain
enter-ifvn say-impfc be-pres
Theres going to be a thunderstorm. (Luvsanjav et al. 1988: 87)
Kullmann and Tserenpil (1996: 188) emphasize the immediacy conveyed by -lee by glossing (171a) as are you leaving [now]? (their
square brackets), but (171b) as Are you going to go? In both cases
the sense is that the going in some sense is already in progress: in the
case of (a), the addressees may have given evidence of their imminent departure, such as putting on their outdoor clothes and going
to the door. In the latter case, there is likely no immediate evidence
of imminent departure, but the speaker has reason to believe that the
addressee has determined to go. However, in the case of (b), the actual
going may be well in the future. If it is to be immediate, the form of
the sentence does not say so. Example (171c) (p. 187), they gloss as
the day is almost over, the almost simply emphasizing the immediacy of its ending.
171. a. i
You
b. Ta
You (pl)
c. dr
Today
yav.laa
go-past
yava.x
go-ifvn
ngr.l.
pass-past
yuu?
qp
uu?
qp
40
From http:// mycolorfulworld.wordpress.com/ 2007/02/14/-/. Cf. Za
za odooxon bosloo at http://www.elibrary.mn/read_book.php?bid=66&page_id=24.
87
The second difference has to do with contingency. Be going to in

English conveys that the determining conditions are already met, and
the future event is represented as planned, scheduled, or certain. The
sun is going to rise tomorrow in the east; Christmas is going to be on
December 25th; Im going to finish this book, no matter what. But the
will/shall future is contingent, and depends on future events. I cant
say at this moment that were not going to see the sun tomorrow, but
if its very cloudy, we wont. God willing, I will finish this book. That
Christmas will be on December 25th is due to a number of preconditions, and if any one of them changes, Christmas may well be on some
other date. One can think of a number of extremely unlikely events
that would have such an effect. For example, if the calendar were so
changed that December had just 21 days and the rest were tacked on
to January, Christmas would be on January 4th.
If we examine future sentences with -lee and -ne (172), we observe
a difference in contingency and dependency on the current state of
affairs. In (172a), the particle biz suggests some basis for likelihood,
or at least possibility; it is a little like the question so youll come
back soon?. Nonetheless, this is essentially epistemic modality: there
is a basis for believing that the event will occur, but the event itself
remains open, and may or may not occur. The example (172b) is different, in that presumably there is reason to believe that the event
itself is more than possibleit is probable or even certain, all other
things being equal. Perhaps the train is scheduled to leave in a few
minutes, or perhaps there are all the signs of a train on the verge of
departure. Finally, in (172c), both in the Mongolian and in the English
translation, the future serves a kind of modal function. Neither the
polite, interrogative form, nor its rather impolite and imperative
declarative counterpart, you will put me through to 375, indicates certainty, and, as with any other request, it is open to the addressee to
refuse (no, I wont). The sense of will here is not quite that of the
volitional will and not quite that of the future will. What these three
disparate examples share, however, is the nature of the contingency in
question. The future events are contingent, but if they depend on the
present situation, they only do so indirectly.
172. a. Ta
udaxgi ir.ne
biz
dee?
you (plural) soon
come-pres perhaps particle
I hope, [sic] youll come back soon. (Luvsanjav et al. 1988: 155)
88
chapter two
b. Odooxon
xdl.n.
just a moment depart-pres
The trains leaving any minute now. (Luvsanjav et al. 1988: 156)
c. Ta
375-d
zalga.j
you (plural) 375dat connect-impfc
g.n
?
do for someone else41-pres
qp
Will you put me through to 375? (Luvsanjav et al. 1988: 226)
Whether used for past or non-past occurrences, -lee is tied to the

speech act situation, fundamentally a marker of proximality and
evidentiality. But neither proximality nor evidentiality is objectively
given. It is a subjective decisionalbeit an unconscious oneon the
part of the speaker how to view the situation in question, and hence
which ending to use.
2.3. The Pragmatics of Immediacy
The determination of when to use a distal (non-immediate), and
when a proximal (immediate) form is up to the speaker, but is subject to a number of pragmatic factors. The judgement that [-sen] is
quite distant, [-lee] quite recent, and in midperiod they overlap leaves
open the question, for example, of how the choice of ending is made
when the situation described is neither obviously immediate nor nonimmediate.
Very likely, the choice is dependent on the discourse-functional
purpose of the utterance, similar to the choice of tenses in metric tense
systems. Thus what is immediate, or distant varies from context to
context. The dichotomy of distant and recent, or non-immediate and
immediate, is not dissimilar to the distinction of past and present perfect in European languages. Right after eating, the speaker uses the
perfect: Ive eaten. Hours later, the past is appropriate: I ate. But inbetween, the choice depends on the context of the utterance. If talking
about the present situation resulting from the earlier eating or noneating, the present perfect is appropriate. Have you eaten? receives
the reply I have or I havent. But if talking about the past situation, the past is naturally normal: Did you eat when the others did?
receives the reply Yes, I did or No, I didnt.
41
Literally, give.
89
In a similar way, -lee is used if the past event is directly linked to

the immediate situation, and cannot be used otherwise. Bi irlee I
came can be said by someone who has just stopped, or been stopped;
otherwise bi irsen is better. Thus what country are you from? is ta
yamar ulsaas irsen be? (Sanders and Bat-Ireedi 1995: 43), but, as we
have seen, a question such as where have you come from? elicits an
answer in -lee, like (151b).
151. b. Bi galt
terg.eer
I firey
wagon-instr
I came by train.
ir.lee.
come-past
Besides recency, descriptions of the form have also centred on present

relevance, and it has consequently been called, inter alia:
Perfect assertive (Schlepp 1983: 37)
Perfect tense (Ramstedt 1902: 24; Grnbech and Krueger 1955: 36;
Chinggeltei 1981: 87)
Present perfectPraesens Perfecti, perfektnyj prezens, present of the
perfect, etc. (Ramstedt 1902: 17; Poppe 1951: 80, 1955: 265, 1970:
130; Saneev 1964: 88)
The present perfect in some cases is proximal like the -lee past in that
the event or process in question continues into the present (173a), is
imminent (173b), or is in the immediate past (173c).
173. a. Ive {been awake/worked} all night.
b. Ive almost finished.
c. Ive {finished my chores/caught a chill}.
But in other cases, the present perfect does not report on a eventuality in the immediate past. In the right context, for example, the situation illustrated in diagram 2 above, in which there is a gap between
the past eventuality and the present time, could be reported using the
present perfect, as Tom has eaten. Affecting the use and interpretation
of the present and other perfect tenses are a number of pragmatic factors, including the context, the point of the utterance, and the nature
of the eventuality itself. Thus a sentence with an activity verb like
work (174a) would normally be interpreted as an experiential perfect
referring to an indefinite time in a perhaps quite distant past when
90
chapter two
associated with a characterization like as a fireman, but as a continuative perfect referring to an immediate past up to and including the
present when associated with a temporal expression like all night
(173a), while (174b), with an eventive verb like go (to the store) would
most likely be interpreted as a resultative perfect, reporting a relatively
recent event. Furthermore, the temporal frame affects the interpretation as well. Example (174c) would likely be interpreted as an experiential perfect because walking across the Sahara takes a long time,
but (174d) as a resultative perfect, because walking across the room
does not, and hence is more likely to be both immediate and relevant
to the present state of affairs. But the context plays a role as well; if
(174c) is a news item, it is likely to be hot news and hence recent, if
not immediate, while in the context of discussing reasons for, or the
circumstances surrounding, walking across the floor, (174d) might be
experiential and non-immediate.
174. a.
b.
c.
d.
Toms worked as a fireman.

Toms gone to the store.
Tom has walked across the Sahara.
Tom has walked across the room.
In some cases of the resultative perfect, to be sure, the present is

interpreted not as the time of utterance, the time of the speech act,
but as an extended now defined by the relevant state resulting from
the past event. For example, in the case of Mother has gone to visit
Uncle Matt, the speakers mother may have literally just gone, may
indeed still be en route. But it is equally possible that she went some
time agohours, days, or even monthsso long as her absence, and
her journey and subsequent visit with Uncle Matt, endure without
break. The meaning of just and its Mongolian equivalent sayaxan is
variable and dependent on a number of pragmatic factors, as shown
by such English examples as those in (175), and Mongolian examples
like (176178). In (175a), the commuters may have gotten off seconds
ago, or minutes, but presumably have not been waiting long; in (175b)
the sign had presumably not been put up in the last few minutes, but
likely at least hours, and probably days, before; and in (175c), we are
explicitly told that the hotel had opened days earlier. Having just gotten off a train is evidently a different matter from having just put up a
notice or having just opened a hotel.
91
175. a. Commuters, who have just come off the train, waiting for the bus to
go home, Lowell, Mass. (caption on photo; http://www.flickr.com/
photos/library_of_congress/2178248615/; at the present time no longer available)
b. I have no idea if the man had some sort of political or cultural agenda
(TVUUC had just put up a sign welcoming gays to the congregation), or if its just some lunatic acting for no reason at all. (http://
www.pamshouseblend.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=6288)
c. He explained the hotel had just opened a few days ago.
(http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/ showthread.php?t=667994; at the
present time no longer available.)
176. Blog.iin
tr.sn
dr sayaxan bolo.v.
Blog-gen be born-pfvn day
just
become-past
(http://www.yes.mn/blog/?mb_id=ternaoda&id=455; at the present time
no longer available.)
It was just the blogs anniversary.
177. Xarin amdral.iin maan anxnii xair sayaxan ir.sen.
But
life-gen
our
first
love just
come-past
(http://www.setguul.mn/index.php?str=news-data&newsid=74)
But the first love of my life has just come.
178. Sayaxan id.sen
ndg namaig zovoo.j
Just
eat-pfvn egg
me-acc bother-impfc
bai.na
uu
be-pres qp
daa
particle
(www.sport-tsonh.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=34& t=435&start=25&st=
0&sk=t&sd=a; at the present time no longer available.)
The egg I just ate is bothering me!
Similarly, proximal -lee can be used in a wide range of actual time

depths from the present (68, 179), depending on a number of pragmatic factors. The present situation, speech act situation, or context of utterance is not a given, but varies from situation to situation.
The speaker is at liberty to represent one and the same past eventuality
as either distal or proximal, just as the English-speaker can use the past
or the present perfect tenses for the same event (180), and with greater
or less distance of the eventuality from the present (181), depending
principally on the purpose of the utterance, but also on a number of
other factors. It would be wrong, however, to say that the choice of
the ending is an option of the speakers, that the speaker is free to use
whatever ending matches the way the speaker views the situation. The
context affects the interpretation of the tense ending, so that, relative
to the intended purpose of the utterance in the particular discourse
92
chapter two
or text, the speaker or writer may have few, if any, choices of tense
ending.
68. bid odoo xool
we
now
meal
we have now eaten
id.lee
eat-past
179. a. 43 dax uls

Guinea Bissau42-d
xl
tav.laa.
43rd
country Guinea Bissau-dat foot set-past
(http://www.amai.mn/archives/1877)
We set foot in [our] 43rd country, Guinea Bissau.
b. 2008 naadam exle.xe.d
belen bol.loo
fashion 2008 show
begin-ifvn-dat ready become-past
(http://www.suuder.com/?p=658)
The Fashion 2008 show is ready to begin.
180. a. Tom ate lunch at noon.
b. Tom has already eaten lunch.
181. a. George W. Bush has been president of the U.S. for seven years.
b. Has any native of Connecticut been president of the U.S.?
2.4. Spoken -v and the Past Tenses in Questions

In speech, -v occurs principally in questions. In statements, it is not
often used in the colloquial language, which prefers the verbal noun
of the perfect . . ., but in questions it occurs quite frequently with the
interrogative particle [-], writes Poppe (1970: 131), and the same is
reported by Street (1963: 122), Hangin (1968: 24), Kasyanenko (1968:
20), and Vietze (1974: 44).
Furthermore, Poppe writes43 Als Prdikat mit der Verneinung gei
(-gi) bildet diese Form eine negative Entsprechung des positiven
Prteritum perfecti auf -wa. (As a predicate with the negation gi
(-gi) [the form -sen] forms a negative expression of the positive past
of the perfect in [-v].) Beffa and Hayamon (1975: 81) specify this as
a postposed negation, and alongside -sen as a substitute for -v, refer to
the verbal noun in -ee. Of the -v ending itself, Poppe writes, Mit einer
Negation kommt diese Form nicht vor. (This form does not appear
with a negation.).44
42
43
44
In the Latin alphabet in the source.

Poppe (1951: 82).
Poppe (1951: 80).
93
From what Poppe and others say, it would seem that -v and -sen
are in complementation; in the colloquial language -sen is the form -v
takes under negation or in the absence of interrogation.45
However, there is reason to believe that in speech -v is actually a
form of -lee.
Traditionally grammarians have observed that all of the indicative
endings can co-occur with the question particle uu/ (thus, for example, Poppe 1951: 79, 1970: 130; Street 1963: 120). But questions in -jee
often involve gej (-j is the short form of -jee used before the question
particle) and are used to verify either a statement (as in a verifying,
echo question like 182) or an intention.46 By the very nature of the
inferential ending, it is unlikely to occur in normal questions like
did you leave? or where did you come from?. Interestingly enough,
there seem, for example, to be no examples of -jee questions in either
the Sanders-Bat-Ireedi phrasebook or the one by Luvsanjav et al.
182.
nexeer 1900 on.d
tr.sn
ge.j
?
You (plural) really
1900 year-dat be born-past say-past qp
Are you really saying you were born in [the year] 1900?
not believing [what you said]
Similarly, interrogative -lee is restricted, though perhaps not as

restricted as -jee. Kullmann and Tserenpil (1996: 187f.) offer up questions in -l (the short form of -lee) with present perfect meaning as alternatives to questions in -sen (183184), and also offer similar questions
with the full form of -lee and with non-past meaning as alternatives
to questions in -x (185187). Kullmann and Tserenpil note (p. 187)
that such questions as (185187) express that one has good reason
to believe that the action will take place. Regarding (183184) they
45
Nelson et al. (1998: 118) point out that -v and -sen are largely confined in their
distribution to written and spoken Khalkh Mongol, respectively.
46
An echo question is a question that directly takes up (or echoes) part of an
uttterance made before. (http://urts120.uni-trier.de/glottopedia/index.php/Echo_
question). It may repeat all (i) or part (ii) of a preceding utterance. It generally lacks
the characteristic word order of real questions, the kind that seek (new) information,
and functions simply to verify something unexpected by, or surprising to, the hearer
(as in i) or which is not clear or not intelligible (as in ii).
i. I just returned from Ulaanbaatar.You just returned from Ulaanbaatar?!
ii. Over break, I ended up visiting my (unintelligible).You ended up visiting
who? (http://www.ling.upenn.edu/~beatrice/syntax-textbook/box-questions
.html )
94
chapter two
comment such questions are used in colloquial language to express

that one cant remember, although one witnessed the action. In other
words, they are, like -jee questions, requests for confirmation, not real
requests for information. One indication that questions in -j(ee) and
-l(ee) are not real questions is that the response to such a question
never seems to employ the same ending as used in the question. This
is in contrast with questions in -sen and -v, where such matching of
endings is quite common.
183. Ta uudan
{ }
yaval
yavsan
184. i ter sonin medeeg

news?
185. i
186. Ta
187. i
{
{
{
yavlaa yuu
yavax uu
untlaa yuu
untax uu
}
}
}
uu? Have you been to the post office?47
sonsol
sonsson
uu? Have you heard that interesting
?48 Are you leaving (now)?

? Are you going to sleep (now)?
bosloo yuu ? Are you getting up (now)?

bosox uu
One can hypothesize that the difference is due to the different functions of the two types of questions. Yes and no are often signaled
in Mongolian by repetition of the verb, and of course the answer to
a WH question (one containing a question word like what or where
and seeking information, rather than an answer of yes or no) may
contain a verb; in either case, the context requires the same ending
as in the question, if a past-tense answer is appropriate. The failure
of echo questions to elicit such a response is due to the fact that
the answer is not intended to be informative, but merely confirmatory. Thus a response such as tiimee yes or gi no is appropri-
47
Regarding examples (183) and (184), however, Tserenchunt comments (p.c.,
October, 2008), In these examples, the yaval uu and the sonsol uu are contraction[s]
of yavsan bil uue? [sic], sonsson bil uu [sic]. It is not the lee ending. Bilee and bil
uu [sic] are used when the speaker [does] not remember the past action and he or
she just wants to recall [it], to make sure if the action had happened before. Im not
sure how how much of the account presented here this would affect; clearly further
research is indicated, especially as regards bilee.
48
Their alternative examples have the subjects i and ta respectively in (185) and ta
nar and ta respectively in (186), but as far as I can tell, this is just a typo.
95
ate; an answer such as trsn was born would be appropriate where

the question is what happened? or he did what? (clarifying an
unclear statement), but not where the echo question is seeking to confirm a statement containing trsn, just as the appropriate response
to an English question like You know the Dalai Lama?! is usually
Yes, I do, or Yes, I do, and not I know him or I know the
Dalai Lama.
It is predictable, accordingly, that, in Tamiriin ber in Vangans
volume Jiriin xms (p. 83), when the character Baldan asks (188),
the character Ulaan deelt (Red-robed) replies simply giNo.
188. Tsaad loo in, amaig
mata.
other
driver your you-acc denounce-past
That there driver of yours, is he squealing on you?
uu?
qp
Though in colloquial speech -v is largely restricted to questions (Street

1963: 122, Hangin 1968: 24, Vietze 1974: 44), there are questions in
-sen as well: [q]uestions are often expressed with this suffix (Kullmann and Tserenpil 1996: 184). In fact, apart from questions explicitly
or implicitly in the present tense, questions in -sen may be the most
common type. They are certainly more common than questions in
either -jee or -lee. Or -v, for that matter.
Though it appears, as is said, that -sen replaces -v in statements,
in questions they compete, and both occur with uu/ (189194),
though only -sen occurs with ve (195, 196). (Questions in -v, at least,
can occur without any question particle, as in (197)). In speech, -v
may be translated using the present tense (189), the past tense (190),
or the present perfect, or more than one of these (191), depending on
the context, but then so can -sen, which is translated by the present
perfect in (198), the present in (199), and the past in (200).49
49
Tserenchunt comments (p.c., October, 2008), in the examples 189200, I would
say that the -v ending refers to the recent action, while the -san ending refers to the
fact in past no matter if it is recent or distal action. . . . There is quite a bit that could
be said about this comment, which, as I read it, is not in conflict with the general
conclusions of the present work. As regards these specific examples and what I have
to say about them, I must let the discussion in this volume speak for itself. At the same
time, the question of precisely what time spoken -v ranges over relative to both its use
in questions and the use of both -lee and -sen in statements, is by no means settled
and evidently calls for further research.
96
chapter two
189. Ta
zam.d.aa
zdre.v
?
You (plural) way-dat-rp tire-past qp
Are you tired from your trip? (Street 1963: 122)
190. Ter
surguul.d
yava.v
uu?
That
school-dat
go-past
qp
Did he go to school? (Street 1963: 122)
191. Ta
ene
nom.iig
ze.v
?
You (plural)
this book-acc see-past qp
Have you seen this book? or Did you see this book? (Street 1963:
122)
192. Ta
gantsaaraa
yav.san
uu?
You (plural) alone
go-past qp
(http://www.tsahimurtuu.mn/show.php?table=news&id=16; at the present time no longer available.)
Did you go alone?
193. Ta
lg.r
You (plural)
vacation-instr
Did you go on vacation?
yav.san
go-past
uu?
qp
194. i
amdraliinxaa
utga ur.iig
ol.son
uu?
you ones own lifes meaning-acc find-past qp
(www.harp.mn/forum/ index.php?Uildel=ShowThread&TiD=1979&P=
0; at the present time no longer available.)
Have you found the meaning of your life?
195. ax
nar xaana50 yav.san
younger brother pl where
go-past
(cgi.geocities.jp/yz_0084/light/light.cgi)
Where did [the/your/my] brothers go?
ve?
qp
196. Why did the Pilgrims come to America? To gain religious freedom.
Yaagaad pilgrim.uud (anxdagid) Amerika.d
irsen
why
pilgrim-pl
(pioneers)
America-dat come-past
ve? ain
te.x
erx l.nij tl.
qp religion worship-ifvn freedom-gen for
(http://www.naizuud.com/blog/view/id_806/)
197. i
xaan.aas
ire.v?
You
where-abl come-past
(http://www.ineehuu.com/print.php?type=N&item_id=4965)
Where did you come from?
50
Sodnomdorj comments that this should be either xaa or xaaaa, not xaana, with
xaaaa the most correct. The source had axa instead of ax, raising questions about
the writers command of at least written Mongolian. I have found only one other Web
page with xaana in this construction.
97
198. (Ter xn)

Darxan xoto.d51 yav.san uu? Yavsan.
That person Darxan city-dat go-past qp
go-past
Has he gone to Darkhan?52 Yes, (he has). (Sanders-Irredi 1995: 28)
199. Ta
You (plural)
gi,
No
uragla.san
marry-past
uu? Are you married?

qp
bi uragl.aa.gi.
No, Im not. (Sanders-Irredi 1995: 48)
I marry-impfvn-neg
200. Xen
yav.san? Aav
yavsan.
Who go-past Father go-past
Who went?
Father went. (Kullmann and Tserenpil 1996: 78)
In this context, it is instructive to consider the rather different uses the

two endings in question are put to.
In contrast to questions in -jee and -lee, the responses to those in
-sen (also -sengi) quite often involve a repetition of the verb, or at
least the tense. (Recall that the usual negation of -sen is not -sengi, but
instead -eegi.) There are numerous such examples in the Sanders-BatIreedi phrasebook (e.g., 198, 199, 201), the phrasebook by Luvsanjav
et al. (202204), and the textbook by Kullmann and Tserenpil (200,
205, 206). Kullmann and Tserenpil pair one question in -sen (207a)
with an answer in -lee (207b), and one with an answer in -v (208),
but there seem to be no similar examples in phrasebooks, interviews,
plays, or Web forums.
201. a. Ta
al
xot.oos
ir.sen
be?
You (plural) which town-abl come-pfvn qp
Which town are you from?
b. Bi . . . xot.oos
ir.sen.
I
. . . town-abl come-past
Im from the town of. . . . (Sanders-Irredi 1995: 44)
51
Sodnomdorj comments that this should be either xot or xot ruu. I found no
Web pages with xotod in this construction, one with xot (quoted from another phrase
book), and none with either xot ruu or xotruu. For ruu yavsan uu, I found 32 Web
examples. Immediately preceding ruu yavsan uu on these pages were the unsuffixed
nouns or nominal expressions, mod (zuud.blog.banjig.net/post.php?post_id=39656),
xoyor uul (www.mongolnews.mn/weekend.php?n=1466), nomiin san (mongolhel
.blog.mn/index.m?p=29), Afganistan (www.lamongols.com/content/view/3366/39), etc.
This would seem to support Sodnomdorjs native-speaker intuition in regard to this
example.
52
My transcription.
98
chapter two
202. a. Ta
zax.iin
tasalbar av.san
You (plural) market-gen ticket
take-past
Have you got a market ticket?
b. Av.san
av.san. . . .
Take-past
take-past
Yes, of course. (Luvsanjav et al. 1998: 214)
uu?
qp
203. a. Ta
biyelgee
zsen
?
You (plural) biyelgee53 see-past qp
Have you seen the body-shaking dance?
b. z.sen. . . .
See-past
Yes. (Luvsanjav et al. 1998: 254)
204. a. Ta
xeden
on.d
tr.sn
You (plural) how many year-dat be born-past
When were you born?
b. Bi 1930 on.d
tr.sn.
I
1930 year-dat
be born-past
I was born in 1930. (Luvsanjav et al. 1998: 42)
be?
qp
205. a. inii aav

xaaaa
yavsan
be?
Your father to where go-past qp
Where did your father go?54
b. Minii aav
gol
ruu
yav.san.
My
father river towards go-past
My father went to the river. (Kullmann and Tserenpil 1996: 99)
206. a. Ter
yuu
ruu
uluu id.sen
be?
That what towards stone
throw-past qp
At what did he throw stones?
b. Ter
tsonx
ruu
uluu id.sen.
That window
towards stone throw-past
He threw stones at the window. (Kullmann and Tserenpil 1996: 99)
207. a. i
yuu.nii
max av.san
uu?
You what-gen meat take-past qp
What kind of meat did you buy?55
b. Bi xr.iin
max av.laa.
I
cow-gen meat take-past
I bought beef.56 (p. 80)
53
A traditional Mongolian folk dance.

Their gloss is Where did your father go last night?, which doesnt match their
example.
55
Tserenchunt (p.c., October, 2008) says that uu here should be be.
56
Tserenchunt (p.c., October, 2008) comments that In this example, the person
who answers the question refers to the action he just has done. So, he uses avlaa.
Because in real interaction people do not follow the [form in the] question. They
can add some new information or emotions. There is an artificial quality to many
54
99
208. a. Dorj.iig
yuug.aar
songo.son
be?
Dorj-acc what-instr elect-pfvn
qp
As what did (the people) elect Dorj?
b. Dorj.iig
ang.iin
axlag.aar
songo.v.
Dorj-acc class-gen
leader-instr elect-past
(They) elected Dorj as class president. (p. 94)
In the case of -v questions, however, when the verb is repeated in the

answer, not only is -v not used (since it is not an affirmative form in
the colloquial language), but, contrary to what the grammatical tradition would suggest about the relationship between -v and -sen, -v is
replaced not by -sen, but by -lee.
Thus immediately following example (188) above, Ntsgen deelt
(bare-robed) asks (209) (did you see the new leader?), to which
Red-robed replies, yes, but in this case, yes is expressed by zlee.
209. ine
new
darg.iig
leader-acc
ze.v
see-past
?
qp
In the phrase book by Luvsanjav et al. (p. 12) the question (210a) appears
immediately above the statement (210b), which is clearly intended as
its response. Similarly, an on-line Chinese/Mongolian phrase-book
(http://www.qingis.com/monggolkiril.htm) gives the question (211a)
just above what is clearly intended as the proper response, (211b). In
an interview on a Web page, the question (212a) elicits the response
(212b). In the play Xuvia bodogid in Jiriin xms (on p. 28),
Sonomxand asks (213a), to which Jamts begins his reply as in (213b).
Here the verb is repeated, but in a different form and in a different
context. But the -lee form teglee seems to be a reflection of -v in the
same way as irlee is a reflection of irev in (210, 211).57
210. a. Sain
yav.
ire.v
?
Well go-impfc come-past qp
Did you have a safe (pleasant) journey?58
b. Sain yav.
ir.lee.
Well go-impfc come-past
Yes, thank you.
examples given in textbooks and phrase-books. It is almost impossible for the nonnative-speaker, however, to judge what is most natural in a given context.
57
In examples (210213) the corresponding forms are underlined.
58
In Tamiriin ber (p. 90), the character Sambuu asks the same question, but the
reply is simply sain irlee.
100
211. a. Sain
Well
b. Sain
Well
chapter two
ire.v
come-past
ir.lee.
come-past
?
qp
212. a. Ta
saixan inele.v
You (plural) fine
renew59-past
Did you have a good New Years?
b. Saixan inel.lee.
Fine
renew-past
I did.
(http://nutag.mn/content/view/820/1/)
213. a. i
saya
ire.v
You
just
come-past
Did you just come?
b. Teg.lee60 . . . .
Yes. . . .
?
qp
?
qp
There are many examples of -v questions in forums on the Web (quite

often presented in the Latin alphabet, e.g., 214, 215), and nearly all
the responses to these questions are, as we would expect, in -lee (as in
214). However, at least one uses -sen (215). And example (216) parallels zev (in an embedded question) with zsen.
214. toglo.j
ze.v
?61
run around-impfc try-past qp
Did you try sports?62
z.le
try-past
I tried them. = I did.
(guitar.mn/forum/viewtopic.php?start=105&t-1836)63
215. chi video.g
ni
ze.v
you video-acc the see-past
Did you see the video?
59
.
qp
The reference is to celebrating the new year.

Literally did so.
61
The front vowels transliterated in the present work as and are generally represented in the Latin alphabet on the Web as oe and ue respectively, occasionally, as
here and in the next example, as o and u. Often in Cyrillic script, and sometimes in
the Latin, is represented as v.
62
I was unable to check the context before this page disappeared. Toglox has a
very wide range of meanings, but I suspect something like playing sports was the
intended meaning.
63
The whole text of (214) (and of 215) is in the Latin alphabet in the source; the
original orthography is copied here.
60
101
z.sen . . . . .
see-past
I saw it. = Yes.
(www.asiafinest.com/forum/loftversion/index.php/t75847.html; at the
216. Ted
they
n
topic marker
yuu.g
what-acc
glrn;
saying:
inii
your
ger.t
house-dat
ze.v
ge.sen.d
Xijxie
n
see-past say-pfvn-dat Hezekiah topic marker
Ted
they
n
topic marker
minii
my
ger.t
house-dat
xamag
bai.gaa.g
z.sen
bui.
everything
be-impfvn-acc see-pfvn copp
(http://gospelgo.com/a/1846/2ki.htm; 2Kings 20:15)
What have they seen in thine house? And Hezekiah answered, All the
things that are in mine house have they seen. . . . (2 Kings 20:15 in
King James version; http://www2.lib.virginia.edu/etext)
Apparently, no responses to interrogative -v use -v . . . except in the

pages of Kullmann and Tserenpils grammar, where the question
(217a) is matched with an answer (217b) using the same, -v, verb form.
If answers like (217b) occur at all, they are likely not readily used in
speech, and must occur under quite restricted conditions.64
217. a. Baatar ene nom.oos
yuu.g
uni.v?
Baatar this book-abl what-acc read-past
What did Baatar read from this book?
b. Baatar ene nom.oos
2-r blg.iig
uni.v.
Baatar this book-abl 2nd chapter-acc read-past
Baatar read the 2nd chapter from this book. (p. 87)
The fact that responses to -sen questions generally employ -sen suggests that the responses to -v questions should likewise repeat the
verb, since both endings are used to ask real information questions.
That -v normally elicits a response in -lee, and that -lee is not used to
form information questions, argues for -v being the form -lee takes in
information questions in the colloquial spoken language. That -v questions are appropriately answerable with -lee shows that such questions
64
I have been able to find few WH questions with a -v verb-form, and none of these
is accompanied by a reply in -v.
102
chapter two
presuppose a recent, proximal answer. Where the context is such that

the speaker makes no such presupposition, the question is phrased
using -sen and it receives an answer in the same tense form. However,
though -v may be proximal in presupposing an eventuality closely
linked to the speech act situation, spoken -v cannot be accounted evidential, since it is restricted to questions.
3. Deictic and Anaphoric
3.1. Reference Times
The past tenses marked with the endings -lee and -jee are polar opposites, the one proximal and evidential, the other distal and inferential.
But what of the past tenses in -sen and -v? In evidentiality, they appear
to be neutral, as described, for example, by Song (1997: 184; 2002: 149),
who writes of the -v ending that it doesnt indicate whether the situation was known directly or indirectly to the speaker. He calls the -lee
past the direct knowledge past, something known to, even witnessed
by, the speaker, and that marked by -jee the indirect knowledge past,
something newly discovered. The -v or neutral past, is described as
relatively colorless (Street 1963: 22), i.e., without specific modal value.65
While this picture is correct and insightful as far as it goes, it is
inadequate to fully capture the range ofand the restrictions onthe
uses of these markers. In particular, a further contrast must be pointed
out. The past tenses marked by -lee and -jee belong to the deictic or
absolute tenses, which serve to directly relate the time of the eventuality or occurrence (the time of the event or situation reported) to
the time of the speech act (the utterance time at which the sentence
is utteredi.e., spoken, written, or otherwise communicated). The
endings -v and -sen, on the contrary, belong to the anaphoric tenses,
which relate the time of the eventuality only indirectly to the time of
utterance, their relationship to this deictic centre being mediated by a
reference time. It is to this reference time, not the utterance time itself,
that they directly relate the time of the occurrence.
Similarly, the pluperfect tense of European languages (as in Tom
had eaten) locates the state or event at a time earlier than now, but it
65
The glosses and terminology have been slightly altered to bring them into conformity with those used in the present work.
103
time
Tom eats
UTTERANCE TIME
(now)
Diagram 3
time
Tom eats
REFERENCE UTTERANCE TIME

TIME
(now)
Diagram 4
does so only indirectly, by dint of placing the occurrence at a time that

is itself prior to a reference time which is already in the past. That is, a
sentence like Tom had eaten lunch, as opposed to Tom ate lunch, presupposes some reference time other than the utterance time. Compare
diagrams 3, 4 above. In the case illustrated in diagram 3, Toms eating
is in the past. In that illustrated in diagram 4, it is also in the past, but
it is also prior to some presupposed time which is itself in the past.
The reference time may be implicit, presupposed in context. In a
discourse (by which term we mean here written text as well as oral
discourse), referring expressionsincluding those with temporal referenceare generally interpreted as relevant to their context; e.g., in
(218), young men and women in the second sentence are understood
as referring to those in Egypt, since the preceding sentence concerns
that country. Temporal references likewise may be implicit, induced
in this way by the context. In (219), daraagiin dr the following day
is understood to refer to the day in December, 1924, succeeding a day
implicitly referred to in the earlier sentence (since in December of
1924 entails on a day in December of 1924).
218. Egypt became considerably more conservative, many Muslims abandoning their European fashions for a more modest and traditional garb.
Young men began to grow their beards in a show of unpretentiousness;
more women began veiling their hair. (http://viviansalama.wordpress.
com/2005/08/27/the-future-of-the-muslim-brotherhood-2/)
219. 1924. 12
1924. 12
sar.d
amyerik.iin
Uotertaun xlg ongots . . .
month-dat America-gen Watertown ship
...
104
chapter two
ine Orlean.ruu
New Orleans-towards
yav.j
go-impfc
bai.x.d.aa
be-ifvn-dat-rp
....
....
Daraagiin
dr
n
....
following
day
the
....
In December of 1924, when the American ship Watertown was going
to New Orleans. . . . The following day. . . .
(http://www.monstudnet.mn/forum/viewtopic.php?t=4105&postdays=0
&postorder=asc&start=15&sid=7327ed038c37b709ec6e47e5ab802ebe)
As it happens, many uses of the simple past tenses of European languagesindeed of all languagesactually presuppose a reference time
that is different from the utterance time, but which coincides with the
time of the eventuality. Thus in a context such as (220), the sentence
Tom ate dinner means Tom ate dinner at the time that the rest of
the family sat down to lunch and we may diagram this sentence as in
diagram 5. But in (221) (possible in North American English), Tom
ate dinner means simply Tom has eaten dinner before now, as shown
in diagram 6. Although traditionally the simple tenses are analyzed by
grammarians as involving only two points in time, as in diagram 3,
since Reichenbach (1947) the mainstream of thought has increasingly
viewed the meaning of even a simple tense like the preterite (simple
past tense) as involving, in principle, three points in time, as in diagram 4, though (as in diagrams 5 and 6) two of the three points may
sometimes coincide.
220. Toms schedule was out of synch with the rest of the world. When it came
noon, he been up for eleven hours and it had been six hours since his
last real meal. The rest of the family sat down to lunch. Tom ate dinner.
221. Every one else is ravenous. But Tom isnt. He [already] ate dinner.
Reference times may be rendered explicit within a particular clause

or sentence by an adverbial or other expression. Some temporal
adverbials always refer to the time of the eventuality itself, and others
always pertain to the reference time, but many, perhaps most, adverbials may do either, and thus, out of context, they may thereby create
ambiguity.
Sentence adverbials typically refer to the reference time. Thus (222b)
seems more normal than (222a). Verb-modifying adverbials typically
modify the time of the eventuality, as in (222c). Example (222d), with
its reference-time-marking already and ambiguous at noon, is confusing, and may strike one as a little odd.
105
time
Tom eats = REFERENCE
TIME
UTTERANCE TIME
(now)
Diagram 5
time
Tom eats
REFERENCE TIME =
UTTERANCE TIME
(now)
Diagram 6
222. a.
b.
c.
d.
At noon, Tom had eaten lunch.

At noon, Tom had already eaten lunch.
Tom ate lunch at noon.
Tom had already eaten lunch at noon.
3.2. Definite, Deictic, and Anaphoric Tenses

In the case of a deictic past tense, the time of the eventuality is simply prior to the present. Temporal adverbials apply to the time of the
eventuality; there is no other time for them to refer to, since the reference time is the same as the time of the eventuality, and the utterance
time is a given. Negation has wider scope than any temporal expression. Thus (223) means that in the past, John never ate at noon. But in
the case of an anaphoric tense the assumption is that the eventuality
occurred or, obtained at, a specific reference time prior to the time
of the speech act. Thus temporal adverbials can refer to the reference
time as well as the time of the occurrence. And negation can have narrower scope than a temporal reference, whether explicit, as in (224a),
or implicit, as in the second sentence of (224b).66 In (223) it was not
the case that at noon John ate lunch, but in (224) today, it was not the
case that John had time for lunch.
66
It was Barbara Hall Partee (1973) who pointed out the differing interpretations of
negation with definite (that is, what is called here anaphoric) and indefinite (deictic)
tenses.
106
chapter two
223. John didnt use to eat lunch at noon.

224. a. Today John didnt have time for lunch.
b. Today a whole load of work landed on Johns desk. He didnt have
time for lunch.
Consequently deictic tenses have been called indefinite, while anaphoric tenses are definite. It is the definiteness of the -sen past that
Tserenchunt and Luethy are referring to when they say (2000: 62) that
it is used to talk about an action that has taken place at a set time in
the past (e.g., I walked home yesterday). The preterite tenses of European languages have often been contrasted with the present perfect as
definite or absolute tenses, which refer to specific times. The perfect
tenses are indefinite; all that (222b) says that there was a time at which
Tom ate lunch, but it neither asserts nor presupposes what time that
time was. When there is no presupposed reference time, as in some
modern literary fiction that (as it were) throws the reader immediately
into the action, the reader must assume such a time.
222. b. At noon, Tom had already eaten lunch.
The habitual past tense of English is another example of a deictic

tense (225), and the conditional (future-in-the-past, 226) an example
of an anaphoric tense. Out of context, the latter invites the question
when are we talking about?, but the former doesnt. The simple past
of English is neutral in this regard, like the imperfective past tense,
the imparfait, of French, which has both deictic (227a) and anaphoric
(227b) uses. But the simple, perfective, past (pass) of French is purely
anaphoric, and (227c) likewise invites the question of when?.
225. Edmonton used to be inexpensive.
226. He would soon leave home.
227. a. Car Piaf ntait pas seulement Piaf. . . . Piaf, ctait la France.
(http://www.rfimusique.com/siteFr/biographie/biographie_8864.asp)
For Piaf wasnt [imparfait, imperfective] only Piaf. . . . Piaf, she was
[imparfait, imperfective] France.
b. En 1947, elle a rencontr lamour de sa vie: le boxeur Marcel Cerdan.
Le problme: il tait mari.
(http://www.on-luebeck.de/~swessin/paris/piaf.htm)
In 1947, she met [pass compos, perfective] the love of her life: the
boxer Marcel Cerdan. The problem: he was [imparfait, imperfective] married.
107
c. Edith Piaf (19151963), chanteuse franaise populaire dont on parle

rgulirement dans les mdias, a t membre de lA.M.O.R.C. jusqu
sa mort. Quelques mois aprs tre devenue Rosicrucienne, elle chantait Soudain une valle, chanson compose par Jean Drjac, qui lui
aussi fut membre de lA.M.O.R.C. jusqu son dcs en 2003.
(http://www.rose-croix.org/histoire/edith_piaf.html)
Edith Piaf, popular French singer of whom one speaks regularly in
the media, was [pass compos, perfective] a member of AMORC
until her death. A few months after becoming Rosicrucian, she
was singing [imparfait, imperfective] Soudain une valle, a song
composed by Jean Drjac, who also was [pass simple, perfective]
a member of AMORC until his decease in 2003.
To a great extent the interpretation of the past tense depends on the

temporal properties of both the subject and the predicate of the sentence. Sentence (225), for example, implies that Edmonton is no longer inexpensive, whereas (228a), assuming as it most likely does, out of
context, a past reference time, normally has no such implication, since
it claims only to speak of the situation at a certain time, which is not
necessarily in contrast with the present situation. (Compare 228bc.)
However, there are contexts in which the past tense receives a sort
of indefinite interpretation, as in (228d); out of context, was seems
to characterize Pompeii as a whole, rather than at a certain point in
its history. Thus the sense of was in (228d) is closer to the imperfect
tense of French (tait) than it is to the simple past ( fut). Notice the
ambiguity of (228e), which is interpreted out of context as indefinite,
if it is understood to refer to ancient Rome, but as definite if it applies
to modern Rome. To some extent the interpretation depends on the
temporal properties of the predicate expression (as well as those of the
topic of the sentence). Expressions that refer to permanent properties
invite indefinite uses (228f); those that refer to temporary situations,
definite ones (228g). That is not to say that alternative interpretations are not possible, but they require special contexts like the one in
(228h), which renders was in the second sentence definite.
225. Edmonton used to be inexpensive.
228. a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
Edmonton was inexpensive.

When she was young, Edmonton was inexpensive.
Edmonton was inexpensive when we vacationed there last year.
Pompeii was a popular resort.
Rome was the centre of Italian life.
Tom was a redhead.
108
chapter two
g. Tom was in a good mood.
h. When Tom returned from the hairdressers, Sue was in for a shock.
Tom was a redhead!
In summary, -lee is evidential and proximal, whereas -jee is inferential

and distal. Both are deictic (indefinite), while -v and -sen, on the contrary, are anaphoric (definite).
3.3. An Implicative Hierarchy
The tenses differ in evidentiality, distality, and deicity, as shown in
figure 1 below. An examination of figure 1 reveals something peculiar about the way we have organized the Mongolian tense system,
however. Three oppositions yield 23 = eight possibilities. In the case
of the Turkish vowel system, which is defined by the distinctive features of backness, height, and rounding, all eight possibilities actually
occur, while Mongolian has but seven of the eight only because back
// merged with front /i/ in most members of the Mongolic language
family. But where the Mongolian tense system is concerned, only two
of the eight positions defined by the three oppositions of evidentiality, distality, and deicticness are filled by -jee and -lee, and even if we
consider -v and -sen to fill four of the remaining six places, that still
leaves a fair amount of redundancy in the system.
To some extent this is to be expected. Distance correlates with evidentiality. The proximal is naturally evidential, and the inferential distal. How could the speaker be unaware of what has just happened,
is happening, or just about to happen in the speech situation? The
claim that something is proximal would generally seem to presuppose
awareness. Likewise use of an inferential form presupposes a lack of
awareness. In normal situations that would clearly indicate an occurrence then, not now, and there, not (typically) here (at least
not lately). Given this redundancy, it would seem that figure 1 is not
the most revealing way to diagram the tenses.
It would seem better to represent them using a tree diagram, that is,
a hierarchical structure, in which one characteristic has priority over
another, and which forms, in effect, an implicative hierarchy, in the
sense that features lower on the street automatically imply features
higher up.
One reason for this is that oppositions may be neutralized, that is,
eliminated. For example, in ancient Greek, distinctions of voicing and
109
evidential
proximal
-lee
non-evidential
distal
-jee
deictic
anaphoric
-v/-sen
Figure 1
aspiration of stem-final stops are lost in certain positions, so that /p,

ph, b/ all appear as p:67
trib- rub
pemp- send
graph- write
te-trip-tai
pe-pemp-tai
ge-grap-tai
It is not uncommon in phonology for distinctions in the sound system

to be neutralized, and the same is true, under certain conditions, where
both morphologyword structureand semantics are concerned. For
an opposition to be neutralized, it must obviously be the case that
there is an opposition in the first instance to be neutralized.
The more members a set has, the more features are required to distinguish the members from one another. Mongolian has (in effect)
only one present tense, certainly only one present tense affix, since
-ne is in complementation with -x, so that they function as if variants
67
Example from http://users.ox.ac.uk/~sjoh0535/Phonology12.pdf. The forms

in the righthand column are perfect passive indicative, third person singular forms
( gegraptai, for example, means [it] has been written).
110
chapter two
non-past
-ne
past
proximal
(can only be
evidential)
distal
-lee
evidential
-sen
inferential
-jee
Figure 2
of one and the same affix. Since there is only one present tense, further distinctions are irrelevant to distinguishing -ne from the past
tenses, and to do so we need only say that it is non-past. But the
past tenses require more than one feature to uniquely identify each
of them. Since proximal tenses can only be evidential, the first distinctive feature under pastness is that of proximality. That leaves
inferentiality to distinguish -jee. But given the correlation of distance with modality, why not simply leave it at proximal and distal?
The reason we need one more feature is that -sen, too, is distal. But
it is evidential, or at least non-inferential. Figure 2 would seem then
generally to capture the potential neutralizations and their implications. If a tense is inferential, it is distal. If we mark it as distal, it is
past. If we dont worry about inferentiality, -sen and -jee can interchange. If we dont care about proximality, any of the past tenses
can be used, and if we dont care about time, any of the tenses can
be used.
But Figure 2 leaves -v to be accounted for. The claim that -v is anaphoric is at odds with the observation made earlier that in questions,
it serves as the counterpart of (the deictic) -lee. This problem opens a
Pandoras box of questions regarding the categorization of the tenses.
111
To deal with those issues, chapter III discusses the use and interpretation of the past tenses in the written language, and their relationship
to use and interpretation in the spoken language, and shows that there
are important differences between the two, thereby creating pitfalls for
the unwary who simply refer, for example, to the past tense in -v.
CHAPTER THREE
USE AND INTERPRETATION OF THE PAST TENSES IN THE

WRITTEN LANGUAGE
1. Spoken and Written Language
1.1. Competing Grammatical Systems
Up to now the discussion has principally concerned the spoken language,
though much of the evidence has been drawn from written sources.
It has implicitly been assumed that, the inherent differences of
written and spoken language apart, written language simply is the
representation of speech in a visual medium, that the difference
in media has no consequences for grammar, and that things like
Ramstedts phonetic transcriptions or Poppes phonemic ones can
freely be replaced by the transliteration of the corresponding written forms, or indeed with the equivalent written forms, whether in
the Cyrillic or the vertical-Mongolian script. In other words, when
Ramstedt writes (1902: 19) jaww (which today we would put in phonetic, square brackets) or Poppe writes (1970: 131) /medb/, the former (went) could simply be replaced by yavav or , and the latter
(knew) by medev or .
The grammatical tradition tends simply to speak of the modern
Mongolian language, or the Khalkha language.
If written Khalkha and written Buriat are different written languages,
but may not, issues of vocabulary apart, constitute completely different spoken languages, this fact may have a number of implications
where grammar is concerned, insofar as the spoken dialects underlie
two different written languages, each with its own grammar. The two
written languages certainly differ in their spelling conventions and in
their vocabulary, though this differs less than do Khalkha in the Cyrillic script and Inner Mongolian in the old vertical script, the latter of
which has many more Chinese, and many fewer Russian, borrowings
than either Cyrillic Mongolian or Buriat. But while the three differ
relatively little in their syntax or morphology, they do differ, while
written Khalkha presumably does not differ essentially from spoken
Khalkha, except insofar as written languages tend to resemble the
114
chapter three
higher, more formal registers of the spoken language than they do the
lower, more colloquial ones.1
That is, in essence, traditional accounts assume, at the very least,
that written Khalkha is simply the representation, using a version of
the Cyrillic alphabet, of spoken Khalkha, which in turn is simply the
modern development of older Mongolian in most of what used to be
Outer Mongolia, just as Mongolian in Inner Mongolia is considered
the written counterpartusing a modernized version of the old vertical script writing systemif not quite the written representation, of
the corresponding spoken language that is the modern development
of Mongolian in Inner Mongolia.
If there are grammatical differences between these three written
languages, on this view they are to be attributed largely to dialectal
differences in the spoken language. Given the rather different histories
of the northern, southern, and central Mongols since the break-up
of Genghiz empire, and especially since the break-up of the Manchu
empire, we should not be surprised to find some strong differences in
vocabulary and syntax, if not in other aspects of language.
But little consideration has been given in the Mongolistic literature
to variation within a delimited linguistic community such as Khalkha.
Such variation is principally on the sociolinguistic level. By now it has
become a commonplace in much of the linguistic literature that a label
such as English covers a very wide range of linguistic phenomena differentiated by all sorts of sociological variables. Not only do languages
vary from place to place, producing geographic dialects, and over time,
producing different stages of the languagesuch as Middle Mongolian
and Modern Mongolianbut in one locality at one time there may
be differences in the speech of different sociologically-defined groups,
and sometimes there are stark differences between spoken and written
language as well, as for example between spoken and written Inner
Mongolian, where the written language is largely based on the spoken language of centuries ago, or between different forms of written
language corresponding to the same spoken language, which is very
nearly the case with Kalmuck in Cyrillic script and Oirat in vertical
script. For that matter, the language of one and the same speaker
1
Although Nelson et al. (1998: 117) cite markedness for style and register as one
of the differences between the past tenses, they seem by this simply to refer to the
difference between written and spoken language, and have little or nothing more to
say on the subject.
past tenses in the written language
115
may vary, not only between their written and spoken languages, but
between more formal (higher register) forms, appropriate to more formal contexts, and less formal, more colloquial (lower register) forms
appropriate to less formal contexts.
In the present work, we are specifically interested in competing
grammatical systems. A classic example of this sort of thing is the past
tense system of French and of dialects of a number of other Western
European languages, for example of Italian, German, and Spanish. In
French and these dialects of other languages, the old preterite (simple
and/or perfective past tense) has been replaced in colloquial speech
by the present perfect, so that, as in classical Latin, the present perfect
form is theoretically ambiguous, at least out of context. Thus in spoken
French jai chant means both I sang and I have sung. In written
French, however, the past tense continues to be represented by the historic simple past (pass simple), which (ironically) descends from the
Latin perfect tense, and I sang is je chantai. In some other languages
the distinction may be one not of spoken and written language, as it
is in French, but of colloquial and formal language, though generally
written languages tend to be standardized and formal, while spoken
language is at best a semi-tamed beast, ranging from highly informal
to almost as formal as the written standard.
Below we shall argue that (Khalkha) Mongolian, too, is a language
with competing grammatical systems that distinguish spoken and written language, and that this is very much the case in particular where
the past tenses of the verb are concerned.
The claim that the past tense systems of spoken and written or
colloquial and formal Mongolian differ creates a couple of complications here. First, the reader will have noticed that much of the evidence
for spoken language used not only by the older grammarians, but
even in this present work, is drawn from written sources. If written
Mongolian really does use the tenses in a rather different way from
spoken Mongolian, is this justifiable? What does it say about the
validity of the written evidence used here (and elsewhere) in arguing for analyses of spoken language? The example of French is not
encouraging in this regard. Written French per se can reveal little reliable information about the use of the past tenses in spoken French,
and this is true not only where the two passs are concerned, but the
imperfect (imparfait) as well, which has present-tense and perfective
uses in the colloquial spoken language that are unknown to formal
grammar.
116
chapter three
The second problem is that the distinction in Mongolian is only

partly between spoken and written language, but is also partly between
more formal, more standard (higher-register) and more colloquial,
less standard (lower-register) language. For one thing, writing is
used, sometimes, to represent speech, and sometimes it is not, but is
independent of it. This, we shall see, is an issue particularly in regard to
the relatively ephemeral language of the Internet and the World Wide
Web. Thus sometimes we are justified in utilizing written data, and
not only in the case of transcriptions of speech. Such things as e-mail
and blogs routinely use what is essentially a written form of spoken
language, and not necessarily because the writers are ignorant of the
standard, written language (Mongols are, on the whole, highly educated and literate people), but rather because they specifically intend
(albeit, perhaps, unconsciously) for their writing to represent speech.
This, of course, raises at least two further questions: are there only
two versions of Mongolian, one formal, standard, and usually written,
the other colloquial, non-standard, and largely spoken? And second,
no matter how many Mongolic languages there may be, how do we tell
the variants apart? When is it appropriate to disregard the difference,
say, of spoken and written language, and when does that difference
matter? Here sociolinguistics, pragmatics, discourse structure, and
philology meet in a complex consideration of just what we are claiming when we speak of this or that feature of the modern Mongolian
language . . . or even just of Khalkha.
1.2. The Non-equivalence of the Written Tenses
Why do we claim that there is such a wide gap between the tense systems of spoken Mongolian and written Mongolian?
In the spoken language, there is no question that the past tense endings are distinct both in meaning and use. The endings -lee and -jee, as
we have shown, are polar opposites. Their opposition in distance from
the speech act situation and in evidentiality affects their interpretations, the contexts and genres in which they occur, and restrict elements of their co-text, such as subjects and adverbials, that they occur
with. The -v past tense and that in -sen differ from both of these. They
are anaphoric, not deictic. They are neutral in evidentiality, though
neutrality in this case means, effectively, non-evidential. Only in distality do they truly resemble either of the two.
117
But in the written language, it has long been observed that it is far
from clear how, or even if, the various past tenses differ. We have seen
that the early Western students such as Ramstedt commented on the
difficulties of this issue. More recently the claim has been made that
at least some of the written tenses are freely interchangeable. Sodnomdorj has said there there is no difference between the endings.2 Tserenchunt and Luethy (2006: 108) write, The [-v] ending can be used in
place of the [-lee] ending in writing, and is used for past actions only
and [i]n many cases, [-sen] can be used in place of [-lee]. If true,
this would be a striking difference between the written and spoken
languages.
The first question then is whether the past tense endings in the written language are differentiated or not. To test this, the Intuition Test
was used. Sodnomdorj was given a set of written passages drawn from
the Internet from which the past tense endings had been removed, and
he was asked to fill them in. If the claim was correct that the past tense
endings are freely interchangeable, we would expect, all other things
being equal, that there would be no preference for any particular ending relative to the original one, that any ending would have a roughly
equal chance of being substituted for any of the others or replaced by
any of the others.
This is not what the results of the Intuition Test revealed (table 5
below). Though this casual, informal test, involving a very small sample
of data and only one test subject, cannot be taken as definitive, even
given the limited nature of the questions it was intended to answer, it
nonetheless is strikingly suggestive.
Table 5. Summary of Intuition Test results 3
Original\Replacement
-jee
-jee 11/12 (92%)

-lee 3/11 (27%)3
-sen 2/5 (40%)
-v 2/3 (67%)
11
2
-lee
3
1
1
-sen
-v
-ne
1
6
2
2
2
I am not certain about precisely what he meant by this, for example whether it
referred to all the past tenses being interchangeable.
3
Sodnomdorj found -lee and -v equally possible in one case, so the example was
counted towards each, explaining the total of 12.
118
chapter three
Most notably, -jee was replaced by -jee in 11 of 12 examples in the text

(i.e., 92% of the time). Clearly this ending is distinctive and likely cannot simply be substituted for by one of the other endings.
The other ending in which a majority of examples were replaced by
the original ending was -v. However, the number of examples was too
small in and of itself (only 3) to draw a conclusion from this result.
But other evidence suggests that it was no accident (a) that 2 out of 3
examples (67%) were correctly identified, and (b) that in the one case
in which it was not, the replacement was -lee, whereas the one nonoriginal replacement of -jee was by -v.
The endings -sen and -lee were replaced by themselves only in a
minority of cases. But if replacement were truly random, we would
expect the correct ending in about 25% of cases, and the remainder
would be distributed roughly equally over the remaining choices. But
while -lee does occur for itself very close to this 25% of the time (in
fact, constituting precisely 25% of the 12 choices), -sen was correctly
filled in 40% of the time (i.e., in 2 of the 5 cases). To be sure, the test
involved too few samples to reach any statistically significant results,
but these numbers are interesting, especially as -jee was filled in for
-sen as often as the original -sen was, but -lee was used only once, and
-v not at all. Even more interesting are the results for -lee: in 4 of the 11
cases (36%), -v was substituted for -lee, whereas -lee itself was the sole
choice in only 2 of the 11 examples (18%)half as frequently. And in
one case, -jee and -v were stated to be equally possible. Fascinatingly
enough, -lee was substituted for by the non-past ending -ne 3/11 (27%)
of the time, the only one of the endings to be so replaced.
These results would seem to call into question the claim that the
endings are freely interchangeable.
Also supporting non-equivalence of the endings is the following
observation by Tserenchunt Legden (p.c., May 26, 2008) regarding
the Mongolian Wikipedia article on the Second World War (http://
mn.wikipedia.org/wiki/__).4
The version of the article that I solicited, and received, her opinion on was not
the same as the version at the time of writing ( July 27, 2008), but some of the content,
including such sentences as (iii), has been preserved. These both have -lee-form main
verbs, despite the distal, factual context. (In the version of the article current on May
18, 2011, there were a total of 17 sentences ending in -lee.)
i. 1939 on.ii
9 sar.iin
1n.d, Adolf Gitler ba Natsist nam.aar
1939 year-gen 9 month-gen 1st-dat Adolf Hitler and Nazi party-instr
119
I just took a look at the Wikipedia article. . . . In my opinion, if a Mongolian language teacher takes a look at this article, it would have quite
many red marks. This article kind of shows a tendency of some languages that pragmatics and grammatics (not semantics) might not coincide. In other words, if a native speaker reads this article, he/she will get
the information about the World War II, given that everyone has some
kind of background about the World War II. However, many of the
[tense] usages are not correct.
If the choice of a past tense were truly random, it would be impossible to declare such tense usages incorrect. As Tserenchunt says in her
comments, the problem lies with what is meant by acceptable, grammatical, or correct, or any other term of approbation by which linguists save a sentence from being marked by an asterisk and teachers
withhold their red marks. The Wikipedia article contains sentences
that while informative and hence not semantically ill-formed, strike the
native speaker as incorrect on the pragmatic level. And Sodnomdorjs
view that the tenses are interchangeable must be taken as referring to
their semanticsafter all, they are all past tenses, more or lesssince
he often commented on the (in)correctness of example sentences, usually from a pragmatic point of view. Hence there is not necessarily a
contradiction between, on the one hand, Sodnomdorjs comment, his
intuition that the various past tenses are pretty much the same as one
another, and are largely freely interchangeable, and on the other, the
results of the intuition test, Tserenchunts comments on the tenses
udirduul.san Germanuud
lead-pfvn
Germans
nutg.t.aa
homeland-dat-rp
Delxii
world
negdgeer dain.d
ald.san
gazar
first
war-dat lose-pfvn land
erg.l.j
turn-caus-impfc
ava.x
take-ifvn
ge.j
...
intend-impfc . . .
Pol
ruu
dovtol.loo.
Poland
towards
attack-past
On the 1st of September of the year 1939, the Germans, directed by Adolf Hitler
and the Nazi Party, invaded Poland . . . with the intention of taking back the land
lost in the First World War.
ii. Yag
ene ye.d
Gitler gazar doorx
Precisely this period-dat Hitler land under
1945
1945
on.ii
year-gen
4
4
bairan.d.aa
residence-dat-rp
sar.iin
30-n.d
ineer
month-gen 30th-dat newly
suu.san
marry-pfvn
exner
Eva Braun.taig.aa
xamt
amia
xorlo.loo. wife E v a
Braun-com-rp
together with suicide commit-past
At precisely this time, Hitler in his underground bunker on the 30th of April in
the year 1945 committed suicide with his new bride, Eva Braun.
120
chapter three
of the Wikipedia article,5 and such comments by Sodnomdorj himself

as that in (229a) baijee is used because the places named in the subject
of the sentence are new things, not previously introduced into the
text (in fact, this is the first sentence of the story), while in the sentence
following it, (229b), baiv is used because the author [has] been talking
about them.
229. a. Ter tsagt
Dos, Donsar, Lin gurvan otog uls bai.jee.
That time-dat Dos Dongor Lin three
nation be-past
At that time there were three nations, Dos, Donsar, and Lin. (http://
www.biirbeh.com/modelues_php?name=News&file=print&sid=
1131; at the present time no longer available.)
b. Dos.iin
noyon Senlon bai.v.
Dos-gen prince Senlon be-past
The prince of Dos was Senlon.
Interesting in light of the results of the Intuition Test reported above

are the results of a second test, which appears to tend to support Sodnomdorjs claim, at least in part. This is the Reversal Test. In this
test, the endings -jee and -lee were replaced (in a series of short passages extracted from Web pages) by each other, and the speaker was
asked to check the passage for unacceptable forms. In the Appendix,
the original forms are in parentheses following the underlined changed
forms. Sodnomdorj accepted all of the altered forms, failing to note
any unacceptable sentences. What the Reversal Test seems to show
is that at the very least, the two endings can occur in the same contexts. This in turn suggests that their difference, if any, is most likely
not semantic (that is, they do not mean different things), but instead
is pragmatic (they are used in different ways, and interpreted differently, relative to a given context). Tense forms that differ in use and
interpretation, but not in meaning as such, can compete in the same
context. Thus the sentences (230a, b) are both acceptable, and mean
pretty much the same thing, but (230c) is of dubious acceptability,
and, whatever the grammaticality of (230c), neither (230c) nor (230d)
means what (230a, b) do.
5
Many of the tenses in the article contradicted the predictions made by the present
work, which is what initially prompted the query that evoked her response.
121
230. a. She worked until midnight and I was in bed listening to music waiting for her. (marcusaanna.blogspot.com/2007_01_01_archive.html)
b. She was working until midnight and I was in bed listening to music
waiting for her.
c. would work
She
until midnight and I was in bed listening to
d. had worked
music waiting for her.
A comment is in order at this point on the terms semantic and

pragmatic. Here semantic has been being implicitly identified with
tense/aspect and pragmatic with modality. This is of course not necessary. A difference of tenses or aspects could be either semantic or
pragmatic, and the same is true where evidential modality is concerned. Semantics has to do with the representation of non-linguistic
phenomena, to the applicability of linguistic expressions to aspects of
reality, while pragmatics has to do with the use and interpretation of
linguistic expressions by a speaker and a listener, or writer and reader,
in particular contexts. The difference between the French pass simple
and the pass compos in its past tense use is not one of meaning; they
are both preterites, that is, past in tense and perfective in aspect. The
difference is essentially stylistic, between the spoken and the written
language, and the choice of one or the other is determined by factors
that belong to sociolinguistics, to stylistics, and to pragmatics, but not
to semantics, that is, there is no difference where the two are concerned between their representations of extra-linguistic phenomena. If
je chantai is a true sentence, then so is jai chant, and vice-versa. But
each is appropriate in its own range of contexts.
In a sense, the past tenses of Mongolian differ in their semantics, in
that the speaker cannot say bi irjee, if he or she just arrived, without
(potentially) triggering false inferences. (In the same way an Englishspeaker who says I have read the newspaper when they mean I read the
newspaper is likely, in most contexts, to lead the listener to the false
inference that they have just or recently read the newspaper.) But it is
not the fact of the speaker having come that is at issue, it is their attitude towards that occurrence, reflected in the modality of that statement. There is a big difference between saying bi irjee when one should
say bi irlee, and saying bi irjee when one means bi irne, the meaning
of which latter sentence really does bear a semantic difference from
that of the former sentence. Since we are principally concerned with
intentions, uses, interpretations, and the like, and not with differing
122
chapter three
real-world situations, our account of the tenses belongs in the realm of

pragmatics, not that of semantics. So long as that is borne in mind, the
abuse of language (abus de langage) involved in equating semantics
with distinctions of tense and/or aspect and pragmatics with distinctions of modality should occasion no confusion.
1.3. The Language of the Internet and Levels of Usage
Because we are claiming that Mongolian is a language with distinct
spoken and written grammars, at least where the past tense system is
concerned, we must be careful to specify what we mean by spoken
and written in this context, and a bit of elaboration and explanation
is in order.
First, sometimes speech represents written language, as in public
addresses and other scripted speech in various media, and conversely,
writing may be the representation or transcription of spoken language,
as in dialogue or quotations. Further, writing may employ informal,
colloquial language approximating spoken language, either for the
purposes of seeming to be speaking, or because there is no concern
with formality or the rigid conventionalities of written language.
This last case is frequently exhibited by the writing that appears on
the Internet. While there are pages, such as Wikipedia articles, news
items, and pages of information posted by organizations (government
agencies, corporations, non-governmental organizations, etc.) that
approximate written documents and may incorporate or even consist
of previously written and edited material, there are also pages that
incorporate or consist largely or entirely of more or less spontaneous,
unedited speech. For all intents and purposes the former are as much
examples of written language as are print materials, while the latter
are essentially examples of spoken language. We have sampled here
numerous examples of both. But especially interesting from this point
of view are the impromptu texts, written with little or no planning,
organizing, editing or re-writing, and more or less as spontaneous
as speech, which are e-mailed, text-messaged, or otherwise communicated, and sometimes posted on the World Wide Web in blogs
(especially their associated comments sections), forums, chat-room
dialogues, and the like.
Such texts tend to be characterized by the lower, more informal
and colloquial, more spoken, registers. The speech of the individual
speaker in theory contains different levels of usage, more or less like
123
the standard, formal language, and appropriate to different contexts.

For example, chatting casually with an intimate tends to discourage
use of highly formal language and encourage that of colloquial language, and addressing a public group on a formal occasion has just
the opposite effect. In general, the written language tends to be similar
to the higher, more formal registers of speech, while casual writing is
more like the lower, more informal registers.
In extreme cases the higher and lower registers are literally different languages or different dialects. International languages such as
English, Spanish, Portuguese, German, etc., are fairly uniform as standard, written languages, but their colloquial spoken dialects are not
necessarily mutually intelligible, especially where the lower registers
are concerned. For example, some Scots speakers speak a dialect of
English in formal settings (perhaps at work or in school ) that is mutually intelligible with English English dialects, but in informal settings
speak a dialect which is not mutually intelligible with them. Swiss German uses standard German as its written language, but Swiss German
is in general not mutually intelligible with Standard German as spoken
in Germany. A quick, informal note or message in Swiss German is
possibly written in a very different language from Standard German.
Thus when we speak of the written and spoken languages we must
be careful to bear two points in mind. First, what we really mean by
written language is the formal, standard language generally characteristic of written texts and spoken discourses in the higher registers,
and by spoken language the informal, possibly ungrammatical
(from the point of view of the standard language) language characteristic of the representation of colloquial speech in writing, and of
colloquial, lower-register, speech in actuality, and of quick, spontaneous communications via e-mail, text-messaging, blog-commentating,
and the like, and which also may characterize informal, spontaneous
writing such as hasty notes.
Second, we should also bear in mind that just as the language of one
and the same individual, even if a monolinguala speaker of one dialect of one languagecontains a range of different usages, reflecting
different registers (so that the same person might say cannot on one
occasion and cant on another), a particular text or discourse may not
represent a pure type of language, but may combine features of both
higher and lower registers, or written and spoken language. The gradient from spontaneous, oral language to graphic, non-spontaneous
language is most apparent in Web-based materials, but it exists in
124
chapter three
print materials and recorded materials as well. Characters in a play or

film can speak a decidedly non-colloquial language, and characters in
a novel are capable of speaking a very colloquial language. The neutral,
omniscient narrator (as in Wells Invisible Man) writes a rather different language than is spoken by Stevensons narrators, or written by
the children in Aldridges epistolary novel The Magnificent Mongolian.
The only really distinct feature of the Net is the ability to publish
and to respond to publishedmaterials more or less instantly, even
in real time. It allows the immediacy of speech to be approximated in
writing.
It is interesting to observe the language of the Internet. In some
regards it is a third type of language, unlike both speech and writing.
This is not surprising, for Web pages mix characteristics of both writing and speech. They may allow for conversation, for dialogue in realtime, that is, instantaneously, but they also allow for the recording and
preservation of speech. They allow for both spontaneous, on-the-fly
publication, but also for preparatory or remedial editing. And the purposes of their authors, indeed the population forming their authors, is
representative neither of the population-as-a-whole, nor of writers-ingeneral, and this is especially the case where Mongolian is concerned,
though Internet use is much more widely distributed amongst the
Mongolian population than in most other Asian countries, indeed,
most countries, period. Expatriates have naturally been active in using
the Internet and in creating a new Mongolian language for electronic
communication, but even in Mongolia itself foreign languages, principally English, have had a considerable impact on the language used
on the Web and to a lesser extent in printed materials.
Many of the peculiarities of Internet language do not touch on
grammar. The language situation on the Internet, and not only where
Mongolian is concerned, is as chaotic and anarchic as the Internet
itself, and quite as rich and creative. Most noticeably where Mongolian
is concerned, orthography is innovative and informal. The Mongolian
version of Cyrillic contains two letters found in few if any other Cyrillic alphabets, namely <> () and <> (). These are not always readily
available in hardware (such as keyboards) or software (such as fonts),
so as a result <> is often replaced by <>, not normally used in Mongolian, or even by <> or <e>, which are; <> is generally replaced by
Latin <v>, or by <>, or very occasionally by Cyrillic <y>, which is also
already used in Mongolian.
For a language standardly written in a Cyrillic alphabet, the Latin
alphabet is surprisingly common in Mongolian Internet usage,
125
particularly in blogs, chat rooms, forums, and the like. The transcriptions used are quite different from standard transliterations (such as
the one used in this book): for example, where we would represent
Cyrillic <x> by x, some might transcribe it as kh, representing IPA /x/,
but it is also often represented as h, based presumably on the phonetics
(IPA [h]). Umlauts and other diacritics are generally not used<>,
here , becomes ch; <>, here , becomes sh; <>, as here, is j, but
sometimes zh; <>, our , becomes u or ue; <>, our , is oe, u, or
ue; but, as here, both <> and <> generally become ii, and both
<> and <> are i. The letters that combine the yod sound with a
vowel<, , >, and <> are represented usually (as in the present
work) as y + vowel. However, e is often simply represented as e.6
These adaptations are natural, given the unschooled and ad hoc
nature of the representations chosen, though over time we should
expect such representations to converge on an emerging standard and
there is some evidence that that is indeed in the process of developing.
Nonetheless, to the literate Mongolian eye such passages must appear
somewhat uncouth, especially those that follow the practices of textmessages, including extensive use of abbreviations (like bna for baina
and blaa for bailaa). On the whole they represent a valiant effort to
adapt the Latin alphabet (sans diacritics) to a language with a somewhat different phonemic inventory from English, the major current
influence today on language in Mongolia (the Mongolian republic, the
former MPR).
One obvious effect of the influence of English and other European
languages is the use of European and American words and names,
phrases, or even fuller expressions, in either the Latin or Cyrillic alphabet. It is hard to find a Web page in Mongolian with any contemporary
reference that fails to contain at least some Englishwhatever language
or script the rest of the page may be in. Common words are those
from computer jargon (computer, also or
; IP; world wide web; Internet or ), the terminology of the entertainment (film and music) world (alternative, Best
Original Song, low angle shot, and the partial loan-translation
pop star),7 commercial business terminology (ATM and banking or
6
For texts in the Latin alphabet with non-standard orthography (i.e., transliteration), see especially examples (231b), (231c), (231g), and (248) below.
7
Od originally meant star in the literal, astronomical sense.
126
chapter three
), and abbreviations for international organizations, corporations, and countries such as UNESCO, RKO, and US.
In addition, the names of foreign publications (e.g., Billboard), films
and other works of art (Citizen Kane), individuals (Liv Tyler), and
companies (Credit Suisse) are often presented in the Latin alphabet,
though sometimes transliterated or transcribed into Cyrillic (
Liv Tyler, Max Weber, - New
York Times).
Many of these have Mongolian equivalents, and computer, for
example, is more likely to occur in a text in Latin alphabet (often written and posted by an expatriate Mongolian in an English-speaking
country or a country where English influence is great, such as Korea
or Japan) than in a text written in Cyrillic (and in Mongolia), which
is more likely to use . Sometimes both versions appear
on the same page, as appears, as well as alternative,
on the page http://musicstreamnsongs.wordpress.com/2008/02/03/
alternative-rock-music/. And sometimes the foreign term is glossed
or vice-versa: appears alongside term on that same page.
Many Web pages are deliberately written in a colloquial-seeming
style intended to read as if the writer were speaking to the reader, and
consequently may approximate speech closely, especially as regards its
deictic quality. One genre in which this kind of pseudo-oral language
prevails is the blog. Commonly written in the first person, blogs generally adopt a spoken style, and even where the blog itself has some
pretensions to a literary style, the associated section of comments
rarely does. Apart from first-person-centred references such as bi I,
bid we, minii my, end here, ene this, etc., as well as second-person
ta you, tanii your, and the like, and deictic temporal references such
as ndr today and odoo now, the language adopts features of
speech such as interjections (e.g., za in 231ab, sometimes, as in 231c,
repeated), and pragmatic particles like dee (231de), (Cyrillic in
231f, Latin shuu in 231b), and dee (231g). Texts may also include
emphatic forms, such as bolnoo in (231h) and tiimee (231i). Such features serve to lend lend a personal, rather than impersonal, quality to
texts.8
8
The translations in (231) are those of Tserenchunt Legden, showing the interpretations of the passages by a native speaker. The glosses are mine.
127
231. a.
..
.
.
OK question-pl-dat your
answer-vol
Dl
(http://bolorcms.com/badaa/index.php?/archives/31OpenOffice
.html)
Dl! Let me answer your questions.
b. Za
nuguu [ng] Choinom guai.n
OK
that
Choinam Mr.-gen
Teneg.uud.iin [Teneg.d.iin]
fool-pl-gen
dund
among
...
...
ge.deg
say-habvn
shig [ig]
like
sana.gda.j
think-pass-impfc
bai.na
shuu [].
be-pres
modp
.html)
It seems like Choinyams Among the fools.
c. Za za
iim
balai
myyxai [muuxai] um [yum]
OK OK such stupid bad
thing
bai.x.gvi [bai.x.gi]
be-ifvn-neg
bi
I
bailgvidee [bailgi dee]

likely-modp
byyryych [buruu ]
wrong-modp
xerbee [xervee]
in case
oilgo.j
grasp-impfc
byryy [buruu]
wrong
tvi tvi9
phooey phooey
bai.j
be-impfc
oilgo.j
grasp-impfc
magadgvi
possibly
bai.bal [bai.val]
be-condc
uuchilal xvc.ie [xs.e].

pardon request- [request pardon = apologize]
(http://mglclub.com/data/view.php?id=zaluus&page=59&sn1=
&divpage=1 &sn=off&ss=on&sc=on&select_arrange=hit&desc=
asc&no=21)
All right, I hope there is no such thing. Maybe I am misunderstanding. I am sorry if I am misunderstanding.
d. .
.
.
Do like this-impfc write-past our
site-instr modp
.
..
.
enter-impfc
come-habvn-neg modp modp
(http://blogmn.net/xvv/2008/1/10956/%20%20.html)
It was written like this. It does not come through our website.
9
The on-line English/Mongolian dictionary www.bolor-toli.com glosses ti as
faugh or pshaw (= phooey or phui).
128
chapter three
e. .
all
unite-pfc
this
big
project-acc
..
.
finish-ix-condc our
future-dat very10
modp very
.
necessary modp
.html)
If we work together and finish this project then it will be really beneficial for our future.
f. 11
.
So
modp
.html)
I agree.
g.

..
Do thus-pfc modp our people a
thing bring out-ix-pfc
.
improve-pfc
running

..
occasion
modp be-ifvn-neg modp
.
modp
.html)
Our people also do not improve and develop further when they
invent something.
h. .
.
.
.
really do so-imp other-dat useful become-impfc be-conc
. ...12
use-impfc become-pres-emphp
(http://oluul.blogspot.com/2007/04/blog-post.html)
Yes, go ahead. You can use it if it is useful to other people.
10
Mn is difficulty to interpret (and to translate) here. It usually means also or the
same. Here the intended meaning is perhaps the sense of the very thing, the heart
of the matter that it has in the expression mn anar anima, being, essence, kernel,
marrow, nature, oneself, pith, point, self, soul, spirit.
11
Tiim and tiimee are often used simply to mean yes.
12
Become also means be becoming, be proper, be all right.

i.
129
..
So-emphp
.html)13
Yes! Yes!
In the following example (232), the emphatic vee, the postposed pronoun, the laconic, verbless style, all mimic speech.
232.
.
!!!!!!
What
qp-emphp
you
Who do you think you are!
(http://enhbaatar.dot.mn/)
While the language of Web pages does exhibit some grammatical

specifically, syntacticpeculiarities, to some extent these simply follow
from characteristics inherited from speech. Thus on the one hand we
find sometimes a sequence of short, somewhat disjointed, sentences,
as in example (i) in note 18 on p. 71, or (231c) above, a characteristically spoken style, or the equivalent of a run-on sentence. In a generally paratactic language like English, a run-on sentence consists of
sentences and/or sentence fragments loosely glued together in some
way, for example:
And, just as Apple blew it with the word book (Powerbook led to Macbook because they didnt own the word powerIBM made them change
it when the processor was changedwhich led others using netbook,
which they dont own at all), they cant own the word Pad either. (http://
sethgodin.typepad.com/all_marketers_are_liars/)
In a largely hypotactic language like Mongolian, the tendency is to

create long sentences by use of embedded subordinate clauses headed
by a converb, or transformed into verbal nominals headed by a verbal noun. These can achieve considerable length in speech, so long as
the structuring is not too complex. Probably an example of this sort
of sentence is this sequence from example (320), here with a rough
translation:
Bagiin surguuld xuviarlagdaad1 baij2 baital3 ter yed Bgd Nairamdax
odoo Mongol Ulsiin said nariin tuaal gar4, ofitsyeriin surguul gedgiig,
surguuliig ineer baiguulan5 1943 onii 9 saraas exlen6 xiellexeer bolson
iim ye baisan7. Bi ter yed, bagiin surguuld orox xuviar aa . . . yosoor
13
This particular source is no longer available, but examples with this utterance
are readily available on the Webfor example (as of May 20, 2011), on http://www.ehealth.mn/index.php?task=read_content&content_id=1129.
130
chapter three
bagiin surguuld oilgigeer d ofitsyeriin surguuld oij8 suraltsaxaar
bolj9, tend oij10 brtglj11 bailaa12.
Meanwhile23, having been assigned1 to the teachers school, at that time
a decree came out4 from the Peoples Republicpresent-day Mongolian Republicministry, establishing5 a new school, the officers school,
which was7 to offer classes, starting6 in September 1943. I at that time,
the teachers school entrance quota, uh . . . so I did not go to the teachers
school and going8 straight to the officers school, went there10 and was12
enrolled11 and started9 studying.
Here the converbs have been underlined, and the sentence-heading

verbs underlined and put in italics. The seven independent clauses of
the English translation accompanying (320) translate just two structures headed by finite verbs (here numbered 12 and 7, the latter
formed with -sen).
But what about the past tense system? Specifically, do we simply
find written usage, similar to that in print materials, when the medium
is used to reproduce or publish what are essentially written materials,
and correspondingly, find spoken usage, similar to that in spontaneous
speech, when the medium is used to reproduce or publish unpolished,
unedited utterances, as if visual tape-recordings? Or is there a distinct
style that is evolving, or has evolved, on the Internet?
In the first chapter of this book, the issue of the distinct characters
of spoken, written, and media languages barely arose, because the
grammatical tradition takes a rather unsophisticated view of what is
a language as rich and complicated as anyMongolian. But, as noted
earlier, it is nave to speak of the Mongolian, even of the Khalkha, language. Recent grammars such as the one by Kullmann and Tserenpil
and textbooks such as the set by Tserenchunt and Luethy have gone a
long way towards recognizing and noting differences between varieties
of the language, and limitations on uses of forms in one style or
another. The second chapter of the present book largely ignored the
issue and assumed that one could use print materials to reveal things
about speech, and that there was no difference between asking a native
speaker of Mongolian to perform tasks involving written language and
asking him or her to perform ones involving speech.
It should be clear by now that there are dangers in that approach.
It obscures the linguistic realities, for not only do the past tenses not
work in written Mongolian the way the traditional grammars claim,
or imply, that they do, but they dont work in written Mongolian the
way they do in Mongiolian speech, either. Notice, for example, that
131
-lee, can, and does, freely occur in sentences like (235236), neither
of which provides a context that supports a proximal or an evidential
reading. There have been presented here examples in which -jee can
hardly be inferential or mirative and in which it is clear that the writer
is presenting the statement as factual and presumably is confident of
its veracity (16). As well, the apparent evidentiality of -sen in speech
(146) contrasts with its rather different, non-evidential, uses in writing
(233234).
146. Bi Xyatad.iin andun
muj.iin
ef
I China-gen Shandong province-gen Chefu
xotn.oo
city-rp
1897 on.ii
1897 year-gen
8
8
sar.iin
month-gen
8-n.d
8th-dat
tr.j,
be born-impfc
tendx.iin
Angli
of there-gen English
sm.d
zagalmailuul.san.
church-dat
baptize-past
(
[14 ],14 http://www.maranata.mn/index.php?option=com_
content&task=view &id=2533&Itemid=127)
233. yekspir
1564 on.d
tr.sn. (Altangerel 1998: 40, column a)
Shakespeare 1564 year-dat be born-past
Shakespeare was born in 1564.
234. 18861894
18861894
on.d
year-dat
(1725 nas)
1725 age
Setsenxan
Setsenkhan
aimg.iin
aimag-gen
Erdenedalai
Erdenedalai
xouun.ii
banner-gen
tamgiin gazar.t
office-dat
Xalx.iin
Khalkha-gen
vang-iin
prince-gen
bten 8
full
8
jil
year
jinxene
biee.eer
ajilla.san.
true
clerk-instr
work-past
(http://www.mongolinternet.com/famous/MagsarHurts.htm)
14
132
chapter three
From 1886 to 1894 (ages 1725) he worked for a full 8 years as a clerk
in the office of the banner of Prince Erdenedalai of the Setsenxan
aimag of Khalkha.
235. Dadorj
Dashdorj
Avtonomit
Autonomous
mongol.iin
tserg.iin
Mongolia-gen army-gen
yaaman.d
biee.eer ajilla.j
bai.laa.
Department-dat
clerk-instr work-impfc be-past
(Yatskovskaya1976: 13)
Dashdorj was working as a clerk in the War Department of Autonomous
Mongolia.
236. Dn an boomt xre.xe.d
Xyatad.iin tsereg
Dun Chan port
reach-ifvn-dat China-gen soldier
uul.iig
brxe.j
bai.laa.
mountain-acc
cover-impfc be-past
When he came to the port of Dun Chan, the mountains were covered
with Chinese soldiers. (Saruul-Erdene 2004: 102)
2. The Past Tenses in Writing

2.1. Written -v
The most apparent difference between the past tenses in speech and
those in writing concerns the use of -v, which in speech is largely
restricted to normal questions, and there generally functions as the
equivalent of -lee.
It is quite otherwise in writing, where -v is quite common in statements. It is the tense of the main verb in 11 of the first 50 sentences
of the text in Saruul-Erdene (2004). Of the first 50 sentences (outside
of dialogue) in Sengees story Ayuu (1961) 10 have a main verb in
-v. All three sentences in reading #5 (from the newspaper nen) in
Montgomerys Reader (1969) end in -v.
Furthermore, in questions in written texts, -v does not necessarily presuppose proximality, and the answer or response is, unlike the
response to -v questions in speech, not necessarily in the -lee tense.
However, some published examples in which the reply to a -v question uses -v in the answer are questionable. China Radio International
posted a Web page containing the dialogue in (237). Likewise Bossons
Modern Mongolian contains the dialogues in (238239), and a page
intended for Russian speakers translates as in (240).
133
237. Ene buuz.iig xen xii.v?

Bid xii.sen
yum.
This buuz-acc who make-past we make-pfvn copp
(mongol.cri.cn/21/2004/11/04/43@31525.htm)
Who made this dumpling?We did.
238. Ta
You (plural)
xaan.aas
where-abl
ire.v?
come-past
Bid
We
surguuli.as
school-abl
ire.v.
(Bosson 1964: 51)
come-past
Where did you come from?We came from school.
239. Ta
You (plural)
Bid
We
tsm
all
xaan.aas
where-abl
ire.v?
come-past
Amyerikiin Negdsen Uls.aas

United States of America-abl
ire.v. (Bosson 1964: 51)

come-past
Where did you come from?We all came from the usa.
240. a. Xen ire.v?
Dulmaa ire.v.
who come-past Dulmaa come-past
Kto prijexal? Dulma prijexal.
(http://predistoria.org/index.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&p
=7871)
Who came? Dulmaa came.
b. Bat xezee ire.v?
Bat ndr ire.v.
Bata when come-past Bata today
come-past
Kogda prijexal Bat? Segodnja Bat prijexal.
(http://predistoria.org/index.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&p
=7871)
When did Bata come? Bata came today.
In archaic or quasi-archaic language, a -v question may also evoke an

answer in -v, as in (241), part of a story about the legendary Geser Khan.
241. amba Meruz (Xar gert
xaan) oxin.d.oo
Shamba Meruz (Black yurted khan) daughter-dat-rp
uurla.j
flare up-impfc
yavdl.iig
act-acc
id.tel
eat-termc
dongodo.v:
rebuke-past
sura.v
learn-past
xaana
where
i?
you
Yaasan
never
gln.ii
Morning
yava.v
i?
go-past you
alia
naidangui
wanton envy
gurvan idee
three
meal
ge.v.
oimson gua
say-past Choimson gua
134
chapter three
xele.v:
say-past
bilee.
copp
Bulag.t
fountain-dat
Bulag
fountain
udgan
fortune-teller
min
my
una.j
fall-impfc
naada.j
oi.j
play-impfc go-impfc
[genet]
yerle.j
suddenly overflow-impfc
xev.
Tn.ii yas.iig
see-past that-gen bone-acc
er.j
search for-impfc
uda.v
bid
ge.v.
stay-past
we
say-past
(http://www.asuult.net/ihtuuh/geser/5021.html)
Shamba Meruz (Black yurted khan) flared up and rebuked his daughter; he said: Where did you learn such a wanton act of envy? Where
did you go during the three morning meals? Choimson gua said, I
went to play by the fountain; my fountain suddenly overflowed and
the fortune-teller fell down and looked. We stayed searching for the
bones.
But even in more colloquial, non-literary language, there are signs that
a question in this form may not be restricted to the proximal. In (242),
ta yuu xiiv what did you do? seems to parallel yuu xiij adsan ve what
could you [= were you able to] do?.
242. ex
Mother
bi
I
neg
a
orn.ii
country-gen
xii.v?
do-past
ix
ex
oron
xn
bi
great mother country modp person not
ge.x.d.ee
say-ifvn-dat-rp
neeltei
openly
tl!
ta
yuu
for the good you (plural) what
tav.ya.
put-vol15
bi neg asuult
ta
bxn.ii dund
I a
question you (plural) all-gen amongst
ta
ex bolson Mongol orn.iix.oo
you (plural) original Mongol country-gen-rp
tl
yuu
xii.j
ad.san
ve?
for the good
what do-impfc can-pfvn qp
(http://ask.banjig.net/question.php?q_id=1998)
For the good of the mother country! What did you do? When you say,
I am not a person from a great mother country, I have a question
to openly put to you. What could you do for the good of the mother
country you came from originally?
15
Also called the first person imperative. The sense is roughly I want to or let me.
135
Questions in -v, other than in quotations and dialogue, are quite

uncommon in writing. But this ending is by no means uncommon in
written statements. It is common in narratives (243). When used in
statements, it apparently functions like -sen, either occurring in contexts where elsewhere -sen occurs, or alternating with -sen in one and
the same context. For example, there are chronologies in -sen (e.g.,
244), others in -v (245), and ones that alternate between the two (246).
The meanings of -sen and -v in such contexts seem to be much the
same, if not precisely the same. And it is clear from these and other
examples (such as 145, 247) that -v in texts is by no means limited to
the recent past or to evidential statements.
145. Baigal orin, xdgiin xgjliin baingiin xoroonii 2003 onii 1 dgeer
sariin 7-nii driin (Myagmar garig) xuraldaan 10 tsag 10 minutad Triin
ordnii V tanximd exlev. Xuraldaaniig baingiin xoroonii darga . Gungaadorj neej, irts, xeleltsex asuudliig taniltsuulav. Xuraldaand irvel zoxix
18 gin.ees 17 gin ir.j, 94.4 xuviin irtstei baiv.
The January 7th, 2003 (Tuesday) meeting of the Standing Committee
on Nature, Environment, and Rural Development began at 10:10 in
Hall B of the State House. . Gungaadorj, chairperson of the Standing Committee, opened the meeting and presented attendance and the
agenda. 17 of the 18 members attending, attendance was 94.4%.
243. Tsagaan Sumyaa
white
Monday
dr.iin
glo
r.eer,
day-gen morning dawn-instr
Mill.iig
bos.oo.gi
Milly-acc get up-impfvn-neg
Xoll
Hall
Ter
that
boso.j
get up-impfc
bai.xa.d
be-ifvn-dat
zoorin.d.oo
cellar-dat-rp
er
male
sem
quietly
rn.s
room-abl
Tiiee
Towards there
lonx.oo
bottle-rp
mart.san.aa
forget-pfvn-rp
Xoll
Hall
avgai
Mrs.
or.son
enter-pfvn
avra.x.iig
bring-ifvn-acc
avgai
Mrs.
xeregt
business
Xoll
Hall
bai.san
be-pfvn
bolo.x.oor
become-ifvn-instr
nuuts ajil.tai
secret work-com
xoin.oo
after-rp
untlag.iinx.aa
sleeping-gen-rp
xoyoul
the two together
sana.v.
think-past
dadamgai
familiar
em
xor
female two
oro.v.
enter-past
xor pivon.iix.oo anar.iig

ze.x
two beer-gen-rp quality-acc see-ifvn
bai.laa.
be-past
ivegin
servant
gol
main
lonxon.d
bottle-dat
Ug
root
zor.son
aim-pfvn
xn
person
nxr
n
companion her
136
chapter three
yava.x
go-ifvn
bolo.v.
Tn.iig atn.ii
become-past That-acc stairs-gen
o.tol
go-termc
yalgi
ajar
ng
other
giin.ii
guest-gen
ongorxoi
open-ifvn
gaix.jee.
be surprised-past
rn.d
room-dat
ile.n
select-modc
Butsa.j
return-impfc
xaalgan.ii
door-gen
or.j;
enter-impfc
lonx.oo
bottle-rp
yav.tal
go-termc
tgjee
bolt
rn.ii
room-gen
bai.x.iig
be-ifvn-acc
Xoll
Hall
talbai
place
deer
in
d
door
xar.aad
look at-pfc
tsaaa
further
untlag.iinx.aa
sleeping-gen-rp
bii
there is
ge.sen
say-pfvn
gazr.aas
n
place-abl his
ol.j
ava.v.
find-impfc take-past
n
the
gadaa
outside
tailaastai
unfastened
zvxn
only
onslootoi
latched
baig.aa.g
xara.v.
(Vells 1979: 28f.)
be-impfvn-acc
see-past
Now it happened that in the early hours of Whit-Monday, before Millie was hunted out for the day, Mr. Hall and Mrs. Hall both rose
and went noiselessly down into the cellar. Their business there was
of a private nature, and had something to do with the specific gravity of their beer. They had hardly entered the cellar when Mrs. Hall
found she had forgotten to bring down a bottle of sarsparilla from
their joint-room. As she was the expert and principal operator in this
affair, Hall very properly went upstairs for it. On the landing he was
surprised to see that the strangers door was ajar. He went on into his
own room and found the bottle as he had been directed. But returning with the bottle, he noticed that the bolts of the front door had
been shot back, that the door was in fact simply on the latch. (H. G.
Wells, The Invisible Man, chapter 6)
244. 8 sar.iin
31-n.d
8 month-gen 31st-dat
bol.son
il yavdal
happen-pfvn event
Events which took place on the 31st of August

1302 on.d:
Frants ba Sitsild xoorondoo
1302 year-dat France and Sicilians between
an.ii
dain.iig
zogso.x.oor
toxirolts.son.
religion-gen
war-acc stop-ifvn-instr agree-past
1302: France and the Sicilians agreed to stop their war of religion.
1674
1674
on.d:
year-dat
Rod-Ailenda.d
Rhode Island-dat
/ANU/ Indianuuda.d
(USA) Indian people-dat
137
arxi
xudalda.x.iig xoriglo.son.
liquor
sell-ifvn-acc prohibit-past
1674: In Rhode Island (usa) they prohibited selling liquor to Indians.
(a portion of the chronology at http://edu.olloo.mn/modules.php?name=
Todaynews&mm=08)16
245. 710 Niislel xot.iig
Nara ruu iljle.v.
710 capital city-acc Nara to
move-past
710. They moved the capital to Nara.
752
752
Todaiji
Tadaiji
sm
temple
dex
of
Ix
Great
Budda.g
Buddha-acc
btee.j
duusa.v.
erect-impfc
finish-past
752. They finished erecting the Great Buddha of the Todaiji Temple.
794
Niislel
xot.iig
Kioto ruu iljle.v.
794
capital
city-acc Kyoto to
move-past
794. They moved the capital to Kyoto.
(A portion of a chronology of Japanese history at http://www.mn.embjapan.go.jp/mn/japan_info/explore_japan/history.htm).
246. 1206 on inggis xaan Mongol.iin
tal xeer.iig
1206 year
Genghiz khan Mongolia-gen steppes-acc
negtge.j,
Mongol.iin
ezent
grn.iig
bai.guula.v.
unite-impfc Mongolia-gen imperial power-acc be-caus-past
1206Uniting the Mongolian steppelands, Chinggis Khan founded the
Mongolian empire.
1240 on
Mongol.iin
nuuts tov.oo
bii.gd.sen.
1240 year
Mongolia-gen secret history-rp write-pass-past
1240The Secret History of the Mongols was written.
1368 on
1368 year
Yuan
Yuan
mongoluud
Mongolian people
gren mx.j
empire collapse-impfc
uuguul
native
nutag.t.aa
homeland-dat-rp
butsa.j
return-impfc
ire.v.
come-past
1368The Yuan dynasty collapsed and the Mongols returned to their
native land.
1691 on
Ar Mongol
in gren.d
dagaar or.son.
1691 year
Outer Mongolia Qing empire-dat capitulate to-past
1691Outer Mongolia capitulated to the Ching empire.
16
The translations are mine.
138
chapter three
(A portion of the chronology [On toolol] from the article http://mn
.wikipedia.org/wiki/_.)17
247. Tomas Alva Edison

Thomas Alva Edison
11
11
1931
1931
n
the
amdral.iig
life-acc
neeltld.iig
discoveries-acc
(1847
1847
on.ii
year-gen
on.ii
10
year-gen 10
xamgiin
most
2 sar.iin
2 month-gen
sar.iin
18)
month-gen 18)
ixeer
xyalbaril.san
greatly simplify-pfvn
xii.sen
make-pfvn
anu-iin
USA-gen
zoxion bteeg,
biznismen
bai.v.
inventor
businessman be-past
(Tomas Alva Edison, http://mn.wikipedia.org/wiki/__
)
Thomas Alva Edison (February 11, 1847October 18, 1931) was an
American inventor and businessman who developed many devices
that greatly influenced life. . . .
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Edison)
2.2. -sen and -sen baina

So far little has been said here concerning combinations such as -sen
yum and -sen baina. The pragmatics of these complexes has to date
received little attention by grammarians and linguistic scholars, and
consequently are bound to be poorly understood by the non-native
speaker.
For a long time, I assumed that predicative -sen was either an optional
short form of -sen bai-, or that the two differed in regard to aspect.
This misapprehension on my part was due to three causes. First, participles used as predicates co-occur with a copula in many languages (as
in French: il est venu he has come, literally he is come), and in some
of those languages a copula is either optionally or obligatorily deleted,
at least in the present tense. Since Mongolian readily deletes copulas
and allows verb-less sentences like (248), it seemed natural to assume
that -sen is a short form of -sen baina.
17
The translations are mine.
139
248. Tiimee BI MONGOL xvn.

Yes
I
Mongolian person
(http://mglclub.com/-data/view.php?id=Yaruu_nairag&page=9
&sn1=&divpage=1 &sn=off&ss=on&sc=on&select_arrange=hit&
desc=desc&no=1553)18
Yes! I [am a] MONGOLIAN person.
The second cause was that in many languages a participle combined

with some form of be (or have) forms a periphrastic (complex) tense
marker. Thus if -sen and -sen baina differ, it might be similar to the
difference between the perfect tenses formed with have and a perfect
participle, as opposed to the simple past, which is a difference of tense,
but also of aspect. There is also the example of what used to be called
Black English:19 The most distinguishing feature of [Afro-American
Vernacular English] is the use of forms of be to mark aspect in verb
phrases. The use or lack of a form of be can indicate whether the performance of the verb is of a habitual nature. (Wikipedia, African
American Vernacular English, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ African_American_Vernacular_English) Compare the sentences in (249).
249. a. He workin. He is working (currently).
He be workin. He works frequently or habitually. [Better illustrated with He be workin Tuesdays.]
The final reason for my false assumption is that predicative -sen and
the -sen bai- construction have often been linked in textbooks and
grammars. Street (1963: 155) explicitly treats -sen as the result of
copula deletion: When [baina] occurs immediately after an adjectival
complement ending in one of the participial particles [i.e., suffixes] [-x,
-sen, -deg, or -ee] . . ., the omission of [baina] is virtually obligatory
and he offers the example (250), for which he also offers the literal
gloss he [is] having gone to his own work. Poppe (1955: 174) invites
the same conclusion where the written language in vertical script is
concerned when he writes of the perfect participle, the nomen perfecti,
18
Latin alphabet in the original, spelt as given here. Capitalization is as in the original. This page is no longer available, but (in Cyrillic) Tiimee, bi mongol xn is quite
common, e.g., at http://aminayalguu.blog.gogo.mn/read/entry28753 (retrieved May
20, 2011).
19
. . . Black English Vernacular is characterised by the absence of the copula: You
sure ugly, He gone. (http://www.planetpapers.com/Assets/4757.php)
140
chapter three
that it occurs with the finite forms of the verbs a- to be and bayito be and the defective verbs bui is, bolai is, and blge was, and
offers the examples in (251).
250. Ter ajildaa javsan. He has gone to work.
251. a. iregsen amui He has come.
b. kgsen bui He has died.
c. trgsen blge He was born.
Kullmann and Tserenpil (1996: 195) say that [u]sually aspects are
built with aspect suffixes. . . . But aspects can be built using analytical verb forms [which are] built using the auxiliary verb [bai-]. They
gloss both Ter untixsan baina and Ter untixaad baina, this latter
constructed with the perfect converb, as He [sic] has slept.
2.3. -jee and -sen baina
One of the earliest accounts to clearly differentiate the -sen bai- construction from predicative -sen is that of Tserenchunt and Luethy
(2005: 92), who say that the Unknown [inferential]20 Past Tense has
two forms of expression, one of which is -sen baina. Of -jee, they
say there that [i]t is used much like [-sen baina]. The [-sen] carries
the feeling of finished, and [baina] of now; together they create the
sense of just now finding out about a past action.
Sodnomdorj observed of (252) that -san baina is better, but [provides the] same information;21 -san baina [is] better than -san.
252. Anx
beginning
1920
1920
on.d
ax d
year-dat brothers
xr
two
Dasser broters
ge.deg
ps baiguulee.22
Dasser brothers
call-habvn store be-caus-past
The Dasser Brothers store was established at the beginning of 1920.
Sodnomdorj also said of (253) that oruuljee in this example equals,

and could be replaced by, oruuulsan bajna, but not by *oruuulsan.
20
Contrasted by Tserenchunt with the Known (evidential) past tense in -lee.

The same information as -jee, that is.
22
Example from the Internet, but the source is unknown and is no longer available
on-line, though it continues to appear in search results.
21

253. Tereer
He
tednii
their
xamtaar
jointly
ard irged.ee
folk-rp
xool
food
gar
hand
xns
food
aravt,
tenth,
141
tereg,
cart
bolo.x
become-ifvn
zuut,
hundredth,
mal
srg.iin
livestock herd-gen
myangat.iin
thousandth-gen
tserg.iin
zoxion baiguulaltan.d
or.uul.jee.
army-gen
control-dat
enter-caus-past
He put the peoples hand carts and food herds jointly under the control
of the army.
Sodnomdorj commented of unsan baina that it had almost the same

meaning as unjee in (148), and Tserenchunt has confirmed that the
[-jee] ending is interchangeable with [-sen baina] (Tserenchunt, personal communication, June 1, 2007). But according to Sodnomdorj,
there are some differences between the two.
148. Bi bagadaa ene nomiig {un.laa/un.jee/un.san}. I read this book when
I was small.
One important difference claimed by Sodnomdorj for the two is that

-sen baina is a written form, whereas -jee is better in speech, and he
suggests that the spoken equivalent of -sen baina is -ixsen. Of course,
-ixjee also occurs in speech. In regard to Poppes example (15), he
says that nar garixsan is better when speaking; nar garsan [is] better
when writing.
15. nar gar the sun rose (Poppe 1970: 131)
Tserenchunt, on the contrary, claims that -jee/chee is [the] more formal and written form (p.c., June 1, 2007), [s]o I would say the best
way of [translating Shakespeare was born in Stratford] is Shakespeare
Stratford hotod tuerjee.23
If there are differences in the status of the two as regards register
or media of use, they require further research to determine. Not only
do both -sen baina (258) and -sen yum (254)24 occur in writing, but
23
In my transcription, xotod trjee.

Although this example is from a Web page, there are numerous examples in
print sources, for example in Austins Reader.
24
142
chapter three
so does -jee (255256). The -jee past, of course, occurs in speech. But
so do -sen baina (3b) and -sen yum (237, 259). In written non-fiction,
-jee may well be the most frequently used of these forms. In the first
three pages of the text of Gongors book (1970), for example, 9 of the
21 full sentences (exclusive of those in quotations) end in -jee, none
end in -sen, -v, or -lee at all, and only one ends in -sengi. Similarly,
in the first three text pages of Sandag (1967), 5 of the 39 sentences end
in -jee, one ends in -sen, and two in -sen baina. None of -v, -lee, or
-sen yum are used there. Obviously the choice of endings is sensitive to
genre: in the last reading of unit 18 of Austin et al. (1963), taken from
the newspaper nen, of the 14 sentences, one ends in -sen baina, one
in -sen yum, and two in -v; but none end in -jee.
3b. Xugarsan baina. Its broken. (Sanders and Ireedi 1999: 191)
237. Ene buuz.iig
xen xii.v?
Bid xii.sen
This buuz-acc who make-past We make-pfvn
(mongol.cri.cn/21/2004/11/04/43@31525.htm)
Who made this dumpling?We did.
254. Edgeer
These
programm.uud n
mergejiltn.d.iin
program-pl
topic professional-pl-gen
yum.
copp
zg.ees
direction-abl
ndr nelelt
av.san
yum.
appreciation
take-pfvn copp
(www.stormpages.com/speaker/about_mon.html)
These programmes are appreciated by professionals.
255. Etseg Jon yekspir
n
Father John Shakespeare his
fyermyer
farmer
ge.g
call-agvn
angl.iin
English-gen
tariain
xn
bai.jee.
(Sandag 1967: 68)
farmer
person
be-past
His father John Shakespeare was a farmer.
256. Tavxan
Just five
xonog.iin
day-gen
tserg.iin
soldier-gen
zvxn
just
dotor
within
daisn.ii
enemy-gen
Byeloruss.iin
Belorussia-gen
77
77
myangan
thousand
3-dugaar
third
front
front
ba
Baltiin negdgeer front.iin
tsereg sn.jee.
and Baltic
first
front-gen army destroy-past
(Austin et al. 1963: 126, from nen, July 3, 1944)
Within just five days they destroyed 77,000 enemy soldiers just on the
Belorussian third front and the Baltic first front.
257. . . . un.ees
this-abl
ze.xe.d
see-ifvn-dat
zarim
some
neg
a
ryestoran.ii
restaurant-gen

ajil
work
modp
autsorsing
outsourcing
143
xii.j
do-impfc
boloxoorgi zil
bi
bololtoi
. . . . (Friidman 2007: 49)
impossible
thing
not apparently . . .
Even some restaurant jobs, it seems, are not immune to outsourcing.
(Friedman 2007: 40)
258. V. Barimt
V. fact
negen
one
n
topic
ye
time
Xereid.iin
Van
Khereid-gen king
Mergede.d
Merged-dat
xan
khan
Tooril
Tooril
olzlo.gdo.j
capture-pass-impfc
budaa
grain
nde.j
yav.san
bai.na.
(Gongor 1970: 97)
beat-impfc go-pfvn
be-pres
V. Khereids khan, King Tooril, one time went beating grain and was
captured by the Merged.
259. Sue
Sue
az jargal.gi
happiness-without
bai.v.
be-past
Tereer aimigt
She
terrible
osol
accident
bolo.x.iig
nd.eer.ee
xar.san
yum.
occur-ifvn-acc eye-instr-rp watch-pfvn copp
Sue was unhappy. She witnessed a terrible accident.
The ending -jee is used both in speech and in writing, and is interchangeable, and nearly synonymous, if not completely synonymous,
with the complex -sen baina. But as we suggested above, Sodnomdorj claimed another difference between -sen baina and -jee, namely
that -sen baina has a sense of something someone was told (hearsay),
whereas -jee could either convey hearsay or something that one figured out (inference). Thus if Dr. Watson concluded that the butler
did it, he would more appropriately use xiijee than xiisen baina. In
regard to (260) as a response to the question Excuse me, when was
the meeting?, too, Sodnomdorj commented that the speaker [heard]
from someone else.
260. igdr
bol.son
Yesterday become-pfvn
It was yesterday.
bai.na.
be-pres
In the case of -ixsen, to express hearsay, gene is required (as in 261),

inviting the inference that -ixsen by itself does not express hearsay.
144
chapter three
261. Gar.ix.san
ge.ne.
someone told you
Go away-ix-pfvn say-pres
They say he/she/they went.
These examples raise a number of questions. Are -jee and -sen baina
freely interchangeable, or do they differ somewhat in either meaning
or use? What is the meaning of -ix, when may (or must) it be used,
and does the difference between bolixson bajna/bolixjee on the one
hand, and bolson baina on the other, turn only on the absence or presence of -ix?25
There are two further questions regarding -jee as well. First, why
is it commonly found in at least some historical accounts, but not in
at least some journalism? That is, why and how is its use sensitive to
genre? And what is the relationship of written -jee to spoken -jee: are
they used in the same way, or do they, like written and spoken -v,
differ in some way?
There are several clues that in fact they do differ. In speech, -jee is
inferential (148) or mirative (114: the speaker had just found Bill dead).
In writing, it seems, rather, to present a fact, an objective statement
about a state of affairs, much as we have seen -sen acting in spoken
sentences such as (115). Where a sentence in -v could perhaps often be
characterized as about an occurrence, a sentence in -jee would seem to
be about a state or situation. It seems appropriate in the former case
to use an anaphoric tense and in the latter a deictic one. But in writing, there is a difference between present-oriented sentences (114, 118,
148), which essentially state what is a fact and relate a past occurrence
to the present as something which happened, and those oriented to a
reference time other than the utterance time (150, 255), which present a circumstance that relates to another eventuality; for example,
in (150), at the time that the speaker or writer came, the brother was
gone, had already gone, as the English translation indicates.
25
Tserenchunt comments (p.c., October, 2008) that -ix is an aspect[ual] suffix

which adds the meaning of completeness or unexpectedness. Its function is expressive. Useful as this observation is, it leaves open a number of questions. Can it always
add either of these two meanings, and if not, under which circumstances does it add
the one and under which does it add the other? I suspect that both completeness and
unexpectedness here require further explication, but even if they dont, what, precisely,
does expressive mean? It is also clear that the suffix has interactions with a number of
other affixes, as regards meaning. Nelson et al. (1998: 127), in contrast to Tserenchunt,
and almost all other sources, analyse this morpheme as a resultative marker. (They
also discuss its relationship to tense and aspect.) Further study is clearly indicated.
145
114. Bill xixjee. Bills dead. (Stivenson 1975: 45).

115. Flint xixsen. Flint is dead. (Stivenson 1975: 85).
118. Tuxain jed bi guravdugaar angid baijee. At that time, I was in the third
grade.
(http://mongol.cri.cn/21/2007/04/20/43@86531.htm)
148. Bi bagadaa ene nomiig unee. I read this book when I was small.
150. Aimgaas namaig irexed Bold ax baisangi, tv r yavjee.
(www.biirbeh.com/modules.php?name=news&file=article&sid=182; at
the present time no longer available.)
When I came from the aimag, my older brother Bold wasnt there; he
had gone to the centre.
255. Etseg Jon yekspir n fyermyer gegc angliin tariacin xn baijee. (Sandag
1967: 68)
His father John Shakespeare was a farmer.
2.4. Distal -lee

Another difference between the spoken and written languages has to
do with proximality. In speech, all the past tenses, with the exception
of -lee, are distal. But in writing, -lee is not restricted in this way, and
in fact, except where it is representing speech, written forms in -lee
may always be distal, too, at least relative to the present time, though
they may be proximal to a reference time distinct from the utterance
time.
One piece of evidence for this is the co-occurrence of -lee with distal
adverbials. In speech, we find it associated with adverbs like saya(xan)
just now and odoo now, but in writing it freely co-occurs not only
with adverbials of fairly recent time like n gl this morning
(262) and ndr today (263), but with ones for distant times such
as ter jil that year (264). What this reflects, amongst other things,
is that in writing the proximal/distal opposition for deictic tenses is
neutralized by the lack of a real deictic centre. In speech, there is a
definitive speech situation, which automatically defines here and now.
But in writing, there is no situation shared by a speaker (writer) and
addressee (reader): they are, in principle as well as in practice, separated in time and space.
262. MIAT kompan.ii
Olon uls.iin
nisleg.iin ingots
MIAT company-gen many country-gen flying-gen boat
n
this
gl
morning
osl.iin
emergency-gen
buult
landing
xii.lee.
make-past
146
chapter three
(http://www.tv9.mn/medee_uzuulch.php?medeenii_dugaar=1237
&medeenii_torol=4&medee_ali=1; at the present time no longer
available.)
MIAT Companys International airplane made an emergency landing
this morning.
263. Yrnxii said

Prime minister
ndr nam.iin
darg.iin
rg.ee
today
party-gen leader-gen duties-rp
gitsetge.lee.
take on-past
(http://www.tv5.mn/tv5/index.php?page=news&nid=3430)
The prime minister today took on the duties of the partys leader.
264. Mn
Same
ter
that
jil,
year
Robyert Koats
Robert Coats
Aleutiin
Aleutian
arl.uud
dax
island-pl of
subdukts,
arlan
num.iig
todorxoil.loo.
subduction island arc-gen
describe-past
(shttp://mn.wikipedia.org/wiki/_)
In the same year, Robert R. Coats . . . described the main features of
island arc subduction in the Aleutian Islands.
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plate_tectonics)
In chapter IV, we explore the roles and functions of the various past
tenses in spoken discourse and written text.
CHAPTER FOUR
THE DISCOURSE FUNCTIONS OF THE TENSES

1. The Functions of the Tenses in Discourse and Text
1.1. The Functions of Utterances
The use of an ending depends on the specific functions that the
clause containing it is to perform in the discourse. There are several
types of functions, including the metalinguistic, the textual, and the
expressive.
We have noted the differing character of the tenses typical of various genres. A side-effect of this is the metalinguistic function of grammatical features such as verb endings, namely to signal, amongst other
things, a genre or type of discourse, or a form of language.
In regard to forms of language, for example, the French perfective
past tense is expressed using the simplex pass simple in writing (e.g.,
elle chanta she sang) but the complex pass compos in speech (elle a
chant). Moreover, there are French tensesthe surcompos tenses
that are considered informal and normally do not appear in writing,
just as there are tenses, including the pass anterieur, that are literary
and less likely to occur, if at all, in colloquial speech. Furthermore,
the same tense may have different uses in written and spoken French.
The imparfait, for example, can sometimes serve as a present tense
in speech, at least in certain special contexts. In Mongolian, too, the
sets of available tenses, and their uses, vary between different forms
principally, but not exclusively written vs. spokenof the language.
Another class of function is the textual. The textual function is to
create and maintain the coherence of the discourse. Discourses are not
merely strings of clauses, but display a hierarchical structure of subunits that cohere both globally (between units), and locally (within a
unit). A conversation, for example, might contain quotations, descriptions, narratives, or jokes. Longer written genres such as novels contain a rich set of sub-structures that includes dialogue, description,
narration, and sometimes reportage by the authorial voice. Extended
dialogue in a novel, for example, must not only be coherent within
itself, but must cohere with the rest of the story surrounding it. And
148
chapter four
should that dialogue itself contain narration, that narration must likewise cohere both within itself and with the rest of that dialogue.
What is meant by coherence in this context is the logical construction of clauses in forming larger linguistic units. But it is important
to note that almost any apparently incoherent string of grammatical
sentences can be rendered coherent by further context. The examples
in (265266) seem incoherent, for various reasons. But within the contexts in (267), they are rendered coherent. What this reveals is that
coherence, like grammaticality, is not an absolute property, but must
be defined relative to the context and/or the intended purpose of the
utterance.
265. Max is tall for a midget. He had been vacationing in Aruba.
266. a. In 1904 there was a great fire in Toronto. Well, I like ice cream, too.
b. Sam eats lunch alone. His car is painted 28 different colours.
267. a. They wanted Max for a special role in their new movie, but he was
hard to contact. Max is surprisingly tall for a midget. He had been
vacationing in Aruba.
b. All Tom is interested in is disasters. The other day he was eating an
ice cream cone and going on and on about stuff that happened a
hundred years ago. In 1904 there was a great fire in Toronto. Well,
I like ice cream, too. But I hate bores, and I hate hearing about horrible things.
c. Sam is pretty eccentric. Sam eats lunch alone. His car is painted 28
different colours. He named his daughter, his dog, and his boatall
of themJessica.
Finally, a further factor in the choice and interpretation of endings is

the expressive function, which is to convey personal attitudes towards
the discourse. Narrative sentences lack the immediacy of factual discourse and offer a distanced, objective perspective on the events they
describe. Tenses such as the (historical) present fulfill an expressive
function in narrative discourse precisely because they are proximal
and hence characterized by involvement of the speech act participants
in the context of the discourse. In a language such as Mongolian, in
which evidentiality is part of the grammatical system, and hence an
obligatory category, even the use of a supposedly neutral tense such as
the -sen past conveys information about the speakers attitude towards
the content of the utterance.
In (147), notice that the backgrounded material is in a tense form
normally used for foregrounding. Here the ending is likely chosen precisely to avoid the attitudes conveyed by -lee and -jee. This of course
the discourse functions of the tenses
149
suggests that the uses of the past tense endings to serve their sundry discourse functions follow from their meanings, rather than the
reverse. (This is in fact the traditional view of the relationship between
meaningsemanticsand usepragmaticsand so should occasion no surprise, but research on pragmatics in recent decades has
at the very least called this perhaps overly simplistic view into question, and certainly where Mongolian is concerned, further research is
indicated.)
147. Ingeed 8 sariin 23-d, 1943 onii 8 sariin 23-d Sxbaatariin neremjit
Ofitseriin surguul deer oson. Ter surguul n odoogiin Gandan deer,
aa . . . odoogoor Barilgiin Texnikum gej aa . . . Barilgiin Texnikum gej,
gej baigaa. Baruun tal n xor davxar, zn tal n xor, drvn davxar,
iim xor yagaan baiin tend baisan. Tnii zaxiral xurandaa Erdendamba gej xn baisan. (http://www.mongolianoralhistory.org/samples/
transcriptions/TR060101B.xml)
On 23 August, 1942 I went to the School of Officers. That school was
situated in recent-time Gandan, aa . . . there is the Construction College now. There was a two-story building on its right and there were
two-story and four-story pinkish buildings on its left. Its director was
[a man named] Colonel Erdenedamba. (http://www.mongolianoralhistory.org/samples/translations/EN060101B.xml)
1.2. The Three Levels of Discourse Coherence

Maintaining coherence is one of the functions of the tenses. But there
are different types or levels of coherence in discourse and text. There
are, in fact, at least these three levels of discourse coherence: linguistic,
intentional, and attentional.
On the linguistic level, coherence consists of the proper anchoring
of the tenses. Anchoring means the binding of temporal anaphors by
antecedents. Much as the isolated sentence She went home does not
reveal who she is, because there is no antecedent for the pronoun, it
does not tell when she went home; the tense has no temporal antecedent, no reference time. The context provided in (268) allows one at
least to say that she went home when she was fed up with work, just
as we can say that she was Jane.
268. Jane was fed up with work. She went home.
Such binding serves to anchor the utterance in the sense of connecting

it with some segment of the preceding discourse or text and thereby
rendering the utterance coherent within that larger unit. Example
150
chapter four
(269) is incoherent precisely because the first, past-tense, sentence

cannot serve as anchor for the second one, whose reference time is
the present.
269. John was distraught. He has witnessed a terrible accident.
As far as temporal binding is concerned, almost any expression in the

context can serve to anchor (i.e., bind) the tense of a clause. A tense
ending may anchor another (as the tense of tusav in 270 is bound by
that of oiv), so may temporal adverbials (the tense of oiv in 270 is
in turn bound by neg udaa), even nominal expressions (the tense of
missed in 271 is bound by the expression the war years).
270. Neg
One
udaa
bi aldsan
xor
occasion I blunder off-past two
er.j,
hunt-impfc
aduu
horse
gov.iin
desert-gen
yerdiin
normal
amd amtan
existence
bel.deg
graze-habvn
uuln.aas
mountain-abl
bai.maar.gi
be-optative1-neg
gn
deep
xavtsl.iin
gorge-gen
bor
dark
arga
tawny
derged
near
zsn.ii
motley-gen
mori.o
horse-rp
bai.san
be-past
xeter.,
exceed.impfc
asga
pinnacle
xad.tai
rock-com
oi.v.
Gev genet
go-past all of a sudden
xoyor
two
sonin
aduu
nden.d tusa.v.
(Oldrij 1980: 12)
strange horse eye-dat strike-past
But one day I was hunting for two of our lost horses further than usual
into the empty mountains, where there are many deep little rocky
valleys and where nobody ever goes anymore, and I saw two strange,
dark, reddish horses. (Aldridge 1976: 5; chapter 1)
271. The war years were difficult ones for Toms family. They missed him a lot.
The initial utterance in a discourse receives its binding, if any, from

just such an adverbial or nominal expression explicitly contained in the
sentence. In the absence of such a reference, the reader must assume
some such temporal reference point.
Expressive of a wish: bi . . . baimaar baina I would like to be . . ..
151
In a discourse, an adverbial such as a couple of minutes after (272)

or a nominal such as successor states (273) may serve to shift the reference time; the time at which successor states fought each other and
outside forces is understood to follow the breakup of the Islamic unity
not only because of the immediately preceding and, but the modifier
successor as well.
272. There he stood on the dark little landing, wondering what it might be
that he had seen. A couple of minutes after, he joined the little group
that had formed outside the Coach and Horses. (Wells, The Invisible
Man, chapter 3)
273. Within a century of Muhammads first recitations of the Quran, an
Islamic empire stretched from the Atlantic Ocean in the west to Central
Asia in the east. This new polity soon broke into civil war, and successor
states fought each other and outside forces. (Islam, Wikipedia; http://
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam)
In the absence of such expressions, tenses are bound by other tenses.

In a narrative sequence, the reference time for the verb ending of each
clause is temporally located just after that of the immediately preceding clause. The result is narrative advance or narrative progression
the feeling that time is passing with each successive event. The
possibility of narrative advance is sensitive to the nature of the eventuality recounted. Normally events trigger advance, but unbounded
eventualitiesstates, activities, and the likedo not. In (274a), Sue
held the newspaper up just after Tom came in, but in (274b), Sue was
already holding it. Compare diagrams 7, 8.
274. a. Tom came in. Sue held up the newspaper.
b. Tom came in. Sue was holding up the newspaper.
Sue holds up the
newspaper
time
Tom comes in
Diagram 7
152
chapter four
Sue holds up the
newspaper
time
Tom comes in
Diagram 8
Sue is hungry
...
time
Diagram 9
In Mongolian there is a greater tendency than in English to render

temporal relationships explicit through the use not only of adverbial
expressions like later and subordinating conjunctions such as after,
but through converbal endings marking finely distinguished temporal
relationshipsyavmagts and yavanguut both mean something like as
soon as (they) went, yavtal until (they) went, and yavangaa while
going. Finite tense forms play a relatively smaller role in Mongolian
than in English, as do implicit temporal relationships holding between
them.
Binding depends to a great extent on the structure of eventualities,
and the various types of predicate expressions have rather different
temporal profiles. States are uniform, unchanging occurrences; as in
diagram 9, at any given point within the period over which the state
holds, it is possible to truthfully say that it is the case (here, that Sue
is hungry).
But events typically consist of various parts or phases. An achievement like spotting something is a momentary event that simply happens at a point in time (as in diagram 10).
An accomplishment combines an activity or process such as running or falling with a culminative change of state, in effect an achievement. Thus climbing a mountain consists of the action of climbing
153
Sue spots a coin on

the pavement
time
Diagram 10
Sue climbs the
mountain
Sue has climbed

the mountain
....
..
time
Sue reaches the

peak
Diagram 11
followed by a culmination: the point at which the peak is finally, actually reached (diagram 11).
Unlike English, which has only the verb climb, German distinguishes
the activity of climbing, das Steigen, from the accomplishment of
climbing to the top, das Ersteigen. But even an activity like running or
the activity phase of an accomplishment like running across the street
(or running a marathon) consists of separate phases, to the extent that
the beginning, middle, and end of an activity may be referred to as
such. Running, for example, generally refers to the medial phase of
an episode of running, so that when we hear that someone is running,
we infer that they have been running and will, presumably, continue
to do so. Neither theyre starting to run nor theyre finishing running refers to the medial phase in the same way and so neither leads
to quite the same inferences.
After the eventuality proper has ended, the world is left in a result
state. For an activity, process, or an episode (a state or process obtaining over a delimited period time, such as being ill for three days or feeling hungry for a few minutes), this is simply the sheer historical fact;
as shown in diagram 11, at any point subsequent to the termination
154
chapter four
preparatory phase
event proper
initial state
result state
time
Diagram 12
of the eventuality in question, it is possible truthfully to say that it has

happened (here that Sue has climbed the mountain).
The result state of an event, however, can be the consequence of the
occurrence, or may simply be its sequence. If Tom has come home,
he is at home. And he is at home because, not merely after, he came
home. But after Tom comes home many things may be the case that
are not due to his coming home, but merely obtain at the time when
he has come home.
In addition to the result state following the eventuality itself, the
eventuality is preceded by an initial state and a preparatory phase
(diagram 12). The initial state is the character of the world before the
occurrence. The preparatory phase is the transition from the initial
state to the eventuality itself. Both ontologically and linguisticallythat
is, in the nature of the phase as well as in how it is referred tothere
is a difference between the preparatory state of an achivement and of
an accomplishment. An accomplishment like climbing a mountain is
actually a complex, consisting both of an activity or process that must
be gone through to reach the culmination, the achievement that ends
the accomplishment. An accomplishment expression such as climb a
mountain subsumes the activity phase within the event-complex itself.
Thus at any point in the climb you can claim to be climbing the mountain, though you cannot claim to have climbed it till the end. German
makes a nice distinction that English lacks, between the activity, the
Steigen, and the accomplishment, the Ersteigen.
Achievements are, properly speaking, momentary events, all cumlmination and no activity. Thus there is something a little oddor
ought to beabout saying things like the train is arriving at the station or hes dying. One difference is that the preparatory phase, the
phase prior to the achievement itself, is only rendered a preparatory
155
phase after the culmination. The train was arriving only if it in fact did
arrive, and someone can be said to have been dying only if in fact they
had died. But you can be climbing the mountain even if you never
reach the top, building a boat even if you never finish it.
In the case of an achievement, however, the preparatory phase
depends on the eventual culmination. The waker who says bi bosloo
Im getting up is only proven correct if they do get up. Many eventualities can be viewed either as achievements or accomplishments,
depending on the scale. For example, pulling the trigger of a gun actually takes time; it is like an accomplishment in that you need to be
drawing the trigger back for a fraction of a second before the mechanism is triggeredthe culmination. But we generally perceive, and talk
about, pulling the trigger of a gun, or a process like the bursting of a
balloon, as instantaneous. Hence normally pulling the trigger refers
to the preparatory phase, not the activity, and you can only be said to
be pulling the trigger if and only if you do in fact pull it.
The initial state in an eventevents inherently involve a change
from an initial state to a result stateis often implicated or implied
by the sentence, rather than rendered explicit. If Tom goes home, he
must initially not have been at home; if Sue falls ill, she must originally
have been well.
The perfective aspect, unlike the perfect and progressive, introduces
the entire structure of the event into the discourse: a succeeding sentence or clause may use any phase of the event as its anchor point,
that is, the time of the eventuality may serve as its reference time, and
a succeeding event may occur within the result state (275a) or the
preparatory phase (275b) of its preceding event. In the former case
discourse time advances because the result state of an event follows
the time of the event proper, and in the latter it regresses because the
preparatory phase precedes the culmination of the event.
275. a. John went into the flower shop. He picked out three red roses, two
white ones and one pale pink. (Webber 1988: 69).
John tsetsg.iin
delgr.t yav.j
oro.v.
John flower-gen store-dat go-impfc enter-past
Tereer
he
gurvan ulaan,
three
red
yagaan
pink
sarnai
rose
xor
two
songo.j
select-impfc
tsagaan, neg
white
one
av.laa.
take-past
tsaivar
pale pink
156
chapter four
b. John bought Mary some flowers. He picked out three red roses, two
white ones and one pale pink. (Webber 1988: 69).
John Mary-d
tsetseg xudalda.j
ava.v.
John Mary-dat flower buy-impfc take-past
Tereer
He
gurvan
three
ulaan,
red
xor
two
tsagaan,
white
neg tsaivar
one pale
songo.j
av.ee.
select-impfc take-past
The time of the event as a whole may also serve as the binder. Thus
in (276), the state of Johns having twisted his ankle is bound by
the time of his going to the hospital and thus is simultaneous with it.
(The result state of his twisting his ankle extends beyond his going to
the hospital, but during the period of time in which he is going to the
hospital, the twohis having twisted his ankle and his going to the
hospitralcoincide.)
276. John went to the hospital. He had twisted his ankle on a patch of ice.
Where more than one temporal structure is available as binder, ambiguity results, as in (277). This could be read as simultaneous (Jane
played the piano while Bill sang), taking the totality of the time Bill
sang as binding the ending of the second clause; or it could be read as
successive, taking only the result state of Bills singing the song as its
reference time. This same ambiguity may be triggered by the imperfect converb of Mongolian. At times it marks co-temporal occurrences (278a), at times successive occurrences (278b), but sometimes
the larger, extra-sentential context is required to indicate which is
intended.
277. Bill sang a song. Jane played the piano.
278. a. Eej
xool xii.j
Mother meal make-impfc
aav
tsai
father tea
uu.j
drink-impfc
bai.na.
be-pres
Mother is cooking, Father is drinking tea. (Kullmann and Tserenpil
1996: 157)
b. Bat gl
ert
ir.j
angi.a
tseverle.jee.
Bat morning early come-impfc classroom-rp clean-past
Bat came early in the morning and cleaned the classroom. (Kullmann and Tserenpil 1996: 157)
157
An activity sentence may be interpreted as either a bounded event

with a result state or as purely a preparatory phase for some achievement. In the latter case (279) a successive reading for the last two
sentences is impossible, but in the former, the same type of ambiguity
appears as that exhibited by (277).
279. Bill and Jane found things to do while waiting. Bill read Hamlet. Jane
did a crossword puzzle.
Since states have a homogeneous phasic structure, the time at which

the state obtains is taken (as a whole) to be the anchor time for a
state (280a) or event (280b) expression following in the discourse. In
(280a), the states temporally overlap: Max was ecstatic at the time Sue
was unhappy. In (280b), the event occurs within the time of the state:
Max decided to help Sue while she was unhappy.
280. a. Sue was unhappy. Max however was ecstatic.
Sue az jargal.gi
bai.v.
Ge.sen
xedii
Sue happiness-without be-past say-pfvn although
modp
Max
az jargal.tai
bai.v.
Max
happiness-com be-past
b. Sue was unhappy. Max decided to help her.
Sue az jargal.gi
bai.v.
Max tn.d
Sue happiness-without be-past Max that-dat
tusl.ax.aar
help-ifvn-instr
iid.lee.
decide-past
On the intentional level, coherence requires that each clause serve

some function in the discourse or text and hence be related by a rhetorical or coherence relation such as elaboration or explanation to
its anchor. In (281a), for example, the second sentence reports the
cause of the state reported in the first; it provides an explanation for it.
There is, however, no rhetorical relation that allows the temporal pattern of (281b), which, on the intentional level, is incoherent because
its second sentence cannot fulfill any discourse function relative to the
first sentence.
281. a. Sue was unhappy. She had witnessed a terrible accident.
b. Sue az jargal.gi
bai.v.
Tereer aimigt osol
Sue happiness-without be-past She
terrible accident
158
chapter four
bolo.x.iig
nd.eer.ee
xar.san
yum.
occur-ifvn-acc eye-instr-rp watch-pfvn copp
c. Sue was unhappy. She has witnessed a terrible accident.
Even if the particular temporal pattern is permitted by some rhetorical relation, our knowledge of the real-world may preclude, or at least
render highly unlikely, two sentences being related by such a rhetorical relation. For example, out of context, (282) strikes one as incoherent, and it is hard to think of a context that would render it coherent.
The reason is that on the attentional level, coherence requires that each
clause belong to a thread defined by a common topic or focus of interest. On this level, (282) is incoherent because its first sentence is about
Sues state of mind, but the second clause cannot easily be interpreted
as being either about, or related to, that state. Her preference in desserts doesnt seem to have anything to do with her having witnessed an
accident. A larger context might, however, provide a connection that
would render the sequence coherent.
282. Sue preferred ice cream to cake. She had witnessed a terrible accident.
In terms of either sentence production or interpretation, the three

levels function simultaneously. The clauses of (281c) cannot be interpreted as having a common topic because they cannot be interpreted
as linked by a rhetorical relation, given their unrelated reference times,
while those of (282) simply lack (or seem to lack) a common topic. It
should be obvious by now that implicit rhetorical relations serve to
render units of discourse such as threads or narrative lines coherent
as much as do explicit ones. Successive statements may be connected
thematically by implicit connections drawn from our knowledge of
the world. Someone who didnt know that Ulaanbaatar is in Mongolia
and was unfamiliar with both Mongolia and Finland might well find
(284a) no different from (284b). Such an addressee might infer from
(284a) that Ulaanbaatar is in Mongolia, but equally might infer from
(284b) that it is in Finland. But often enough a speaker uses explicit
connections, especially when the addressee may require background
information to properly interpret statements. Compare (284c), which
makes it explicit that Ulaanbaatar is in Mongolia.
281. c. Sue was unhappy. She has witnessed a terrible accident.
283. Sue preferred ice cream to cake. She had witnessed a terrible accident.
159
284. a. I love Ulaanbaatar. Mongolia is such an interesting place!

b. I love Ulaanbaatar. Finland is such an interesting place!
c. I love Ulaanbaatar. Like the rest of Mongolia, its such an interesting
place!
The rhetorical relationship, if any, between a pair of clauses is marked

by, and constrained by, their tenses. In narrative, the past tense of
one sentence generally refers to a slightly later time than that of the
immediately preceding clause. Hence where a temporal regression is
indicated, as in (285a), this cannot be a narrative sequence. A consequence can be expressed as a relatively later event (285b), and the
reverse is true of a cause (285c). Sentences such as those in (286) are
rather odd, at least out of context, and the sequences in (287) likewise
seem, at least out of context, simply incoherent.
285. a. A munitions ship exploded. It had been hit by another vessel.
Thousands of people were killed.
The explosion would be felt
b. A munitions ship exploded.
hundreds of miles away.
Another ship collided with it.
Its cargo had been set ablaze
c. A munitions ship exploded.
by a collision.
286. a. A munitions ship exploded and it was hit by another ship.
b. The explosion being felt hundreds of miles away, the munitions ship
exploded.
287. a. A munitions ship exploded. The explosion had been felt hundreds of
miles away.
b. A munitions ship exploded. Another ship would collide with it.
But often enough the temporal relations depend on the rhetorical relations; (288) and (289) have the same tense endings but different temporal relations because of their different rhetorical relations. Example
(288, translated in 290) involves temporal advance, since the relation
of the second sentence to the first is presumably that of consequence:
Maxs standing up naturally follows Maxs spotting John, since this latter event caused the former. In (289, translated in 291), however, there
is a temporal regression due to the relation of explanation that the
second sentence bears to the first: as the cause of the event recounted
in the first sentence, Johns pushing Max, recounted in the second
sentence, naturally precedes it. Without our knowledge of the world,
however, it would be impossible to interpret sequences like these,
160
chapter four
at least out of context. Compare (292); its nonsense verbs preclude

interpretation based on real-world knowledge. It could be similar to
(289), with Maxs globulation the consequence of Johns orballing
him. But it could equally well be similar to (293), in which case Johns
orballing him is the consequence of Maxs globulating.
288. Max saw John approach. He stood up.
289. Max fell. John pushed him.
290. Max
Max
Tereer
He
291. Max
Max
John.ii
ir.j
yava.x.iig
xara.v.
John-gen come-impfc go-ifvn-acc see-past
boso.j
get up-impfc
una.jee.
fall-past
zogs.loo.
stand-past
John
John
tn.iig
that-acc
tlx.sen
push-pfvn
bai.na.
be-pres
292. Max globulated. John orballed him.

293. Max won. John envied him.
Discourse coherence and temporal coherence go hand in hand. Discourse structure affects the interpretation of endings and endings in
turn contribute to structuring discourse, principally on the local level,
and specifically between pairs of clauses. Example (281a) is rendered
temporally coherent by its set of endings, which share a past reference
time, whereas (281c) is incoherent. The structuring of both sentences
and larger units of discourse and text in a language such as Mongolian, in which hypotactic structures predominate over the paratactic
structures typical of a language like English, is such that intrasentential relations (between sentences) play perhaps no greater role than do
intrasentential ones (within them).2 The implicit relationships between
2
Hypotaxis putting-under refers to the syntactic subordination of one unit to
another. In languages of the Altaic type, including Mongolian, there is a tendency for
parallel structures not to be treated syntactically as units of equal rank. For example, a
series of events can be reported in a single sentence with but one clause, marked by a
finite verb-ending. All the rest are converbal or participial phrases subordinated to the
(single) independent clause. Parataxis putting alongside refers to the syntactic coordination of units. In languages like English and Chinese there is a tendency for parallel
structures to be treated as units of the same rank. A series of events is typically reported
using independent clauses (i, iii) or sentences (ii, iv), each with a finite verb.
i. I came, I saw, I conquered.
ii. I came. I saw. I conquered.
iii. I drove home and found the front door wide open.
iv. I drove home. I found the front door wide open.
161
events or events and states stated in independent clauses or sentences

in parataxis are typically rendered more explicit in hypotaxis through
the subordination of one to the other. Some forms of English do, however, allow hypotaxis, in which case a passage such as (281a) can be
rendered as a single sentence (294).
281. a. Sue was unhappy. She had witnessed a terrible accident.
c. Sue was unhappy. She has witnessed a terrible accident.
294. Sue, having witnessed a terrible accident, was unhappy.
Tense endings contribute to the interpretation of discourse, but their

own interpretation depends on their co-text as well as on the speech
act participants knowledge of language and knowledge about the
world. The speaker, in producing a sentence, must therefore take these
various factors into consideration when choosing an ending for each
clause.
2. The Functions of the Past Tenses
2.1. Past Tenses and Temporal Reference
The significance of the facts presented in these last sections is that
tenses with different temporal properties differ in their uses and interpretations. One respect in which they clearly do is in their definiteness, in how they relate to presupposed reference times. A deictic tense
requires no reference time, no assumed contextual time. It can, therefore, be freely used in a position where there is no presupposed reference time, such as in headlines or in the first sentence (or independent
clause, rather) of a text or discourse.
Traditionally, for example, -jee is used at the beginning of folk tales.3
Baijee [there] was often occurs with expressions like ert urid tsagt
once upon a time, as in (295). Of the eight traditional tales in Poppes
(1955a) collection, five have an initial sentence ending in -jee, mainly
baij or baijee (some, like examples 295, 296, with appended gene
[they] say). But two of the eight end instead in -v, and one in -sen.
If we examine the initial sentences of these three exceptional tales, we
3
Nelson et al. (1998: 117) already noted that -jee is particularly prevalent in spoken storytelling, particularly when setting the scene or introducing a new event in the
discourse.
162
chapter four
notice that they, and only they of the eight tales, contain temporal
references other than the vague once upon a time. Thus the story of
Bogdo Nojin Dschagar Khan (p. 170f.) begins as in (296). While the
temporal specifications in (296) strike one as equally mythic as those
in (295), they are sufficiently specific to justify the use of an anaphoric
tense requiring a specific reference point.
295. Erte urda
Early former
tsag.ta
nege jixe
xn.
time-dat a
great khan-gen
ura gu dagin
bai.d
ge.n..4
Uran Gua Dagina
be-past say-pres-emphp
(Poppe 1955a: 188, ura gu dagin)
Es lebte in alten Zeiten, wie man erzhlt, Uran Gua Dagina, [die Tochter]
eines groen Knigs. (Poppe 1955a: 189, Uran Gua Dagina)
Once upon a time there was a great kings [daughter] Uran Gua Dagina.
296. Ert
urda
Early former
sai tsag.ta,
sai
good time-dat good
tsag.
time-gen
exin.d,
beginning-dat
sar
saji manda.xa.d,
adi
saji delgerxe.d,
moon just rise-ifvn-dat religion just expand-ifvn-dat
man galw.
exin.d,
mandi xn.
our
kalpa period-gen beginning-dat Manchu khan-gen
txen.d,
ene l
galw.
exin.d,
history-dat
this modp kalpa period-gen beginning-dat
ert
xn.
txen.d
dz urda tewg
early
khan-gen history-dat east
south part of the world
edzel.se
rule-pfvn
tr.s
umar umar
oron.d
be born-pfvn most northerly country-dat
uma dalai xn.
x bogdo noji dagar x
uma dalai khan-gen son bogdo noji dagar khan
bai.dag
be-habvn
ge.d
say-impfc
bai.w
ge.n.
be-past say-pres-emphatic
(Poppe 1955a: 170, bogdo noji dagar x)
In frheren guten Zeiten, zu Beginn einter guten Zeit, als der Mond
soeben aufging, als die Religion sich verbreitete, am Anfang unserer
Kalpa-Periode, in der Geschichte des Mandschurenkaisers, am Anfang
dieser Kalpa-Periode, in der Geschichte der frheren Khane, lebte,
wird erzhlt, Bogdo Nojin Dschagar Khan, der Sohn des Uman Dalai
Poppes phonetic rendering.
163
Khan, welcher in der allernrdlichsten Gegend hauste und ber den

sudstlichen Weltteil zu herrschen geboren war.
(Poppe 1955a: 171, Bogdo Nojin Dschagar Khan)
In early good times, at the beginning of a good time, as the moon had
just risen, as the religion was spreading, at the beginning of our kalpaperiod, in the history of the Manchu emperors, at the beginning of
this kalpa-period, in the history of the early khans, there lived, as
they say, Bogdo Nojin Dschagar Khan, the son of Uman Dalai Khan,
who lived in the northernmost land, and was born to rule over the
southeasternly part of the world.
In the absence of a temporal reference, modern stories, that is, fictional narratives, can make use of the ending -jee to open a tale as well.
Thus the beginning of H. G. Wells The Invisible Man was translated
using -jee (297). Although the English makes one wintry day and early
in February overt adverbial modifiers and thus provides a definite, if
somewhat vague, reference time, the Mongolian translation builds
the temporal reference into the description of the weather and hence
emphasizes not that the stranger came on a day early in February, but
that he came in a wintry, early-February storm, thereby rendering the
explicit temporal reference a mere inference and allowing (or requiring?) the use of -jee, rather than of -v.
297. The stranger came early in February, one wintry day, through a bitter
wind and a driving snow, the last snowfall of the year, over the down,
walking as it seemed from Bramblehurst railway station, and carrying
a little black portmanteau in his thickly gloved hand. (H. G. Wells,
The Invisible Man, ch. 1)
vl.iin
sl.iin tsas
or.dog
xordugaar
Winter-gen tail-gen snow fall-habvn second
sar.iin
month-gen
budra.n,
fall-modc
ter
that
salxi
wind
tmr zam.iin
railroad-gen
negen
one
sge.j
growl-impfc
Bremblxerst
Bramblehurst
beelii.tei
glove-com
gar.t.aa
hand-dat-rp
bar.san
carry-pfvn
neg
a
xr.
arrive-impfc
dr.iin
day-gen
tsas
snow
bai.xa.d
be-ifvn-dat
rtn
station
jijigxen
little
tani.x.gi
know-ifvn-neg
ir.jee.
come-past
gl
morning
deer.ees
on-abl
zuzaan
thick
xxn xairtsag
black
case
xn
javgan
person afoot
(Vells 1979: 5)
164
chapter four
Stories or articles that contain explicit temporal references at the

beginning can use -v (or -sen), and do not require the use of a deictic
tense. However this is limited to genres that are essentially narrative:
autobiography (146), biography (247), and fiction.
146. Bi Xyatadiin andun mujiin ef xotnoo 1897 onii 8 sariin 8-nd trj,
tendxiin Angli smd zagalmailuulsan. (Nert mongol erdemten Nikolas Poppegiin duradxal [1-4-r bleg],5 http://www.maranata.mn/index
.php?option=com_content&task=view &id=2533&Itemid=127)
I was born in Chefu city of Shantung province of China on the 8th of
247. Tomas Alva Edison (1847 onii 2 sariin 111931 onii 10 sariin 18) n
amdraliig xamgiin ixeer xyalbarilsan neeltldiig xiisen NU-iin
zoxion bteeg, biznismen bai.v.
(Tomas Alva Edison, http://mn.wikipedia.org/wiki/__
)
Thomas Alva Edison (February 11, 1847October 18, 1931) was an
American inventor and businessman who developed many devices
that greatly influenced life . . . .
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Edison)
Where the co-text or an expression within the sentence forces a definite reading, an anaphoric tense may occur in contexts in which deictic
tenses are more to be expected. Journalistic articles, for example, tend
not to use -v (viz., the articles in Montgomerys Reader). To be sure,
the on-line newspaper Dayaar Mongol does use an -v form, davtagdav, in the headline of a news article (http://dayarmongol.com/index
.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1752&Itemid=45). But in
the body of the article, the forms used are garee, ildjee, xorooson
baina, todorxoi baigaa yum baina, regdsen, and buudallasan baijee.
In a brief item about the same occurrence, the on-line daily news,
driin Sonin (http://www.dailynews.mn/modules.php? name=News
&file=article&catid=20&sid=14370) uses buuduuljee in the headline,
and in the text neejee, arxdaad baina, yegtgejee, baisan gene, baijee,
a non-verbal predicate followed by gene, and gsngi.
Articles in the Mongolian Wikipedia also tend to avoid the -v form.
As with most reference works, an article such as the Wikipedia article about stars (mn.wikipedia.org/wiki/) is written entirely in the
non-past tense, using verb forms such as baidag is, baina is, bolno
5
165
becomes, copulas like yum is, and predicates without copulas, e.g.,
bolomtoi possible, etc.
Use of -v in Wikipedia articles is quite exceptional, and generally
limited to pages of biographical or historical matter. Typical is the
example (298), one of only three uses of -v in Tomas Alva Edison
and (299), the sole example of -v in the article Mongol uls (The Mongolian nation); note the temporal expressions fonografiin daraa after
the phonograph in (298) and 1919 ond in the year 1919 in (299).
298. Fonograf.iin
daraa Edison
Phonograph-gen after Edison
tsaxilgaan
electric
gerel
light
xii.x.eer
maxran oroldo.j
exle.v.
make-ifvn-instr experiment-impfc
begin-past
(http://mn.wikipedia.org/wiki/_)
After the phonograph, Edison began trying to make electric lighting.
299. 1919 on.d
1919 year-dat
Xyatad.iin tserg.iin
China-gen army-gen
erxten
organ
r
Mongol.iig
ezel.j,
avtonom.iig
ustga.v.
Back Mongolia-acc seize-impfc Autonomy-acc destroy-past
(mn.wikipedia.org/wiki/_)
In [the year] 1919, the army organs of China seized Outer Mongolia
and destroyed its autonomy.
In Web pages, headlines (the first utterance, in absolute position, separated from the main text) are often in either the -jee or the -lee form,
especially on pages reporting some form of news.
There follows (300304) a selection of headlines from articles on
various Web sites:
300. Mongoluud
Mongol people
Olimp
ze.x
Olympics see-ifvn
4000
4000 ticket
bilyet
book-past
zaxial.jee
reserve-past
(http://www.bugdeeree.mn/?p=2754)
Mongols have reserved 4000 tickets to see the Olympics.
301. Mongol.d
kompyutyer ildverle.lee
Mongolia-dat computer
develop-past
(http://www.mongolnews.mn/unuudur.php?n=18173)
A computer is developed in Mongolia.
166
chapter four
302. Mgl Academy6 Mongol

Surguul Nee.gd.lee
Mgl Academy Mongolian School
open-pass-past
(http://dayarmongol.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view
&id=1682)
The Mongolian school Mgl Academy is opened.
On the site http://www.openmn.org/, the list under Sliin 5 medee

(latest 5 news items) contains, at the time of writing this, (303):
303. a. Bolor
crystal
tol.iin
turilt.iin exn.ii
xuvilbar
mirror-gen test-gen origin-gen version
inele.gd.lee
remake-pass-past
[2008/02/04 02:02:04]
A new version of the original trial crystal mirror.
b. Sun MySQL AB7-g
terbum dollar.aar
Sun MySQL AB-acc billion dollar-instr
xudalda.n
av.laa
[2008/01/21 09:14:57]
buy-modc take-past
Sun MySQL AB is bought for 1,000 million dollars.
c. OpenOfis.iin
Mongol
ex
xel
OpenOffice-gen Mongolian mother tongue
tsl
exll.lee
[2008/01/10 10:32:00]
project start-past
OpenOffices Mongolian Mother Tongue project has started.
d. GNOME-n
orluulg.iin
fail.uud onlain
GNOME-gen translation-gen file-pl on-line
orluulg.iin
sistyem.d
or.loo
[2008/01/05 23:12:34]
translation-gen system-dat
enter-past
GNOMEs translation files enter on-line translation system.8
e. OpenMN xolboon.ii
ine
veb xuudas
OpenMN communication-gen
new
Web page
mendel.lee. [2008/01/03 20:53:42]
greet-past
The new OpenMN communication Web page says hello.
The name is in English and in the Latin alphabet in the original.

In the Latin alphabet in the original.
8
This headline, like many headlines in any language, is, out of context, multiply
ambiguous. From the sentence itself, there is no way of telling which of the system, a
system, its system, etc., is intended. Someone familiar with the background probably
could correctly interpret it, however.
7
167
Blogs, in contrast, tend to have noun-based titles, without verbs

(304306), though some do have headlines ending with a verb, sometimes -lee (179, 307), often some non-past form, including (explicit or
implicit) copulas, as in (308309):
179 a. 43 dax uls
Guinea Bissau.d
xl
43rd
country Guinea Bissau-dat foot
(http://www.amai.mn/archives/1877)
We set foot in [our] 43rd country.
tav.laa.
set-past
179 b. 2008 naadam exlexe.d

belen bol.loo
fashion 2008 show
begin-dat ready become-past
(http://www.suuder.com/?p=658)
The Fashion 2008 show is ready to begin.
304. Mongol
ba
Kompjuter
Mongolia and [the] Computer
(http://nasmgl.blogspot.com/2007/06/blog-post_15.html)
305. Mongol
mayag.iin bolovsrol
Mongolian style-gen education
(http://erkhembayar.blogspot.com/2007/02/blog-post_22.html)
Mongolian-style education
306. Stiven Sigal-iin
Mongol
Tusla.x
Steven Seagal-gen Mongolian help-ifvn
(http://goojuur.com/archives/175)
Steven Seagals Mongolian Help
307. Naadam
saixan bol.loo.
Naadam (games) fine
become-past
(http://seniorexpert.blogspot.com/2008/07/blog-post_13.html)
The Naadam was fine.
308. Blog ge.j
yuu be?
Blog say-impfc what QP
(http://oluul.blogspot.com/2007/04/blog-post.html)
What is a blog ?
309. Bi amin xn
I
selfish person
(http://duluu.blogspot.com/2006/09/blog-post_7557.html)
Im a selfish person.
In this, blogs and many other Web pages are rather more like journalism than they are like, for example, history texts. In Montgomerys reader we find that the readings (all from the newspaper nen)
mainly have noun-based (310a, b) headlines or ones in some form of
168
chapter four
the present tense (310c, d). One has an -v ending (310e), but surprisingly, none has -lee.
310. a. Namr.iin otor
(reading #6, p. 19)
fall-gen encampment
Autumn pasturing
b. montsameg.iin medegdel
montsame-gen statement
A communiqu of montsame (reading #8, p. 22)
c. Latin Amyerik.iin
ard tmen Kub.iin
Latin Amerika-gen masses
Cuba-gen
tal.d
bai.na
(reading #2, p. 11)
side-dat be-pres
The masses of Latin America are on the side of Cuba.
d. Xyatad.iin udirdag.d.iin nglz.x
China-gen leader-pl-gen impinge-ifvn
bodlog.iig
jigi.j
bai.na
(reading #24, p. 24)
policy-acc
condemn-impfc be-pres
The Chinese leaders policy of impingement is condemned.
e. Bolgar.iin
jjig.d.iin
toglolt.iig
Bulgaria-gen actor-pl-gen performance-acc
nam
zasg.iin
udirdagi.d ze.v (reading #5, p. 18)
party
government-gen leader-pl
see-past
Party and government leaders saw the performance of the Bulgarian
actors.
The first lines of paragraphs, or even of whole texts, also tend to contain deictic tenses, and for the same reason as headlines: deictic tenses
do not require any presupposed reference time. The example (311) is
both the headline and the first line of an item on a Web page. Another
page similarly begins with a -lee sentence (312); four -lee-less paragraphs follow it. A further example from the Internet: the page http://
www.mongolnews.mn/unuudur.php?n=18173 opens with (313); there
is no other -lee in the story. In published, print texts the same is often
the case. For example, in quite a few short stories the first sentence
ends with a -lee form, and there are no further -lee forms in the first
paragraph, nor do subsequent paragraphs start with sentences ending
in -lee. That is the case, for example, with Baasts stories Xaltarx
(pp. 920), Xyaruu unasan tsagaar (pp. 4050) (314), and others of
those that do not start with a non-past tense (though it is true that
almost all the initial sentences of the paragraphs in the story ine
baiin [pp. 5156] end in a -lee form!).

311. Avilg.iin
tol
Corruption-gen dictionary
169
nom xevle.gde.n.
book publish-pass-modc
gar.laa
come out-past
(http://www.demparty.mn/modules.php?name=News&file=categories&
op=newindex&catid=1&pg=17; at the present time no longer available.)
The book A Dictionary of Corruption has been published.
312. MGL Academy9
MGL Academy
Mongol
Mongol
Mongol
Mongol
xxd.d.ee
child-pl-rp
bag,
teacher
surag.d.iin
student-pl-gen
surguul balir.xan
school
baby-diminutive
brtge.j,
register-impfc
uuzalt,
meeting
aav,
father
yariltslaga
discussion
eej.d,
mother-pl
xii.j
make-impfc
. . . Los Anjeles
xotn.oo d xaalgaa nee.lee.
. . . Los Angeles
city-rp door gate-rp open-past
(http://dayarmongol.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view
&id=1682)
The Mongolian school MGL Academy is registering small children,
and holding a meeting and discussion of parents and teachers and
students, held an open house . . . in Los Angeles.
313. Migma elektoniks XXK Mongold
anx
Migma Electronics XXK Mongolia-dat first
udaa
occasion
MGM10
sine kompyuter ildverle.j
ex.lee.
MGM
new computer
produce-impfc start-past
(http://www.mongolnews.mn/unuudur.php?n=18173)
Migma Electronics XXK has started producing the new MGM computer for the first time in Mongolia.
314. Eej.ees.ee
neg zaxia xleej av.laa.
Mother-abl-rp a
letter receive-past
I received a letter from my mother.
(Baast 1962: 40)
There are, however, quite a few initial -jees to be found on Web pages.
Examples include (315316):
315. Pop od
Pop star
9
10
11
Britney Spears
sayaxan
Britney Spears11 just
Los Anjeles dax

Los Angeles in
In English in the Latin alphabet in the original.

MGM in Latin alphabet in the original.
The name is in the Latin alphabet in the original passage.
170
chapter four
jiriin
humble
gazar
place
xyamd
cheap
ne.tei
price-com
or.j
enter-impfc
s.nii
hair-gen
ire.n
come-modc
salon.ii
salon-gen
salon.ii
salon-gen
ajiln.aas
worker-abl
s.iig
n
xus.
g.x.iig
gui.jee.
hair-acc her shave-impfc give12-ifvn-acc ask-past
(http://news.banjig.net/news-5363.html)
Pop star Britney Spears recently came into an ordinary inexpensive
Los Angeles hair-dressing salon and asked the staff to shave her hair
for her.
316. 200 garui
200 over
oxi.d.iig
x.eer
girl-pl-acc forcibly
biye.iig
n
body-acc their
nell.j
bai.jee.
set a price on-impfc be-past
(http://www.ecpat.mn/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=
52&Itemid=43)
More than 200 girls are forced to put a price on their bodies.
Biographies naturally begin with sentences like (16). Essays and articles, however, often use the present tense in opening with a factual
statement. Thus Sodovs preface to the section on Boccaccio in his
anthology begins with (317). The Wikipedia article on France (
) begins likewise with a present-tense factual statement (318).
16. Dadorjiin Natsagdorj
Dashdorjiin Natsagdorj
1906 on.d
1906 year-dat
tr.jee.
be born-past (Yatskovskaya 1976: 8)
317. Jovanni
Giovanni
Bokkao
Boccaccio
bol
topic marker
Ital.iin
Italy-gen
ix
great
xnleg zelten zoxiol

yum. (Sodov 1967: 51)
humanist
author
copp
Giovanni Boccaccio is a great Italian humanist author.
318. Frants
France
Baruun
Western
12
(Bgd Nairamdax Frants Uls) n

(The French Republic)
topic
Yevrop.d
Europe-dat
To do for someone else.
ori.x,
be located-ifvn
171
Yevrop.iin
xolboon.ii
gin
oron
yum.
Europe-gen union-gen member country copp.
(http://mn.wikipedia.org/wiki/_)
France (the French Republic) is located in Western Europe and is a
member of the European Union.
In published, hard-copy non-fiction, the various past tense endings

are distributed rather differently from one another, both in regard to
position in the paragraph, but also in the text as a whole. For example,
of the twenty readings in Montgomerys (1969) collection of articles
from the newspaper nen, five (25%) have initial sentences using the
ending -jee and three (15%) the ending -lee. Five (25%) have -v, none
have -sen, and the rest (seven, or 35%) have various present-tense constructions. In the Mongol Reader edited by Austin et al. (1963), there
are some 60 readings taken from various sources. Of these, 27, almost
half (45%), have initial sentences in -v, 13 (22%) in -jee, but only two
in -lee, two in -sen yum, one in -sengi, and one in -sengi yum. The
rest9, or 15%have some kind of present-tense sentence. Of course,
these are very small samples, and I have made no effort to match the
tenses to the specific genres in question. A large number of factors
play a role in determining tense suffix choice, only one of which is
the specific function assigned the opening sentence of an article (or
chapter of a book).
2.2. Past Tenses and Grounding
One type of textual function is foregrounding material (placing it in
the main sequence of narrative events) or backgrounding it, making
it subordinate in some way to those events. In summarizing a story
the body of the narrative is stripped down to the skeleton of the story,
the basic events. The material stripped out is largely the subordinate
background. When Caesar utters (7b) (in Suetonius account, anyway,
and in Latin), we arent told the when, where, why, how, with whom,
etc., of each event, just the events and their order. Caesars purpose
in uttering (7b) is simply to present the events; his account is all foreground, without background.
7.
b. I came, I saw, I conquered.
At the beginning of chapter 2 of The Invisible Man, while Mrs. Hall

is screwing up her courage to go in and ask her visitor if he would
172
chapter four
take some tea, Mr. Henfrey, the clock-jobber, comes into the bar and
complains about the weather (or his boots). Wells writes at this point
example (319a), which appears in Mongolian translation as (319b).
The Mongolian past progressive is a close translation of the corresponding English tense, and, like it, serves to background the material.
The question, though, is whether, as in the case of English, it is the
imperfective aspect, marked by the -ing form (roughly equivalent to
the Mongolian imperfective converb in -j), or whether it is the ending
-lee, that is crucial here.
319. a. The snow outside was falling faster.
b. Tsas ulam irse.j
bai.laa.
snow more rage-impfc be-past
(Vells 1979: 10)
In either case, the said of the English original is translated with -v,
marking Mr. Henfreys advent and complaint as the first event-complex of the chapter. Strictly speaking, it consists of two events, Mr.
Henfreys entrance into the bar and his comment on the defeat of
his boots by the weather. In English these are separate events marked
by the main verbs came and said of their respective sentences. But
in Mongolian came is translated by the perfect converb ireed and
thereby syntactically subsumed into an event-complex: he came into
the bar and complained. The initial hypothesis would be that choice
of the perfective converb serves merely to syntactically subordinate his
entrance to his complaining; the imperfective converb would render
the event semantically subordinate as well,13 a mere aspect of the event
of complaining. One might say that ireed here is not unlike came
and . . . in English, indicating a closer connection between the two
events than separate sentences would, though the English original does
have separate sentences, unlinked by the conjunction.
In a spoken narrative sequence, we may find a series of -sens, and
in writing, a series of -vs. For example, the following fragment of
an interview contains an autobiographical recounting which consists
largely of a sequence of statements in -sen (320):14
13
This is a hypothesis obviously requiring both further refinement and future testing. For one thing, what does it mean, precisely, to be semantically subordinate, in
the sense used here?
14
I have underlined the verbs with -sen endings, and the corresponding verbs in
the translation.

320. manai
Our
anx
first
surguul
school
xoyor
two
tegexed xoyor angi.tai,

then
two
class-com
angi.taig.aar,
class-com-instr
angi.taig.aar
class-com-instr
Tegeed
then
tgs.d,
finish-pfc
namaig
me-acc
surguul
school
20-iod
20-ish
aa . . .
ah . . .
bag.tai
teacher-com
barilga
building
bar.san
build-past
Tegeed
Then
bi
I
aa . . . 6
uh . . . 6
surguuli.a
school-rp
surguuli.a
school-rp
1943
1943
ingej
thus
xgj.sn.
develop-past
on.d
year-dat
tgs.d
finished-pfc
surguul.d
school-dat
xuviarla.gd.san
assign-pass-pfvn
Bag.iin
teacher-gen
surguul.d
school-dat
xuviarla.gd.aad
assign-pass-pfc
odoo
now
ter
that
Mongol Uls.iin
Mongolia-gen
ofitsyer.iin
officer-gen
surguul
school
baig.uula.n
be-caus-modc
1943
1943
ye.d
time-dat
said nar.iin
minister pl-gen
tuaal
command
ge.dg.iig,
say-habvn-acc
surguul.iig
school-acc
on.ii
year-gen
9
9
xiel.le.x.eer
pursue-caus-ifvn-instr
iim
such
bai.san.
be-past
surguul.d
school-dat
oro.x
enter-ifvn
bai.san.
be-past
Bgd Nairamdax
Republic
exle.n
begin-modc
ye
time
on,
year
bol.son.
become-past
1943
1943
ontssain
excellently
baital
while
xoyordugaar
second
angi.tai,
class-com
bag.iin
teacher-gen
bai.j
be-impfc
angi,
class
tgs.x.d
finish-ifvn-dat
manai
our
ine
New
negdgeer
first
Drvn bag.tai,
neg zaxiral.tai.
Ingej
four
teacher-com a
principal-com thus
bai.guula.gd.san.
be-caus-pass-past
on.d
year-dat
173
Bi
I
ter
that
gar.,
go out-impfc
ineer
newly
sar.aas
month-abl
bol.son
become-past
ye.d,
time-dat
bag.iin
teacher-gen
xuviar aa . . . yosoor
bag.iin
quota uh . . . accordingly teacher-gen
174
chapter four
surguul.d
school-dat
oil.gi.geer
going-neg-instr
surguul.d
school-dat
oi.j
go-impfc
tend
there
Ingeed
Then
oi.j
go-impfc
Ofitsyer.iin
Officer-gen
brtgl.j
enlist-impfc
surguul
school
Gandan deer,
Gandan on
Texnikum
college
ge.j,
say-impfc
ge.j ,
say-impfc
ge.j
say-impfc
tal
side
xoyor,
two
drvn
four
n
its
1943
1943
on.ii
year-gen
Sxbaatar.iin
Sxbaatar-gen
neremjit
named
deer
to
odoog.iin
today-gen
o.son.
go-past
aa . . .
uh . . .
aa . . .
uh . . .
Ter
That
surguul
school
n
topic
odoog.oor
Barilg.iin
today-instr construction-gen
Barilg.iin
construction-gen
Texnikum
college
baig.aa.
be-impvn
xoyor
two
davxar,
story
bol.j,
become-impfc
bai.laa.
be-past
23-d,
23rd-dat,
23-d
23rd-dat
Baruun
Right
ofitsyer.iin
officer-gen
suraltsa.x.aar
train-ifvn-instr
8 sar.iin
8 month-gen
8 sar.iin
8 month-gen
d
straight
davxar, zn tal
story
left
side
iim
thus
xoyor
two
n
its
yagaan
rosy
baiin
tend bai.san.
building
there be-past
(http://www.mongolianoralhistory.org/samples/transcriptions/TR060101B
.xml)
My school was established with two classes-the first and the second, 4
teachers and director. When I graduated from the school in 1943 it
had . . . 6 classes, . . . about 20 teachers. A new building was built and
developed. In 1943 I graduated from my school I was assigned to the
teachers school. At that time a decree of the Ministries of the Mongolian Peoples Republic (MPR) was issued and the school of Officers
was established to launch its classes in September 1943. Id decided
to study there. I did not go Teachers school and was registered as a
student of the school of Officers. On 23 August, 1942 I went to the
School of Officers. That school was situated in recent-time Gandan,
aa. . . . there is the Construction College now. There was a two-story
building on its right and there were two-story and four-story pinkish
buildings on its left. (http://www.mongolianoralhistory.org/samples/
translations/EN060101B.xml)
175
Similarly, the minutes of meetings typically consist of a series of statements in -v, as in this fragment of the minutes of the 2003/01/07 meeting of the Standing Committee on Nature, Environment, Food, and
Agriculture of the Mongolian national Parliament (321):15
321. Baigal
Nature
orin,
xd.giin
environment country-genitive
baingiin
standing
xoroon.ii
committee-gen
1 dgeer
1st
sar.iin
month-gen
(Myagmar garig)
(Tuesday)
Tri.in
State-gen
7-nii
7-gen
tsag
hour
tanxim.d
hall-dat
10 minuta.d
10 minute-dat
exle.v.
begin-past
xoroon.ii
committee-gen
. Gungaadorj nee.j,
. Gungaadorj open-impfc
irts,
attendance
darga
chairperson
xeleltsex asuudl.iig
agenda-acc
taniltsuula.v.
present-past
Xuraldaan.d
Meeting-dat
ir.vel
come-condc
gin.ees
member-abl
17 gin
17 member
ir.j,
come-impfc
94.4
94.4
xuviin
percent
nd:
Herein:
Neg.
One.
irts.tei
attendance-com
Tasalsan:
absent:
xii.j
do-impfc
Tailan.tai
Report-com
zoxix
belonging
bai.v.
be-past
D. Arvin
D. Arvin
Ulsiin Ix Xural.iin
Parliament-gen
namr.iin
fall-gen
15
10
10
V
B
baingiin
standing
on.ii
year-gen
dr.iin
day-gen
xuraldaan
meeting
ord.nii
house-gen
Xuraldaan.iig
Meeting-acc
2003
2003
xgjl.iin
development-genitive
uulgan.ii
assembly-gen
gitsetge.sen
perform-pfvn
2002
2002
on.ii
year-gen
xugatsaand
during
ajl.iin
work-gen
xolbogd.uul.j
agree-caus-impfc
Part of this passage is in example (145) above.
tailan
report
18
18
176
chapter four
Ulsiin Ix Xural.iin
Parliament-gen
sanal
opinion
gar.san.gi.
go out-past-neg
12 minuta.d
12 minute-dat
Xoyor.
Two.
gi.d.ees
member-pl-abl
Ug
principal
xeleltse.j
discuss-impfc
Ulsiin Ix Xural.iin
Parliament-gen
namr.iin
fall-gen
uulgan.ii
assembly-gen
xii.x
do-ifvn
ajl.iin
work-gen
Tlvlegn.ii
plan-gen
asuudl.iig
question-acc
10 tsag
10 hour
duusa.v.
finish-past
2002
2002
on.ii
year-gen
xugatsaand
during
tlvlegn.ii
plan-gen
tsl.ti
draft-com
Uls.iin Ix Xural.iin
parliament-gen
asuult,
question,
tsl
draft
xolbogd.uul.j
agree-caus-impfc
gin
member
L. Davaadtsedev,
Ts. iirevdamba, O. Nigamyet, Ts. ld,

R. Tsogtbaatar, Ts. aravdorj, G. Nyamdavaa,
Ts. Nyam-Osor
nar
pl16
sanal
opinion
xele.v.
speak-past
Xuraldaan 10 tsag
45 minuta.d
ndrl.v.
Meeting
10 hour 45 minute-dat wind up-past
The January 7th, 2003 (Tuesday) meeting of the Standing Committee
on Nature, Environment, and Rural Development began at 10:10 in
Hall B of the State House. . Gungaadorj, chairperson of the Standing Committee, opened the meeting and presented attendance and
the agenda. 17 of the 18 members attending, attendance was 94.4%;
absent: D. Arvin.
One. Report of the work performed during the Fall 2002 assembly of
the National Parliament.
Accepting the report, the members of Parliament did not raise questions or express opinions. The discussion of the principal question
concluded at 10:12.
Two. Draft plan during the Fall 2002 assembly of the National Parliament for work to do.
Accepting the draft plan, members of Parliament [names] gave their
opinions. The meeting wound up at 10:45.
16
The plural marker nar is used here to sum up the list of members. That is, it
marks it as a group of people.
177
Confronted with the task of translating (322), Sodnomdorj spontaneously wrote down (323), using -v (except in the third sentence). In
other translations of narrative sequences, he likewise used this form,
except in the occasional sentence.
322. The chairman opened the meeting with a Tibetan prayer. Then several
people asked questions. Finally the mayor spoke to us. He said the city
was in financial trouble.
323. Xurl.iig
dargalag tvd.iin
mrgln.ii
Assembly-acc president Tibet-gen prayer-gen
xamt.aar
together with-instr17
Tegeed
Then
xot.iin
city-gen
xed xeden
several
darga
leader
sanx.giin
finance-gen
ulzalt.iig
meeting-acc
xn
person
nee.v.
open-past
asuudal
question
tavi.v.
Etses.t
n
put-past end-dat the18
biden.tei yarilts.laa.
Tereer xot
us-com converse-past he
city
xnd
difficult
baidal.d
state-dat
bai.na
be-pres
gej
that
maan
our
yari.v.
say-past
The question is whether -sen (-v) is the only form that is available
for narrative sequence and, if it is, under what conditions a narrative
sequence is appropriate in discourse, and, if it is not, what factors, if
any, determine the choices of form. As yet, complete and definitive
answers cannot be given for these questions, because little investigation has been made of the structures and functions of discourse, conversation, and text in the Altaic languages, especially where Mongolian
is concerned.
The importance of narrative sequence is that past tenses in narrative
typically are non-deictic. A deictic tense normally takes its reference
point, the time to which it relates the time of the occurrence recounted,
from an adverbial expression or some other temporal expression. For
example, in (324), the past tense in and of itself only indicates that the
discovery of America by Columbus precedes the present time. When,
precisely, it occurred, is specified by the adverbial prepositional phrase
17
Xamtaar together with here seems to be a misunderstanding of the instrumental
with in the English passage.
18
Literally his, her, their, this possessive form is used as a marker of definiteness,
roughly equivalent to the.
178
chapter four
in 1492. Similarly, in (325), the adverbial subordinate clause provides

the reference for the utterers state of hating school. Out of context
(326) seems incomplete, because it fails to provide a reference point
for the tense, though the reader may assume, through a process of
accommodation, a contextual time such as when I was a child or
when I was in school. In (327), however, it is the previous sentence,
that is, part of the context, which provides the reference; we understand that it is during the war years that the utterers family never had
enough to eat.
324. Columbus discovered America in 1492.
325. When I was a child, I hated school.
326. I hated school.
327. The war years were hard on our family. We never had enough to eat.
In narrative sequences it is the so-called event time (the time of the

occurrence or eventuality) of one clause that provides the reference
time for the next statement in sequence. Or, more precisely, a time
immediately following the state resulting from the occurrence in the
preceding clause serves as the reference time for the tense of the next
statement of the next occurrence in sequence. In (328), the narrators
getting up results in a state of affairs wherein they had gotten up. It was
at this time, that is, when they had gotten up, that they got dressed.
Their getting dressed, in turn, creates a state of having gotten dressed,
and it is while this state of having gotten dressed obtains, that they
went downstairs.
328. I got up. I got dressed. I went downstairs.
Of course, some states are permanent or endure over long periods of

time. From (328) we infer that the narrator got dressed as soon as, that
is, immediately after, they got up, and they went downstairs immediately after getting dressed. What immediate in this context is, is
pragmatically determined, that is, in light of the context, including the
speakers world knowledge. Thus we know that if (328) recounts all the
essential events that transpired (so that getting up, for example, does
not include more than getting out of bed and the events which occur
between getting out of bed and getting dressed are merely incidental
and can be subsumed under the terms get up or get dressed), perhaps
only a few minutes, or even less, elapsed between the two events. But
179
in the case of Caesars boast (7b), we know that a long period of time
must have separated each pair of events.
7. b. I came, I saw, I conquered.
For example, in the passage from The Marvelous Mongolian in (329),

the verbal complex began to bark takes as its reference time the time
expressed by the adverbial complex then one night, at about two am,
while the next predicate, woke up, takes as its reference time the time
when Skip had begun to bark. That is, the narrator (who is Kitty
Jameson) woke up when Skip had begun to bark, that is, in sequence
with his beginning to bark (and presumably in consequence of it).
That the narrators telling him to be quiet follows his waking up is
doubly indicated; since normally she would not have been talking in
his sleep, telling the dog something must have followed waking up,
but also, the use of and to conjoin actions idiomatically implicates
sequentiality: the reverse order, I told him to be quiet and woke up
would be odd, to say the least. The next but one and has the same
effect: Skip kept barkingdespite what Kitty said to himafter the
narrator got up and saw that it was Peep. Another sequence occurs
in the second paragraph. Skip ran off after Peep wouldnt let Kitty
touch her, and it was when he had run off that his barking woke up
Grandfather. The time when he had woken Grandfather becomes the
time at which Grandfather came outside, asking his questions of the
narrator.
329. Then one night, at about two am, Skip began to bark under my bed,
as if he was afraid of something. I woke up and told him to be quiet.
But I thought I saw something outside. I got up to look out, and it was
Peep. And though I said, Shhh, to Skip, its Peep come back, Skip
kept barking, and I had to crawl out of the window to see what was
wrong.
Peep was muddy and untidy and very restless, and she wouldnt let
me touch her at first. Then Skip ran off into the darkness barking at
something, which woke Grandfather. He came outside with a torch
asking me what on earth I was doing in the cold in my dressing gown
and with no shoes on. (Aldridge 1974, chapter 5)
Non-narrative statements, that is, statements that form part of the

narrative background and not the foreground (the main line of
the narrative, the sequence of events forming the story), do not
advance narrative time. That is, they do not occur at a time immediately
180
chapter four
after the onset of the state resulting from the previous event or occurrence, but rather the time of the occurrence itself. For example, Peeps
being muddy and so on, at the beginning of the second paragraph,
holds at the time of the preceding action, naming the narrators looking out.
Finally, this passage illustrates another way in which sequentiality
can be implicated. Its being Peep is a state obtaining at the time that
the narrator looked out; but that time is later than the time at which
she got up. This ordering follows from the use of the infinitive: if you
get up to look out, then you naturally look out after getting up. A
similar ordering defined by the use of the infinitive occurs in I had to
crawl out of the window to see what was wrong.
Whether a past tense verb functions sequentially to advance narrative time, or not, or functions deictically to merely state a fact (as in
the second sentence of example (330), the past tense of which does
not take its reference point from the time of conquest, but rather is
simply a time preceding the speech act time), depends on the Aktionsart of the predicate, the kind of occurrence it denotes, but also on
other contextual factors, including discourse functions. For example,
in (331) and (332), the temporal relations between the pairs of sentences differ because the rhetorical relations between them differ. In
(331), Toms being seriously injured is the consequence of his being
hit by a truck, but in (332) his being hit by a truck is the consequence
of his not properly looking to see if there was traffic. The ordering of
the sentences differs because the second sentence in (332) expresses
the cause of the event in the first, and hence an event occurring at an
earlier time, whereas in (331), the second sentence does express a consequence and hence a later event in sequence. How a sentence relates
functionally to the sentences around it is pragmatically determined,
and in the absence of context can be ambiguous. Thus in the case of
(333), we dont know in which order the events occurred; if this is a
narrative sequence, Tom was shot before stepping out; if the second
sentence is a statement of the conditions under which he was shot, of
course his being shot came after his stepping out.
330. The Romans conquered Britain. It was the westernmost of their conquests.
331. Tom was hit by a truck. He was seriously injured.
Tom truckan.d dajruul.jee.
Tereer xnd arxad.san
Tom truck-dat knock down-past He
heavy wound-pfvn
181
bai.na.19
be-pres
332. Tom was hit by a truck. He didnt properly look to see if there was
traffic.
Tom truckan.d dajruul.jee.
Tereer
Tom truck-dat knock down-past He
traffic
traffic
bai.sn.iig
be-pfvn-acc
xar.aa.gi
look-impfvn-neg
bai.na.
be-pres
333. Tom was hit by a bullet. He stepped out just as a second fighter made
its strafing run.
In (334), from Yann Martels novel Life of Pi, it is most likely, out of
context, as this passage is, that the ship made the burping sound as or
after, and because, it sank. In contrast, in (335), the state of the aircraft
reported in the second sentence is the state at or before, not after, the
crash. Nothing about the tenses used reveals this; we infer it because
of our knowledge that a crashed airplane cannot prepare for landing,
whereas the reverse is, unfortunately, possible.
334. The ship sank. It made a sound like a giant metallic burp. (http://www
.oxonianreview.org/issues/2-2/2-2-1.htm)
335. The plane crashed in a rural residential area about 200 or 300 feet from
a house, Stables said. The aircrafts landing gear and flaps were down,
seemingly in preparation to land. (http://www.newarkadvocate.com/
apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080112/UP-DATES01/80112011; at the
19
I wondered if the Mongolian should contain an indefinite neg a. I also wondered about the English word truck. As to the latter, I found on a Web page (www
.mongoliadc.us/News/AD/JOB.htm) the example (i) below, given as in the original.
In regard to the former, a Web page (http://tuurug.banjig.net/zuud/index.php?b_
type=as) included (ii) (again, given as in the original).
i. TRUCK bari.j
chad.dag [ad.dag] bai.h [bai.x] hereg.tei.
Truck
drive-impfc be able-habvn
be-ifvn
necessity-com
Being able to drive a truck is necessary.
ii. zam gara.h [gara.x] ge.j
bg.aad [baig.aad]
road exit-ifvn
intend-impfc be-pfc
mashin.d [main.d]
dairuul.j
car-dat
run into-impfc
exiting, [theyre? Im?] hit by a car
bn [bai.na]
be-pres
gj [ge.j]
say-impfc
182
chapter four
Although English does have different past tenses that could be used
to differentiate a narrative sequence from a passage containing both a
foregrounded and a backgrounded occurrence, namely the simple past
tense, the past progressive, and the past perfect, it cannot use these to
disambiguate the discourse structures of strings of sentences because
the simple past tense can be used in the same contexts as the other
two tenses: compare (336ab) and (337ab). In (337b), the simple past
tense seems more colloquial than the past perfect, but otherwise there
is no difference between the two passages (337a, b).
336. a. Six people have died after a cargo plane crashed in Cameroon after
failing to land at an airport in Ndjamena, capital of neighbouring
Chad. The Ukrainian aircraft had been chartered by Libya to fly food
and medical aid to Chad. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/4936912
.stm)
b. Six people have died after a cargo plane crashed in Cameroon after
failing to land at an airport in Ndjamena, capital of neighbouring
Chad. The Ukrainian aircraft was chartered by Libya to fly food and
medical aid to Chad.
337. a. The military investigation confirmed what had been obvious from the
moment the tragedy occurred. The plane, which severed the ski lift
cable in the Italian resort of Cabalasi, was flying far too low. (http://
www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/military/jan-june98/cablecar_3-12.html)
b. The military investigation confirmed what had been obvious from
the moment the tragedy occurred. The plane, which severed the ski
lift cable in the Italian resort of Cabalasi, flew far too low.
c. The military investigation confirmed what had been obvious from
lift cable in the Italian resort of Cabalasi, had flown far too low.
d. The military investigation confirmed what had been obvious from
lift cable in the Italian resort of Cabalasi, had been flying far too low.
In many languages an imperfect or imperfective past verb form contrasts with a perfect or perfective one and does serve to disambiguate such strings. The simple past (perfective) and the imperfect of the
Romance languages, for example, functions this way. For example, it
would be impossible to change (338) as indicatedreplacing the perfective pass tense with the imperfective imparfait, without changing
both the meaning and the function of the sentence in question, unlike
in the case of the the English examples above. (Hence those linguists
who use ! to mean unacceptable with the assumed meaning would
likely replace the asterisks below with exclamation marks.)
183
338. Lenqute
mene
par les autorits
canadiennes
The-inquiry conducted by the authorities Canadian
rvlent [pass simple *rvlait, imparfait]
revealed
dAir France
of-Air France
avait abord
had approached
altitude et une
altitude and a
vitesse
speed
trop
too
la
the
que
that
lavion
the-plane
piste daterrissage avec une

runway
with an
leves. Le
high
The
2 aot
2 august
2005, lAirbus
A340 dAir France
2005, the-Airbus A340 of-Air France
sest
cras [pass compos *crasait, imparfait]
itself-is crashed
on
son atterrissage
its landing
at
avait
had
gliss
slid
Toronto. Sous
Toronto. Under
le long de
along
piste
runway
avant
before
ravin
ravine
et
and
Selon
According to
la
the
de finir
of finishing
de
of
sa
its
prendre
catching
lenqute
the-inquiry
la
tempte, lavion
the storm
the-plane
course
run
dan un
in
a
petit
small
feu.
fire.
des
of-the
autorits
authorities
canadiennes,
Canadian
lAirbus
volait [imparfait *a vol, pass compos] trop vite.
the-Airbus was flying
too fast.
Lappareil
est arriv [pass compos *arrivait, imparfait]
The-machine arrived
Toronto au
at Toronto in-the
dune
of-a
violente
violent
milieu
middle
tempte,
storm
dont
of which
les
the
vents
winds
changeaient [imparfait *a chang, pass compos]

were changing
de
in
et
and
direction
direction
avec
with
peu de
little of
visibilit,
visibility
a expliqu [pass composee *expliquait, imparfait]

explained
rapidement
rapidly
184
chapter four
Wendy Tadros,
Wendy Tadros
du
of-the
directrice
director
Bureau
bureau
Canada (BST).
Canada (BST)
de la
of the
scurit
safety
des
transports
of-the transporation
du
of-the
Il
It
est arriv [pass compos *arrivait, imparfait] trop haut et

arrived
too high and
trop
too
vite.
fast
posant ses
putting its
mouille
wet
En
In
roues
wheels
et
and
presque
almost
in
la
the
moiti de la
middle of the
piste,
runway
glissante,
slippery
il na
tout
simplement pas eu [pass compos *avait, imparfait]
it neg-has entirely simply
not had
assez de place.
enough room
(http://www.francesoir.fr/actualite/societe/avion-l-airbus-accidentetoronto-volait-trop-vite-22374.html)
The inquiry conducted by the Canadian authorities reveals that the
Air France plane had approached the runway with too elevated an
altitude and speed. On August 2, 2005, the Air France Airbus A340
crashed during its landing in Toronto. Under the storm, the plane had
slid along the runway before finishing its run in a small ravine and
catching fire. According to the inquiry of the Canadian authorities, the
Airbus was flying too fast. The plane arrived at Toronto in the middle
of a violent storm whose winds were changing rapidly, and with little
visibility, explained Wendy Tadros, director of the Transport Safety
Board (TSB) of Canada. [It] came in too high and too fast, touching
down almost halfway along the wet and slippery runway. It simply
ran out of room.20
In Mongolian, aspect need not take on this burden: modality is available to mark the same function. Consider again the passage (329) from
The Marvelous Mongolian:
20
For the original English of the quotation, see http://urbantoronto.ca/forum/
showthread.php/5567-PearsonCanada-should-expand-runway-safety-zones-tointernational-code-says-Air-France?p=122935.
185
329. Then one night, at about two am, Skip began to bark under my bed, as
if he was afraid of something. I woke up and told him to be quiet. But I
thought I saw something outside. I got up to look out, and it was Peep.
And though I said, Shhh, to Skip, its Peep come back, Skip kept
barking, and I had to crawl out of the window to see what was wrong.
Peep was muddy and untidy and very restless, and she wouldnt let
me touch her at first. Then Skip ran off into the darkness barking at
something, which woke Grandfather. He came outside with a torch asking me what on earth I was doing in the cold in my dressing gown and
with no shoes on. (Aldridge 1974, chapter 5)
We saw that there is here a sequence of events, marked mainly by the

successive verbs began to bark, woke up, told, got up, kept barking,
woke, came. In addition, there are a number of other predicates. He
was afraid concerns a putative state at the time Skip began to bark.
Thought may represent a state at the time Kitty told Skip to be quiet;
it is possible, however, that it represents an occurrence subsequent
to that. That it was Peep indicates a state discovered subsequent to
looking out. Having to crawl out the window is a state of affairs holding at the time that Skip kept barking. In English both foregrounded
events and backgrounded states are expressed with the simple past
tense: began, woke, got, etc., but also the stative was and had.
It is instructive now to consider the Mongolian translation of this
passage (329M).21 As one might have expected, the narrative backbone, the foregrounded events, are all expressed using -v, with the
possible exception of serjee in the second paragraph: began to bark
exlev, toldzandrav,22 got upbosov, etc. And, interestingly enough,
the states are mainly expressed with -lee: it was Peep: bailaa; Peep was
muddy and untidy and very restless: bailaa. She wouldnt let me touch
her at first: bailaa.
329M. Neg udaa niin xor tsagiin yed Skip yamar negen yumnaas aisan
yum ig minii oron dooguur orj, xutsaj exlev. Bi serj, tniig duugi
bai gej zandrav. Getel ene mid tsonxnii tsaana yamar negen yum
brtelzex ig bolov. Bi tniig olj xaraxaar bosov. Getel ene n Davjaa bailaa. Xediigeer bi Skip noxoidoo imeegi, ene cin Davjaa
21
I have underlined the -v forms and both underlined the non-v finite verbs in and
put them in italics. For the detailed gloss of the first paragraph, see (329) in its place
above; that of the second paragraph is presented below.
22
Got up and told him to be quiet is rendered using the modal converb: roughly,
Getting up, I told him to be quiet.
186
chapter four
ergej irsen baina dee gej xelsen bolov Skip xutssaar l bailaa.
Yuu bolsniig medexiin told bi tsonxoor garav.
Davjaag.iin
Davjaa-gen
xamag
whole
bol.sn.oos
become-pfvn-abl
tevdsen
panicky
Daraa n
After that
xaranxui
dark
avar
avxai
muddy dirty
uirgi
mindlessly
bai.laa.
be-past
ai.j
fear-impfc
Exl.eed
Begin-pfc
ogt
completely
terbeer
off
xrge.x.gi
reach-ifvn-neg
namaig
me
bai.laa.
be-past
ruu
towards
davxi.xa.d
run-ifvn-dat
dn.ii
door-gen
bar.saar
carry-contc
dan
only
modp
n
her
Skip yamar neg yum ol.j

z.sen
met
Skip what a
thing find-impfc see-past as if
xutsa.j
bark-impfc
i
you
gadna
beside
baidal.tai
state-com
biyen.d.ee
body-dat-rp
Terveer
Out
biye
body
atan
steps
gar.
go out-impfc
boinz.toi,
housecoat-com
baig.aa
yum
be-impfvn thing
be
qp
n
his
v
grand-dad
deer
on
gar iiden
flashlight
ire.n,
come-modc
xl
foot
ge.j
say-impfc
ser.jee.
awake-past
ntsgen
naked
ene
this
xiten.d
cold-dat
yuu
what
xii.j
do-impfc
asuu.v. (Oldrij 1980: 70f.)

ask-past
Two verbs in this passage require special comment. Bolov in the third
sentence (which translates But I thought I saw something outside)
marks that this is not a state, but rather a psychological event, in two
ways, first by using the verb bolox become, come to be, come about
rather than the purely stative baix be, and secondly through the use
of the narrative ending -v. The sense is that then (getel) the narrator
had a sensation of seeing something outside.
The second verb is that serjee in the second paragraph. This sentence is the translation of Then Skip ran off into the darkness barking at something, which woke Grandfather. The English original makes
explicit that Skips barking woke Grandfather, that it was the cause of
his waking. Nonetheless, his waking is not an event in the narrative, as
shown by its being presented in a relative clause, subordinate to barking at something. The Mongolian makes his (Skips) running barking
187
the context of Grandfathers waking by putting xaranxui ruu xutsaj

davxix n his running barking towards the darkness into the dative
case. Hence in the Mongolian, although v serjee grand-dad awoke
is not syntactically subordinate, it is still not an independent event, but
a circumstance, as marked by the deictic verb.
Where the fore- and backgrounding in a discourse is concerned,
there is a correlation between aspect, Aktionsart, and grounding. The
foregrounded material normally consists of expressions referring to
bounded activities and events, that is, which have well-defined endpoints (beginning and end), while the background material consists
usually of unbounded states and processes. For example, in (320), the
event of going to the school is recounted, and then a description of
the school follows. We dont knowand dont care, in this context
when these facts came to be true or how long they endured. The passage simply states that this was the situation at the time that the event
(going to the school) occurred. Even in cases where the reader infers
an initial and/or final bound, such a passage in and of itself states only
that such-and-such a situation obtained at the time of the event.
320. Manai surguul tegexed xoyor angitai, anx xoyor angitaigaar, negdgeer
angi, xoyordugaar angitaigaar. Drvn bagtai, neg zaxiraltai. Ingej
baiguulagdsan. Tegeed namaig 1943 on, ond tgsd, tgsxd manai
surguul aa . . . 6 angitai, 20-iod aa . . . bagtai bolson. ine barilga barsan
ingej xgjsn. Tegeed bi surguulia 1943 ond surguulia ontssain tgsd bagiin surguuld xuviarlagdsan baisan. Bagiin surguuld xuviarlagdaad baij baital ter yed Bgd Nairamdax odoo Mongol Ulsiin
said nariin tuaal gar, ofitsyeriin surguul gedgiig, surguuliig ineer
baiguulan 1943 onii 9 saraas exlen xiceelllexeer bolson iim ye baisan. Bi ter yed, bagiin surguuld orox xuviar aa . . . yosoor bagiin
surguuld oilgigeerd ofitsyeriin surguuld oijsuraltsaxaar bolj,
tend oij brtglj bailaa. Ingeed 8 sariin 23-d, 1943 onii 8 sariin 23-d
Sxbaatariin neremjit Ofitsyeriin surguul deer oson. Ter surguul
n odoogiin Gandan deer, aa . . . odoogoor Barilgiin Texnikum gej, aa . . .
Barilgiin Texnikum gej , gej baigaa. Baruun tal n xoyordavxar, zn
tal n xoyor, drvn davxar, iim xoyor yagaan baiin tend baisan.
(http://www.mongolianoralhistory.org/samples/transcriptions/TR060101B
.xml)
My school was established with two classesthe first and the second,
4 teachers and a director. When I graduated from the school in 1943
it had . . . 6 classes, . . . about 20 teachers. A new building was built and
developed. In 1943 I graduated from my school I was assigned to the
teachers school. At that time a decree of the Ministries of the Mongolian Peoples Republic (MPR) was issued and the school of Officers
188
chapter four
was established to launch its classes in September 1943. Id decided
to study there. I did not go Teachers school and was registered as a
student of the school of Officers. On 23 August, 1942 I went to the
School of Officers. That school was situated in recent-time Gandan,
aa. . . . there is the Construction College now. There was a two-story
building on its right and there were two-story and four-story pinkish
buildings on its left. (http://www.mongolianoralhistory.org/samples/
translations/EN060101B.xml)
Events are strung together to form the narrative line like beads on
a cord; as events they have a well-defined temporal shape, which is
why they seem to be encapsulated and thus viewed from the outside
as an integral whole, whereas progressive expressions turn them into
quasi-states viewed from an internal perspective and as obtaining at
some point in the narrative sequence. For this reason the main line
of a narrative tends to use perfective aspect (for example the English
simple past tense, as in example 7b), while the background uses for
the most part imperfective aspect (for example the progressive past
tense, which renders a putative narrative such as (339) rather odd).
The foreground material therefore tends to utilize predicates that
can express bounded eventualitiesprincipally eventive expressions,
accomplishments like come and conquer, and achievements like notice
and arrive. Activities (processes) like run or melt, and states like exist
are inherently unbounded, although episodes are bounded activities
or states that function like events, so that in the right types of context the sentences in (340), which could simply be lists of temporally
unrelated (or simultaneous) occurrences, could function as narrative
sequences. (The context of 340b, which is the response in an interview
to the question What was the impact like?, referring to going over a
waterfall, suggests that these occurrences are in fact sequential.)
7. b. I came, I saw, I conquered. (Caesar)
339. I was coming, I was seeing, I was conquering.
340. a. I swam, I jogged, I lifted weights.
b. I felt a shock wave bell ring. I saw stars and heard a loud tone.
(http://www.wetdawg.com/pages/whitewater/ed_lucero/index_ww.php)
2.3. Past Tenses and The Topics of Threads

The coherence of a work on the local level is maintained by rhetorical
relations, sometimes called coherence relations. Where an utterance
189
can be related to the preceding sentence, or a larger unit of discourse,

by a rhetorical relation, the discourse is coherent. For example, the
discourse fragment in (7a) is coherent because one of the sentences is
relationally subordinate to the other; the second offers the reason or
cause for the eventuality recounted in the first. Similarly (288) offers in
the second sentence a consequence of the first. In (275b), the second
sentence expands on the first, offering more detail.
7. a. The Titanic sank. It hit an iceberg.
275. b. John bought Mary some flowers. He picked out three red roses, two
white ones and one pale pink.
288. Max saw John approach. He stood up.
We can easily alter such examples to render them incoherent. All we

need do is change the topic (341a) or the theme (341b), or both (341c).23
341. a. The Titanic sank. The Explorer hit an iceberg.
b. The Titanic sank. At the time, it was the most luxurious liner in the
world.
c. The Titanic sank. In its day, the Vasa was the greatest warship in
Europe.
Even these sequences could be rendered coherent by further context,

as (341b) is in (341d), and (341a), at least, could be read as coherent if
23
The term topic has a somewhat different meaning in discourse pragmatics than
in syntax and semantics, and confusingly enough, both are used in the present work.
The particle bol marks a topic in the semantic sense. It is the thing the speaker or
writer is talking about. The topic may or may not coincide with the grammatical subject. In Japanese, for example, there are distinct topic (wa) and subject (ga) markers.
In English, it is possible to have both topic and subject in one sentence: As for Ontario,
the climate is humid all year round. Here the topic, what is being talked about, is
Ontario, but the subject, what something is being predicated of, is the climate. (It
does not reduce the terminological confusion that subject has a meaning in grammar distinct from its ordinary meaning of topic.) In discourse pragmatics the term
topic is roughly a synonym of theme; as one source (http://www.thefreedictionary
.com/topic) puts it, a topic in this sense is A word or phrase in a sentence, usually providing information from previous discourse or shared knowledge, that the
rest of the sentence elaborates or comments on. While the specific interpretation of
this definition varies considerably in various linguistic theories, the concept approximates the everyday concept of topic much more than the meaning of the term in
semantics does.
190
chapter four
it is taken as part of a list of statements, possibly exemplifying newsworthy maritime accidents or the like.
341. d. Marine safety is not guaranteed by the modernity or the size or the
classiness of a vessel. The Titanic sank. At the time, it was the most
luxurious liner in the world. And the most modern, and the largest.
Threads are strings of sentences with a common theme. They often

commence with a new topic. Some rhetorical relations function to
maintain the thread by coordinating material with the preceding cotext. Others may start a subordinate thread by subordinating new
material. A subordinate thread concerns a new theme, but that theme
is within the larger context of the theme of the superordinate thread,
so that while opening up a new thread, it does not close the superordinate thread. Once the subordinate thread is closed, the superordinate
thread may be resumed. In structural terms, the relationship is rather
like that of a subordinate clause embedded within a sentence; the end
of the subordinate clause does not necessarily conclude the sentence
as a whole.
Compare, for example, (342a), in which the second sentence simply
fills out details of the statement in the first sentence and thereby maintains the thread, with (342b), which introduces a potential new topic
for a subordinate thread. In (342c) that topic is actually exploited to
create a subordinate thread, but in (342d) the same thread is simply
continued.
342. a. Martha was in a bad mood. She felt crummy and irritable.
b. Martha was in a bad mood. She felt crummy and irritable, and
couldnt help frowning and grumbling at everything, and everyone.
c. Martha was in a bad mood. She felt crummy and irritable, and
Her husband in particular was a source of great irritation and an
unfortunate victim of this irritability.
d. Martha was in a bad mood. She felt crummy and irritable, and
She hoped that taking some anti-depressant tablets would put her in
a better mood.
But the third sentence in (342c) and in (342d) introduces yet another
source of a potential new subordinate string. At every point in a discourse or text the speaker has the choice of starting a new thread, of continuing the current one, or of returning to a yet earlier, superordinate
191
thread. The relations between topics, threads (attentional structure),

rhetorical relations, and the like, have only become the subjects of
intense study in the last decade and a half or so, and much remains to
be discovered regarding the structure of discourses and texts, and its
relationship to tense and aspect.
Where the present work is concerned, one issue in this regard is the
paragraphic structure of texts. While the available scholarship can as
yet hardly offer a serious theory of the paragraph, it has long been clear
that the paragraph is a unit on the level of the structure of discourse
and text, that is, a rhetorical structure. As the24 Wikipedia article on
the paragraph says, A paragraph (from the Greek paragraphos, to
write beside or written beside) is a self-contained unit of a discourse
in writing or dealing with a particular point or idea, that is, what has
been called here a theme.
Consequently it seems only natural that a new paragraph marks a
new thread, the end of a paragraph signals the end of a thread, and
the middle of a paragraph marks the continuation of a thread.25 This
hypothesis is likely in time to turn out to be more or less incorrect,
but it is a good first approximation to understanding the functioning
of the paragraph. And insofar as threads are structured by rhetorical relations, which in turn have consequences for tense-marking, we
would expect to find a correlation between tense choice and position
in the paragraph.
One property of utterances in context that native speakers intuit
is conclusiveness. Certain utterances seem to have as their purpose
to initiate or to solicit discussion, while yet others seem intended to
end it. There has been much investigation of the role of utterances in
structuring conversation, but for present purposes we need only note
that the conversational functioning of utterances is closely related to
discourse structure. For example, an open thread may be an invitation
to a conversational partner to continue it, or to start a subordinate
thread. On the other hand, the closure of a thread may be intended to
end dialogue regarding that topic.
Some rhetorical relations are what we are calling conclusive. They
draw the particular thread of discourse to an end (and thus are likely
24
Current version at the time of writing.

Of course, this is purely on the local level. A thread may be spread over many
paragraphs, or even separate texts. A paragraph which contains an entire thread may
be embedded within a superordinate thread spread over several paragraphs.
25
192
chapter four
to close out a paragraph). The following (343) is an example of a paragraph with such a conclusive final sentence. The reference in the first
sentence to the most authentic event, and the absence of any initial
introduction of topics or themes, reveals this to be a non-initial paragraph and subordinates it to earlier co-text. The last sentence, with its
reference to the final rider, apparently closes this particular thread.
343. What is shaping up to be the most authentic event is a horse relay
from Chingis Khans homeland, Khentii Province, to the ancient capital
of Karakorum. The relay harks back to the days of the great Mongol
empire, when horse messengers carried documents across the Asian
landmass at lightning speeds. This summers relay will cover 600km in
just 48 hours. Festivities begin 2 August in Dadal Soum, Chingis birthplace, where the first rider will accept a sample of soil and water from
the homeland. The final rider will gallop into the ruins of Karakorum,
and even more festivities, on 4 August. (http://www.lonelyplanet.com/
travelstories/article/ghengiskhan_0606)
On the other hand, some rhetorical relations are non-conclusive, and

invite further material; they naturally tend to start threads and often
appear, therefore, at the beginning of paragraphs. For example, Saruul-Erdene (2004) breaks the Secret History of the Mongols down into
a series of one-paragraph stories. Most open with a verb-form in -jee
marking the beginning of a new topic. Section 2 begins with (344a);
Alun Gua has not previously been mentioned. Section 3 (beginning
with [344b]) shifts attention to her son Bodsonchar, who again has
not previously been mentioned. Section 5 (344c) concerns Temjins
betrothal at age nine, a whole new topic. Section 6 (344d) contains an
episode about Temjins father.
344. a. ingis
Xaan.ii
Genghiz khan-gen
udam.d
ancestry-dat
Alun Gua ge.deg

Alun Gua call-habvn
uxaan.tai
emegtei
bai.jee.
cleverness-com woman
be-past
One of the Chinggis Khaans ancestors, Alun Gua (beautiful Alun),
was a clever woman. (Saruul-Erdene 2004: 8)
b. Alun Guag.iin neg x.g
Bodonar
Alun Gua-gen one son-acc Bodonar
ge.deg
bai.jee.
call-habvn
be-past
One of Alun Guas sons was Bodonchar. (Saruul-Erdene 2004: 10)

c. Temjin.iig
Temujin-acc
ysn
nine
193
nas.tai
bai.xa.d
age-com be-ifvn-dat
Yesxei Baatar Olxunud

Yesukhei Baatar Olkhunud
aimg.iin
aimag-gen
Dei Setsen
Dei Setsen
ge.deg
xn.ii
oxin.toi
si tav.jee.
call-habvn
person-gen daughter-com betroth-past
When Temujin was nine years old Yesukhei Baatar arranged his
betrothal to the daughter of Dei Setsen (Wise Dei) of Olkhunud
aimag. (Saruul-Erdene 2004: 14)
d. Temjin.iig
Brte.tei
si tav.sn.ii
Temujin-acc Borte-com betroth-pfvn-gen
daraa
following
Yesxei Baatar
Yesukhei Baatar
xurim
wedding feast
xii.j
make-impfc
butsa.j
return-impfc
bai.x.tai
be-ifvn-comitative
taarald.jee.
come upon-past
As he was traveling home from arranging the betrothal, Yesukhei
came upon a wedding feast in Tataar aimag. (Saruul-Erdene
2004: 16)
Often -lee is non-conclusive, inviting further material. Indeed it may

function like a verbal colon; the reader expects what follows to fulfill
the function opened up the sentence in -lee. Thus in regard to the
sentence in (345), then something follows; [it] sounds like more is
coming. What follows might be a report of what was read; and the
point of uttering (349) might be simply to introduce the topic into
the conversation.
345. Bi avtobus xlee.j
bai.x.d.aa,
I
bus
wait-impfc be-ifvn-dat-rp
bi
I
sonin
newspaper
un.laa.
read-past
While I was waiting for the bus, I read the newspaper.
An ending such as -sen does not function in this way.

Sodnomdorj commented in regard to (346) that xellee would be
acceptable in this sentence, indeed better than xelsen. He noted that
if the addressee knew what the speaker was about to say, the speaker
could use xelsen, but otherwise xellee functioned like a colon to prepare the addressee for what he was going to say.
194
chapter four
346. Teg.eed
bag.d.aa
neg dr xel.sen.
do so-pfc teacher-dat-rp One day say-past
(The Oral History of Twentieth Century Mongolia,
Choijamts; TR060101AHistory of Ulaanbaatar 1; Interview 1; http://www.
mongolianoralhistory.org/ samples/transcriptions/TR060101A.xml)
Then one day I told the teacher. (EN060101AHistory of Ulaanbaatar 1;
Interview 1English; http://www.mongolianoralhistory.org/samples/
translations/EN060101A.xml)
Similarly, the -sen-form trsn in (347) does not lead [to] further
information. Presumably, a -lee-form, trl, would indicate further
information is to come. The form trsn simply states a fact, Sodnomdorj
indicated, as in answer to the question when was he born?
347. Ix
zoxiol Dadorjiin Natsagdorj
Great writer Dashdorjiin Natsagdorj
1906
1906
on.d
year-dat
Gn Galuutai
Gn Galuutai
odoog.iin
now-gen
(zarimdaa
sometime
Baganuur
Baganuur
Melzei)
Melzei
orim
near
ge.deg
call-habvn
gazar
place
tr.sn. (http://www.mongolinternet.com/famous/DNatsagdorj.htm)
be born-past
The great writer Dashdorjiin Natsagdorj was born in the place called
Gn Galuutai (sometime Melzei) near present-day Baganuur in the
year 1906.
In commenting on an utterance such as (152a), Sodnomdorj said that

one cannot use -sen to open a passage; that uulzsan marks the statement as finished, as the end of [the] statement.
152. a. igdr
bi tn.tei
uulz.san.
Yesterdsay I that-com meet-past
Yesterday I met with him/her.
While -lee may be non-conclusive, -jee may be conclusive, and tends

in a discussion to [close] the whole thing, as in (348). Here one could
use [the -v form], but -jee [is] better.
348. Tegeed daxin
Then
again
nam.iin
party-genitive
ava.x
film-ifvn
r.iin
cell-gen
ge.j
ire.x.d.ee,
call-impfc come-ifvn-dat-rp
nar.iin
pl-gen
bigiin darga.d
secretary-dat
195
iim
ilerxiilelt
g.ee.
(Luvsantseren 1972: 100)
such demonstration give-past
Then, when again we [they?] came with the intention of filming, we
[they?] gave such a demonstration to the secretary of the party cell.
Given the close relationship of the -sen yum construction to the ending -jee, we should not be surprised to find that -sen yum, too, has a
distinct functional role to play in discourse. Unlike -sen, which disconnects the statement from the thread, and specifically the opening
sentence of the thread, -sen yum serves to connect the utterance with
that opening. Thus in (349), the -lee of the first sentence leads to the
second sentence, but the -san yum of the second sentence does not
lead anywhere. It coincides with the end of the paragraph.
349. Ene n bid
This night we
neg
an
xerg.iig
issue-acc
bai.j
be-impfc
xayaa
edge
unta.x.iin
mn
sleep-ifvn-gen before
tun
very
iid.lee.
decide-past
ruu
towards
ix
marga.j
greatly contest-impfc
n
Night
xaruula.x
show-ifvn
uu,
qp
unta.x.d.aa
sleep-ifvn-dat-rp
tolgoi.goo
head-rp
golomt ruu
centre towards
xaruula.x
uu ge.j
bid marga.san
yum.
show-ifvn qp say-impfc we contest-pfvn copp
(Luvsantseren 1972: 13)
This night, before we went to sleep, we decided an issue, debating very
greatly. [We decided our problem after long discussion.] We debated
whether to show our heads towards the outside or towards the inside
while we slept.
The question then is how to relate this particular type of function of

the tenses with their meanings and their other functions. In particular,
can we generalize regarding the difference in discourse functioning on
the attentional level between deictic and anaphoric tenses? These are
complicated issues, which require further study.
2.4. The Paragraph
As well as positionand hence discourse-functionin a whole written work such as an article, one determinant of ending choice is position (and hence function) in the paragraph.
196
chapter four
There are a number of problems involved in testing this hypothesis.

A paragraph is not quite the same thing in a hypotactic language
like Mongolian as in a paratactic language like English. There are different definitions of these terms, according to some of which both
English and Chinese are paratactic languages, and according to others
of which, Chinese is paratactic, but English hypotactic. Complicating
matters is the fact that few if any languages are purely of one type or
the other, and English in particular is quite capable of producing classic examples of sentences of either type.
For present purposes, these terms are used as follows. Paratactic languages tend to associate structures by coordinating them. For example,
to turn three sentences into one, a paratactic language simply throws
them together, a process called asyndeton or asyndetic coordination.
Caesars boast in the form of (7b) is the classic paratactic sentence;
it turns three independent structures into one by simple concatenation (chaining-together). Here, however, we do not distinguish such
simple, unmarked concatenation from conjunction through the use
of coordinating conjunctions. Consequently we regard both I came, I
saw, and I conquered and I came and I saw and I conquered as equally
paratactic as (7b).
7. b. I came, I saw, I conquered. (Caesar)
Latin is notoriously hypotatic, however, and noted for few laconic

utterances. Mongolian, likewise, can build quite short sentences, of
which we have seen such examples as (16) and (309). But it is also
quite capable of readily producing even more lengthy and complex
sentences like the one below from (243). In this case, both the English
and the Mongolian exhibit hypotactic structure, in which a structure
is subordinated to, not coordinated with, another structure. Here the
Mongolian translation follows the English structure closely. In both
cases, a sentence contains another sentence, which contains a further
sentence, but both of those included structures are subordinate to,
rather than coordinate with, the clause they are attached to. In English,
this is accomplished here by use of the complementizer that and by
the subordinating conjunction before. In Mongolian, the verb bai- is
nominalized, turning it into the infinitive or non-past verbal noun, to
which is then added the dative case, which in effect functions as a subordinator meaning when or at the time that; and bos- rise, which in
English is coordinated with went by means of and, is subordinated to
orov through use of the imperfective converbial form in -j (bosoj).
197
16. Dasdorjiin Natsagdorj 1906 ond trjee.

(Amdralyn zam, p. 8, in Yakovskaya 1976)
Dashdorjiin Natsagdorj was born in [the year] 1906.
243. Now it happened that in the early hours of Whit-Monday, before
Millie was hunted out for the day, Mr. Hall and Mrs. Hall both rose
and went noiselessly down into the cellar. (H. G. Wells, The Invisible
Man, chapter 6)
Tsagaan Sumyaa driin glo reer, ivegin Milliig bosoogi baixad
er em xor Xoll bosoj zoorindoo sem orov. (Vells 1979: 28)
309. Bi amin xn (http://duluu.blogspot.com/2006/09/blog-post_7557.html)
Im a selfish person.
Accordingly, in Mongolian, what in languages like English would be

independent sentences are often partly subsumed in other sentences. Nor
is it obvious how to count the sentence in a one-sentence paragraph.
Arguably such a sentence is as much a final sentence as an initial one.
It is also difficult to know whether to consider solely the last verb, or
to treat complexes as distinct from their component final verbs. While
some complexes are clearly not the same as their final member without
the preceding elements (for example, a -sen yum form is clearly not the
same thing as a yum when it is not preceded by -sen, nor is a -sen baina
form the same as baina), it is far from clear that all such combinations
form syntactic or semantic units distinct from their final verbs.
The value of the following figures is reduced by the lack of answers to
such questions, as well as by the small sizes of samples involved. Nonetheless the numbers are suggestive. They point in the direction of two
conclusions: first, that genre and subject matter affect the choice of tense
markers, and second that position in the paragraph does as well.
Accordingly, we would expect to find differences in affix usage relative to position in the paragraph, assuming that the paragraph reflects
discourse structure and the various endings differ functionally from
one another. And that is indeed what we do find. For example, a series
of readings in the reader by Austin et al. are historical, and are minibiographies of the khans of the period of, and preceding, the Mongolian Yuan dynasty. The first, appropriately enough, concerns Genghiz,
and is 18 paragraphs long. Of these 18 paragraphs, seven (39%) have
initial sentences ending in -v, three (16%) in -jee, four (21%) in -sen
yum, and just two (11%) in -sen. None have -lee. But consider the
comparable numbers for the final sentences of the paragraphs. Of the
18, 9, or half, have -v; five, or 26%, end in -sen yum (and one more in
-sen baina); two in -jee; and only one in -sen. Again, none ended in
198
chapter four
Table 6
initial sentence of paragraph
final sentence of paragraph
16%
0%
11%
21%
39%
14%
11%
0%
6%
26%
50%
7%
-jee
-lee
-sen
-sen yum
-v
other
-lee. (These figures are set out in table 6 below for ease in comparison.)
This is vastly too small and non-representative a sample to draw any
definitive conclusions from, because we cannot evaluate its statistical
significance, but these variations, while not spectacular, are suggestive
and invite further inquiry.26
3. The Functions of the Past Tenses in Various Genres
3.1. Meaning, Use and Genre
Consider, for example, chapter 2, BNMAU-d soyol-gegeerliin ine
baiguullaga bui bolson niigem ediin zasgiin nxtsl vrmts ontslog
(19211940), of Davaasambuus BNMAU-iin sol gegeerliin ajiliin
txen zamnal. This chapter concerns development and contains
many statements about the situation at various dates in the past. Here
(table 7) are the figures for the first twenty pages or so of the chapter. The percentages are based on the totals in the last column, and
rounded to the nearest integer.
Table 7
-v
-jee
-lee
initial
8 (9%) 25 (29%) 4 (5%)
medial
6 (32%) 6 (32%) 4 (21%)
final
1 (4%)
9 (33%) 0 (0%)
TOTAL 15 (11%) 40 (30%) 8 (6%)
-sen
-sen yum
other
0 (0%) 26 (30%) 24 (28%)

0 (0%) 3 (16%) 0 (0%)
0 (0%) 5 (19%) 12 (44%)
0 (0%) 34 (26%) 36 (27%)
TOTAL
87
19
27
133
26
Nelson et al. (1998: 118) note that in newspaper articles, the concluding sentence of each paragraph almost invariably contained the past tense form in -v.
199
A number of things are to be observed about these numbers:
-sen does not occur at all

-jee is five times as frequent as -lee and three times as frequent as -v
-jee and -sen yum are about equally frequent
other, mainly non-past sentences, occur in more than a third of
the cases
-jee is about equal in all positions, and each closely matches its overall share
-v occurs in 11% of all sentences
but 32% of middle ones
40% of -vs occur in mid-paragraph
-lee likewise, occurring in 6% of all cases
but 21% of mid-paragraph ones
50% of its examples are mid-paragraph
-sen yum is radically reduced in mid-paragraph and final sentences
other (mainly pres) is 27% over-all
but makes up 44% of finals
and 0% of mid-paragraph sentences
How, precisely, we are to interpret these fairly informal statistics is

a good, and unanswered, question, but at the very least these numbers raise questions about what factors give rise to these results and
what they have to say about the meaning and use of the tense markers. Interesting as these results are on their own, however, they take
on more significance when we compare them to a small sample of
yet another non-fiction work, Gongors (1970) Xalx tovoon. This
sample covers the first dozen or so pages (pp. 4355) of the section,
Yazguuriin mongol aimguud: Darligin, Nirun xoyor. Here (table 8)
are the numbers for this selection:
Table 8
-v
initial
medial
final
TOTAL
-jee
-lee
0 (0%) 17 (37%) 0 (0%)

0 (0%) 13 (46%) 0 (0%)
0 (0%) 9 (38%) 0 (0%)
0 (0%) 39 (39%) 0 (0%)
-sen
-sen yum
other
TOTAL
0 (0%)
0 (0%)
0 (0%)
0 (0%)
3 (6%)
3 (12%)
2 (8%)
8 (8%)
29 (59%)
12 (43%)
13 (54%)
54 (53%)
49
28
24
101
200
chapter four
Once again, these numbers are interesting. Notice:

not only does -sen does not occur at all, but neither do -v or -lee
-jee is almost four times as frequent as -sen yum
other, mainly pres sentences, occur in more than half of the
cases
-jee once again is about equal in all positions
and each closely matches its over-all share
There are significant differences from the Davaasambuu sample:
neither -v (11% in Davaasambuu) nor -lee (6%) occurs at all

-sen yum is radically reduced (from 26% to 8%)
other is increased (from 27% to 53%)
other is fairly evenly distributed through the paragraph here
which was not the case in the earlier sample
Given these differences, it might be argued that differences in individual style or some other extrinsic factor plays a role in marker choice
significant enough to account for, and thereby render insignificant,
these differences. But the figures for -jee suggest this is incorrect. In
both samples the over-all usage of this form is about a third, and it
is fairly equally distributed over the three positions, forming about a
third in each position. It is highly unlikely that this similarity is just
chance or accidental concord in style. And if that is true of -jee, it is
likely true of the other endings as well.
The pattern that emerges from these two samples, however, is not
the end of the story. The first ten pages or so of the section Amdraliin
zam of the translation of the biography of Natsagdorj by Yatskovskaya shows the following results (table 9):
Table 9
-v
-jee
initial
3 (13%) 4 (17%)
medial
7 (10%) 11 (16%)
final
2 (10%) 2 (10%)
TOTAL 12 (11%) 17 (15%)
-lee
-sen
3 (13%) 3 (13%)
6 (7%) 10 (15%)
1 (5%)
2 (10%)
10 (9%) 15 (13%)
-sen yum
other
TOTAL
0 (0%)
0 (0%)
1 (5%)
1 (1%)
10 (43%)
35 (51%)
12 (60%)
57 (51%)
23
69
20
112
201
There are several comparisons that could be made with the earlier
samples. The following are the most noteworthy results, however:
all the past tense forms appear, including -sen
-sen yum only appears once (1%), compared with 26% and 8% of
the earlier samples
-jee is about halved in over-all share, but is once again about equally
distributed
other (again, mainly pres) forms make up just over half this
sample
-lee is about twice as frequent in initial as in other positions
The effect of genre can be seen in the following (table 10) results from
a short story, Badraa by Baast, in the volume Xyaruu unasan tsagaar (1962):
Table 10
-v
-jee
-lee
initial
10 (53%) 2 (11%) 2 (11%)
medial 19 (48%) 3 (8%)
5 (13%)
final
1 (10%) 3 (30%) 4 (40%)
TOTAL 30 (43%) 8 (12%) 11 (16%)
-sen
-sen yum
other
TOTAL
0 (0%)
3 (8%)
0 (0%)
3 (4%)
0 (0%)
0 (0%)
0 (0%)
0 (0%)
5 (26%)
10 (25%)
2 (20%)
17 (25%)
19
40
10
69
Here we see quite different patterns from the earlier samples, and
especially the Davaasambuu one. There -v formed 11% of all examples;
here it is 43%. On the other hand, -sen yum, which constituted 26% of
all sentences there, does not occur at all here. The -jee marker forms
the smallest percentage of sentences of all the samples. However, the
small numbers render the statistical significance dubious at best.
While much, much more research is required to make these numbers useful, this exercise has hopefully convinced the reader of three
things, if the earlier discussion in this book has not:
the past tense markers as used in spoken Mongolian differ from
those in written Mongolian;
the past tense markers differ in their meanings and/or uses;
discourse functions of various kinds are correlated with the meaning
and/or use of the markers
202
chapter four
3.2. Diegetic and Mimetic Genres
To understand the uses of deictic and non-deictic tenses we need to

know something of the functions of the two types of tenses in discourse, for the two kinds of tenses correlate with different discourse
functions, and ultimately with different types of genres.27
Plato (Republic, book 3) distinguishes mimesis, the imitation or representation of reality in genres such as drama, from diegesis, the narrative recounting of events. The distinction relates to time in that in
diegesis the events recounted are in the past and narrative time moves
forwards, but never reaches the present, while in mimesis it is (nominally) always the present, just as in real life. Hence diegetic genres
such as the novel and the short story are typified by the past tense, but
mimetic works such as plays by the present tense.
A related, but somewhat dissimilar, distinction is made by Benveniste (1959) and by Weinrich (1964, ch. 2). Benveniste distinguishes
histoire (story) from discours (discourse). In histoire, the events
recounted are divorced from the situation of the speech act, of the
act of utterance; there is no reference to the situation that the utterer
and addressee find themselves in. Hence there is a tendency to use the
third person and non-deictic adverbial expressions like there. Temporal adverbials are anaphoric, for example, then, at that time, in the
afternoon, the following day. In discours, on the other hand, the speaker
has the intention of affecting the addressee in some way, and depends
on the fact that they are both in the same situation. Naturally references to aspects of that situation are possible. The first (referring to
the speaker) and second (referring to the addressee(s)) persons readily
occur. Adverbials may refer to the immediate situation of utterance:
here, now, today. And the tenses differ. Narrative tenses are past, distal, removed from the present: the past, the pluperfect, the future-inthe-past. Tenses in discours are present-based tenses: the present, the
future, the present perfect.
Weinrich similarly distinguishes, as the subtitle of his book indicates,
Besprochene und erzhlte Weltthe discussed and the recounted
worlds, defined in somewhat different terms than are Benvenistes
discours and histoire, but effectively pretty much the same. Like
Benveniste, Weinrich counts amongst the Tempora der besprochenen
27
This section draws heavily on Binnick (2003). For the sources of the concepts and
theories presented here, see that article.
203
Welt (tenses of the described world) the present-based tenses, and

amongst those of the recounted world, past-based ones. Benveniste
and Weinrich associate diegesis with past tenses, and the contrasting,
non-diegetic genres with non-past tenses.
Both the choice and the interpretation of an ending are sensitive to
the purpose of the utterance, and hence in the first place to the genre
of the discourse containing it. For example, storieswhich concern
events and are about what happenedare normally recounted in the
past tense, while reportswhich concern facts, what is the casein
general tend to use non-past tenses. As a result, in Mongolian, autobiography has a higher percentage of sentences in -sen (e.g., 146,
346) than many other genres, and fiction (243, 350) has many more
sentences in -vand sequences of sentences in -vthan genres that
do not in some sense tell a story. (I have underlined the -v-forms in
(243, 350).) For similar reasons, journalism has more non-past sentences (e.g., (351)) than does fiction, as has non-fiction in general
(352353).28
146. Bi Xyatadiin andun mujiin ef xotnoo 1897 onii 8 sariin 8-nd trj,
tendxiin Angli smd zagalmailuulsan. (

[1-4- ], http://www.maranata.mn/index.php?option=com_content
&task=view &id=2533&Itemid=127)
August of [thyear] 1897 and was baptized in the English church.
243. Tsagaan
white
Sumyaa dr.iin
glo
r.eer,
Monday day-gen morning dawn-instr
Mill.iig
Milly-acc
xoyor
two
Ter
the
bos.oo.gi
get up-imperfect-neg
Xoll
Hall
xor
two
ajil.tai
work-com
Tiiee
Towards there
28
bai.xa.d
be-ifvn-dat
boso.j
zoorin.d.oo
get up-impfc cellar-dat-rp
pivon.ii.xoo
beer-acc-rp
anar.iig
quality-acc
ivegin
servant
er
male
sem
quietly
z.ex
see-ifvn
em
female
oro.v.
enter-past
nuuts
secret
baj.laa.
be-past
or.son
enter-pfvn
Note the verblessness of (352353); (353) does not even have an explicit copula.
204
chapter four
xoin.oo
after-rp
untlag.iin.xaa
sleeping-gen-rp
rn.s
room-abl
lonx.oo
bottle-rp
avr.ax.iig
bring-ifvn-acc
xoyoul
the two together
mart.san.aa
forget-pfvn-rp
Xoll
Hall
avgai
Mrs.
Ug
root
xeregt
business
avgai
Mrs.
dadamgai gol
familiar
main
zor.son
aim-pfvn
xn
person
Xoll
Hall
sana.v.
think-past
bai.san
be-pfvn
bol.ox.oor
become-ifvn-instr
lonxon.d
bottle-dat
nxr
companion
n
her
yava.x
go-ifvn
bolo.v.
become-past
Tniig
That-acc
atn.ii
stairs-gen
talbai
place
giin.ii
rn.ii
d
guest-gen room-gen door
deer
on
o.tol
go-termc
yalgi ongorxoi
ajar
open-ifvn
ng
other
bai.x.iig
be-ifvn-acc
xar.aad.
gaix.jee
Xoll
look at-pfc be surprised-past Hall
tsaaa untlag.iin.xaa
further sleeping-genitive-rp
rn.d
room-dat
ge.sen
say-pfvn
gazr.aas
place-abl
or.j;
enter-impfc
n
his
Butsa.j
return-impfc
bii
there is
ile.n
select-modc
yav.tal
go-termc
n
the
lonx.oo
bottle-rp
gadaa
outside
ol.j
find-impfc
xaalgan.ii
door-gen
ava.v.
take-past
tgjee
bolt
tailaastai
unfastened
zvxn onslootoi bai.gaa.g
xara.v.
(Vells 1979: 28f.)
only
latched
be-impfvn-acc see-past
Now it happened that in the early hours of Whit-Monday, before Millie was hunted out for the day, Mr. Hall and Mrs. Hall both rose
and went noiselessly down into the cellar. Their business there was
of a private nature, and had something to do with the specific gravity of their beer. They had hardly entered the cellar when Mrs. Hall
found she had forgotten to bring down a bottle of sarsparilla from
their joint-room. As she was the expert and principal operator in this
affair, Hall very properly went upstairs for it. On the landing he was
surprised to see that the strangers door was ajar. He went on into his
own room and found the bottle as he had been directed. But returning with the bottle, he noticed that the bolts of the front door had
been shot back, that the door was in fact simply on the latch. (H. G.
Wells, The Invisible Man, chapter 6)
205
346. Teg.eed
bag.d.aa
neg dr xel.sen.
Do so-pfc teacher-dat-rp One day say-past
(The Oral History of Twentieth Century Mongolia, Choijamts;
TR060101AHistory of Ulaanbaatar 1; Interview 1; http://www
.mongolianoralhistory.org/ samples/transcriptions/TR060101A.xml)
Then one day I told the teacher. (EN060101AHistory of Ulaanbaatar 1; Interview 1English; http://www.mongolianoralhistory.org/
samples/translations/EN060101A.xml)
350. Neg
One
udaa
occasion
n.iin
xor
night-gen two
Skip
Skip
yamar
which
negen
a
minii
my
oron
place
dooguur
under
exle.v
begin-past
ge.j
say-impfc
Bi
I
yumn.aas ai.san
thing-abl fear-pfvn
or.j,
enter-impfc
ser.j,
wake up-impfc
yum
copp
ig
like
xutsa.j
bark-impfc
tniig
that-acc
duugi
silent
bai
be
zandra.v.
rebuke-past
Getel
but
ene
this
yum
thing
brtelzex
glimpse
ig
like
tsag.iin
ye.d
hour-gen time-dat
mid
hasty
bolo.v.
become-past
xara.x.aar
look-ifvn-instr
tsonx.nii
window-gen
Bi
I
tsaana yamar negen

outside which a
tniig
him (accusative)
boso.v.
get up-past
Getel
but
ene
this
ol.j
find-impfc
n Davjaa
the Davjaa
bailaa.
be-past
Xediigeer
then
bi
I
Skip
Skip
noxoi.d.oo
dog-dat-rp
imeegi,
quiet
ene
this
cin
your
Davjaa
Davjaa
erge.j
ir.sen
return-impfc come-pfvn
xel.sen
say-pfvn
bai.na
be-pres
modp
dee
modp
ge.j
say-impfc
206
chapter four
bolov
although
Skip
Skip
xuts.saar
bark-contc
l
modp29
bai.laa.
be-past
Yuu
what
bol.sn.iig
become-pfvn-acc
mede.x.iin
know-ifvn-gen
tuld
on account of
bi
I
tsonx.oor
window-instr
gara.v. (Oldrij 1980: 70f.)

go out-past
But one night, at about two a.m., Skip began to bark under my bed, as
if he were afraid of something. I woke up and told him to be quiet.
But I thought I saw something outside. I got up to look out, and it
was Peep. And though I said, Shhhh to Skip, its Peep come back,
Skip kept barking, and I had to crawl out of the window to see what
was wrong. (Aldridge 1976: 55; chapter 5)
351. Brazil.iin
ard tmen
Brazil-gen masses
Kub.iin
esreg
Cuba-gen against
alivaa
any
tremgiill.iig
buruuaa.j
bai.na.
aggression-acc condemn-impfc
be-pres
The Brazilian people condemn any aggression against Cuba.
(Montgomery 1969: 11, 123; reading #2)
352. Manai
our
il
work
xerg.iig
udirda.x
gol
cause-acc lead-ifvn main
xcin bol
Xyatad.iin
Kommunist Nam mn.
force
topic marker China-gen Communist Party copp
(Mao Tsedong 1972: 1)
The force at the core leading our cause forward is the Chinese Communist Party.
(Mao Tsedong 1966: 1)
353. Niislel n Paris xot.
Capital its Paris city
(http://mn.wikipedia.org/wiki/)
Its capital [is] the city of Paris.
In diegetic (narrative) genres there is a perspective or point of view

from which the author chooses to narrate the event, and the use of
endings is sensitive to this focalization. Narration may be non-focalized, in which case the narrator adopts the objective voice of a historian, or it may adopt the perspective of an internal focalizer, that
29
Sanders and Bat-Ireedi (1999) call l a modal particle, but Kullmann and Tserenpil (1998:348f.) treat it as a restrictive focus particle. (Cf. note 3 on p. xxi on .)
207
is, a character within the narrative (as Treasure Island is constructed

as the memoirs of Jim Hawkins and The Marvelous Mongolian is an
epistolary novel consisting almost exclusively of the letters exchanged
by Kitty Jamieson and her friend, Mnxiin Bayart). In (354), is represents the present-time perspective of the speaker, while was reflects
the past-time perspective of the subject, Columbus. The temporal perspective of the focalizing agent has sometimes been identified with
the reference time. In diegetic genres, however, there can be a conflict
between the reference time in the sense of the consciousness filtering
events and the reference time as the point reached in the narrative
progression, since the latter generally advances through the course of
the story, but the former does not.
354. Columbus was well aware that the earth {is, was} round.
3.3. Genre and Tenses

The various factors mentioned in this section result in the tenses having distinctive uses, and hence, distinctive distributions in discourse.
This provides a set of properties that serve to categorize the various
tense endings. In general:
deictic tenses should be:
preferred in genres of discourse and in mimesis (e.g., in plays)

preferred for factual (as opposed to eventive) statements
backgrounded in narrative text
preferred for stative expressions (that cannot refer to events per se)
preferred in contexts in which there is, or can be, no explicit reference time apart from the time of the eventuality or the time of the
utterance
and correspondingly anaphoric tenses should be:
preferred in diegetic, narrative genres (e.g., novels and short stories)

preferred for occurrences in narrative sequences
foregrounded in narrative text
preferred for non-stative (eventive) expressions (such as accomplishments and achievements, or episodes of states and activities)
208
chapter four
Table 11
Source
Dialogue in Amdraliin dr (p. 10)

The Oral History of Twentieth Century Mongolia:
Divasambuu
(TR060402Gandan Interview, Person 1)
(http://www.mongolianoralhistory.org/samples/
transcriptions/TR060402.xml)
Dialogue in the story Toogiid ngrlsen negen dr
(Erdene 1969: 15f.)
Non-dialogue in the story Altai (Erdene 1969: 912)
inggis Xaan (unit 21, Austin et al. 1963: 174f.),
excluding quotations
Number of
non-past tenses
in first 25
sentences
22
20
15
7
1
preferred in contexts in which there is, or must be, an explicit reference time apart from the time of the eventuality or the time of the
utterance
The non-past tense, for example, whether marked by -ne or by a present-tense copula such as yum or mn, is a classic example of a deictic
tense, since it relates the time of the eventuality directly to the speech
act time. It refers directly to the present, to now. If we examine plays
and film scripts (e.g., Amdraliin dr in Lodoi 1967), interviews (such
as the Divaasambuu Gandan interview), or even the dialogue in novels
and stories, the present (or some other tense of discours) is overwhelmingly the tense utilized. Equally natural is the use of the present tense
in the fictional correspondence in The Marvelous Mongolian and its
Mongolian translation, Gaixamigt mongol mor. The figures above (in
table 11) are for the first 25 sentences in each of the listed discourses,
and the last two are given to provide contrast with the first three.
These facts establish clearly that the non-past is principally, if not
exclusively, a deictic tense.30 In the next section we apply these criteria
30
The historical present and certain other uses of the present allow it to act like an
anaphoric tense, as in (i), but it is usually deictic.
i. Then I wake up on one of my days off . . .which was Sunday . . .and I come
downstairs and my moms [sic] boyfriend is freaking out and yelling at me. He
has such a short temper. (http://www.rottentomatoes.com/vine/journal_view
.php?s=&journalid=317231)
209
to the various past tenses of Mongolian, partly to justify the claim at

the beginning of this section that the two kinds of tenses correlate
with different discourse functions, and ultimately with different types
of genres, and partly to explore the functioning of the various tenses
in discourse.
3.4. Past Tenses in the Various Genres
We have seen that anaphoric tenses require (or at least allow) reference times distinct from both the time of the eventuality and the time
of utterance, while deictic tenses do not. Consequently, in narrative
genres, anaphoric tenses foreground an eventuality, presenting it as
an event in a narrative sequence, whereas deictic tenses background
an eventuality as a circumstance outside of that sequence. Moreover,
anaphoric tenses are typical of diegetic genres such as fiction and autobiography, and deictic tenses are typical of non-diegetic genres such as
factual non-fiction, journalism, and reference works.
We take these properties as criteria to be applied to the past tenses
of Mongolian in order (1) to justify our classification of -jee and -lee
as deictic, and -v and -sen as anaphoric, and (2) to explore the use and
interpretation of the various past tenses in differing contexts.
We saw earlier that one of the properties distinguishing anaphoric
(definite) tenses from deictic (indefinite) ones that the former require
a presupposed reference time different in principle from both the time
of utterance and that of the eventuality. In practice this means that
contexts lacking such presupposed times, for example initial position
and absolute position, are biased towards deictic tenses, and anaphoric
tenses are more likely to occur in mid-discourse. And that is precisely
what we have found, where the past tenses of Mongolian are concerned. Both -jee and -lee occur in initial and absolute position, while
-sen and -v do not.
We have also seen that there is a correlation between rhetorical function and genre. Narrative is defined by narrative sequence, narrative
advance, and we have seen that where there is a temporal sequence,
as in chronology or narrative, -v and -sen are the tenses used. On the
other hand, where facts, as opposed to events, are in question, as in
reportage, the tenses used are -jee and -lee.
Which past tenses appear, for example, in diegesis, and which in nondiegetic genres? The foreground of written narratives such as novels and
short stories is characterized by the use of -v. For example, successive
segments of dialogue in fiction are regularly marked by gev said.
210
chapter four
Chapter 6 of The Invisible Man opens with the Halls getting up; they
go into the cellar (355a). There follows a background comment on their
business there (b). Mrs. Hall realizes she has forgotten something (c)
and Mr. Hall goes back upstairs for it (d). He is surprised to see that the
strange guests door is ajar (e). He goes into his own room and finds
what he had come for (f ). Returning downstairs, he notices something
amiss (g), which arouses some thoughts (h), and recalls something (i).
Then he stops and turns back (j), knocks at the strangers door (k), and
when there was no response (l), enters (m).
355. a. Now it happened that in the early hours of Whit-Monday, before
Millie was hunted out for the day, Mr. Hall and Mrs. Hall both rose
and went noiselessly down into the cellar.
b. Their business there was of a private nature, and had something to
do with the specific gravity of their beer.
c. They had hardly entered the cellar when Mrs. Hall found she had forgotten to bring down a bottle of sarsparilla froim their joint-room.
d. As she was the expert and principal operator in this affair, Hall very
properly went upstairs for it.
e. On the landing he was surprised to see that the strangers door
was ajar.
f. He went on into his own room and found the bottle as he had been
directed.
g. But returning with the bottle, he noticed that the bolts of the front
door had been shot back, that the door was in fact simply on the
latch.
h. And with a flash of inspiration he connected this with the strangers
room upstairs and the suggestions of Mr. Thomas Henfrey.
i. He distinctly remembered holding the candle while Mrs. Hall shot
these bolts overnight.
j. At the sight he stopped, gaping, then with the bottle still in his hand
went upstairs again.
k. He rapped at the strangers door.
l. There was no answer.
m. He rapped again; then pushed the door wide open and entered.
In the Mongolian translation,31 entered (356a = 355a) is an -v form

(orov). The backgrounded sentence that follows (b = b) ends in bajlaa,
a -lee form. The report of Mrs. Halls realization (c = c) ends in an -v
31
The detailed glosses for (hm) have been added here. The passage in (355356)
was originally example (243) above, and the detailed glosses for (ag) can be found
there.
211
form, sanav thought. Mr. Hall had to go (yavax bolov in d); an -v

form is used here, probably because this necessity arose only after the
sudden realization in (c). The next sentence (e = e) reports his mental
state and thus ends in -jee: gijxjee (he) was surprised. Entering his
own room, he found (olj avav, with an -v form) the bottle (f = f ). He
noticed (xarav, again -v) something odd (g = g); then comes another
mental occurrence: he connected this observation with past events
(h = h) ends with the -jee form bodjee thought. He remembered . . .
(i = i) ends with a -laa form, sanalaa. Then he knocked at the door,
but there was no answer ( j = j, k, l). So he pushed the door open and
entered (orov) (k = m).
356. a. Tsagaan Sumyaa driin glo reer, ivegin Milliig bosoogi
baixad er em xor Xoll bosoj zoorindoo sem orov.
b. Ter xor pivoniixoo anariig zex nuuts ajiltai bailaa.
c. Tiiee orson xoinoo untlagiinxaa rns lonxoo avraxiig xoyoul
martsanaa Xoll avgai sanav.
d. Ug zorson xeregt Xoll avgaj dadamgai, gol xn bai.san boloxoor
lonxon.d nxr n javax bolov.
e. Tniig atnii talbai deer otol ng giinii rnii d yalgi
ongorox baixiig xaraad gaixjee.
f. Xoll tsaaa untlagiinxaa rnd orj; bii gesen gazraas n ilen lonxoo
olj avav.
g. Butsaj yavtal n gadaa xaalganii tgjee tailaastai zvxn onslootoi
baigaag xarav.
h. Xoll genet
uxaar.
ene baidl.iig
Hall suddenly realize-impfc this situation-acc
nx
tonights
bas
also
gii.iin
guest-gen
Teddi
Teddy
xaalga,
door
Xenfr.iin
Henfrey-gen
yaligi
insignificant
taavar
guess
bodjee.
think-past
i. Urd
oroi
gergii n
earlier evening wife
his
laan.ii
candle-gen
gerel.d
light-dat
xaalga
door
ongorxoi
opening
xoyor.toi
two-com
bai.san,
be-past
xolbon
together
tnii
bar.j
bai.san
that-gen carry-impfc be-pfvn
tgjsen.iig Xoll
bolt-acc Hall
sana.laa.
think-past
j. Xoll xeseg zuur yaa.x
ur.aa
Hall a while
do what-ifvn happen-impfvn
todorxoi
distinctly
olo.x.gi
find-ifvn-neg
212
chapter four
zogso.j
bai.sn.aa
lonx
stand-impfc be-pfvn-rp bottle
bar.saar
butsa.j
carry-contc return-impfc
g.sn,
do for someone else-past
xn.ii
person-gen
ng
other
tog.vol
xariu alga.
knock-condc reply none
k. Daxin tog.ood
d.ii
n
Again knock-pfc door-acc the
d.iig
door-acc
tele.n
nee.n
widen-modc open-modc
oro.v.
enter-past
If this passage is typical, there is very nearly, if not completely, a correlation between foregrounding and the use of -v on the one hand, and
backgrounding and the use of -jee and -lee on the other, just what we
would expect if the former is an anaphoric tense and the latter two
deictic, in the senses in which we have been using these terms.
In non-fiction, again as one would expect, factual statements tend
to use -lee and -jee, while past events in sequence are recounted using
-v. Chronologies, for example, often use -v. Thus most of inges xaany
txen on daraalal (http://www.maranata.mn/index.php?option=com_
content&task=view&id+1305&Itemid=125) consists of a list of events
in chronological order, identified by year, and expressed in sentences
which use -v; some of the early entries are given in (357):
357. 1164 on
1164 year
(xx biin
(blue monkey
jil):
Temjin
year) Temjin
gurvan nas.tai
three
age-com
bai.v.
be-past
1164 (blue monkey year): Temjin was three years of age.
Temjin .ii
ix d
Joi Xasar
tr.v.
Tamjin-gen big younger brother Jochi Xasar be born-past
Temjins older younger brother Jochi Xasar was born.
1165 on
1165 year
(xxgin
taxia
jil):
(bluish-grey chicken year)
Temjin
Temjin
drvn
four
nas.tai
bai.v.
age-com be-past
1165 (bluish-grey chicken year): Temjin was four years old.
1166
1166
on
year
(ulaan noxoi jil):

Temjin tavan
(red
dog
year) Temjin five
nas.tai
age-com
213
bai.v.
be-past
Temjin.ii
Temjin-gen
xoyordugaar
second
d
younger brother
Xaigun
Xachigun
tr.v.
be born-past
1166 (red dog year): Temjin was five years of age. His second younger
brother Xachigun was born.
A chronology of Japanese history at http://www.mn.emb-japan.go.jp/

mn/japan_info/explore_japan/history.htm likewise uses -v forms (a
sample was given in 245).
245. 710 Niislel xotiig Nara ruu iljlev.
710. They moved the capital to Nara.
752 Todaiji sm dex Ix Buddag bteej duusav.
752. They finished erecting the Great Buddha of the Todaiji Temple.
794 Niislel xotiig Kioto ruu iljlev.
794. They moved the capital to Kyoto.
The -sen form is sometimes similarly used, as in this portion (244)

of the chronology at http://edu.olloo.mn/modules.php?name=Today
news&mm=08:
244. 8 sar.iin
31-n.d
bol.son
il yavdal
8 month-gen 31st-dat happen-pfvn event
Events which took place on the 31st of August
1302 on.d:
Frants
1302 year-dat France
ba
Sitsild xoorondoo
and Sicilians between
an.ii
dain.iig
zogso.x.oor
toxirolts.son.
religion-gen war-acc stop-ifvn-instr agree-past
1302: France and the Sicilians agreed to stop their war of religion.
1674 on.d:
Rod-Ailenda.d
1674 year-dat Rhode Island-dat
/ANU/ Indian.uuda.d
(USA) Indian-people-dat
arxi
xudalda.x.iig
xoriglo.son.
liquor
sell-ifvn-acc prohibit-past
1674: In Rhode Island (USA) they prohibited selling liquor to Indians.
The study of the pragmatics of tense in written text and spoken discourse
in Mongolian is just beginning, however, and much more research is
required before a comprehensive account can be achieved.
REMARKS IN LIEU OF A CONCLUSION

The present work set out specifically to justify the claim that at the
heart of the past tense system of Khalkha Mongolian and of other
closely allied Mongolian dialects and languages is an opposition of
evidential and inferential past tenses similar in general to that found in
such Turkic languages as Turkish. More generally, it sought to investigate the relationship between the various past tense markers, and,
incidentally, adjudicate between the conflicting claims that the endings
can optionally be exchanged for one another at the discretion of the
speaker or writer, and that they do indeed differ from one another and
are not freely interchangeable.
Where the spoken language is concerned, in addition to the opposition of evidential (-lee) and inferential (-jee), two other distinctions
between this pair of endings were found. (The inferential ending, by
the way, is also mirative, i.e., used to report something newly discovered; what the relationship of inferentiality is to mirativity in Mongolian was not investigated.)
The first of these is that of proximality and distality. The evidential ending is proximal; it serves to connect the eventuality (event or
state) referred to in the sentence to the immediate speech act situation.
Where it is used for distant past events, removed in time from the
present, it is nonetheless linked to the present situation in some way.
For example, if the speaker says that he or she read this book when
they were young, the book is within the speech act situation, it is here,
and the fact that the speaker read the book in the past is in some way
relevant to what is the case at the present time. The other endings, with
the exception of -v in questions (where it functions as a version of -lee,
which cannot itself appear in real, information-seeking questions),
are all distal, and concern matters separated in time from the present.
The proximal ending may also be used as a present or future, that is,
as a non-past, but once again it serves to link the situation referred to
in the sentence to the present situation, unlike the non-past ending
-ne, which, in its actual present use, is distal, concerning a situation
separated in time from the present, and not especially linked to the
present situation.
216
remarks in lieu of a conclusion
The second additional distinction is that between anaphoric and

deictic tenses. Deictic tenses simply relate an eventuality to the deictic
centre (roughly, the time of the speech act). In regard to this distinction, the endings -jee and -lee do not contrast, as both are deictic. Anaphoric tenses are like anaphoric pronouns in requiring antecedents,
specifically what are called reference times. In narration, the reference
time for a clause or sentence may be provided by the time of the eventuality reported in the preceding clause or sentence. Each event in a
narrative sequence follows immediately on the preceding one. (What
immediate means in this context is, however, dependent on the context and a number of other pragmatic factors. Thus in the case of Caesars boast Veni, vidi, vici I came, I saw, I conquered, a considerable
amount of time presumably passed between each pair of these events.
If I say I went home, I changed into casual clothes, I had dinner, the
pace of events is clearly much more rapid.)
Because anaphoric tenses depend on some contextual time, they
are called definite. Barbara Hall Partee (1973) famously observed that
I didnt turn off the stove does not mean I never turned off the stove,
only that at a certain given time I failed to do so. Deictic tenses are
indefinite, since they neither require nor point to a certain time. The
present perfect of European languages, for this reason, has sometimes
been called the indefinite past tense, the regular preterite tense being
definite.
The perfective participial ending -sen, often (but probably erroneously, in light of what has been said here about its relationship to the
imperfective participle) reported to replace the other endings under
negation, in fact functions, when used without a copula as the main
predicate of the sentence, as an alternative past tense to all the others,
with its own character. Although it can be used to recount ones own
experiences, as in autobiographical accounts, and to that extent is evidential, it is distal, and so contrasts (in this use) with both -jee (which
is inferential or mirative) and -lee (which is proximal).
It has traditionally been noted that the -v past is largely restricted
in the modern spoken language to questions, but in the case of writing is regarded as the major tense marker. This characterization is not
completely correct, but is important as the most obvious difference
between spoken and written Mongolian tense usage. It became obvious in the course of the research for the present book that the tense
system of spoken Mongolian is not the same as that of written Mon-
217
golian. (These labels of spoken and written should not be taken too
seriously, for spoken Mongolian can be represented in writing, and
informal writing approximates to speech in many ways, while written Mongolian can be spoken, and formal speech may approximate to
the written language. Furthermore, a mixture of features of both styles
can be observed in electronic communications such as text messaging
and Web pages on the Internet.)
In fact, the kinds of uses and interpretations which characterize any
of the various past tenses in conversational speech differ from those
the ending in question shows in writing, not just -v. It is true that the
evidential/inferential distinction is maintained in writing (though -jee
may be replaced with -sen baina, and other complex forms, both evidential and inferential, also are used, for example -sen yumthe use
and interpretation of these complexes has not been investigated as part
of the current study), but although the proximal/distal opposition of
-jee and -lee is maintained, the deictic centre is not a given, as it is in
oral communication, and often these endings are defined as proximal
or distal relative to a time which is not the actual present, the time of
utterance or (in the case of writing) the time of interpretation. In such
usage, these tenses function like anaphoric tenses rather than deictic
ones. It is this usage which led some grammarians to equate -jee to
the pluperfect. This usage is found, for example, in the background of
narration. Circumstances taking place at the same time as, or in some
way linked to, the associated foregrounded event, use -lee, while those
which are in the history of that event use -jee.
Foregrounded events are recounted using anaphoric tenses, and
they require definite tenses and are naturally distal as well. Especially
in objective, factual, third person, historical accounts, writing uses
the neutral, colourless -v. But speech uses -sen in this role. Thus
these two endings contrast as non-evidential, non-inferential, and definite (anaphoric) tenses with the deictic tenses, but also as distal with
the proximal -lee, though admittedly -sen must in some cases be characterized as evidential. In general, however, it can be said that spoken
-v is a form of -lee, but written -v a form of -sen. (And despite what has
sometimes been written, the sometimes-evidential, often-neutral -sen
is not just the inferential -sen baina with the copula omitted.)
The discussion in chapter I had already demonstrated the problems
with the traditional semantic theory of the tenses, which distinguished them according to temporal (tense) and aspectual differences
218
of meaning. Chapters II and III explored, justified, and illustrated

the distinctions of use and interpretation outlined above in these
remarks.
Sodnomdorj, my native-speaker guide through the thickets of the
Mongolian tense system, set out a challenge with his claim that the
endings all mean the same thing and are optionally interchangeable.
This sort of suggestion is to be found in Ramstedts work (1902) as
well. When put to the Intuition Test, however, the distribution of
the tenses was shown to be neither whimsical nor optional, but dependent in some way on the context. This fact was reconciled with Ramstedts and Sodnomdorjs observations thus: the endings do mean the
same thing, they are, after all, all just past tense endings. But though
that, in and of itself, means that they are freely interchangeable, and
as regards their contributions to the meanings of the sentences containing them they therefore differ in no way, they differ pragmatically,
that is, how they are used by the speaker or writer and interpreted by
the listener or reader.
Crucial to their use and interpretation is context, which at the narrowest means the immediate situation of utterance (at least in the case
of speech), and the co-textthe speech preceding the utterance in
question, and the writing surrounding the passage of text in question.
But at its broadest, context includes everything the speaker knows, and
all that he or she presumes that the addressee knows.
A separate set of factors in tense choice (or interpretation) is the
function of the utterance. For example, neither -jee nor -lee can occur
in real questions. The questions they occur in are employed with
other purposes in mind than seeking a yes or no, or the answer
to a WH question like yamar which? or xen who?. Facts and background information require precisely these deictic tenses, while the
recounting of events (as in foregrounded narrative) can no more use
these tenses than can real questions.
The functions of utterances involve a number of interrelated categories and levels. For example, temporal relations provide cues to rhetorical functions. The sequence The ship grommed. It vlurped. reveals
the role that real-world knowledge plays in interpretation. The use of
the nonsense words grom and vlurp prevents us from employing the
kind of common sense that tells us that in The Titanic sank. It hit an
iceberg, the second sentence recounts a previous occurrence to that in
the first sentence, and therefore is some kind of background informa-
219
tion such as the cause of that subsequent (and consequent) occurrence. In contrast, The Titanic hit an iceberg. It sank, our sense tells
us that if the second sentence is non-narrative, it must represent one
of the types of rhetorical relations in which the accessory information
concerns a following, rather than a preceding, time. Where ambiguity
is possible, we can use an explicit marker of precedence, such as the
pluperfect: The ship grommed. It had vlurped. Or an expcit marker
of subsequence, such as the conditional tense: The ship grommed. It
would vlurp. In a given context, the apparent rhetorical function may
indicate the temporal relationship, or vice-versa.
Temporal relations and rhetorical relations are important because
they function to construct discourses and texts. Here there are three
different, but concurrent and mutually-interactive levels of structural
coherence. Temporal relations yield linguistic coherence. Deictic tenses
require an appropriate deictic centre, anaphoric tenses an appropriate reference time. Tenses can also serve to create temporal references
which can serve as reference times. Rhetorical relations yield intentional coherence. The sequence The Titanic sank. It had vlurped is
temporally coherent, since the pluperfect takes as its reference time a
time immediately following the past time denoted by the past tense in
the preceding sentence. But since we have no idea what vlurping is,
we can only assume that vlurping is the kind of thing that can cause
a ship to sink. And finally, well-formed language requires attentional
coherence. To change the subject, for example, there are certain rules
of the conversational game which must be followed.
In addition to these textual functions, there are others. But in each
case, there is a rich, complex interplay of purpose, context, and meaning to construct larger units (for example, conversations) from smaller
ones (such as utterances). Markers such as tense endings must interact
with the meanings of content words like verbs and nouns to establish
the appropriate meaning relationships in each context, as the conversation, discourse, text, etc., develops.
Needless to say, the investigation of the use and interpretation of
such markers as tense endings is as complicated as it is interesting
and revealing, and where the Mongolian tense system is concerned,
it is not surprising, given how little attention has been paid by linguists to (both structural and functional) units of language larger than
the sentence, that the present work has raised many more questions
than it has answered. But one can hope that it has made grammarians,
220
linguistic scholars, teachers, and students of the language aware of how

inadequate the traditional grammars have been on the subject of the
tenses, and has pointed the way towards future research for those who
may wish to pursue the questions raised here.
One may also hope that it may help the non-native-speaker to more
correctly use and interpret the past tenses of the language. Many of
the nuances of this rich language are simply lost to those who know
only the -v past.
APPENDIX
The passages used in the Reversal Test

. 67

(bajlaa). 5 , 60 ,
500- .
.
.
(bajlaa). (no longer available)

?
1942
.
(bajlaa). (www.olloo.mn/modules
.php?name=News&file=print&sid=43454)
2005 , ,
(-jee).

,
. 20042005 ,
(-jee). (no longer available)
,
,
20002002 ,

2004 11.0 . ( 1.8)
9.5 (-lee).
(www.nso.mn/v3/download_data.php%3Ftype%3Dreview%26year
%3D2005%26file%3Drep_dec_2005.pdf )
222
appendix
, ,
,
,
(-ee). ,

.1
-
,
(-lee).

(-lee). (origo.mn/24tsag/2007/02/17/5451)
1876
(-jee). ,
(bajlaa). -

(-lee).
,

. 1877
(-jee). (mn.wikipedia.org/wiki/
__)
1
The passage with this spelling is no longer available, but the same passage with a
similar, non-standard spelling can be found at http://www.olloo.mn/modules.php?na
me=News&file=print&sid=16776 and in standard spelling at http://www.forum.mn/
res_mat/MongoliaCorruptionAssessmentFinalReportCompleteMN.pdf.
LIST OF WORKS CITED

Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y., and R. M. W. Dixon (eds.). 2003. Studies in Evidentiality.
Typological studies in language, 54. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Aldridge, James. 1974. The Marvelous Mongolian. Boston: Little, Brown. Reprinted,
1976, New York: Bantam Books.
Altangerel, Damdinsuren. 1998. Angli-Mongol Tol/English-Mongolian Dictionary.
Ulaanbaatar: Interpress.
Austin, William M., John G. Hangin, and Peter M. Onon. 1963. Mongol Reader. Uralic
and Altaic Series, 29. Bloomington: Indiana University Publications.
Baast, Bxiin. 1962. Xyaruu unasan tsagaar. Ulaanbaatar.
Beffa, Marie-Lise and Roberte Hayamon. 1975. Elments de grammaire mongole. Paris:
Association Jean-Favard.
Benveniste, mile. 1959. Les rlations de temps dans le verbe franais. Bulletin de la
Socit de Linguistique de Paris 54: 6982. Reprinted, 1966, in Problmes de linguistique gnrale, 237250. Paris: Gallimard.
Binnick, Robert I. 1979. Past and Perfect in Modern Mongolian. In Studies on Mongolia: Proceedings of the First North American Conference on Mongolian Studies,
edited by Henry G. Schwarz, 113. Bellingham: Western Washington University.
. 1990. On the Pragmatic Differentiation of the Mongolian Past Tense. Mongolian Studies 13: 4756.
. 1991. Time and the Verb. New York: Oxford University Press.
. 2003. Tense and Aspect. In Handbook of Pragmatics Online, edited by Jef Verschueren, Jan-Ola stman, Jan Blommaert and Chris Bulcaen. Amsterdam: John
Benjamins.
Blsing, Uwe. 1984. Die finit indikativischen Verbalformen im Kalmckischen: Untersuchung ihrer Anwendung und ihrer Abgrenzung voneinander. Stuttgart: Franz
Steiner.
Bosson, James E. 1964. Modern Mongolian. Uralic and Altaic Series, 38. Bloomington:
Indiana University Publications.
Botne, Robert. To appear. Remoteness Distinctions. In The Oxford Handbook
of Tense and Aspect, edited by Robert I. Binnick. New York: Oxford University
Press.
Bulchuluu. 1988. egn yogur kelen- il ge-yin ag-un kelberi (togain glek
tlb) [Tense forms of the verb in the Jegn Yogur language] in Tum-datu ulusun Monggol kele biig-un sinjilegen-n erdem sijilgen- glel-n tegbri (nige)
[The Collective Articles of the Association of Mongolian Language Researchers of the
Peoples Republic of China (one)], edited by The Association of Mongolian Language
Researchers of China. Beijing: Minority Nationality Press.
Chenggeltei. 1981. Odo ye-yin Mongol kelen- i [Modern Mongolian Grammar].
Kkeqota: Mongol-un arad-un keblel-n qoriya.
Chung, Kyung-Sook. 2006. Korean Evidentials and Assertion. Presented at WCCFL
[West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics] 25. (Abstract available at http://
depts.washington.edu/lingweb/events/wccfl25/abstracts/ChungK.html; paper available at http:// http://www.lingref.com/cpp/wccfl/25/paper1438.pdf.)
. 2007. The Korean Suffix -Ess: The Perfect and the Indirect Evidential. Journal
of Language Sciences 14: 137158. (Available at http://www.alskorea.com/report/
143/14307.pdf.)
. 2007a. Spatial deictic tense and evidentials in Korean. Natural Language
Semantics 15: 187219.
224
list of works cited
Clauson, Gerard. 1956. The case against the Altaic theory. Central Asiatic Journal
2: 181187.
Comrie, Bernard. 1985. Tense. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Davaasambuu, P. 1990. BNMAU-iin sol gegeerliin ajiliin txen zamnal. Ulaanbaatar:
Ulsiin xevleliin gazar.
Dobu. 1983. Menguyu Jianzhi [A Concise Grammar of Mongolian]. Beijing: Minzu
Chubanshe.
Doerfer, Gerhard. 1963. Bemerkungen zur Verwandtschaft der sog. altaische
Sprachen. In Trkische und mongolische Elemente im Neupersischen, Bd. I: Mongolische Elemente im Neupersischen, 51105. Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner Verlag.
. 1985. Mongolica-Tungusica. Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz.
Dugarova, G. S. 1991. Glagolnyi vid v sovremennom Mongolskom iazyke [Verbal aspect
in the contemporary Mongolian language]. Novosibirsk: Nauka, Sibirskoe otd-nie.
Engkebatu. 1985. Dagur kelen-u ge kelelge-in materiyal. Language Materials for
Dagur, 1. Huhhot: Inner Mongolian Peoples Press.
Erdene, S. 1969. driin od. Ulanbaatar: Mongoliin zoxioldiin xevlel.
Friedman, Thomas L. 2007. The World is Flat: A Brief History of the Twenty-First
Century. Toronto: Douglas & McIntyre. Originally 2005, New York: Farrar, Straus
and Giroux; expanded editions 2006, 2007.
Friidman, Tomas L. [Thomas L. Friedman] 2007. Delxii brnxii bi: 21-r zuunii
daryarlagdsan delxii. Ulaanbaatar: Numun Dalai. Translation of Friedman
(2007).
Galsang, S. 1981. Guanyu Eyu he Mengkuyu de Shitai Tedian Wenti [About the
features of tense in Russian and Mongolian]. Mengguyuwen Yanjiu Cankaoziliao.
[Materials for Mongolian Language Studies] 5: 1015. Huhhot: Institute for Mongolian Language Studies, Inner Mongolia University.
Gongor, Dgeriin. 1970. Xalx tovoon I: Xalx mongoluudiin vg deedes ba xalxiin
xaant uls (VIIIXVII zuun). [Khalkha history I: The forefathers of the Khalkha Mongols and the kingdom of Khalkha (8th17th centuries).] Ulaanbaatar: injlex Uxaanii
Akadyemiin xevlex ildver.
Grnbech, Kaare and John R. Krueger. 1955. An introduction to classical (literary)
Mongolian. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.
Hangin, John G. 1968. Basic Course in Mongolian. Uralic and Altaic Series, 73. Bloomington: Indiana University Publications.
. 1976. Intermediate Mongolian. Uralic and Altaic Series, 125. Bloomington: Indiana University Publications.
Hashimoto, Kunihiko. 1993. The Domain of Past Tense: On the meanings of the past
tense suffixes in Mongolian. Gengo Kenkyu 104: 120. In Japanese.
Itani, Reiko. 1994. A relevance-based analysis of hearsay particles: Japanese utterance-final tte. UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 6: 379400.
James, Deborah M. 1982. Past Tense and the Hypothetical: A Cross Linguistic Study.
Studies in Language 6: 375403.
Janivdorj, C. and B. Ragaa. 1967. Mongol xelnii g zi [Morphology of the Mongolian
language]. Ulaanbaatar: BNMAU gegerliin yaamnii xevlel.
Jiang, Zhao-zi and Chang-zhong Shao. 2006. Markedness in Universal Grammar and
Second Language Acquisition. US-China Education Review 3. Available at http://
www.teacher.org.cn/doc/ucedu200608/ucedu20060815.pdf; retrieved May 2, 2011.
Johanson, Lars. 2003. Evidentiality in Turkic. In Aikhenvald and Dixon (eds.),
273290.
. 2006. Indirective sentence types. Turkic Languages 10: 7389.
Johanson, Lars and Bo Utas (eds.). 2000. Evidentials: Turkic, Iranian and Neighboring
Languages. New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Kasyanenko, Z. S. 1968. Sovremenii mongolskii iazyk [The contemporary Mongolian
language]. Leningrad: Izdatelstvo Leningradskogo Universiteta.
list of works cited
225
Kim, Mary Shin. 2005. Evidentiality in achieving entitlement, objectivity, and detachment in Korean conversation. Discourse Studies 7: 87108.
Koshmider, E. [Koschmieder, E.] 1962. Turetskii glagol i slavyanskii glagolnyi vid [The
Turkish verb and Slavic verbal aspect]. Moscow Izd-vo Inostr. Lit.
Kullmann, Rita and D. Tserenpil. 1996. Mongolian Grammar. Hong Kong: Jensco.
Lamb, Sydney M. and E. Douglas Mitchell (eds.). 1991. Sprung from Some Common
Source: Investigations into the Prehistory of Languages. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Lodoi, J. 1967. Xavtgai tsagaan ulz. Ulaanbaatar: Mongoliin zoxioldiin xoroonii
xevlel.
Luvsanjav, oi., L. Tsetsegmaa, and Ts. Erdenetsetseg/Choi. Lubsangjab, L. Tsetsegma,
and Ts. Erdenitsetseg. 1988. Mongol angli yarianii devter/Mongolian English Phrase
Book. Ulan Bator: Joint Editorial Board of textbooks and Journals attached to Ministry of Public Education, MPR.
Luvsantseren, P. 1972. Usnii ergleg buyuu Borzoonii yavdal. Ulaanbaatar:
BNMAU Ardiin Bolovsroliin Yaamnii Xevlel.
Malchukov, Andrej L. 2000. Perfect, evidentiality and related categories in Tungusic
languages. In Johanson and Utas (eds.), 441470.
Mao Tsedong. (Mao Zedong, Mao Tse-tung) 1966. Quotations from Chairman Mao
Tse-tung. Peking: Foreign Languages Press.
. 1972. Darga Mao Tszedungijn gijn tver. Beijing: Gadaad xelnii xevleliin
gazar.
McCready, Eric and Norry Ogata. 2007. Evidentiality, modality and probability. Linguistics and Philosophy 30: 147206. Available at http://www.cc.aoyama.ac.jp/user/
t00586/evid22.pdf.
Menges, Karl H. 1975. Altajische Studien II: Japanisch und Altajisch. Wiesbaden: Franz
Steiner Verlag.
Miller, Roy Andrew. 1971. Japanese and the Other Altaic Languages. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
. 1991. Genetic connections among the Altaic languages. In Lamb and Mitchell
(eds.), 293327.
Montgomery, David C. 1969. Mongolian Newspaper Reader. Uralic and Altaic series,
102. Bloomington: Indiana University Publications.
Mushin, Ilana. 2001. Evidentiality and Epistemological Stance: Narrative Retelling.
Pragmatics & Beyond, new series, 87. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
. 2001a. Japanese reportive evidentiality and the pragmatics of retelling. Journal
of Pragmatics 33: 13611390.
Nasunbayar et al. 1984. Orin a-un Mongol kele [Modern Mongolian Grammar].
Kkeqota: Mongol-un arad-un keblel-n qoriya.
Nedjalkov, Igor. 1997. Evenki. London/New York: Routledge.
Nelson, Diane, T. T. L. Davidson, Narantuya, Narmandah, and Judith Nordby. 1998.
Four Past Tense Morphemes in Khalkh Mongol. Leeds Working Papers in Linguistics and Phonetics 6: 115131.
Oldrij, Jeims. 1980. Gaixamigt mongol mor. Ulaanbaatar: Ulsiin xevleliin gazar.
Translation of Aldridge (1974).
Partee, Barbara H. 1973. Some structural analogies between tenses and pronouns in
English, The Journal of Philosophy 70: 601609.
Poppe, Nicholas N. 1951. Khalkha-mongolische Grammatik. Wiesbaden: Otto
Harrassowitz.
. 1954. Grammar of Written Mongolian. Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz.
. 1955. Introduction to Mongolian Comparative Grammar. (Mmoires de la
Socit Finno-Ougrienne, 110.) Helsinki: Socit Finno-Ougrienne.
. 1955a. Mongolische Volksdichtung. Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner.
226
list of works cited
. 1960. Vergleichende Grammatik der altaischen Sprachen. Teil I. Vergleichende

Lautlehre. Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz.
. 1965. Introduction to Altaic Linguistics. Ural-altaische Bibliothek, 14. Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz.
. 1970. Mongolian Language Handbook. Washington: Center for Applied
Linguistics.
Ramstedt, G. J. 1902. ber die Konjugation des Khalkha-Mongolischen. Mmoires de
la Socit Fenno-Ougrienne, 21. Helsingfors: Socit Fenno-Ougrienne.
. 195256. Einfhrung in die altaische Sprachwissenschaft. Edited by Pentti Aalto.
Helsinki: Suomalais-Ugrilainen Seura.
Sadovyanu, Mixail. 1967. gllegd. Ulaanbaatar: Ulsiin Xevleliin Xereg Erxlex
Xoroo.
Sandag, Ts. 1967. Gadaadiin uran zoxiol [Foreign literature]. Ulaanbaatar: Gegeerliin
yamnii xevlel. Second edition.
Sanders, Alan J. K. and Jantsangiin Bat-Ireedi. 1995. Mongolian Phrasebook. Hawthorn, Australia: Lonely Planet.
. 1999. Colloquial Mongolian: The Complete Course for Beginners. London and
New York: Routledge.
Saneev, G. D. 1964. Sravnitelnaia grammatika mongolskix iazykov: Glagol [Comparative grammar of the Mongolic languages: The verb]. Moscow: Izd. Nauka.
. 1973. Modern Mongolian Language. Moscow: Nauka. Translation by D. M. Segal
of Sovremennyi Mongolskii Iazyk, Moscow: Nauka, 1959.
Saruul-Erdene, M. 2004. Mongoliin nuuts tovoo. Ulaanbaatar: Urlax Erdem xevleliin
gazar.
Schlepp, Wayne A. 1983. Classical Mongolian: Grammar. The Mongolian Project, 2.
Toronto: Department of East Asian Studies, University of Toronto.
Schmidt, I. J. 1831. Grammatik der mongolischen Sprache. St. Petersburg: Kaiserliche
Akademie der Wissenschaften. Reprinted 1968, Leipzig: Zentral-Antiquariat der
DDR.
Sengee, D. 1961. Ayuu. Ulaanbaatar: Ulsiin xevleliin xereg erxlex xoroo.
Sodov, D. (ed.). 1967. Gadaadyn uranzoxiolyn unix biig [Foreign literature reader].
Ulaanbaatar: BNMAU gegeerlijn jaamny xevlel.
Song, Jae-mog. 1997. Tense, Aspect and Modality in Khalkha Mongolian, Ph.D.
dissertation, SOAS, University of London.
. 2002. A Typological Analysis of the Korean Evidential Marker -te-. Eoneohag
32: 147164.)
Stivenson, R. L. 1975. Erdene Bulsan Aral. Ulaanbaatar: BNMAU ardiin bolovsroliin
yamnii xevlel. Translation of R. L. Stevensons Treasure Island.
Street, John C. 1963. Khalkha Structure. Uralic and Altaic Series, 24. Bloomington:
Indiana University Publications.
Svantesson, Jan-Olof. 1991.Tense, Mood and Aspect in Mongolian. Working Papers,
Lund University 38: 189204.
evernina, Z. V. 1958. Analitieskie glagolnye formy v sovremennom mongolskom
jazyke [Analytic verbal forms in the contemporary Mongolian language]. In
Filologija I istorija mongolskix narodov, Moscow: Iz. Vost. Lit., 82100.
Tenny, Carol L. 2006. Evidentiality, Experiencers, and the Syntax of Sentience in
Japanese. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 15: 245288. Available at http://www
.linguist.org/Evidentiality_JEAL.pdf.
Todaeva, B. X. 1964. Baoanskii iazyk [The Baoan language]. Moscow: Izd. Nauka.
. 1973. Mongorskii iazyk [The Monguor language]. Moscow: Izd. Nauka.
Tserenchunt, L. and Sharon Luethy. 2000. Sain Baina Uu?: Mongolian Language Textbook One. Ulaanbaatar: Urlax Erdem. Second printing, 2006.
. 2005. Sain Baina Uu?: Mongolian Language Textbook Two. Ulaanbaatar: Urlax
Erdem. Second edition.
list of works cited
227
Ujeyediin Chuluu [Chaolo Wu]. 1994. Introduction, Grammar, and Sample Sentences
for Dagur. Sino-Platonic Papers, 56. Philadelphia. Available at http://www.sinoplatonic.org/complete/spp056_dagur_language.pdf.
. 1998. Morphological Studies of the Mongolian Verb. University of Toronto doctoral dissertation.
Vangan, L. 1967. Jiriin xms. Ulaanbaatar: Mongoliin zoxioldiin xoroonii xevlel.
Vells, Xerbert [H. G. Wells] 1979. l zegdeg xn. 2nd edition. Ulaanbaatar: Ulsiin
xevleliin gazar. Translation of Wells, The Invisible Man (1897).
Vendler, Zeno. 1957. Verbs and Times. The Philosophical Review 66: 143160.
Reprinted 1967 in Linguistics in Philosophy, Ithaca: Cornell University Press,
97121.
Vietze, Hans-Peter. 1974. Lehrbuch der Mongolischen Sprache. Leipzig: VEB Verlag
Enzyklopdie. Second edition; fifth edition, 1988.
Vovin, Alexander. 2005. The End of the Altaic Controversy. Central Asiatic Journal
49: 71132.
Webber, Bonnie. 1988. Tense as Discourse Anaphor. Computational Linguistics 14:
6173.
Weiers, Michael. 1969. Untersuchungen zu einer historischen Grammatik des prklassischen Schriftmongolisch. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.
Weinrich, Harald. 1964. Tempus: Besprochene und erzhlte Welt. Stuttgart: W. Kohlhammer. Second edition, 1971. Translated 1971 as Tempus: le funzioni dei tempi nel
testo, Bologna: Il Mulino; 1973 as Le Temps: rcit et commentaire, Paris: Seuil.
Wells, H. G. 1897. The Invisible Man. London. (Quotations taken from 1957 Pocket
Books [New York] edition.)
Wu, Chaolo [Chaolu Wu, Chuluu Ujeyediin]. 1995. Mongolian Past Tense Markers
and Their Usage. Mongolian Studies 13: 85112.
. 1996. A Survey of Tense Suffixes in Mongolian Languages. Central Asiatic
Journal 40: 5686.
Yatskovskaya, K. N. 1976. Dadorjiin Natsagdorj. Ulaanbaatar: Ulsiin xevleliin gazar.
Translation of the biography Dadoriin Natsagdor. Moscow: Nauka, 1974.
INDEX
-be, see -v
-bei 8 n. 6
-ei 8 n. 6
-ix- xviii, 51, 141, 144, 144 n. 25
-ixsen 141, 143f.
-cki 11 n. 13
-deg 5, 29
-dg 37f.
-ee 4f., 9, 9 n. 10, 10 ex. 3b, 26f., 29f.,
see also -eegi
replaces -v 92102
-eed 5
-eegi 3133, 31 n. 51, 32 n. 52, 45,
92, 97
vs. sengi 31, 31 n. 51, 45, 97
-eegi baina 32 n. 52
-ge 9, 29 n. 48
-gsen 29 n. 48
-gi not 4f., 31f., 45, 92
-j (converb) 4f., 5 ex. 2c, 172
-j (Kalmuck) 7 n. 5, 38
-j (= -jee) 8, 51, 93f.
-jei 8 n. 6
-jana 37f., 37 n. 57
-jee xii, 6, 7 n. 5, 8f., 11 n. 15, 12 n. 16,
13, 15, 17, 19, 21f., 3337, 40, 55f., 61,
63f., 141144, 163, 165, 209, 212
as indirect past tense 56, 66, 143
as inferential past tense 40, 5054,
6270, 77, 102, 144
as present perfect 16, 35, 62
conclusive 194
in folk tales 161, 161 n. 3
in paragraphs 169, 171, 192, 197200
in questions 51, 9395, 97
in the first person 52f., 6569, 70
n. 18
in the second person 5153, 65, 67
marks a profound regress 15, 38, 40
marks the distant past 15, 33, 36 ex.
16, 36 ex. 61, 41 n. 62, 81
marks the recent past 15, 34f., 63
metric theory of 3337
mirative 144
modal accounts of 5459
synonymous with -sen baina 140145
vs. -lee 41, 46, 81, 102, 116, 120
vs. -sen 10 n. 11, 65, 77

vs. -v 19, 47, 163
-k 8 n. 6
-ki 11 n. 13
-l (= -lee) 8, 46, 73 n. 20, 93
-la (Kalmuck) 7 n. 5, 37f.
-le 8 n. 6, 23 n. 39
-lee xii, 6f., 7 n. 5, 9, 11 n. 15, 12
n. 16, 13, 13 n. 17, 15, 17, 19, 22f.,
25, 3338, 45, 45 n. 70, 54f., 61, 81,
97, 142, 145f., 165, 172, 185, 209,
212
as a non-past tense 12, 19, 22, 43
as direct past tense 56, 66
as evidential past tense 15, 23 n. 35,
4047, 64, 7074, 76, 88, 102
as future tense 34, 43 n. 65, 8288
as present perfect 16, 19, 22, 63
in paragraphs 168, 171, 193,
197200
in questions 45, 73, 9395, 97
in responses 73, 73 n. 20
in the first person 71, 73, 76
in the second person 70 n. 18,
7173
marks a distant past 36
marks a shallow regress 15, 38, 40
marks the imminent/near future
24f., 85
marks the immediate/recent past 24,
33, 63, 80f., 86, 88f., 91
metric theory of 3337
modal accounts of 5459
non-conclusive 193f.
vs. -jee 41, 46, 81, 102, 116, 120
vs. -ne 82, 85
vs. -v 47, 70 n. 17, 73, 99101
vs. -sen 73 n. 20, 79, 97
-legei 8 n. 6
-lge 11 n. 13, 33 n. 55, 36
-lgei 8 n. 6
-luqa, -luqai 8 n. 6
-ne xviii, 1719, 21 n. 34, 37f., 48, 208
as future tense 82, 8587
as general present tense 37 n. 57
vs. -lee 82, 85
-seer xxi, 1, 3f.
230
index
-sen (= asan) 28, 93

-sen baina 62, 74 n. 22, 138142
in paragraphs 197
synonymous with -jee 61 n. 2, 68
n. 14, 140145
-sen xii, xvii, 5, 6 ex. 3a-b, 7, 9, 12 n.
16, 13, 26f., 32, 56, 61f., 7479, 81, 95,
102, 116, 142, 161, 164, 203, 209, 213,
see also -sengi
as short form of -sen bai- 138f.
as spoken form 93n. 45
conclusive 194
disconnects from thread 195
evidential 77, 79
in paragraphs 197200
in questions 46, 50 n. 74, 73 n. 20,
74, 9399, 101f.
in response to -sen question 101f.
in response to -v question 100f.
in speech 7479, 144
in the first person 76
in writing 7479
modal neutrality of 61
negated 31f., 61, 74, 92, 142
neutral in evidentiality 102, 116, 148
vs. -ee 26
vs. -jee 10 n. 11, 65, 77
vs. -lee 73 n. 20, 79
vs. -sen baina 138140
vs. -v 26, 49, 61, 74, 92102, 95
n. 49, 99, 102, 116, 135
-sen yum 138, 141f., 171, 195, 197200
-sengi 31f., 61, 74, 92, 97, 142, 171
vs. -eegi 31, 31 n. 51, 45, 97
-sengi yum 171
-sn (Kalmuck) 7 n. 5, 37f.
-tel 6 ex. 3d
-v xii, 6, 7 n. 5, 9, 11 n. 13, 12 n. 16,
13, 15, 17, 25, 37, 46f., 101 n. 64, 95,
102, 116, 142, 161, 164f., 168, 203,
209, 212f.
as a written form 93n. 45
colourless 46, 50, 102
evidential 47, 70 n. 17
in narrative 57, 164, 177, 185, 212
in paragraphs 171, 197200
in questions 50 n. 74, 70 n. 17, 73,
73 n. 20, 94f., 99102, 132135
in response to -sen question 97
in response to -v question 101,
132134
in speech 7479, 92102, 132, 144
in statements 132146
in writing 7479, 132138, 144
marks distant (remote) past 34

marks future time 48
marks recent past 15, 95 n. 49, 102
marks hypothetical suppositions 17,
48
modal neutrality of 46, 61, 66
modality of 4650
neutral in evidentiality 102, 116
non-past uses of 48
not negated 92102
vs. -jee 19, 47, 163
vs. -lee 47, 70 n. 17, 73, 99, 101
vs. -sen 26, 49, 61, 74, 93, 95 n. 49,
99, 102, 116, 135
-v (Kalmuck) 7 n. 5, 93
-x xvii, 5, 6 ex. 3c, 85, 93
-y 18 n. 24
a- be 28, 140
accidental form 56
accommodation 178
actio 18
actio imperfecta 17f.
actio perfecta 17
addressee 72f.
adverbials 35, 81
converbs as 5
Afro-American Vernacular English
139, 139 n. 19
ajee was 28
Aktionsart 24, 180
Aldridge, J., see Magnificent Mongolian,
The
Altai 208
Altaic languages 34, 41
Altangerel, D. 10 n. 11
Amdraliin dr 208
amnesia 65, 68
anaphoric tenses 13, 102111, 144,
162, 164, 207, 209
anaphors, binding of temporal 149
anchoring 149f.
answers to questions 95, 97, 98 n. 56,
99
anteriority, relative 37f.
aorist 21 n. 32
Aristotle 24 n. 42
asan 28, 93
aspect 1420
aspectual class 24
asterisk 53 n. 77, 67 n. 13
attentional coherence 158, 191, 219
Austin, W. et al. 141f., 171, 197, 208
autobiography 164, 203
index
awareness, coming into
Ayuu 132
50f., 53f., 63
Baast, B. 168, 201

background(ing), see grounding
Badraa 201
bai-, bayi- be xxi n. 1, 45, 140
baij(ee) (there) was 120, 161
bailaa contrasts with baiv 47
Baoan 3
Bat-Ireedi, J., see Sanders, A. and
Bat-Ireedi, J.
be going to 8587
be/ve xvii, 46, 95
Beffa, M.-L. and Hayamon, R. 19
n. 26, 19 n. 31, 21, 21 n. 32, 26 n. 44,
33 n. 55, 45, 63, 63 n. 5, 80, 92
Benveniste, E. 202f.
besprochene Welt 202
bi- 45n. 70
bii xxi n. 2
bilee is, was 45, 45 n. 7071, 94 n. 47
binding of temporal anaphors
149152
Binnick, R. xi, 24 n. 42, 40f., 44, 54
biography 164f., 170, 200
biz 41, 87
Blsing, U. 2, 7 n. 5, 17f., 17 n. 23, 37,
37 n. 57
BNMAU-iin sol gegeerliin ajiliin txen
zamnal 198
bol- become 6
bolai is 140
bolon as well 6, 6 ex. 3g
Bonan 3
Bosson, J. 19, 63, 132
bounded occurrences 187
bounding point 23
bui is 140
Bulchuluu 48
Buriat 2, 12, 48, 113
bgd and 5, 6 ex. 3f
b- 5
blge is, was 45 n. 70, 140
(particle) xxi n. 3
Caesar 16, 171, 179, 196, 216
certainty of past occurrence 15
Chakhar 2
Chenggeltei 23, 23 n. 39, 36, 57, 89
China Radio International 132
Chinese 196
Chinese/Mongolian phrase-book 99
chronologies 212
231
Chuluu, U. xii, 1, 7 ex. 4, 7 n. 5, 8

n. 6, 10, 10 n. 11, 11, 16, 18 n. 24,
2325, 23 n. 3739, 24 n. 40, 29, 33
n. 55, 3436, 36 n. 56, 44, 48, 49
n. 73, 5154, 53 n. 78, 55 n. 79, 56, 56
n. 80, 5759, 58 n. 82
critique of modal accounts 5459
i you xviii
inges xaany txen on daraalal 212
inggis Xaan 208
Clauson, G. 3 n. 1
coherence 147161, 188, 202
coherence relation 157159, 188190,
192, 219
commenting on ones own experience
68, 72
completed past action or occurrence
15, 20, 22, 25, 27, 34
Comrie, B. 13 n. 17
conclusiveness 191194
consequence 159
contextual time 30
contingency 87
continuative converb xxi, 1, 3f.
converbs 5, 152
as adverbials 5
copula deletion 139
copular particle xxi n. 2, 5, 165
copula, verbal noun as predicate
with(out) 9, 27f., 30, 138, 165
Dagur (Daur) 3, 12, 48
Davaasambuu, P. 198, 200f.
Dayaar Mongol 164
decisive form 55
dee 126
definite past tense 19
definite tenses 13, 105111
degrees of remoteness 13, 33, 37
deictic centre 80, 126, 145
deictic tenses 13, 102111, 144, 161,
164, 168, 177, 202, 207209
diegesis, diegetic genres 202f., 206f.
direct past tense 56, 66
discours 202, 207f.
discourse, types of 37f.
discourse coherence 147161, 202
discourse functions 3740, 57, 79
n. 29, 147213, 147161, 195, 201f.
distality 12, 15, 34, 7982, 91, 145f.
Divaasambuu 208
Dobu 23 n. 3739
Doerfer, G. 3 n. 1
Dongxiang 3
232
index
Dugarov, G. S. xii, xv, xvi, 15, 38, 39

n. 60, 40
durative Aktionsart 37 n. 57
duusfinish xviii
grounding 16, 38, 148f., 171188, 207,

209, 212
Grnbech, K. and Krueger, J. xvii
n. 1, 63, 89
echo question 93f., 93 n. 46

edge/odu-a a ziaqu khelber 19 n.
31
effectif non pass 19 n. 31
emphatic forms 126, 129
Engkebatu 48
epistemic modality 87
Erdene, S. 208
Erdene bulsan aral, see Treasure Island
ert urid tsagt once upon a time 161
erzhlte Welt 202
es, ese not 45
evidential past tense xii, 4046, 7074
evidentiality/inferentiality, opposition
of 6180
explanation (rhetorical relation) 158f.
expressive function 147f.
extended past tense 15, 21
habitual verbal noun 29

Hangin, J. 19f., 33f., 33 n. 55, 43, 50f.,
54, 63f., 80, 92, 95
Hashimoto, K. xvi, 3436
headlines 161, 164168
histoire 202
historical matter 165, 197
historical present tense 208 n. 30
hypotactic language, hypotaxis 129,
160f., 160 n. 2, 196
hypothetical fact 47
fiction 164, 203

finite indicative verbs 18, 2025, 31
firmness of the statement 22
first person in questions 74
focalization 206f.
focus 57
focus particle xxi n. 3, 57
folk tales 38, 161
foreground(ing), see grounding
Foreign Literature Reader 10 n. 11,
170
frequentative verbal noun 29
futurate constructions, English 85, 85
n. 38
future hypothetical 48
future participle 21 n. 34, 83
future tense 87, 202
ga (subject marker) 189 n. 23
Galsang, S. 53f.
ge- say, think, quotative auxiliary 46,
51
gej, ge that 55 n. 7
gene says, they say 143f., 161
general present tense 37 n. 57, 82
genre 13, 144, 198213, 164, 201207,
209
gev said 209
Gongor, D. 142, 199
Gongor, S., see Sodnomdorj Gongor
immediate future tense 82

immediate past tense 34, 80
imminent future 24
imparfait 106f., 115, 147, 182184
imperfect aspect 5, 11, 18f., 18 n. 25,
22, 26
imperfect present tense 19 n. 28
imperfect tense(s) 25, 115, 182
imperfective aspect 5 n. 4, 23, 27, 172,
188
imperfective converb 4f., 5 ex. 2c, 172
imperfective participle 29, see also -ee
imperfective past tense 182
imperfective present tense 18
imperfective verbal noun, see -ee
imperfectivisches prsens 18, 19 n. 30
imperfectivisches prteritum 19 n. 27
imperfektnyi preterit 19 n. 27
imperfektnyi prezens 19 n. 28
indefinite tenses 13
indicative tenses 18, 2025, 31
indirect past tense 44, 56, 66
indirect quotation 54
inferential, biz as 41
inferential past tense xii, 40, 41, 46,
5054, 6270
infinitive(/future verbal noun) 21
n. 34, 82
Inner Mongolian dialects 2, 12
intention(ality) 86, 93
intentional coherence 157f., 219
interjections 126
internal focalizer 206
Internet, language of the 14, 116,
122132
Intuition Test 117120, 218
Invisible Man, The 124, 163, 171f., 210
index
ireedin tsagt ilt ner
is going to 8587
83
James, D. 48
Janivdorj, C. and Ragaa, B. 15, 19
n. 31, 23 n. 35
Japanese 3, 42, 189 n. 23
Jiriin xms 95, 99
Johanson, L. 41
Johanson, L. and Utas, B. 41
journalistic language 132, 142, 164,
167, 170f., 198 n. 26, 203
Kalmuck 2, 7 n. 5, 12, 48, 113
Kara, G. xix n. 3
Kasyanenko, Z. S. 15, 21 n. 32, 34, 63,
80, 83, 92
keeps on xxi n. 1
Khalkha 1f., 3, 7, 113f.
Known Past Tense 44, 140 n. 20
Konverbum abtemporale xxi n. 1
Korean 3, 41f.
Koschmieder, E. 15
Krueger, J. xvii n. 1, 63, 89
Kullmann, R. and Tserenpil, D. xii,
xviii n. 2, xix, xxi n. 13, 11, 11 n. 13,
14, 14 n. 19, 32, 4446, 44 n. 68, 45
n. 69, 51, 73 n. 20, 75, 86, 93, 95, 97,
101, 130, 140, 206
l (particle) 206
Legden, T., see Tserenchunt, L.
Leuthy, S., see Tserenchunt, L., and
Leuthy, S.
levels of usage 113116, 114 n. 1,
122132, 141
Life of Pi 181
linguistic coherence 149157, 219
linking consonant xvii, 5 n. 3, 9 n. 9
linking vowel 8 n. 7
Lodoi, J. 208
Lonely Planet Mongolian phrasebook
11 n. 15
Luvsanjav et al. 32 n. 52, 93, 97, 99
Manchu 3
markedness 25, 25 n. 43, 114 n. 1
mart- forget 52, 66, 69
Martel, Y. 181
Marvelous Mongolian, The 124, 179f.,
184f., 207f.
Menges, K. 3 n. 1
metalinguistic function 147
metric tense system 33 n. 54
233
metric tenses 13, 13 n. 18, 33, 79 n. 30

metric theories of the tenses 3337,
79 n. 30
Miller, R. 3 n. 1
mimesis, mimetic genres 202f., 207
mirativity 12, 144, 215
modal account of the tenses 40, 66
modal distinctions 11, 41
modal particle xxi n. 23, 206
modal uses 17
modality 87, 184
modi, modus 17f., 40
Moghol 3
Mongolian language 2, 62, 196f.
Mongolic languages 110, 12, 13 n. 18,
61
Monguor 3
Montgomery, D. 132146, 164, 167,
171
mn xxi n. 2, 128 n. 10, 208
narration, narrative 13, 16, 37f., 57,
163f., 177f., 188, 202, 207, 209
narrative advance 151, 159, 179f.
narrative tenses 19, 202
narrator, omniscient 124
Nasunbayar et al. 33 n. 55, 34
nedavno zaveriveesja proedee
vremja 80
negation 27, 30f., 45, 105
Nelson, D. et al. xii, xiii, 11 n. 14, 12
n. 16, 13 n. 17, 41, 55 n. 79, 58,
58 n. 82, 70 n. 17, 79 n. 30, 93 n. 45,
114 n. 1, 144 n. 25, 161 n. 3, 198
n. 26
neutral past tenses xii, 12
neutralization 108110, 145
nidonon last year 34 ex. 56b
nom verbal du pass fini 26
nomen futuri 83
nomen imperfecti, see -ee
nomen perfecti, see -sen
nominalization 5
non-focalized narrative 206
non-narration 13
non-neutral (past) tenses xii
non-past tenses 164, 208
not yet 33
novels 37f., 209
odoo now 43 n. 65, 126, 145
odoo ba ireedi tsagiin dagavar 19 n. 31
odoo tgssn tsag 80
odoo tsag zaax xelber 19 n. 31
234
index
Oirat 2, 12, 113

igdr, cgedr yesterday 24, 81
driin Sonin 164
g- give; do for someone else 4 ex. 1c
nggeren tegsegsen ca 19 n. 26
nggeren tegsegsen ca-tur ilet
ner-e 26 n. 44
nggeren rglzilegsen ca 21 n. 32
ngrn tgssn tsag 19 n. 26
ngrn tgsson tsagt ilt ner 26 n. 44
ngrn rgeljilsen tsag 21 n. 32, 63
n gl this morning 145
ndr today 81, 126, 145
paragraph 168, 171, 191f., 191 n. 25,
195198
paratactic language, parataxis 160f.,
160 n. 2, 196
parfait immdiat 33, 80
Partee, B. H. 105 n. 66, 216
participles 5, 8, 2537
pass antrieur 147, 182
pass compose, pass simple 62, 115,
121, 147
pass prolong 21 n. 32
past 23 n. 36
past assertive tense 44
past imperfect tense 19f., 19 n. 27, 63
past participle 27, see also -sen
past perfect tense 19f., 19 n. 26, 19 n. 28
past progressive tense 172, 188
past tense 19, 56, 202
forms xi, 1, 7
in -jee, see -jee
in -lee, see -lee
in -sen, see -sen
in -v, see -v
past tenses 58, 171, 201f.
and grounding 171188
and temporal reference 161171
and topical threads 188195
in questions 92102
in the spoken language 61111
in the written language 113146
in various genres 198213
the problem of the 1014, 19 n. 28
past-based tenses 202f.
perfect aspect 18 n. 25, see also
perfective aspect
perfect participle, see perfective verbal
noun
perfect tense(s) 15, 25
perfect verbal noun, see perfective verbal
noun
perfective aspect 5 n. 4, 27, 188
perfective converb 24 n. 41
perfective participle 29
perfective past tense 182
perfective present tense 18
perfective verbal noun xvii, 8, 8 n. 8,
27, 139f.
perfectivisches prsens 18, 19 n. 29
perfectivisches prteritum 18, 19 n. 26
perfectum 11
perfektnyi preterit 19 n. 26
perfektnyi prezens 19 n. 28, 89
performative utterances 82 n. 31
perspective 79 n. 29, 206f.
phases 152f.
Plato 202
pluperfect 15, 79 n. 29, 102, 202
Poppe, N. xviii, xxi n. 1, 3 n. 1, 7 n. 5,
8 n. 6, 1417, 18 n. 24, 19 n. 2630,
21, 21 n. 33, 23, 23 n. 35, 26 n. 44, 28
n. 45, 33 n. 53, 43, 48, 56, 63, 78, 82
n. 32, 83, 89, 92f., 139, 161
post-terminal viewpoint 38
praesens imperfecti 19 n. 28
praesens perfecti 19 n. 28, 89
praeteritum imperfecti 19 n. 27
praeteritum perfecti 19 n. 26
pragmatic particle 126
pragmatic theory of the tenses 11,
3759, 120, 213
pragmatics identified with modality 121
present imperfect tense 19f.
present participle 27
present perfect tense 15, 16, 19
n. 2829, 20, 23, 35, 62, 8993, 95, 202
-eegi as 32
-lee as 19, 23
French 62
German 11, 16
present progressive tense, English 37
n. 57
present result 16
present tense 18 n. 24, 82, 168, 170,
202, 208, see also -ne
-jana as 37 n. 57
-lee as 13 n. 17, 18
historical 208 n. 30
present-based tenses 202f.
present-future tense, see -ne
present-future verbal noun xvii, 5, 6
ex. 3c, 83, 85, 93
preterite tense(s) 22, 26, 47
priastnaya forma nastoyaegobuduego vremeni 83
progressive construction, English 4,
5 n. 4
index
prolongation in time 20f., 21 n. 32, 63,
63 n. 5
pronoun, second person xviii
proedsee dlitelnoe vremya 21 n. 32,
63
proximal past tense(s) 34, 80
proximality 12, 7982, 91
proximity, relative 13, 13 n. 17
prsens imperfecti 18, 19 n. 30
prsens perfecti 18, 19 n. 29, 22
prteritum imperfectum 11 n. 13
prteritum imperfecti 19 n. 27, 63
prteritum perfecti 18, 19 n. 26
question particle 8, 46, 93, 95
questions 45f., 50 n. 74, 74, 74 n. 21,
92102
Ramstedt, G. 3 n. 1, 10, 11 n. 13,
1620, 17 n. 22, 19 n. 2627, 19 n.
2930, 22f., 23 n. 35, 25, 26 n. 44, 33,
37, 43, 63, 82f., 89, 117, 218
and modal account 37, 40, 42, 47
warns against his labels 20
recall 53, 94 n. 47
recency of discovery 64f.
recent past tense 15, 33 n. 55, 63
recent past time 24, 31, 34
reference time 13, 102105, 144,
149151, 158, 161163, 177180, 207,
209
registers 113116, 114 n. 1, 122132,
141
regress 15
Reichenbach, H. 104
relative past meaning 8, 26
reminders 70, 72
remoteness, degrees of 13, 33, 33 n. 54,
37
responses to questions 95, 97, 98 n.
56, 99
repetition 63 n. 5
repetition of the verb 97, 99
Republic, The 202
restrictive focus particle 206
result state 153
Reversal Test 120, 221f.
rhetorical function 209
rhetorical relation 157159, 188190,
192, 219
Rudnev, A. D. 55
Sandag, Ts. 142
Sanders, A. and Bat-Ireedi, J. xii,
xviii, xix, xxi n. 1, xxi n. 3, 8 n. 8, 9
235
n. 10, 11 n. 15, 14, 19 n. 29, 31 n. 51,

32 n. 52, 83, 93, 97, 206 n. 29
Saneev, G. D. 10 n. 11, 16, 19
n. 2627, 19 n. 2930, 89
saya, sayaxan, sayi just (now) 24, 43
n. 65, 44, 90f., 145f.
sayaxan ngrsn tsag 80
sayaxan tgssn tsag 33 n. 55
sayiqan nggeregsen ca 33 n. 55
Schlepp, W. 15, 41 n. 62, 44, 89
Schmidt, I. 11, 11 n. 13
scope 29f., 29 n. 46, 34, 46, 105
Secret History of the Mongols, The 192
seit since xxi
semantic theories of the tenses 11,
1437
semantics identified with tense/
aspect 121
Sengee, D. 132146
sentence adverbials 104
short stories 37f., 209
simple past tense 15, 182, 185, 188
since xxi
Sodnomdorj Gongor xii, xvii, 11
n. 14, 30 n. 49, 43 n. 65, 47, 64 n. 9,
65, 68, 68 n. 14, 71, 73f., 74 n. 21,
7779, 81, 85, 96 n. 50, 97 n. 51, 120,
140f., 143, 193f.
written tenses do not differ from
one another 117, 117 n. 23, 119,
218
Sodov, D. 10 n. 11, 170
Song, J. xii, 11, 41, 46, 66f., 102
spoken and written language 113132,
201
Sprachbund 3
Stevenson, R. L., see Treasure Island
still not 33
story 202
Street, J. xviii, xix n. 2, 15, 16, 26, 35f.,
41, 41 n. 61, 4346, 43 n. 66, 45 n.
7071, 56f., 62, 82 n. 32, 92f., 95, 102,
139
style, stylistic features 12 n. 16, 47, 114
n. 1, 126, 129
surcompos tenses 147
Svantesson, J.-O. xii, 36, 44, 56
evernina, Z. V. 15, 17
ine baiin 168
(dee) 126
ta you xviii
taar- match 4 ex. 1b
Tamiriin ber 95, 99
tempora (indicativi) 17f.
236
index
temporal adverbials 202

temporal coherence 160
temporal reference 161171
temporal relations 219
tense 1320, 24
tenses xi, 19, 202f.
Tserenpil, D., see Kullmann, R. and
Tserenpil, D.
terminal converb 5
text 147161
textual functions 147f., 219
theme 13, 189f., 189 n. 23
thread, see topical thread
tiim(ee) yes 94, 126f., 128 n. 11
Toogiid ngrlsen negen dr 208
topic 189 n. 23
topical thread 13, 158, 188195, 191
n. 25
transliteration 65 n. 10, 100 n. 61, 124f.
Treasure Island xi, 65, 124, 207
Tserenchunt, L. xix n. 3, 11, 31, 61
n. 1, 64, 69, 70 n. 18, 73, 73 n. 20, 74
n. 23, 75 n. 24, 94 n. 47, 95 n. 49, 98
n. 5556, 118f., 126 n. 8, 140 n. 20,
141, 144 n. 25
Tserenchunt, L., and Leuthy, X xii,
xiii, 11, 11 n. 14, 14, 14 n. 19, 31, 41,
4446, 5052, 62 n. 4, 69, 117, 130,
140
Tu 3
Tunghsiang 3
Tungusic languages 3, 42
Turkic languages 3, 41
Turkish 3f.
evidential/inferential in 41, 45, 50,
61, 64
udaqu soon 24
Ujeyediin Chuluu, see Chuluu, U.
unbounded occurrences 187
Unknown Past Tense 44, 51, 140
unt- fall asleep, sleep 52, 66, 69
usages, varieties of 14
Utas, B. 41
uu/ 8, 46, 93, 95
uxaan ald- lose consciousness 66
gi without, not, no 31f., 92, 94f.
l, l not 45
nen 132146, 167, 171
Vangan, L. 70, 95
variation 114, 123f.
Vendler, Z. 24 n. 42
Vendlerian class 24
verbal nouns 5, 8, 26
in questions 30
predicative 5, 9, 27, 27f.
verbs of motion 25
verification questions 74 n. 21, 93
vertical script written Mongolian 2
Vietze, H.-P. xix, xxi n. 1, 26 n. 44,
33, 43 n. 67, 63f., 63 n. 67, 80, 83,
92, 95
Vovin, A. X. 3 n. 1
wa (topic marker) 189 n. 23
warnings 48
Weiers, M. 8 n. 6, 18 n. 24
Weinrich, H. 202f.
Wells, H. G., see Invisible Man, the
WH questions 101 n. 64, 218
will 87
witnessed occurrence 15
written tenses 116122, 132146
Wu, C., see Chuluu, U.
Xaltarx 168
Xalx tovoon 199
Xuvia Bodogid 70, 99
Xyaruu unasan tsagaar
Yatkovskaya, K. N. 200
Yellow Uygur 48
yum xxi n. 2, 164, 208
168, 201

The Past Tenses of The Mongolian Verb. Meaning and Use

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Past Tenses of The Mongolian Verb. Meaning and Use

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Past Tenses of the Mongolian Verb

Artemis Alexiadou, University of Stuttgart, Germany

The titles published in this series are listed at brill.nl/ealt

The Past Tenses of the

This book is printed on acid-free paper.

For Sodnomdorj Gongor

I. The Problem of the Mongolian Past Tenses ...........................

II. Use and Interpretation of the Past Tenses in the Spoken

III. Use and Interpretation of the Past Tenses in the Written

IV. The Discourse Functions of the Tenses .................................

Remarks in Lieu of a Conclusion ...................................................

do primarily with their literal, context-free meanings in terms of tense

Hashimoto (which, despite its title, is in Japanese, and accompanied

CONVENTIONS AND TRANSCRIPTION

In the glosses, the terms and abbreviations following the hyphens

conventions and transcription

3739). Although somewhat arbitrary, these labels generally reflect its

In the present work, affixes containing vowels are represented by their

conventions and transcription

is not infrequently written in the Latin alphabet and such examples

conventions and transcription

THE PROBLEM OF THE MONGOLIAN PAST TENSES

the problem of the mongolian past tenses

on the analysis of the corresponding verb forms of the languages in

related Mongolic languages, we have occasion as well to refer to at

Combinations of auxiliaries or copulas with other verbal forms mark

the problem of the mongolian past tenses

Mongolian verbs today have at least four different verbal nouns or

In addition to these complexities, there are those presented by the

the problem of the mongolian past tenses

Because of vowel harmony, each ending in a typical modern Mongolic

The -jee ending is unusual in not undergoing vowel harmony. Thus

the problem of the mongolian past tenses

-ge/-a (= Khalkha -/-/-/-, -aa/-ee/-oo/-).9 This is usually

Consequently, following the lead of some grammarians, the perfective

1.2. The Problem of the Past Tenses

There has been a wide divergence of opinion regarding almost every

the problem of the mongolian past tenses

the problem of the mongolian past tenses

and where the speaker is uttering the sentence in question.17 When

the problem of the mongolian past tenses

Extended quotations in translation here are mine, unless otherwise noted.

What Dugarova is suggesting is that these markers form part of

Translation by Jan Schallert, thanks to Christina Kramer.

the problem of the mongolian past tenses

endings -ne (the present-tense, i.e. the non-past or present-future),

Ramstedt suggests designating them not tempora (tenses), but rather

the problem of the mongolian past tenses

Thus, following Ramstedt, the -v past, referred to simply as the past

As has already been suggested, Ramstedt explains these labels poorly

Nonetheless there has been a tendency by later scholars to elaborate

the problem of the mongolian past tenses

As a matter of fact, the -jee past, supposedly imperfective in aspect, can

the problem of the mongolian past tenses

Accordingly he glosses example (17) below thus: (er) stirbt schon,

Others,37 however, have viewed the form, in contrast to Ramstedts

Chenggeltei (1981: 298, in Wu 1995: 97) sees the form as indicative of

Wu points out (1995: 98) that the interpretation of -lee depends on

Examples from Wu (1995: 97).

the problem of the mongolian past tenses

Further, with verbs of motion, -lee generally refers to the imminent

the problem of the mongolian past tenses

In keeping with the agglutinative character of the Mongolian language,