Vol.63 , No.3(2015)212山中 行雄「パーリ語の未来形について ： 過去文脈で使用される未来形を中心にして」

(142)

Jburnal

ofindian

andBuddhist StudiesVbl.

63,

No. 3,March 2015

Notes

on

the

Problematics

of

the

Future

Forrns

in

Pali,

Regarding

Their

Preterit

and

Modal

Functions

YAMANAKA

YukiO

Introduction

We

occasionally come across an -issa-

future

used

in

the_pastsense or context

in

the

Pali

canon likethis:

JaIV 177,22'

napubbe dhanarpesissamp.

Formerly Ididnet _pursuewealth.

The

adverb, _pubbe, expresses the

_past

time.

But

the

finite

verb, esissai?i,

is

future.

In

fact,

thisusage of the

future,

ignoring

thesequence of thetenses,

is

not exceptional. And

it

seems thatthis_phenomenon was a subject of discussionamong theindigenousPali

gram-marlans:

Sadd818,29sutta 894

maiantare tampkiilavacanicchdyam atite pibhavissanti.

"`According

toanother view

(the

suMxes oD thefuturearealsoused inthesense ofa _preteritwhen

thereisthewish touse thattime

(i.e.

futuretime)."

(Konow:

1937,234)

In

Sadd,

however,

Aggavarpsa

himselfrejects

thisview ofanother

(matantara)

and finally

triestoexplain that-issam _{ending can}

_be

_{used as substitution of-im. ending}

(Sadd

821,3-5).Apart

from

the correctness of

his

explanation, we can _perceive

from

this_passagethat

this

_phenomenon

was a controversial matter.

Some modern scholars also

discussed

thisusage of the

future

fbrms.

L)

They

refer mostly

tothe

fbllowing

Panini

sntra:

PEniniIII2.l12

abhijnnyd-vaeane lr;.

InVerbindungmit einem Verbum inderBedeutung ,,daran denken,sich erinnern" steht indiesem

NII-Electronic Library Service

NotesontheProblematicsoftheFutureFormsinPfili,RegardingTheirPreteritandModa1Functions

(Yl

YAMANAKA)(143)

Thisstttra indicatesthat

the

first

future

(

=

ig't

= -sya-future) stands

in

connection with a

verb

in

thesense of`;to think,toremember." It,

however,

remains unclear whether this

sU-trashould relate tothespecial usage ofPali -issa-future,

because

its

examples lacktheverb

of "to think,remember," which seems, according tothesittra,to

be

an obligatory element

in

order to use the

future

in

the

_past

sense.2)

In

a concise manner, themorphological explanation ofthisspecialfuture

is

already _given.

And

in

Pali

this

is

also valid fbrthe first_person,butwe do need to examine the examples

of thesecond and third_persons.

Outline

of

the

Etymological

Explanation

Inthe

fbllowings

we sum up themorphological explanation:

As

the

future

ending of 1

sg. -issapa,resembles thatof the sigmatic aorist, -isam, theyare used

interchangeably

with

each other,

i.e.,

fut.

-issai?i

is

used

in

the_pastsense and aor. -isam

in

the

future

sense:

See

Uberblick

_9465;

Alsdorf

(1936,

323-324)_;

G

_g159;

P

_g5I6.

InPaliprosedy,the

future

fbrm

used

in

the_pastsense occurs mostly

in

1sg.And, as we

could easily

_presume,

the_geminate-ss-of-issarp makes a longsyllable: We

have

actually

some exarnples

in

which the

future

forms

are used fbrthe metrical adjustment

(Sn

446

nadhigacehissapa; Sloka.

C

_£

Ilj

II

393,9

nhahigamim. .

Ja

IV

330,19'pavissam;tristubh.

Pv

230 sanryamissaip; gloka).3)

Nevertheless,

-issam occurs also without metrical _ground

(Dhp

153

sandhavissapa; Sloka.

Ja

IV

177,22"esissam;

Sloka)

.

In

thosecases, -issam

does

not contribute tothe

improvement

of themetre of theverses.

Furthermore

we

find

-issapa

also

in

_prose

(M

III

247,2amafifiissam, not conditional). TherefbreSmith

(1952,

182)

doubts

strongly whether the_geminate-ss-could becaused by themetrical adjustmenL

Further

investigation

is

stillneeded inorder toattestthatthisconfusion of the simple -s-with the_gerninate-ss-should

have

ranged over thesecond and third

_persons.

`) InPaliat

least,

we

find

a

1arge

number of examples of thesecond and third_persons,which

does

not

have

anything to

do

with thismorphological confusion.

On

the

Examples

of

the

Second

and

Third

Persons

The

examples

in

thesecond and third

_persons

need not only themerphological, butalso

the

semantic analysis, fbrthey obviously _playa semantic role inthe sentences: InVin,the

future

fbrms

denoting

the_pastsense are used, when the

Buddha

blarnes

his

disciples

fbr

-(1")Notes

on_theProblematiosoftheFutureFormsinPfi1i,RegardingTheirPreteritandModalFunctions

(Yl

YAMANAKA)

improper

acts.

On

thespot, the

Buddha

declares

theirimproper acts _{as offense.}

Namely

those

future

fbrms

occur often

in

introductory

stories

(vatthu)

fbrthe

Vin

rules.

Context:A monk _{calledDhaniya,}deceivingan administrator, _getspiecesof wood, which belongto

thekingBimbisara.Because efthis improperact, Dhaniya _{Qffends people}inMagadha.This_reaches

Buddha's ear. VinIII44,34-35

saccarp kiratvam, Dhanlya,rafifio ditrfiniadinnarp adiyiti?

"Is ittrue,as issaid, Dhaniya, that _you havetaken _piecesofwood belongingtothekingwhen they

were not _given

(tD

_you)?"

(Homer:

Vin_trans.I₇₀₎

The action,

_getting

_pieces

of wood, hasalready

happened

atthetimewhen the Buddha

in-quires

of Dhaniya about hisact. Consequently the Buddha asks

him

with

_preterit

adlyi.

Dhaniya

answers with "saccaip"

and then the

Buddha

blarnes

Dhaniya

in

the

fo11owing

manner:

VinIII44,38-45,1

kathafihindma tvarp,maghapurisa, rafifio ddrtiniadinnam adtyissasi.

"How can _you,fbolishman, takethe_piecesofwood belongingtothe kingwhen they hayenotbeen

giventoyou?!"

(Horner:

Vintrans.I71)

The

Buddha uses

fut.

Eidlyissasi,when he blames Dhaniya,_although

Dhaniya's

improper

act

has

already

happened.

Thisusage ofthe futureisalso

discussed

in

Sadd:

Sadd 818,6sutta 893

kathafihinimiavogenditite'nagatassevapayogo.

Inthe_pastsense inthe connection with

[the

_phrase]kathafihinama, the usage

[ofthe

verb form]

islike

[that]

ofthe future.

Seemingly,Aggavarpsa admits thatthe _{usage of} the

future

fbrms

in

the

_past

_sense

is

al-lowed

inthe combination with kathafihinama, when thisisused inthe sense of "blame'7

(nindevacane,

Sadd

818,8).

But he doesnot admit itin_combination with _{a single} "nama"

(Sadd

818,17ff).

As Bechert

(1953,

65)

indicates,

thisexample from Vin can linktoPaptniIII

3.144

and

the

following

sDtras:

PaniniIII3.144

ldmve"ttelin'-ig(-au.

InVerbindungmit einem Pronomeninterrogativiumsteht,wenn ein [fadelausgedrtickt wird, der

NII-Electronic Library Service

NotesontheProblematjcsoftheFutureFormsinPali,RegardinglheirPTeteritandModalFunctions

(Y,

YAh(ANAKA)(!45)

This

sUtra

indicates

thatinthe connection of an

interrogative

_pronoun,

theoptative or

first

future

stands,

if

blame

isexpressed. According tothis,lldtyissasi

in

the above-cited Vin

ex-arnple

is

allowed.

The

next sUtra isalso important:

PaniniIII3.145

anavakLpty-amansayora-kim. -vrtte'pi.

Wenn ausgedr(ickt wird, dassman etwas nicht fiirwahrscheinlich halteoder es nicht leidenwUrde,

stehen Potentialund erstes Futurumauch ohne ein Pronomeninterrogativum.

This sUtra means thattheoptative or futurestands,

if

one expresses something thatone

does

not regard as_possibleor

does

not like,also without interrogative

_pronoun.

According

to

Papini

III

3.144-145,the optative and

future

can

be

replaceable with each other,

ifone

blames

someone, or

if

one

describes

acertain incornprehensiveas well as

disgusting

event.

Anotherexample

from

Vin

isinteresting:

Context:Uruvelakassapawonders Buddha'ssupematural _power,by which fivehundredsticks are chopped simultaneously, when heonly says "let sticks bechepped."

Vinl31,13-14

mahidtthiko khomahdsamano mahanubhavo, _yatrahinama kaglhbnipiphallyissanti.

"Truly

the _greatrecluse isof _{greatpsychic power,} of _greatmight, inthatalso the sticks are

chopped."

(Horner:

Vintrans.IV41

)

The action,

letting

thesticks

be

chopped,

has

already happened.But Uruvelakassapauses

fut.

_{phdltyissanti.}

According to ParpiniIII

3.145,

thiswould

be

also allowed

because

the

sentence expresses

Uruvelakassapa's

wonder.

However,

thisusage of the

future

might

con-flictwith PaiiLiniIII3.147-151,

in

which only theoptative isallowed

in

the clause with

yatra,when wonder

is

expressed.

Roughly

speaking, the _grammaticalrules of

Panini

are

applicable fbrthePfili,

but

thereare also

deviations

when we

look

intodetails.

"Ib

return tothefirstexample, theBuddha

blarnes

his

disciple.

In

thesecond,

Uruvelakas-sapa wonders the supernatural _power of the

Buddha:

We can read itfrom them thatthe

speakers express emotion or attitude toward theevent. Inthissense, the

future

fbrms,

adi-yissasiand

_{phallyissanti}

in

theseexamples takeover

the

"modal"

functionand so

deviate

_from

_the

5)

tense system.

Thisseems at

first

to

be

so strange thatthetense marker -issa-cross over the

_grammatical

category and take over themodal

function.

The

adjective "modal" hereisconnected tothe

"modality,"

which

designates

the expressed attitude of thespeakers toward what they are

saying.6) And thusthemodality

differs

from

themood, which isthe system of the yerb

-(146)Notes

ontheProblernaticsoftheFutureFormsinPali,RegardinglheirPreteritandModaiFunctions

(Yl

YAMANAKA)

corp'ugation. The modality isa concept of the semantics and itsanalysis doesnot always

agree with the_{morphological one.}

It

is

therefore

_possible

that_{a certain modality can}

be

ex-pressedwith a

different

rnorphological

feature

thanthatof

the

mood. 'Ib_givean example,

the

English

word "would"

is

the

_past

fbrm

of "will,"

but

it

is

used actually also as modal

auxiliary verb

in

order toexpress speaker's tentativeness

("Would

_you

open the

door?")

.

Nevertheless,

thisspecial usage ofthe -issa-

future

in

Pali

does

not occur arbitrarily. It

is

conditioned

by

theadditional adverb, nama, or _phrase,

hathafi

hi

nama

in

Vin:

Context:A monk, torrnented bydissatisfaction,cut hismale organ off: Hearingofthis happening,theBuddhautters as fo11ows:

Vin II110,25

afifiamhi so bhikkhavemaghapuriso chetabbamhi afifiam chindim, .

"This _{fbolishman, monks, cut off one thing}

when another should have beencut offL"

(Horner:

Vin

trans.V 149)

The Buddha

blames

thismonk with the

blaming

word "moghapurisa,"

but

the

finite

verb is

aor. chindim. .

Consequently

it

seems thatan adverb

like

nama or adverbial

phrase

like

kathafi

hi

nama

is

obligatory touse the

future

form

fbr

the

_pastevent.

Conclusion

[Ib

summarize, the

future

fbrrns

in

P51i

text,used

in

the_pastsense or context, are various

and not simple.

We

should categorize them intotwo

different

_groups at least:The first

groupof them stands mostly

in

1sg.

Its

examples are morphologically explainable,

i.e.,

the

substitution ofthe sigmatic aorist, caused

by

theresemblance ofthe

form

(-issaml-isam).

This

leads

further

tothe

_general

confusion of -issar!tand -isam, and

it

occurs

in

_prosody

also without the metrical

_ground

as well as

in

_prose.

On

the other

hand,

the second

_group

stands mostly

in

the second and third

_persons.

Inthis_groupthe

future

fbrms

have

a medal

function,

i.e.,

they express the

feeling

or attitude ofa speaker

like

blame

or wonder, and so

they

deviate

from

the tense-system.

However,

thisspecial usage of the

future

is

condi-tioned

by

the syntax: This

is

always combined with the adverb nama, or adverbial _phrase

hathafi

hinnma. And thus thismodal usage of the futuretbrms can relate to ParpiniIII 3.145fflThe futurefbrms inPalistillneed to

be

observed more

_precisely

and

NII-Electronic Library Service

Netesonthe

Problematics

oftheFutureFormsinPfi[i,RegardinglheirPreteritandMDdalFunctions

(Y,

hMANAKA)(147)

<Notes>1)

SeeCharpentier

(1918);

Konow

(1937).

Seealso Bechert

(1954,

13),concerning theliterature

on thistopic.

2

)

Sanskritexamples are collected by Sen

(1953,

g129)

_;Renou: Grammaire

g340,

_p.462.

Further-more Burrow

(1937,

g124)

eollects examples ofnorthwestern dialect.

3

)

SeeNorman:EV INote Qn 78,concerning furtherexamples Qfthe confusion of-isarp and -tssarp.

4) Alsdorf

_(1936,

324-325) argues thatinPrakrit,futurefbrms used inthe _pastsense or context

should havebeenoccurred forthesecond and third_persons.

5

)

Reneu:Grammaire

_g340,

_p.462describesthatthe futurecan take over themodal function,when thedoubtor blameisexpressed. Comparewith Speijer:Syntax344,_p.267.

6

₎

On the_generalexplanation ofthe "medality," see Palmer

(2001,

4ff:);Portner

(2009,

221-265).

<Abbreviations>

Dhp

GHomer:

M trans.

Homer:Vintrans.

JaM Norman:EVI Norman: Sn trans. PPdninifi II Pv Renou:Grammaire Sadd Sn

Dhammapada.von HinUber,Oskarand KennethRoyNorman,eds. Dhammapado.

Oxford:PaliTbxtSociety,1995.

Geiger,Wilhelm.Pali:Literatur und

SPraehe.

Strassburg:TrUbner,1916.

Horner, IsalineBlew,trans.17ieMiddleLength Sdyings

(Majjhima-Nikaya).

London:PaliIbxtSociety,1954-1959.

Horner,IsalineBlew,trans.TheBook

_ofthe

Discipline

(Vinaya-Pi!aka)

. 6vols.

1992-1993

(first

_published1938-1966).

Jitaka.Fausbld11,Viggo,ed. 77ieJZitaka.London: TrUbner,1877-1897.

Majjhimanikaya.Trenckner,Vilhelm and Robert Chalmers,eds. The

MinXihima-Mkdya.

Oxfbrd:

PaliTextSociety,1993-1994

(firstpublished

1888-1899).

Norman, Kenneth Rey, trans.Elder:s' PbrsesI,7:heragathd.London: PaliText

Society,1969.

Norman, Kennth Roy, trans.T)heGroup

ofDiseourses

(Sutta-Nipata)

Il.London: Pali[fext

Society,

1992.

Pischel,Richard.GrammatikderPrakrit-S2)rachen.Strassburg:TrUbner,1900.

B6htlingk,Ottovon, ed. Ptininii Grammatik.Leipzig: Haessel,1887.

ParamatthajotikaII.Smith,Helmer,ed. Paramatthojotika-ll.3 vols. London:

PalifextSociety,1916-1918.

Petavatthu.Jayawickrama,N. A.,ed. Vimanavatthu and Petavatthu.London: PaliTlextSociety,1977.

Renou,Louis.Grammairesanscrite, 2tomes.Paris:Adri¢n-Maisonneuve, 1930.

Saddaniti.Smith,Helmer,ed. Saddaniti:La _{grammaire palie}dtAggavai?2sa.

Lund:Gleerup,1928-1966.

SuttanipEta.Dines,Andersen and SmithHelmer, eds. 7VreSutta-?Vipa-ta.London:

Pali[textSociety,1990

(first

_publishedl913).

-(148)Notes

ontheProblematicsoftheFutureFormsinPiri,RegardingThcirPreteritandModalFunctions

(Yl

YAMANAKA)

Speijer:Syntax Th

Uberblick

Vin

Speljer,JacobS.Stinskrit

_Syntax,

Leyden: Brill,l886.

Theragathfi.Oldenberg,Hermann and Richard Pischel.71he71hera-and

71Jzen"-gdithdi.2nded. Oxford:PaliTk)xtSociety,1990.

von HinUber,Oskar.Das dittereuattelindischim

Oberblick

2.erw. Aufl.Wien:

VerL derOsterreichischenAkad. derWiss.,2001.

Oldenberg,Hermann, ed. T7zeP7nayaPit.aka.5vols. London: PaliText Society,

1969-1984

_(first

_published1879-1883).

<Literature>

AlsdorCLudwig."The _{Vasudevahindi,}

a SpecimenofArchaic Jaina-.Ma-harastri."Bulletin

ofthe

School

ofOrientai

and477riean Studies8,no. 2/3

(1936);

319-333 = KleineSchrijien,56-70.

2nd ed.Stuttgart:Steiner,2001.

Bechert,Heinz,"Uber _{denGebrauchderindikativischen[[emporaim Pfili."MdinchenerStordien}

zur

SPrachwissenschof

3

(1953)

:53-66

(Revidierter

Nachdruck 1958).

Bechert,Heinz."Das _{Cullasutasomajatakam.7'MdinchenerStudien}

zorr EIPnachwissenschcpt4

(l954)

: 9-28

(Revidierter

Nachdmck 1961).

Burrow, Thomas. 71heLanguage

_of

the KharoslhiDoeuments

_faom

C7iinese1burkestan.Cambridge:

Cambridge UniversityPress,1937. Charpentier,Jarl."Altindisches

Futurum IIinimperfektischemGebrauch."InStordiertiliegnade

iasfegntirden13.JlanuariJ918,141-148.Lund: C.W. K.Gleerup,1918. Konow, Sten."Future

Forms denoting Past Time inSanskritand Prakrit."Norsk 7}ciskrij}

for

tlprogvidenskap9

(1937):

231-239.

Palmer,FrankRobert.Mood and Moclality.2nded. Cambridge: Cambridge UniversityPress,2001. Portner,Paul.Modoiity.Oxford:Oxford UniversityPress,2009.

Sen,Sulcumar.HistoricalSlyntax

ofMiddle

lvdo-A,yan.Calcutta:LinguisticSocietyofIndia, 1953=

Syntactic

Studies

ofinclo-Aryan

Languages, 255-402. Data For theStudy of Languages ofAsia and Africag.Ibkyo:InstitutefortheStudyofLanguages and CulturesefAsia and Africa[rbkyo UniversityofForeign Studies,1995.

Smith,Helmer."Le _futur

moyen indienetsesrythmes." JburnalAsiatique240

(1952)

:169-183.

<Key

words> MiddleIndic,Pali,Future,Semantics,Modality