# Tense describing a repeated action



## PersoLatin

What is the technical term for such a tense? 
Modern English expresses it by using 'to keep', as in : I kept telling him, don't keep saying that.


----------



## ahvalj

Iterative.


----------



## PersoLatin

Thank you ahvalj,

Are there any examples of iterative tense in IE languages, e.g was there ever a Germanic version and why does English use 'to keep' to achieve it?

In classic Persian there are many examples of its use. in modern Persian, there is a verb prefix that achieves it, but it's  only used in informal/colloquial speech, and it is similar to the prefix used in classic Persian.


----------



## ahvalj

No, the Germanic languages in their attested forms never developed formalized Iteratives. 

Lithuanian has a special past tense with the suffix -_dav_-: _rašydavau_ "I used to write", _kalbėdavau_ "I used to talk". Homeric Greek expressed the same with the suffix -_σκ_-: _εἴπεσκον_ "I used to say", _ἔδεσκον_ "I used to eat". Some Slavic languages (especially Czech) have Iterative verbs formed with the suffix -_va_-: _dělávat_ "to do repeatedly", _chodívat_ "to walk repeatedly"; this suffix can be added twice or even thrice: _chodívávat, chodívávávat _"to walk especially repeatedly". Other examples can be found as well, but PIE itself most probably didn't have any standard morphological way to express the Iterative. The closest thing to this is the suffix _*-ehₐ-,_ attested in Latin, Baltic and Slavic as _-ā-_ and used (often with a lengthened grade in the root; occasionally in Latin, more in Baltic and very widely in Slavic) for the Intensive verbs, which contextually can be used for the repeated action: Latin _oc-culere_ "to hide" → _cēlāre_ "to hide", Latvian _mest_ "to throw" → _mētāt_ "to throw repeatedly", Old Church Slavonic _mesti_ → _mětati_ (the same).


----------



## olaszinho

ahvalj said:


> Some Slavic languages (especially Czech) have Iterative verbs formed with the suffix -_va_-: _dělávat_ "to do repeatedly", _chodívat_ "to walk repeatedly"; this suffix can be added twice or even thrice: _chodívávat, chodívávávat _"to walk especially repeatedly". Other examples can be found as well, but PIE itself most probably didn't have any standard morphological way to express the Iterative[/QUOT



Now I'm quite curious about other Slavic languages, such as Polish or Slovak, do they have the same suffix as Czech to express iterative actions?


----------



## bearded

Two questions for ahvalj:
1. Also in Italian we have a -sk suffix: _io aggredisco _from _aggredire..., _clearly adopting the Latin _ (e)sco>isco _ending.  Could that, too, be the remnant of an original ''formalized iterative''?
2. A famous Latin adage occurs to me: _Aliquando dormitat Homerus, _referring to some inconsistencies or errors contained in Homer's poems. Would the form ''dormitat'' also show an iterative suffix, compared to the simple 'dormit'?
Thanks in advance for your reply.


----------



## ahvalj

Slovak has the same system as Czech: _chodievať, chodievavať_ etc. Russian, though to an incomparably lesser extent, also has such verbs (especially in the past centuries): _ходить → хаживать, говорить → говаривать, видеть → видывать._ Not sure about other Slavic languages. In any case, there are  no signs that the system of the Czech or Slovak type is inherited: these _-va-_verbs rather represent an extension of the Late Common Slavic system of secondary Imperfectives.


----------



## ahvalj

bearded man said:


> Two questions for ahvalj:
> 1. Also in Italian we have a -sk suffix: _io aggredisco _from _aggredire..., _clearly adopting the Latin _ (e)sco>isco _ending.  Could that, too, be the remnant of an original ''formalized iterative''?


No, the Homeric specialization of -_sk_- in the Iterative meaning was a local dialectal development, not shared even by most other Greek dialects. In various IE languages this suffix has different meanings, e. g. Latin -_scō_ in older verbs shows no clear meaning: _gnōscō_, _pāscō, crēscō, poscō,_ but later this suffix became specialized as inchoative ("to begin to do something, to become something"): _amāscō_ "I fall in love", _albēscō_ "I become white". In Hittite, this suffix forms the Imperfectives (denoting progressive, durative, iterative, habitual etc. actions); as the Czech and Slovak -_va_-, this -_šk_- in Hittite can be repeated. Germanic, Baltic and Slavic use the verb _*eı̯-sk-_ for "to search", derived from _*eı̯-_ "to go". Several branches use _*pr̥kʲ-sk-_ for "to ask" (the above _poscō,_ German _forschen_ "to research", Lithuanian _prašyti,_ Latvian _prasīt_ and Old Church Slavonic _prositi_ "to ask", Sanskrit _pr̥cchāmi_ "I ask" etc. 



bearded man said:


> 2. A famous Latin adage occurs to me: _Aliquando dormitat Homerus, _referring to some inconsistencies or errors contained in Homer's poems. Would the form ''dormitat'' also show an iterative suffix, compared to the simple 'dormit'?
> Thanks in advance for your reply.


Yes, Latin developed a whole system of Iterative _ā_-verbs formed from the Perfect Passive Participle / Supine: _dicere → dictus → dictāre, canere → cantus → cantāre,  habēre → habitus → habitāre, ūtī → ūsus → ūsāre, dormīre → dormītum → dormītāre_ etc. This _-itā-_ was later extended to verbs of various types: _vocitāre, agitāre _etc.


----------



## Karton Realista

olaszinho said:


> Now I'm quite curious about other Slavic languages, such as Polish or Slovak, do they have the same suffix as Czech to express iterative actions?


Polish has it different:
Chodzić - *chadzać* 
Mówić - *mawiać* 
Spać - *sypiać* 
Bawić - *zabawiać* 
Etc. 
They are sometimes used together with "zwyknąć" (use to) in the past tense. Mój dziadek zwykł mawiać... - my grandfather used to say... You can remove "zwykł" if you want and just say "mawiał". You can also say "zwykle mawiał" (usually said). 
In present they are used normally: On sypia z wieloma kobietami naraz (he sleeps with multiple women at once). 
In future it's treated as imperfective (which it is a variaton of).


----------



## olaszinho

Karton Realista said:


> Polish has it different:
> Chodzić - *chadzać*
> Mówić - *mawiać*
> Spać - *sypiać*
> Bawić - *zabawiać*



Isn't this the aspectual distinction between perfective and imperfective verbs? You can find them in all Slavic languages.


----------



## Karton Realista

olaszinho said:


> Isn't this the aspectual distinction between perfective and imperfective verbs? You can find them in all Slavic languages.


No.
Mówić - imperfective Mawiać - imperfective iterative
Chodzić - imperfective Chadzać - imperfective iterative


----------



## olaszinho

Karton Realista said:


> No.
> Mówić - imperfective Mawiać - imperfective iterative
> Chodzić - imperfective Chadzać - imperfective iterative



Ok. Thank you!


----------



## Karton Realista

olaszinho said:


> Ok. Thank you!


Btw, those two verbs don't really have regular perfectives.
Mówić - powiedzieć (perf.) Powiedzieć has another imperfective iterative (powiadać), but does not have a "normal" regular imperfective.
Chodzić - przyjść, pójść etc., all coming from iść, synonym of chodzić. They are translated to English with phrasal verbs (walk in, walk out, (...) and also come, which is not a phrasal verb).


----------



## PersoLatin

PersoLatin said:


> In classic Persian there are many examples of its use. in modern Persian, there is a verb prefix that achieves it, but it's only used in informal/colloquial speech, and it is similar to the prefix used in classic Persian.



In Persian we use the prefixes hami and mi, both seem to have developed from *hami*sha(*hami*šé) i.e. always, ever. hami is no longer used in contemporary Persian but 'mi' is still used to form imperfect & present tenses.
*In classic Persian: *
present : _mi-guyam_ 'I say' مى گويم
imperfect : mi-goftam 'I used to say' مى گفتم
Iterative : hami-goftam 'I kept saying/I repeated said' همى گفتم

*In contemporary Persian :*
present : _mi-guyam_  'I say'
imperfect : mi-goftam 'I used to say'
iterative : informally/colloquially hey-mi-goftam هى مى گفتم (read 'hey' as English 'hay'). It looks like over the ages, همى has been split into هى & مى. This style is used in present tense too. This is all from observation, someone may know of a text book that covers this aspect for Persian.(?)


----------



## Ben Jamin

Karton Realista said:


> No.
> Mówić - imperfective Mawiać - imperfective iterative
> Chodzić - imperfective Chadzać - imperfective iterative



I think it is dubious to classify the "Chodzić - *chadzać *type verbs" just as an underclass of the imperfective aspect.
There are some features of this class of verbs that suggest that they form an aspect on their own. 
I would also argue if the name "iterative" is correct to use for them. They rather denote a *habit*, not a repetition.

I would rather reserve the term "iterative"  to actions described by the verbs of the type "porozbijać okna" (to break all/many of the windows one after another) or "powbijać gwoździe" (to drive in all/many nails one after another).

By the way, there is only a little number of verb concepts that occur in this habitual(?) aspect. 
I can recall only 12 of them (bywać, siadywać, chadzać, czytywać, pisywać, jadać, pijać, sypiać, widywać, grywać, miewać, bijać) used in modern Polish. Maybe there are a few more (mostly obsolete). I have also an impression that the use of most of these verbs is declining in the colloquial language.


----------



## Nino83

PersoLatin said:


> Modern English expresses it by using 'to keep', as in : I kept telling him, don't keep saying that.


If we include analitic constructions like the English "keep doing", in Romance languages we say "continuare a fare" (Italian), "continuer à faire" (French), "seguir haciendo" (Spanish), "ficar fazendo" (Portuguese). For the negative verb we use "smettere di fare" (Italian), "arrêter de faire" (French), "parar/dejar de hacer" (Spanish), "parar de fazer" (Portuguese), (stop doing).
"Continuo a dirglielo", "smettila di dire queste cose!".


----------



## Karton Realista

Ben Jamin said:


> I think it is dubious to classify the "Chodzić - *chadzać *type verbs" just as an underclass of the imperfective aspect.
> There are some features of this class of verbs that suggest that they form an aspect on their own.
> I would also argue if the name "iterative" is correct to use for them. They rather denote a *habit*, not a repetition.
> 
> I would rather reserve the term "iterative"  to actions described by the verbs of the type "porozbijać okna" (to break all/many of the windows one after another) or "powbijać gwoździe" (to drive in all/many nails one after another).
> 
> By the way, there is only a little number of verb concepts that occur in this habitual(?) aspect.
> I can recall only 12 of them (bywać, siadywać, chadzać, czytywać, pisywać, jadać, pijać, sypiać, widywać, grywać, miewać, bijać) used in modern Polish. Maybe there are a few more (mostly obsolete). I have also an impression that the use of most of these verbs is declining in the colloquial language.


Aspekt czasowników w języku polskim
That's a pretty good source explaining iterative in Polish - it's all in the second paragraph. It is not a third aspect.


----------



## PersoLatin

Nino83 said:


> If we include analitic constructions like the English "keep doing", in Romance languages we say "continuare a fare" (Italian), "continuer à faire" (French), "seguir haciendo" (Spanish), "ficar fazendo" (Portuguese). For the negative verb we use "smettere di fare" (Italian), "arrêter de faire" (French), "parar/dejar de hacer" (Spanish), "parar de fazer" (Portuguese), (stop doing).
> "Continuo a dirglielo", "smettila di dire queste cose!".


 You can do the same in English too; "he continued to hit her" but I think that lacks the repeatedness aspect that "he kept hitting her" offers, otherwise why use "to keep" when "continue" would have done.

Maybe for some verbs, the two are the same, e.g. "I kept walking/working/seeing" and "I continued to walk/work/see" but not for all, e.g. "I kept falling" and "I continued to fall", mean slightly different things.

With the Persian and English (using, to keep) versions, a sense of repeatedly doing something, in one or several bursts, is conveyed. The polish examples are probably similar, but I don't know polish so I can't quite get the sense.


----------



## Karton Realista

PersoLatin said:


> With the Persian and English (using, to keep) versions, is a sense of 'repeatedly doing something, in one or several bursts', is conveyed. The polish examples are probably similar, but I don't know polish so I can't quite get the sense.


As Ben Jamin said, there are verbs that describe repectitive atcion and ones describing habitual action. Both of those are iterative, because both actions are being repeated. In English it would be respectively "keep doing sth" and "use to do sth".


----------



## Nino83

PersoLatin said:


> You can do the same in English too; "he continued to hit her" but I think that lacks the repeatedness aspect that "he kept hitting her" offers, otherwise why use "to keep" when "continue" would have done.


Maybe because "keep" is the native verb and "continue" is its counterpart of Romance origin.
[intransitive, transitive] to keep existing or happening without stopping
[intransitive, transitive] to keep doing something without stopping
continue verb - Definition, pictures, pronunciation and usage notes | Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary at OxfordLearnersDictionaries.com
[intransitive] to continue doing something; to do something repeatedly 
keep verb - Definition, pictures, pronunciation and usage notes | Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary at OxfordLearnersDictionaries.com
I'm not saying that the meaning ot these verbs is always the same, in all cases, I just gave the corresponding verb used in Romance languages.


----------



## merquiades

@Nino83  I would say _keep on hitting her_ gives more of the repeated aspect.  Otherwise, _keep hitting her_ and _continue hitting her_ mean the same thing.  With the verb hit there has to be hitting more than once, because it's not feasible for hitting to be one long drawn out activity.  That would be the case of _keep raining_ or _continue raining_.


----------



## Ben Jamin

Karton Realista said:


> Aspekt czasowników w języku polskim
> That's a pretty good source explaining iterative in Polish - it's all in the second paragraph. It is not a third aspect.


According to this classification _latać _and _bywać _belong to the same class "częstotliwy". This classification does not seem to concern the same grammatical phenomenon. The "habitual" verb related to _latać _would be_ *latywać, _if such a verb existed.


----------



## Karton Realista

Ben Jamin said:


> According to this classification _latać _and _bywać _belong to the same class "częstotliwy". This classification does not seem to concern the same grammatical phenomenon. The "habitual" verb related to _latać _would be_ *latywać, _if such a verb existed.


The author clearly said that there are two types of iterative verbs, movement verbs and "the rest". 
This is surely one grammatical category, since there is at the very beggining "Zagadnienie czasowników częstotliwych (iteratywnych) ".


----------



## PersoLatin

Nino83 said:


> Maybe because "keep" is the native verb and "continue" is its counterpart of Romance origin.


True, but "continue" didn't replace "keep", when it arrived.

"I kept slipping while climbing" here; climbing is a continual action during which slipping happens, with some regularity (due to ice or inexperience), but not continually, otherwise there'll be no climbing.


----------



## Nino83

PersoLatin said:


> but not continually


Thank you for the info!


----------



## Ben Jamin

Karton Realista said:


> The author clearly said that there are two types of iterative verbs, movement verbs and "the rest".
> This is surely one grammatical category, since there is at the very beggining "Zagadnienie czasowników częstotliwych (iteratywnych) ".


Grammatical categories are often arbitrary and you can make divisions in many different ways. Here "inne czasowniki częstotliwe" corresponds to the category "habitual". It is not obvious which categorization is better.


----------



## Delvo

Black American English includes "be _-ing", as in "he be walking to work" or "she be telling them to turn the lights off when they leave", which would mean "he routinely walks to work" or "she repeatedly reminds them to turn the lights off when they leave".


----------



## danielstan

Nino83 said:


> If we include analitic constructions like the English "keep doing", in Romance languages we say "continuare a fare" (Italian), "continuer à faire" (French), "seguir haciendo" (Spanish), "ficar fazendo" (Portuguese). For the negative verb we use "smettere di fare" (Italian), "arrêter de faire" (French), "parar/dejar de hacer" (Spanish), "parar de fazer" (Portuguese), (stop doing).
> "Continuo a dirglielo", "smettila di dire queste cose!".


Romanian has developed a particular analytic construction for positive continuous actions:
"a tot face" (translated literally in French as "tout faire", but with the meaning: "repeatedly doing something").
Observation:
In Romanian is correct to say "a face tot" (literally French: "faire tout"), but with the expected meaning: "to do everything".

Romanian has not an equivalent for the negative continuous actions from the other Romance languages.


----------



## Sardokan1.0

danielstan said:


> Romanian has developed a particular analytic construction for positive continuous actions:
> "a tot face" (translated literally in French as "tout faire", but with the meaning: "repeatedly doing something").
> Observation:
> In Romanian is correct to say "a face tot" (literally French: "faire tout"), but with the expected meaning: "to do everything".
> 
> Romanian has not an equivalent for the negative continuous actions from the other Romance languages.




it's interesting Romanian, a similar construction is present also in Sardinian "a totu fàghere", but the verb is changed according to the action they are doing

example :

they are doing this continuously/quickly -> issos lu sun fattende *a totu fàghere*
they are running continuously/very fast -> issos sun currende *a totu currere*
they are drinking continuously/a lot -> issos sun buffende *a totu buffare*

While the other way of saying this are related more or less to the other Romance languages

they keep doing -> issos *sìghin *a fàghere (they follow/continue to do)
they keep running -> issos *sìghin *a currere
they keep drinking -> issos *sìghin *a buffare

instead in the negative phrases there are various verbs that can be used

they stop doing -> issos *lassan *de fàghere (they leave to do) issos *sénsan *de fàghere (they cease to do) issos *tzédin *de fàghere (they cede to do)


----------



## danielstan

I feel I mislead you with 1 single example from Romanian...

The formula "a *tot *face" (infinitive) is applicable for any action in a way very similar to the Sardinian examples above:

they are doing something continuously (and repeatedly and a lot) -> ei *tot *fac
they are running continuously (and repeatedly and a lot) -> ei *tot *aleargă   (another variant which is archaic and regional, from Latin _in_+_currere_: ei se *tot *încurează)
they are drinking continuously (and repeatedly and a lot) -> ei *tot *beau


----------

