Chapter XI: Future
Surprisingly enough, the sentry absorbed the concept of an aspect. He already understood that time could be described both discretely and continuously, and he not only knew how to form the different aspects but also, according to himself, was always conscious of them when he did so. My first thought was to be elated and happy for my student, to be grateful that I could have had the opportunity to teach one who knew little but was so bright that he could eventually know all; but then I thought back to the days, the weeks gone by, how absorbed the both of us would become in my lectures, and I knew that there inevitably had to have come a point where he stopped viewing my lessons as idle talk and began to dwell on them in his free time, like a proper student, which did not so much testify as to his eagerness to learn than as to my didactic prowess. I didn’t know which it was; but, in any case, either he was a good student or I a good teacher—and I was satisfied with the thought of both possibilities.
The concept of a tense, however, baffled him: though he did not complain of its difficulty, as a child complains of how much homework his teachers assign to him; he complained as a scholar who was adept enough to follow the reasoning of the theories and to ask questions as to their nature, to the extent where they became so obscure, undefinable, and complex that even I, the professor, got confused.
“You’ve spoken of progressives, perfects, and simples,” he said, rubbing his eyes with his hooves. “And now you speak of past and present combined with them. Now I know that can’t be right. You’re missing some tenses.”
I told him that it was a gray area how many unique aspects there were, that different languages have different numbers of tenses, that there was a disagreement whether or not auxiliary verbs in certain contexts were distinct tenses, and his confusion was in an area that was not as precise as he wanted it to be.
“That’s not what I meant,” he replied. “You’ve spoken of past and present—but never the future.”
“There is no future tense.”
The sentry laughed. I laughed too, but for much, much different reasons.
“Well,” he smirked, “I really don’t know what I can say to that.”
“Yes,” I replied. “Of course you would say and think that. You’re speaking of the indicative mood, after all.”
“What else would I speak of?”
“The subjunctive. In the indicative, you speak of the future; but if you were to speak in the subjunctive, you would not.”
He coughed bemusedly. “You speak all the time of how your first language is all about the subjunctive. Am I really supposed to believe that you can’t speak of the future?”
“Yes.”
The air settled around us. I could hear my heartbeat in my ears as I stared at him. He looked back, his mouth open, his eyes wide.
“What?” was all he could say.
*
We did not deal with the future; there was nothing to deal with. We did not speak of the future; we had no need. Our language was not built to display and proclaim that which we found useless. The subjunctive has no future tenses.
If you fancy yourself a pure philosopher, I can tell you right now that in this issue exists no problem that you will find substantial. Here you will find no epistemological or metaphysical conundrums to satisfy your churning mind. It is purely a linguistic one.
For the concept of a future was not unknown to us. We had both a noun and an adjective for future. We knew that the future became the present, which in its turn became the past. Even our indicative mood (though only a few of our writers and orators knew how and when to use the indicative mood), which was as vestigial and unwieldy as this language’s subjunctive, had a future tense (and from those aforementioned writers and orators, even fewer knew how to use the future tense).
Go across all races, all cultures, all languages, ask about their subjunctive and the future tense, and though you may not understand the responses given to you, I can translate them for you right now: The subjunctive has no future tenses. The future indicative? Always, and indispensable.
The future is solely a property of the indicative, not the subjunctive. I was not surprised by the sentry’s confusion.
But, remarkable enough to say, the sentry’s confusion was not exclusive to him and his race of indicatives. Plenty of scholars, myself included, have struggled to find the answer to the problem, but have inevitably come up short:
“Why does the subjunctive not have future tenses?”
So asked I during the first years of my education. A teacher (there were many) whom I posed this question to would respond with one of the following: either he would look at me in complete silence; he would give me an incredibly unsatisfying answer ripe with fallacies; or he, especially if he was old, would laugh at me.
But the question didn’t go away. When I’d finished my education, most of my research went into this problem. It became my obsession, my own Last Theorem, to which, for a good part of my studies, I dedicated all and obtained nothing. There was a reason, I knew. I tried to formalize that reason and voice it, once and for all; I tried to synchronize logic with intuition. I looked at our culture, our customs, our methods, our means, looked for anything in our way of life to find why the future tense in the subjunctive, the most important of moods, was not just unnecessary but impossible. I came up with a few arguments, but none held up to rigorous scrutiny. In the end, as in the beginning, I had no physical or scientific basis to support the fact. It was only after a certain conversation with one of my old, trusted mentors that I stopped:
“Why does this bother you so much?” he had asked.
“Because I don’t know why. I want to know why.”
“Do you think the subjunctive mood should have future tenses? That it ought to, that it must?”
“No!” I shouted. “It’s not needed.”
“Why isn’t it needed?”
“That’s what I’m trying to figure out.”
“Yet you said that to me, ‘it’s not needed,’ with such conviction. You’re certain it’s not needed?”
“Yes. I just don’t know why!”
“Well then,” he said, smiling, “that should be enough. You’re certain it’s the case, that it can’t be any other way. So as I think. Why bother then? Do something else.”
Yes, it was yet another unsatisfying answer; but, nevertheless, it had made more sense than anything else I’d ever been told.
Even though I and my brothers and sisters had grown up with the subjunctive mood, even though no sentence went by without our using it, we would not be able tell you why the subjunctive has no future tenses. There’s a reason for it, but an ineffable one, a reason that is felt rather than voiced. It is unsatisfying to me, the scientist, to have something within me that I know yet cannot give reasons as to why I know; but to one born in the subjunctive, who operates in it—nothing else is needed. The latter holds it as axiomatic.
For my part, that question has been consigned to the same mystery as grammatical genders. Genders of nouns are supposedly arbitrary; yet they’re so consistent across languages for the same nouns, and so ingrained into the mind as true that a speaker needs not even think about it.
Unfortunately, I have to end the explanation there, because I’m sincerely unable to say more. All I can say is had you grown up with this mood, had it been a part of your life ever since your birth, you would understand why the subjunctive does not, and cannot, have future tenses; and you would understand how, even without these tenses, it’s still more useful and versatile than the indicative. We, the creatures of the subjunctive mood, the superiors, understand this intuitively, if not formally.
And we had to content ourselves with that.
*
“That’s why.”
The sentry looked down and shook his head for a long time in silence. The hair of his mane fell down around him, dejected, helpless, yearning, and rejecting.
“I know it’s an unsatisfying answer,” I went on, “but that’s all—”
“Where are you from?” he said suddenly. He had stopped listing, but his head was still lowered. I could not see his mouth or his eyes as he talked; and, for a moment, I felt that that sentence could have and had been spoken by all, by the air and the city, to elucidate every confusion, every obscurity.
“Fillydelphia,” came the stock response.
“I didn’t ask where you went to university,” he said, looking up. A certain ineffable quality traced his countenance and ended in the fluctuations of his voice, low, quiet, but carrying that malice peculiar to frustration. “Where do you and your people, with your own language and culture, come from?”
“Fillydelphia.”
“Horse apples!” he said. Though the sentry was prone to grandiose gesticulations, clapping, and general physical demonstrations to intensify his words, he did not move for this comment but stared straight at me with that same look as before. There weren’t many curses in this language, and he had used one on the lower end of the spectrum; yet, all the same, it gave to me all the intended strike of a curse with none of the implied vulgarity.
“Why?”
“The Fillydelphian accent is the most distinctive in Equestria and the most easily caricatured. It’s so recognizable that even the worst impressionist can do the most offensive and inaccurate mockery and still ponies will say: ‘That’s a Fillydelphian accent.’ Wanna see?” And he turned from me, presumably to grab the attention of another.
“You,” I quickly said, coughing, “you can . . . hardly ascribe an entire region a single accent and dialect . . .”
The sentry turned back, shaking with the weight of frenzied thoughts trying to make their escape. “But that’s just it!” he said. “Your accent is unplaceable!”
“There . . .” I stammered, “are technically—theoretically, I mean—an infinite number of accents and . . .”
“Even if you were from other places . . .” He rubbed his cheeks with a hoof, blinked rapidly, coughed, and generally took every pretense to avoid looking at me directly. “Most ponies,” he continued, “with most ponies who have unplaceable accents, it’s because they’ve been around a lot, picking up the accents as they go, till they have their unique blend. But always you can sort of say ‘his accent sounds kind of like the accent of so-and-so a country’ or ‘it sounds as if she has lived in so-and-so an area a while’—but you? Your accent . . . it’s a ghost. I’m not even sure it’s from this world.”
I didn’t say anything. It was only now that the sentry looked at me, albeit hesitantly. I couldn’t help but look away.
There was a long silence. I knew he felt as though everything I’d said to him, not just the fabricated stories of my origin but also my lectures, were terribly unimportant in the face of this question. I felt as though I had lost something—what exactly, I couldn’t say.
He sighed, nodded respectfully, and stood up. “I have to go,” he mumbled. “So you’re not going to tell me where you’re from?”
Again, I said nothing.
“You are a very strange thing, Dr. Errenax,” he murmured, casting me a sidelong glance. “A very . . . very strange . . . eccentric . . . mysterious thing.”
“Then arrest me,” I whispered.
He laughed and turned to me. He had not yet assumed the mien of a soldier. When he spoke next, I knew that he was not the sentry I referred to him as but the pony Foil.
“Arrest you?” he said, laughing once more. “Last time I checked, being strange and mysterious wasn’t illegal. Frustrating, yes, unbelievably frustrating . . . but not illegal.”
When he moved away as a soldier, he marched hesitantly, twitching his neck as he strained not to look back, as though he were being ordered to retreat from a battlefield the enemy was still storming.
Stats
Page generated in 0.021 seconds
Total duration
681 users online
397,834 hits today, 1,300,540 yesterday
FIMFiction
My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic Fanfiction
Designed and coded by knighty & Xaquseg - © 2011-2024
Follow & Support Us
Support us
SubStar
Chat!
Discord
Follow us
Twitter
MLP: Friendship is Magic® - © 2024 Hasbro Inc.®
Fimfiction is in no way affiliated with or endorsed by Hasbro Inc.®
If I was going to arrest you I would have brought backup?
The interaction between Errenax and the sentry is just spot-on immersive! You could write an entire novel just centered around their linguistics conversations. Sure it will mean more "I'm better" sentiment from Errenax, but, sweet intangible feelings, these conversations are too good!
With the nuance of language, latin, if I recall my lessons. Lessons by far I should have paid true application to, had three forms of the future as it was. (or recall the right lessons here) If memory holds, and it is a fallible thing, mind you, then there is the future, the future that will be, and the future that is, or a close approximation of that. The participles of such are vague at best, and though that nuance of tongue is long past, i try to recall old lessons as time flows onward.
However in the language of current forms, the antiquated nuance of latin, holds itself to standards that are not the same. Either in the melding of places and tongues to make the current amalgamation of the modern tongue, or the aspects of culture that bring such to the forefront in needing some form in which a people can exchange and find common ground.
But these updates are fun to see. And brings a moment that I can comment in such a manner that I enjoy.
I ship ErreFoil with the strength of one thousand armies.
Also, as a student of German, gendered nouns are ridiculous. English may have its silly moments, but at least we escaped gendered nouns somewhere along the line.
In any case, I'm loving this story! Errenax is a fascinating narrator, even if he is a bit of a jerk. I'm very interested to see why you have Fluttershy tagged on this story.
According to a quick Google, Spanish has a (somewhat archaic, but at least preserved in legal language) future subjunctive. I don't have more than two years of middle school Spanish, but the explanations make sense, and 'come what may' seems like an English case of the future subjunctive, so I don't see the 'impossibility'.
Aren't all orders and demands subjunctive in the future tense? That seems not quite ...right. Even if you can't say what will be or what you want to happen, you can still demand for it to happen!
I suppose berefit of a future subjunctive you could order someone to have been in the necessary past states such that they will carry out your desired actions in the future. Can't see as it would do much good though. "I order you to have hidden in Canterlot undercover for the last three months, so that you are there this very moment!" "uh..."
The last passage, where the sentry asks about Errenax's origins, immediately reminded me of this scene. "Ich spreche mit dem Hauptsturmführer Heimatlos."
I still don't completely get the subjunctive mood. Can someone give some examples? And how do future tenses fit in indicative but not subjunctive?
5294777
Here is a site that explains the subjunctive mood as it pertains to learning Spanish.
The subjunctive mood is used whenever the speaker feels uncertain about the action of the sentence, or when the speaker is expressing a subjective opinion.
e.g.:
(Archer is probably rolling his(?) eyes at this point and negating the above examples...)
To my English-speaking ears, the subjunctive mood sounds almost indecisive, uncertain, and noncommittal; the stereotypical passive-agressive Jewish Grandmum. There is desire, there is doubt, and there are actions yet to be completed, but there is nothing definite, concrete, or objective. It barely sounds that they (changelings) can make actionable statements; everything appears to be all vague, nebulous desires with narry an action.
I can imagine Foil's frustration:
"How do you know it is useless?"
"Our language does not have it."
"Why does your language not have it?"
"Because it is useless."
Circular reasoning much?
The lack (and disdain) of indicative mood does make a certain amount of sense given that changeling language is characterised by its high bandwidth dissemination of raw intent and desire, and that changelings themselves are biologically optimised to make full use of this method of communication. If you can communicate directly through pure desire, why would you feel the need for anything else?
All that said, there does seem to be a nasty cloud looming over changelings and their culture with their lack of future tense and indicative mood:
Their direct communication certainly gives them a unified Will, but what happens when that Will becomes limited and insular in its thinking and ossified in its ways? How do you hope and plan and dream for a better future when you do not, nay can not, talk about it?
How do you imagine?
How do you dream?
How do you innovate?
(On an non-poni note, it would be interesting to compare and contrast cultures with languages than are primarily subjunctive with languages that are primarily indicative in the way each culture treats calendars, scheduling, and plans for future events...)
4070331
Amen! As a polyglot and native Anglophone, I agree! IMO, French is the worst at it, though, as the same word, with a different gender, can mean two different things:
un poêle is a stove, whereas une poêle is a pan. un livre is a book, une livre is a pound (both the weight and the British currency).
Oh, silly linguist. While the lexical structure of the future tense classifies it as indicative, the very nature of it makes it subjunctive; the future tense is subjunctive because everything in the future is unrealized, a concept, a potential. Even if you express future facts with absolute certainty, no method exists of verifying their truthfulness other than waiting until the future becomes the present - and ceases to be the future.
All we can say about the future are our hopes, convictions, plans and expectations. You could say with full certainty that the Sun will rise tomorrow morning, but you can't prove the universe won't be torn asunder before midnight. It is merely your conviction and experience that such things are not known to happen, but it is not a fact - not until the Sun actually rises. Until then it's just a highly probable outcome of the known state and behavior of the world, within scope of our knowledge.
And so, since the future lacks a proper indicative tense - at least until time travel is invented and one can verify future facts by going there and back - with our language so rich in indicative and so impaired in subjunctive it was only natural that the future tense's only mood took the lexical form proper for the most common mood, allowing us to neglect the uncertainty and falsely proclaim potential effects of our expectations as facts.