Unit 8: Verbs

In this unit we will learn about different kinds of verbs, their internal structure, and how they interact with noun phrases. We will also learn how to make sentences in the present tense and the past tense, and how to turn nouns or adjectives into verbs using verbalizers.

Unit 8 Sections:

1. 1. Verbs
   1. 1.1. Internal structure
   2. 1.2. Transitivity
   3. 1.3. Arguments
   4. 1.4. Respectful verbs
   5. 1.5. Tense
   6. 1.6. Evidentiality
2. 2. The present tense
   1. 2.1. The abbreviated present tense
   2. 2.2. Other present tense auxiliaries
3. 3. The agentive particle {གིས་}
   1. 3.1. Simple verbs with transitivity pairs
   2. 3.2. Instruments
4. 4. The past tense
   1. 4.1. The abbreviated past tense
   2. 4.2. Other past tense constructions
5. 5. Argument structure
   1. 5.1. Verbs with two arguments
   2. 5.2. Verbs with three arguments
   3. 5.3. Deviations and alternate structures
6. 6. Verbalizers
   1. 6.1. Complex verbs with volition pairs
   2. 6.2. Complex verbs with transitivity pairs
   3. 6.3. Turning adjectives into verbs
7. 7. Terminology
   1. 7.1. Vocabulary
   2. 7.2. Jargon

1. Verbs

In Unit 5 we learned about the distinction between nouns, which are people, places, and things; and, verbs, which are actions that nouns do or have done to them. Here are some example sentences with the verbs underlined:

• Tsomo fell down.
• Tendzin lives in India
• I see a cat
• Nyima sent a letter to Dawa

English verbs generally have three main features — their internal structure, their tense, and their arguments.

The verb’s internal structure refers to its internal components. For example, the verbs “lives”, “see”, and “sent” are all simple verbs because they each consist of a single verb by itself. The verb “fall down” is a complex verb because it combines a verb (“fall”) with another word (“down”).

The verb’s tense refers to whether it is happening in the past, the present, or the future. The verbs “fell down” and “sent” happened in the past, so they are past tense, whereas the verbs “lives” and “see” are happening right now, so they are the present tense. There is also the future tense for verbs that will happen the future, as in “I will reply tomorrow” or “they will arrive at 6:00″.

The nouns that are involved in a verb are called the verb’s arguments. In English grammar we typically talk about subjects (which go before the verb) and objects (which go after the verb).

The subject is the noun that we’re making a statement about, or the noun that is doing the action of the verb. For example, in the sentences above, “Tsomo is the subject of “Tsomo fell down” because she’s the one who’s doing the action of falling down, and “Nyima” is the subject of “Nyima sent a letter to Dawa”, because he’s the one who’s doing the action of sending the letter to Dawa.

The object is the noun that the verb is being done to. For example, “a cat” is the object of “I see a cat” because it is the thing that’s being seen, and “a letter” is the object of “Nyima sent a letter to Dawa” because it is the thing that’s being sent.

There are also various other types of arguments, such as the recipient (“to Dawa”) or the location (“in India”). English usually marks these other types of arguments with prepositions like “to” or “in”, whereas the subject and object are left unmarked. The sentence “Nyima sent a letter to Dawa” thus has three arguments: “Nyima” (the subject), “a letter” (the object), and “to Dawa” (the recipient).

Tibetan verbs also have internal structure, tense, and arguments, but these often work a bit differently in Tibetan than they do in English. Tibetan verbs also have other important features that are not so important for English verbs. In this unit we will look at six basic dimensions of Tibetan verbs:

• internal structure (simple vs. complex, verb root vs. auxiliary)
• transitivity
• arguments
• respectfulness (a.k.a. honorifics)
• tense
• evidentiality (personal, factual, experiential, etc.)

Section 1 will offer a theoretical overview of Tibetan verbs through these six dimensions. Just focus on understanding the basic points being made here; we will study more concrete examples in later sections.

1.1. Internal structure

Tibetan verbs can be divided into be-verbs and true verbs. True verbs are in turn divided into simple verbs and complex verbs. These categories are shown in the following list:

• be-verbs: {ཡིན་} and {ཡོད་}
• true verbs: every verb other than {ཡིན་} and {ཡོད་}
  • simple verbs: consist of a single verb
    • e.g. བསྡད་ “to live/stay” (v.)
  • complex verbs: consist of a noun or adjective + a verb
    • e.g. སློབ་སྦྱོང་ “studying” (n.) + བྱེད་ “to do” (v.) = སློབ་སྦྱོང་བྱེད་ “to study”

All Tibetan verbs go at the end of the sentence. For example:

• བསྟན་འཛིན་རྒྱ་གར་ལ་ཡོད་རེད། Tendzin is in India
• བསྟན་འཛིན་རྒྱ་གར་ལ་བསྡད་ཀྱི་ཡོད་རེད། Tendzin lives in India
• བསྟན་འཛིན་རྒྱ་གར་ལ་སློབ་སྦྱོང་བྱེད་ཀྱི་ཡོད་རེད། Tendzin studies in India

When used in a sentence, verbs usually include a verb root (e.g. བསྡད་ or བྱེད་) plus an auxiliary (e.g. ཀྱི་ཡོད་རེད།). We learned about the roots of be-verbs in Unit 5 for {ཡིན་} and Unit 6 for {ཡོད་}, and we will learn about their auxiliaries in Unit 9. For now, let’s focus instead on the verb roots and auxiliaries of true verbs.

The verb root of a true verb carries the following information:

• the main meaning of the verb (e.g. “to live”, “to do”)
• transitivity (transitive vs. intransitive)
• respectfulness (familiar vs. respectful)

The auxiliary of a true verb carries the following information:

• tense (past vs. present vs. future)
• evidentiality (personal vs. factual vs. experiential)

To illustrate this, let’s consider the example sentences given above. The verb root བསྡད་ means “to live (somewhere)”; it is intransitive; and it is familiar. The verb root བྱེད་ means “to do”; it is transitive; and it is familiar. The auxiliary ཀྱི་ཡོད་རེད། is present tense and factual.

In the following sections we will explore what these labels mean in more detail.

1.2. Transitivity

Transitive verbs (བྱེད་འབྲེལ་ལས་ཚིག་) involve a noun doing an action to another noun, where the two nouns are separate entities. We can remember this by thinking that transitive verbs are done by one noun to another just as public transit goes from one station to another.

Intransitive verbs (བྱེད་མེད་ལས་ཚིག་), by contrast, do not transit from one noun to another. They only affect one noun, and are not done to it by some other noun.

Tibetan verbs generally match the transitivity of English verbs, so you don’t really need to memorize the transitivity of every verb you encounter. For example, the verb མཐོང་ “to see” is transitive in both languages (a noun sees another noun) and the verb རིལ་ “to fall down” is intransitive in both languages (a noun falls down — but no separate noun makes it happen).

If you’re not sure whether a verb is transitive or intransitive, just go ahead and make a sentence without worrying about it. You might make a mistake, but that’s fine. You’ll get better through practice, not through the paralysis of perfectionism.

1.3. Arguments

The nouns that are involved in a verb are called its arguments. In §1 above we looked at a few English sentences and learned about two main kinds of argument: subjects and objects. There are also other kinds of argument, such as recipients and locations.

The terms “subject” and “object” are very useful for describing English verb arguments, but are less useful for describing Tibetan verb arguments. When discussing Tibetan, we will more often talk about agents and patients instead. These are similar to subjects and objects, but not exactly the same.

English and Tibetan treat arguments differently in two ways:

1. Argument marking: English and Tibetan mark arguments in different ways (sentence order vs. particles)
2. Argument types: English and Tibetan have different types of arguments (subjects + objects vs. agents + patients)

1) Argument marking

In English, subjects and objects are marked by sentence order, i.e. whether you place the noun before the verb (which makes it a subject) or after the verb (which makes it an object). Other arguments (such as recipients) are marked with prepositions such as “to” or “from”.

In Tibetan, all arguments are marked using nominal particles, i.e. small words that follow the argument to specify what role it plays in the verb. Tibetan typically marks agents using the agentive particle {ཀྱིས་} (which we will learn about in §3 below), whereas patients are left unmarked, and other kinds of arguments are marked with other particles. For example:

• བདེ་སྐྱིད་ཀྱིས་ཞི་མི་ཞིག་མཐོང་སོང་། Dekyi saw a cat.
  • བདེ་སྐྱིད་ཀྱིས་ “Dekyi” is the agent because she is marked with the agentive particle {ཀྱིས་}
  • ཞི་མི་ཞིག་ “a cat” is the patient because it is unmarked

That being said, the arguments of a Tibetan verb still typically follow a specific order, which we will discuss in §5 below. In that context, the term “subject” may be used for the first argument, and “object” for the second argument. This is the convention I followed in Units 5-7 of this course, first introduced in Unit 5 §3.1.

Tibetan also changes the order of a verb’s argument to highlight which noun we’re making a statement about, most often by putting the noun that we’re making a statement about (i.e. the topic) at the beginning of the sentence. However, the actual argument type of the noun depends on its particle. For example:

• བོད་ལ་གཡག་ཡོད་རེད། རྟ་ཡང་ཡོད་རེད། In Tibet there are yaks and horses.
• གཡག་བོད་ལ་ཡོད་རེད། བལ་ཡུལ་ལ་ཡང་ཡོད་རེད། There are yaks in Tibet and in Nepal.

The arguments གཡག་ (“yaks”) and བོད་ལ་ (“in Tibet”) are marked the same way in both sentences — གཡག་ with no particle and བོད་ལ་ with a locative particle. However, the first sentence is making a statement about what’s in Tibet, so བོད་ལ་ is placed at the beginning of the sentence; whereas the second sentence is making a statement about yaks, so གཡག་ is placed at the beginning of the sentence. We will discuss this more in §5.3 below.

2) Argument types

The arguments of a Tibetan verb depend on whether the verb is transitive or intransitive. In this context, a noun that’s doing an action to another noun is called an agent, whereas a noun that’s being directly affected by an action (whether that action is done by a separate agent or not) is called a patient.

For example, the following sentences have transitive verbs:

• བདེ་སྐྱིད་ཀྱིས་ཞི་མི་ཞིག་མཐོང་པ་རེད། Dekyi saw a cat
• བསོད་ནམས་ཀྱིས་ཟླ་བ་ལ་ཡི་གེ་བཏང་པ་རེད། Sönam sent a letter to Dawa

These verbs are transitive because they involve an agent (བདེ་སྐྱིད་ཀྱིས་ Dekyi, བསོད་ནམས་ཀྱིས་ Sönam) doing an action (seeing, sending) to a separate patient (ཞི་མི་ཞིག་ a cat, ཡི་གེ་ a letter).

The following sentences have intransitive verbs:

• མཚོ་མོ་རིལ་སོང་། Tsomo fell down
• བསྟན་འཛིན་རྒྱ་གར་ལ་བསྡད་ཀྱི་ཡོད་རེད། Tendzin lives in India

These verbs are intransitive because they involve a patient (མཚོ་མོ་ Tsomo, བསྟན་འཛིན་ Tendzin) being directly affected an action without anyone else doing it to them. Tsomo is just sitting down herself; nobody else is making it happen. Likewise, Tendzin is just living in India himself; nobody else is making it happen. The nouns “Tsomo” and “Tendzin” in these sentences are patients because they are directly affected by the action, and so they are unmarked.

Notice that the agent-patient framework of Tibetan grammar is different from the subject-object framework of English grammar. In transitive verbs, the subject is the agent and the object is the patient; but in intransitive verbs, the subject is the patient. To put it another way, the agent corresponds to the subject of transitive verbs, whereas the patient corresponds to the object of transitive verbs and the subject of intransitive verbs.

1.4. Respectful verbs

Verb roots have respectful (or honorific) forms just like nouns do. Honorific forms are commonly used for strangers, older people, and especially for religious figures. For example, the following two sentences both mean “Tendzin lives in India”, but the first is more casual and the second is more respectful:

• བསྟན་འཛིན་རྒྱ་གར་ལ་བསྡད་ཀྱི་ཡོད་རེད། Tendzin lives in India.
• བསྟན་འཛིན་རྒྱ་གར་ལ་བཞུགས་ཀྱི་ཡོད་རེད། Tendzin lives (h.) in India.

We won’t discuss honorific verbs in detail here. In general, you can ask “་་་་་་་ཀྱི་ཞེ་ས་ག་རེ་རེད།” (“What is the honorific of ___?”) to figure out the honorific form of a noun or a verb.

1.5. Tense

In older forms of Tibetan, tense was marked by the verb root, and so auxiliaries were rarely used. Verb roots had up to four distinct forms: the past tense, the present tense, the future tense, and the imperative. For example, the verb བཏང་ “to send” had the following forms:

• བཏང་ (past tense)
• གཏོང་ (present tense)
• གཏང་ (future tense)
• ཐོངས་ (imperative, i.e. a command or an order)

However, over time, more and more prefix letters became silent, so the different forms of the verb root started to sound similar. For example, བཏང་ and གཏང་ have the same pronunciation in Standard Tibetan. As a result, Tibetan speakers began to rely on auxiliaries to mark tense instead.

Then, as auxiliaries became a common way to mark tense, it stopped being necessary to distinguish the different tenses of the verb root at all. Because of this, many Tibetan verb roots have collapsed into a single form in the spoken language — most often that of the past tense.

For example, in Standard Tibetan the past tense root བཏང་ is used for all tenses in the spoken language, whereas the forms གཏོང་ and གཏང་ only appear in the written language. Likewise, the sentence བསྟན་འཛིན་རྒྱ་གར་ལ་བསྡད་ཀྱི་ཡོད་རེད། is present tense because of its auxiliary, but it uses the past tense root བསྡད་ in the spoken language. However, in the written language it would be considered an error to use the past tense verb root བསྡད་ in a present tense sentence, and so the present tense root སྡོད་ would be used instead: བསྟན་འཛིན་རྒྱ་གར་ལ་སྡོད་ཀྱི་ཡོད་རེད།. The collapse of verb roots is still an ongoing process in Standard Tibetan, and different verb roots have collapsed to different degrees. Some verbs, such as འགྲོ་ (“to go”), are collapsing to their present tense root instead.

It can be useful nonetheless to study the different forms of verb roots — especially if you want to learn the written language, but also if you want to understand written-style speech. Traditional Tibetan grammar distinguishes between several different verb root patterns based on similarities in their spelling in each tense, including the generic (སྤྱིར་བཏང་), the particular (བྱེ་བྲག་), the equal pervasion (ཁྱབ་མཉམ་), and the miscellaneous (ཐོར་བུ་). We will not discuss these patterns in detail here because we will focus on learning the auxiliaries instead. However, you can ask a Tibetan teacher about them.

1.6. Evidentiality

Evidentiality is a term for the ways that a language allows us to express what kind of evidence we are drawing from when making a statement. For example, stating a fact based on general knowledge is different from stating a fact based on our experience.

Evidentiality in Standard Tibetan is expressed through the personal vs. impersonal distinction we learned about in Unit 5 and the factual vs. experiential distinction that we learned about in Unit 6. These evidential distinctions apply not only to be-verbs, but also to true verbs, because auxiliaries are built around {ཡིན་} and {ཡོད་}.

We learned in Unit 5 that the use of personal vs. impersonal forms is ultimately about the degree of ownership or control that we want to express in a sentence. Personal verb forms express ownership and control, whereas impersonal verb forms express a lack of ownership and control. This means that personal forms tend to be used in first-person statements (“I” statements), but not always — we can use impersonal forms when discussing ourselves in an external or depersonalized way, such as when talking about other people’s opinions of us. I will call this phenomenon depersonalization.

Depersonalization can also happen when {ཡིན་} or {ཡོད་} are acting as auxiliary verbs. Certain verb roots, such as verbs of perception (e.g. མཐོང་, “to see”) or accident (e.g. རིལ་, “to fall down”), tend to be outside of our control. As a result, first-person statements that use these verb roots tend to expressed with an impersonal auxiliary even for first-person statements. For example:

• ངས་ཞི་མི་ཞིག་མཐོང་སོང་། I saw a cat
• ང་རིལ་སོང་། I fell down.

We will learn about the past tense later on, but the important point here is that the auxiliary སོང་ is an impersonal auxiliary, the same kind that you would use for making observations about other people. We use an impersonal auxiliary for these first-person statements because seeing and falling down are outside of our control; they are not actions that we intentionally did.

It is important to note that we can use different auxiliaries to express different levels of control. Certain verbs tend not to use personal forms — for example, falling down usually happens accidentally — but this is not always the case.

For example, let’s say that someone asks you a question, and you want to say that you don’t know the answer. You would typically use the impersonal auxiliary ངས་ཤེས་མ་སོང་། (“I don’t know”) to mean that you simply don’t know the answer. By contrast, using the personal form ངས་ཤེས་ཀྱི་མེད། (“I don’t know”) would imply that you could know the answer if you thought about it, and are simply refusing or choosing not to know the answer. So, the personal form ངས་ཤེས་ཀྱི་མེད། is typically a bit rude and uncooperative.

(However, the personal response becomes acceptable if the original question was phrased using a personal auxiliary (e.g. ་་་་ཤེས་ཀྱི་ཡོད་པས། “Do you know…?”), which is very common.)

We will discuss this topic in more detail later on. For now, it is enough to remember that impersonal auxiliaries, particularly experiential forms, are commonly used for physical experiences (e.g. I’m hungry, I’m thirsty, my head hurts, I fell down, etc.) and for thoughts and feelings (e.g. I’m happy, I’m sad, I remember, I forget, etc.). These experiences are typically things that happen to us, not things that we ourselves do. We can provisionally call such verbs non-volitional verbs.

We will learn about other evidential categories, such as inference, as we make our way through the different auxiliaries.

2. The present tense

The present tense (དུས་ད་ལྟ་བ་) is the tense used for events that are happening now, and that have not been completed yet (e.g. “I’m studying Tibetan”).

The present tense is also used for habitual actions, even if they are not occurring right this moment (e.g. “Tsomo showers every day”); and for long-term or habitual events in the past (e.g. “At that time, he was studying in India”).

The present tense has the format:

present tense verb root + {ཀྱི་} + {ཡོད་}

Because the present tense auxiliary verb is {ཡོད་}, it has different forms for personal, factual, and experiential events.

The personal present tense uses ཡོད་, the factual present tense uses ཡོད་རེད་, and the experiential present tense uses འདུག་. For example:

• ང་ཚོང་ཁང་ལ་འགྲོ་ཡི་ཡོད། I am going to the store.
• བསྟན་འཛིན་རྒྱ་གར་ལ་བསྡད་ཀྱི་ཡོད་རེད། Tendzin lives in India.
• ཆར་པ་བཏང་གྱི་འདུག It’s raining.
  • བཏང་ here is a verbalizer; see §6 below.

When used as an auxiliary verb, {ཡོད་} can still be negated or have verbal particles added to it, and it still follows the rule of anticipation.

• ཆར་པ་བཏང་གི་འདུག་གས། Is it raining?
• ཁྱེད་རང་ག་པར་བཞུགས་ཀྱི་ཡོད། Where do you live? / Where are you staying? (h.)
• ཁྱེད་རང་ཚབ་ཚབ་བྱེད་ཀྱི་མེད་པས། Aren’t you nervous?
  • ཚབ་ཚབ་ (adj. “nervous”) + བྱེད་ (v. “to do”) = ཚབ་ཚབ་བྱེད་ (v. “to be nervous”)

As mentioned in section 1, non-volitional verbs use impersonal forms for first-person statements and second-person questions:

• ང་ན་ཡི་འདུག I’m sick.
• ཁྱེད་རང་སྙུང་གི་འདུག་གས། Are you sick? (h.)

The present tense format is extremely important, and you should practice making present tense sentences until it becomes second nature.

2.1. The abbreviated present tense

Non-volitional verbs can often appear in a shortened form where the final {ཡོད་} is dropped; for example:

• ང་ན་ཡི། I’m sick.

2.2. Other present tense auxiliaries

There are a few other constructions that are sometimes used used to express continuous actions in the present tense. These forms are not very common and are more typical of the written language, so they are included here as a reference, rather than as something to memorize.

1) The གིན་ and བཞིན་ constructions

The meaning “to be in the middle of [verb]ing” can be expressed with the constructions:

verb root + གིན་ + {ཡོད་}

verb root + བཞིན་ + {ཡོད་}

For example:

• ང་ལས་ཀ་བྱེད་བཞིན་ཡོད། I’m working.
  • ལས་ཀ་ (n. “work”) + བྱེད་ (v. “to do”)
• ང་ཁ་ལག་བཟོ་གིན་ཡོད། I’m making food.
  • ཁ་ལག་ (n. “food”) + བཟོ་ (v. “to make”)

These constructions are easy to remember because they have basically the same format as the ordinary present tense. Their meaning is similar to the ordinary present tense, but they emphasize a bit more that you’re still doing the action described by the verb. Unlike the ordinary present tense, they are not used for habitual actions.

Note: I use the term “verb root” to refer to the main form of the verb root in the spoken language, but in the written language it may be considered more proper to use the present tense verb root.

2) The བསྡད་ construction

A continuous action that you’ve been doing for a while and are still doing, similar to the English phrasing “to have been [verbing]”, can be expressed with the construction:

verb root (+ ནས་) + བསྡད་ + {ཡོད་}

For example:

• ཆར་པ་བཏང་བསྡད་འདུག It’s been raining (and still is)
• ང་སློབ་སྦྱོང་བྱེད་ནས་བསྡད་ཡོད། I’ve been studying (and still am).

3) Postpositional present tense constructions

The meaning “to be in the middle of [verb]ing” can also be expressed with the constructions:

verb root + པའི་/བའི་སྒང་(ལ་) + {ཡིན་}

verb root + བཞིན་པའི་སྒང་ + {ཡིན་}

verb root + བཞིན་པའི་ངང་ + {ཡིན་}

These constructions involve postpositions, so I have called them “postpositional present tense constructions”.

For example:

• ང་ཁ་ལག་བཟོ་བའི་སྒང་ལ་ཡིན། I’m in the middle of making food.
• ང་ཁ་ལག་བཟོ་བཞིན་པའི་སྒང་ཡིན། I’m in the middle of making food.
• ཁོང་ལས་ཀ་བྱེད་བཞིན་པའི་ངང་རེད། They’re in the middle of working.
• ཁོང་ལས་ཀ་བྱེད་བཞིན་པའི་སྒང་རེད། They’re in the middle of working.

These express more strongly that you are in the middle of doing some action.

You can also use these constructions to make “while” clauses:

• ང་ཁ་ལག་བཟོ་བའི་སྒང་ལ་སློབ་སྦྱོང་བྱེད་ཀྱི་ཡོད། I’m studying while making food.

3. The agentive particle {གིས་}

The agentive particle {གིས་} is used to mark an agent. It has five alternate forms in the written language:

• ཀྱིས་ is used after ད་བ་ས་
• གིས་ is used after ག་ང་
• གྱིས་ is used after ན་མ་ར་ལ་
• -ས་ is added as the suffix letter to syllables with no suffix letter, and replaces the འ་ in words which have འ་ as their suffix letter
• ཡིས་ is mainly used in verse to fill out the meter

However, in the spoken language, all of these forms except for -ས་ are pronounced as ki. In very careful speech, the agentive particles have a sharply falling tone to distinguish them from the connective particles, but in ordinary speech they have the same pronunciation.

The particle -ས་ causes vowel raising because it is the suffix letter ས་.

The agentive particle is most often used in the past tense. Agents in other tenses are typically left unmarked, which is why we saw present-tense sentences with unmarked agents in the previous section:

• ཁྱེད་རང་ཚབ་ཚབ་བྱེད་ཀྱི་མེད་པས། Aren’t you nervous?
• ང་ཁ་ལག་བཟོ་གིན་ཡོད། I’m making food.
• …and so on.

The agentive particle is typically used only with transitive verbs.

3.1. Simple verbs with transitivity pairs

There are many pairs of simple verbs that have a similar appearance, where one verb is intransitive and the other is transitive. The transitive verb of the pair is usually marked with a superscript ས་. For example:

• འཁོར་ (“for something to spin”) vs. སྐོར་ (“to spin something”)
• གྱུར་ (“for something to change”) vs. སྒྱུར་ (“to change something”)
• ཐིམ་ (“for things to mix together”) vs. སྟིམ་ (“to mix things together”)

The left of these pairs is intransitive, and the right is transitive. Such pairs of simple verbs are more common in older forms of Tibetan, and in the written language.

3.2. Instruments

In addition to marking agents, the agentive particle is also used to mark instruments, which are the tools with which or causes by which something happens. For example:

• ངས་སློབ་དེབ་ཀྱིས་སློབ་སྦྱོང་བྱེད་ཀྱི་ཡོད། I’m studying with a textbook.

Note that this sentence has both an agent (ངས་ “I”) and an instrument (སློབ་དེབ་ཀྱིས་ “with a textbook”) marked with an agentive particle.

4. The past tense

The past tense (དུས་འདས་པ་) is used for past actions that didn’t last a long time and that are now complete.

The personal and factual past tense have the format:

past tense verb root + ({པ་}) + {ཡིན་}

The personal past tense uses ཡིན་ and the factual past tense uses རེད་:

• ང་ལངས་པ་ཡིན། I stood up. / I got up.
• བསྟན་འཛིན་རྒྱ་གར་ལ་སླེབས་པ་རེད། Tendzin arrived in India.

The experiential past tense has the format:

past tense verb root + སོང་

For example:

• མཚོ་མོ་སླེབས་སོང་། Tsomo has arrived.
• ང་རིལ་སོང་། I fell down.

The factual past tense is naturally somewhat rare in ordinary speech, and is mostly used for stories, news reports, and hypothetical past tense situations.

4.1. The abbreviated past tense

In casual speech, {པ་} is often dropped in the past tense for personal verbs:

• ང་ལངས་ཡིན། I stood up.
• ང་ཚོང་ཁང་ལ་ཕྱིན་ཡིན། I went to the store.
  • ཕྱིན་ is the past tense of འགྲོ་ (v. “to go”)

Past tense yes/no questions that are personal and volitional can be formed using the format:

verb root + པས་/བས་

For example:

• ཁྱེད་རང་ཁ་ལག་བཟོས་པས། Did you make food?
  • བཟོས་ is the past tense of བཟོ་ (v. “to make”)
• དངུལ་བཏང་པས། Did you send the money?

Past tense questions that use question words, and that are personal and volitional, can be formed using the format:

verb root + པ་/བ་

For example:

• ཁྱེད་རང་ག་པར་ཕྱིན་པ། Where did you go?
• ག་དུས་རྒྱ་གར་ལ་སླེབས་པ། When did you arrive in India?

4.2. Other past tense constructions

1) The མྱོང་ construction

The meaning “to have ever [verb]ed” can be expressed using the format:

present tense verb root + མྱོང་ + {ཡོད་}

For example:

• ཁྱེད་རང་རྒྱ་གར་ལ་འགྲོ་མྱོང་ཡོད་པས། Have you ever gone to India?
• ང་ཁ་ལག་བཟོ་མྱོང་མེད། I’ve never cooked.

2) The ཚར་ construction

The meaning “to be done [verb]ing” can be expressed using the format:

verb root + ཚར་ + ({པ་}) + {ཡིན་} (personal + factual)

verb root + ཚར་ + སོང་ (experiential)

For example:

• ངས་ལས་ཀ་བྱེད་ཚར་ཡིན། I’ve finished working.
• ཟླ་བས་སློབ་སྦྱོང་བྱེད་ཚར་སོང་ངས། Is Dawa done studying?

When used as a standalone verb, ཚར་ means “to finish”:

• ལས་ཀ་ཚར་སོང་ངས། Is all the work finished?
• ང་ཚར་སོང་། I’m finished! (either 1. “I’m all done!” or 2. “I’m done for!”)

3) The བྱུང་ construction

If you are the recipient or target of a verb, then you can use an alternate past tense:

verb root + བྱུང་

For example:

• ཉི་མས་ང་ལ་ཡི་གེ་བཏང་བྱུང་། Nyima sent me a letter.
  • ཡི་གེ་ (n. “a letter”), བཏང་ (v. “to send”)
• ཁོང་གིས་ང་ལ་ཁ་པར་བཏང་བྱུང་། He called me.
  • ཁ་པར་ (n. “a phone”) + བཏང་ (v. “to send”) = ཁ་པར་བཏང་ (v. “to call on the phone”)

5. Argument structure

Above we discussed how particles are used to show a noun’s relationship to the verb. Agents are typically marked with {ཀྱིས་}, patients are typically left unmarked, locations and recipients are typically marked with ལ་, and so on.

Different verbs have different kinds of arguments and different numbers of arguments, and the arguments of a verb typically follow a certain order. I will use the term argument structure to refer to the kinds of arguments that a verb has, the number of arguments that a verb has, and the order that those arguments typically follow.

5.1. Verbs with two arguments

Here is a list of argument structures for verbs with two arguments:

Class (with example)	1st argument	2nd argument
Null-null structures e.g. ང་དགེ་རྒན་ཆགས་སོང་། “I became a teacher”	unmarked e.g. ང་	unmarked e.g. དགེ་རྒན་
Null-ལ་ structures e.g. ང་རྟ་ལ་ཞེ་ཡི་འདུག “I‘m scared of horses”)	unmarked e.g. ང་	+ ལ་ e.g. རྟ་ལ་
Null-ནས་ structures e.g. ང་བལ་ཡུལ་ནས་ཡོང་ཡིན། “I came from Nepal”	unmarked e.g. ང་	+ ནས་ e.g. བལ་ཡུལ་ནས་
Null-དང་ structures e.g. ང་གྲོགས་པོ་དང་ཐུག་སོང་། “I met with a friend”	unmarked e.g. ང་	+ དང་ e.g. གྲོགས་པོ་དང་
ལ་-null structures e.g. ང་ལ་དངུལ་བརྙེས་སོང་། “I found money”	+ ལ་ e.g. ང་ལ་	unmarked e.g. དངུལ་
{ཀྱིས་}-null structures e.g. ངས་ཞི་མི་ཞིག་མཐོང་སོང་། “I saw a cat”	+ {ཀྱིས་} e.g. ངས་	unmarked e.g. ཞི་མི་ཞིག་

For example, “null-ལ་ structures” would refer to all verbs that leave their first argument unmarked, and that add the particle ལ་ to their second argument. The sentence ང་རྟ་ལ་ཞེ་ཡི་འདུག (“I’m scared of horses”) is a null-ལ་ structure because its first argument (ང་ “I”) is unmarked, and it’s second argument (རྟ་ “horses”) is marked with the particle ལ་. Note that the arguments of Tibetan verbs are often marked differently from the arguments of English verbs — for example, ང་རྟ་ལ་ཞེ་ཡི་འདུག would translate literally as “I’m scared at horses”, and ང་ལ་དངུལ་བརྙེས་སོང་ would translate literally as “To me, money was found.”

I have not followed existing descriptions of argument structure (such as Joe Wilson’s system of 8 verb classes) for five reasons:

1. They are typically designed for Classical Tibetan and not Standard Diaspora Tibetan;
2. they categorize arguments on the basis of Sanskrit grammar rather than Standard Diaspora Tibetan grammar;
3. they cannot be adapted fluidly to any Tibetic lect;
4. they conceive of verbs as being part of a class even if the verb can follow more than one argument structure;
5. they require memorizing abstract numbers or Latinate case names such as “nominative” and “accusative”.

The chart above is based on the main particles that are used to mark arguments in Standard Diaspora Tibetan. The order of arguments here is based on how a verb would be used in a neutral narrative, so arguments that are rearranged for rhetorical effect (see §5.3 below) are not counted as a separate argument structure.

Particles with limited usage (e.g. the comparative particle ལས་) are discussed as being part of certain constructions (e.g. the comparative construction), and are not counted as examples of fundamental argument structures. Instruments are considered to be optional additions to a verb, and thus are not counted as true arguments either.

5.2. Verbs with three arguments

Here is a list of argument structures for verbs with three arguments:

Class (with example)	1st argument	2nd argument	3rd argument
{ཀྱིས་}-ལ་-null structures e.g. ཉི་མས་ཟླ་བ་ལ་ཡི་གེ་བཏང་པ་རེད། “Nyima sent a letter to Dawa”	+ {ཀྱིས་} e.g. ཉི་མས་	+ ལ་ e.g. ཟླ་བ་ལ་	unmarked e.g. ཡི་གེ་
{ཀྱིས་}-null-ལ་ structures e.g. ངས་ཁོང་ཇོ་ཇོ་ལ་གོ་ཡི་འདུག “I think of him like a brother”	+ {ཀྱིས་} e.g. ངས་	unmarked e.g. ཁོང་	+ ལ་ e.g. ཇོ་ཇོ་ལ་

5.3. Deviations and alternate structures

There are two basic reasons reasons why a verb might deviate from its typical argument structure. These are argument-rearranging:

• topic-fronting (e.g. བོད་ལ་གཡག་ཡོད་རེད།)
• emphatic rearrangement (e.g. དངུལ་ངས་བཏང་པ་ཡིན།)
• topic-finalizing (e.g. ཞིམ་པོ་ཡོད་རེད། ཤ་མོག་མོག)
• clipping (e.g. དངུལ་ང་ལ་སྤྲད་སོང་།)

…and particle-dropping:

• {ཀྱིས་}-dropping in non-past tenses (e.g. ང་ལས་ཀ་བྱེད་ཀྱི་ཡོད།)
• {ལ་}-dropping in possessive constructions (e.g. བསྟན་འཛིན་དངུལ་མང་པོ་ཡོད་རེད།)

Argument-rearranging is when we move an argument to a different part of the sentence (or remove it entirely) for rhetorical effect. For example, the topic may be placed at the front of the sentence:

• བོད་ལ་གཡག་ཡོད་རེད། “There are yaks in Tibet.”
  • This sentence is describing what’s in Tibet, and is not describing yaks.

…or, an argument may be emphasized by putting it directly before the verb, with an obligatory argument particle:

• དངུལ་ངས་བཏང་པ་ཡིན། “The money was sent by me.”
  • This could be said in an argument about who sent the money, or about who gets to determine the details of the service that was paid for, etc.

…or, the topic may be given after the end of the sentence, if it was clipped or forgotten initially:

• ཞིམ་པོ་ཡོད་རེད། མོག་མོག “They’re tasty, momos are.”

(Momos are Tibetan dumplings.)

Clipping reduces the number of stated arguments, which can make a verb look like it has a more limited argument structure than it really does:

• དངུལ་ང་ལ་སྤྲད་བྱུང་། “The money was sent to me.”
  • The agent (the person who sent the money) has been clipped, which makes the verb སྤྲད་ look like it only has room for two arguments. However, སྤྲད་ actually has room for three arguments.
  • Additionally, the recipient ང་ལ་ (“to me”) here has been rearranged for emphasis. With the verb སྤྲད་, the patient (here དངུལ་) usually comes after the recipient.

Particle-dropping is when a marked argument drops its particle. When this occurs, the order of the arguments is used to tell which argument is which. Argument rearranging usually cannot be done to a sentence with particle dropping because changing the order of a particle-dropped sentence would change its basic meaning.

The two particles that are dropped most often are {ཀྱིས་} and ལ་. As discussed above, {ཀྱིས་} is typically not used in non-past tense sentences. For example:

• ང་ལས་ཀ་བྱེད་ཀྱི་ཡོད། I’m working.

However, if you want to rearrange a non-past tense sentence, you can do so by adding {ཀྱིས་} back in:

• ལས་ཀ་ངས་བྱེད་ཀྱི་ཡོད། The work is being done by me.

The particle ལ་ is often dropped in possessive constructions:

• བསྟན་འཛིན་དངུལ་མང་པོ་ཡོད་རེད། Tendzin has a lot of money.

Also, some verbs can use multiple different argument structures, which I will call alternate structures. For example, the verb གོ་ means “to hear” when used with a {ཀྱིས་}-null structure (e.g. ངས་སྐད་ཅོར་ཅིག་གོ་སོང་། “I heard a noise”), and means “to think of” or “to consider” when used with a {ཀྱིས་}-null-ལ་ structure (e.g. ངས་བསྟན་འཛིན་ཇོ་ཇོ་ལ་གོ་ཡི་འདུག “I think of Tendzin as a brother”). As another example, the verb འགྲོ་ (“to go”) often follows a null-ལ་ structure in the spoken language and a {ཀྱིས་}-ལ་ structure in the written language, with no change in meaning.

6. Verbalizers

Verbalizers are verbs that can be attached to a noun or adjective to make a complex verb. For example:

• སློབ་སྦྱོང་ “studying” (n.) + བྱེད་ “to do” (v.) = སློབ་སྦྱོང་བྱེད་ “to study” (v.)
• བེད་སྤྱོད་ “use, utility” (n.) + བྱེད་ “to do” (v.) = བེད་སྤྱོད་བྱེད་ “to use” (v.)
• ཆར་པ་ “rain” (n.) + བཏང་ “to send” (v.) = ཆར་པ་བཏང་ “to rain” (v.)
• ཁ་པར་ “a phone” (n.) + བཏང་ “to send” (v.) = ཁ་པར་བཏང་ “to call on the phone” (v.)

The 3 most common verbalizers are བྱེད་, བཏང་, and བརྒྱབ་. When used as simple verbs they mean “to do”, “to send”, and “to hit” respectively, but when used as verbalizers their literal meaning is not important, and their function is simply to turn a noun or adjective into a verb.

Many complex verbs can use several different verbalizers; for example:

• བེད་སྤྱོད་བྱེད་ or བེད་སྤྱོད་བཏང་ “to use”
• ནང་སྦྱོང་བྱེད་ or ནང་སྦྱོང་འབྲི་ “to do homework”
• ནོར་འཁྲུལ་བྱེད་ or ནོར་འཁྲུལ་བཟོ་ “to make a mistake”

And many verbs have both simple and complex forms with the same meaning:

• དྲན་ or དྲན་པ་བཟོ་ “to remember”
• ངེས་ or ངེས་པ་བྱེད་ “to keep in mind; to understand”

The honorifics of བྱེད་, བཏང་, and བརྒྱབ་ are usually གནང་, བཏང་གནང་, and བཀྱོན་ respectively.

6.1. Complex verbs with volition pairs

Many complex verbs have both volitional and non-volitional forms, depending on the verbalizer used. For example:

• གད་མོ་བགད་ “to laugh intentionally” vs. གད་མོ་ཤོར་ “to laugh unintentionally”
• མེ་སྤར་ “to light a fire” vs. མེ་ཤོར་ “for a fire to start by itself”
• གཅིན་པ་བཏང་ “to urinate” vs. གཅིན་པ་ཤོར་ “to piss yourself”

6.2. Complex verbs with transitivity pairs

Modern spoken Standard Tibetan has many pairs of complex verbs where one uses an intransitive verb root and the other uses a transitive verb root. For example:

• འགྱུར་བ་འགྲོ་ “for something to change” vs. འགྱུར་བ་བཏང་ “to change something”
• ཁག་ཁག་བྱེད་ “to separate / divorce” vs. ཁག་ཁག་བཟོ་ “to make people break up”
• སེམས་ཤུགས་འཕར་ “to be encouraged / motivated” vs. སེམས་ཤུགས་སྤར་ “to encourage / motivate someone”

These can be compared with transitivity pairs involving simple verbs (§3.2.).

6.3. Turning adjectives into verbs

You can turn adjectives into complex verb pairs with the following format:

adjective + ཆགས་ (intransitive)

adjective + བཟོ་ (transitive)

For example:

• ལྗང་ཁུ་ཆགས་ “to become green” vs. ལྗང་ཁུ་བཟོ་ “to make green”
• རློན་པ་ཆགས་ “to become wet” vs. རློན་པ་བཟོ་ “to make wet”
• མེད་པ་ཆགས་ “to disappear” (lit. “to become nonexistent”) vs. མེད་པ་བཟོ་ “to cancel” (lit. “make nonexistent”)

This allows us to make sentences like:

• ངའི་དུག་སློག་རྩྭས་ལྗང་ཁུ་བཟོས་སོང་། My clothes were made green by grass.
  • དུག་སློག་ (“clothes”), རྩྭ་ (“grass”)
• ངའི་དུག་སློག་ཆུས་རློན་པ་བཟོས་སོང་། My clothes were made wet by water.

You may be able to use a specific verb instead:

• ངའི་དུག་སློག་ཆུས་གཤེར་སོང་། My clothes were wettened by water.
  • གཤེར་ (“to wetten”)

You can also turn adjectives into complex verb pairs with the format:

adjective root + རུ་ + འགྲོ་ (intransitive)

adjective root + རུ་ + བཏང་ (transitive)

For example:

• དམར་རུ་འགྲོ་ “to become redder” vs. དམར་རུ་བཏང་ “to make redder”
• ཡག་རུ་འགྲོ་ “to become better / for something to improve” vs. ཡག་རུ་བཏང་ “to make better / to improve something”

The ཆགས་ vs. བཟོ་ constructions tend to be all-or-nothing, whereas the འགྲོ་ vs. བཏང་ constructions express different degrees of intensity. For example:

• ཀུ་ཤུ་དེ་དམར་པོ་ཆགས་སོང་། That apple became red (i.e. previously it wasn’t red, and now it is)
• ཀུ་ཤུ་དེ་དམར་རུ་ཕྱིན་སོང་། That apple became redder (i.e. it might have been a bit red already)

---

We’ve now finished learning the basics of true verbs. In the next unit we will learn about two more tense auxiliaries, verbal particles, adverbs, be-verb auxiliaries, and secondary verbs.

7. Terminology

7.1. Vocabulary

Nouns:

Verbs:

7.2. Jargon