It is known that PIE had no grammatical future tense.

As such, I wonder how future events were expressed in PIE. Whether they used go-periphrasis, desiratives or a form of the root bheudh- (grow, develop)?


The reference to future was inferred from the context, much like in today's German: Ich arbeite morgen nicht (I won't work tomorrow). The adverb "tomorrow" indicates that the speaker conveys a future event. Without a semantic clue in the sentence, the preceding discourse might be an indication.

The go-periphrasis is a much later development.

  • 4
    While the disagreement among the daughter languages as to how to form a future certainly strongly implies that there was no future tense, I'm wondering how Atamiri can state this so dogmatically. How do we know what syntax they used?
    – Colin Fine
    Nov 14 '13 at 19:14
  • What is the evidence that the subjunctive - the PIE general irrealis mood - was not used for the future? Nov 15 '13 at 7:55

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.