Passive participles of the future tense. Future

SPbSU, St. Petersburg

ACTIVE FUTURE PARTICIPLE

PERFECT IN THE RUSSIAN LANGUAGE1

1. In the overwhelming majority of grammatical descriptions of the Russian language, the paradigm of real participles includes 3 members: present participles and past participles of the perfect (SV) and imperfect form (NSV). However, a number of researchers (V.A. Plotnikova in [Shvedova (ed.) 1980], V.V. Vinogradov in [Vinogradov 1947], etc.) note the presence in the language of so-called future participles, derived from SV verbs according to the formation model present participles and which are “a deviation from the literary norm; for example: hundreds of excerpts from Greene’s books that will excite everyone (Paust.); examples of headlines that can attract attention (gas.)" [Shvedova (ed.) 1980].

2. Proposals have been repeatedly put forward to introduce future participles into the participial paradigm of the Russian language. The first of these attempts (which dealt with the Church Slavonic language) should be considered the grammar of M. Smotritsky [Smotritsky 1619], which provides active and passive participles of the future tense, such as pobgoshsh (active) - beaten / pobgoshshs# (pass.) and etc. [Smotritsky 1619: 182]. However, this grammar was more focused on the translation of texts from ancient Greek (which contains participles of all times, including the future), rather than on living spoken language, for which it was criticized, in particular, by Yu. Krizhanich, who wrote in 1666 that “...single verbs do not have a present participle,” and “Smotritsky gives a lot of perverse words as an example” [Kpgats 1984: 144].

1 The study was supported by the Russian Humanitarian Foundation grant No. 09-04-00264a “Grammar of attributive secondary predications (relativization in the Russian language).”

In recent years, future participles have also attracted the attention of researchers more than once, however, all the articles and notes on them known to us are mainly aimed at resolving the issue of their status in literary Russian, see, for example, [Epstein 2000; Shapoval, manuscript]. We set ourselves the task of analyzing the use of future participles based on texts found on the Internet by the Google search engine (www.google.com), as well as assessing their acceptability based on an experiment with native speakers.

3. For the study, 100 frequency SV verbs were selected that do not have morphonological “contraindications” to the formation of future participles, and the first important result can be considered that for some of these participles (losing, going out, writing, finding, opening, saying) Google finds more than a hundred uses, and the person who comes for the communion finds more than five hundred.

To resolve the issue of independence (independence of context) of future participles, we analyzed 312 cases of their use from different points of view. We tracked in which cases they are most often used, whether they are necessarily part of a participial phrase, how often they are found in pairs with participles of the same root (drunk and drinkers, sung and singing), and compared the data obtained with the data for participles allowed by normative grammar.

The results speak in favor of the usefulness of the forms under consideration. For example, the case distributions of uses of future participles SV and past participles SV2 do not show statistically significant differences (p >> 0.10), i.e., from this point of view, future participles behave exactly the same as "full" past participles.

From the point of view of inclusion/non-inclusion in the turnover, between future and past participles (for comparison, we analyzed 312 examples of past participles

2 The distribution for past participles was calculated for contexts found in the National Corpus of the Russian Language (www.ruscorpora.ru) in the subcorpus with removed grammatical homonymy.

SW time) quite significant differences are observed. Thus, in our materials we found only 13 sentences with single future participles (4.17%), while single past participles make up 30.13% of uses (94 examples). However, these differences, in our opinion, are quite understandable if we take into account the “repressed” status of future participles and their rarity in the Russian language: a fairly large proportion of the single past participles we examined are fully or partially adjectival participles, such as past (grown by 6% over the past year) or sunken (moves his sunken lips), and adjectivation, as is known, occurs as a result of prolonged use of a word and a gradual change in its meaning, see [Lopatin 1966: 47].

An important parameter allowing us to make an assumption

about the reasons for the appearance of future participles in speech is their position in the participial phrase: they are almost 6.5 times more likely than the past participles of the SV from our sample to occupy a non-initial position in the participial phrase (46.15% versus 7.34% for past participles).

It can be assumed that it is precisely these kinds of cases that are “extreme”, forcing the carrier to fill in a cell that is usually not filled in in the participle paradigm. Indeed, the most successful replacement for the phrase with the future participle in the Russian language, as we will show below, is the relative clause, see (1):

(1) Thus was born a form with its own personality and originality, a happy combination of functionality and aesthetics that will not lose its appeal for many years. (Google)

However, since in relative clauses the member expressed by the relative pronoun always (with the exception of some special cases associated with the “pied catcher effect”) moves to the left periphery, starting dependent predication with any phrasal category that does not dominate the allied word (adverbs of time, etc.) etc.), the speaker can no longer use the “allowed” way of expressing the required meaning and is forced to use a non-literary form, see (2):

(2) I remember at the time when I wrote this, I considered myself a Great Writer, sooner or later who would write / *who would write a work of genius... (Google)

The last assumption that could indicate the lack of independence of future participles was that they are used exclusively or predominantly in pairs with past participles, see (3), or present participles, see (4), formed from a verb of the same aspect couples:

(3) We present to your attention a catalog of literary works published or published under the Neue Partisanen label. (Google)

(4) Poland is generally a unique, eternally dying, but not dying phenomenon in world history. (Google)

However, although such uses occur, they account for only 3.8% (12 cases), which, of course, cannot serve as a strong argument in favor of the lack of independence of the forms in question.

However, realizing that the examples found on the Internet could well have been generated by people who do not speak Russian well, we considered it necessary to conduct an experiment with literate native speakers, which would allow us to assess the acceptability of future participles from the point of view of speakers.

4. For the experiment, we selected 8 sentences from those considered earlier, diverse in terms of actional characteristics and argument structure of the verb from which the participle is formed, the structure of the participle phrase, etc. For each of the examples, we selected unique “analogs”: two sentences, if possible, repeating all the above characteristics of the original, but differing from it in that in one, instead of a future participle, there was a past participle SV with the same taxic meaning, and in the other, a relative clause3.

All proposals included in the questionnaire were found by us in the NCRC or on the Internet using the Google system, some of them underwent minimal editing before being presented to the public.

Here is an example of such a trio of sentences:

(5) But without respect there is no love, do not believe women who say otherwise! (Google)

(6) And I tell you right away: the person who has declared his candidacy will need to undergo an interview.

(7) And I will gladly laugh in the face of anyone who reports the presence of corruption at Moscow State University or MIPT.

During the experiment, respondents4 were asked to rate proposals on a four-point scale from absolutely acceptable (3) to absolutely unacceptable (0). For each sentence, the average score was calculated based on the results of the experiment, which was subsequently used for comparison.

As expected, the future participles prohibited by the norm turned out to be the least acceptable of the three options (average score - 1.26), however, since, for one reason or another, the two grammar-allowed options did not score the maximum number of points (average score for past participles was 2.15, and according to the most acceptable option - relative clauses - 2.39), we can say that the assessment by speakers of future participles is 53% of the recorded maximum, which, of course, is not much, but not so much that it can be neglected .

5. Thus, although in the Russian language the actual participles of the future tense SV are prohibited by grammar, but, being allowed structurally, they periodically occur in texts (especially when replacement is impossible, i.e., first of all, in a non-initial position in the participial phrase) , demonstrate noticeable similarities in behavior with “full-fledged” participial forms and are not perceived as completely marginal by native speakers.

4 For the experiment, 20 people aged from 18 to 43 years old who had received or are receiving higher education were selected. Schoolchildren and people with a philological education were not allowed to participate (these two groups of people, as it seemed to us, could be guided in their assessments primarily not by a sense of language, but by knowledge of normative grammar that prohibits the forms being studied).

Literature

Vinogradov 1947 - V. V. Vinogradov. Russian language. Grammatical doctrine of words. M.: Uchpedgiz, 1947.

Lopatin 1966 - V.V. Lopatin. Adjectivation of participles in its relation to word formation II Questions of Linguistics 5, 1966. pp. 37-47.

Shvedova (ed.) 198G - N. Yu. Shvedova (ed.). Russian grammar. T. 1-2. M.: Nauka, 198G.

Smotritsky 1619 - M. Smotritsky. Slavonic grammar correct Syntagma. Evye, 1619. Reprint: Kiev, 1979.

Shapoval, manuscript - V.V. Shapoval. There's a prize for whoever draws the house! (Future participles in our speech). (http:IIwww.ruscenter.ruI 73G.html)

Epstein 2GGG - M. N. Epstein. Participles of the future tense (doing) II Projective Lexicon of Mikhail Epstein. Issue 17. 2GGG. (http:IIold.russ.ruIantologIintelnetIdar17.html)

Krizanic 1984 - J. Krizanic. Gramaticno izkazanje ob ruskom jeziku. Sabrana djela Jurja Krizanica. Knj. 2. Zagreb: Jugoslavenska akademija znanosti

- an unconjugated verbal form expressing a characteristic of a person or object that arises as a result of an action: comrade(Which?), arrived from Moscow(comrade who came from Moscow);
book(which?), read by me(the book I read).

The participle combines the grammatical features of a verb and an adjective. In it, as in the verb, the difference is , ; The participle controls the same case as the verb; the same adverbs can be attached to the participle as to the verb. But at the same time, the participle is declined and agrees with the noun in gender, number and case, like an adjective.

Participles are divided into valid And present and past passives. There is no future participle tense.

Active participles

Active participles denote a characteristic of a person or object that arises as a result of the actions of that person or object: reading student book, standing there is a table in the room.
Active participles are formed from transitive and intransitive verbs and retain the control characteristic of the verb; active participles of reflexive verbs retain the particle (meeting, met, met).

Formation of active participles

Active present participles are formed only from imperfective verbs by adding the present tense to the stem (for the first conjugation) or -ash-/-box-
push-ut - push-ushch-y (writing, writing, writing),
know - knowing (knowing, knowing, knowing),
knock-at - knock-ash-y (knocking, knocking, knocking),
pageó -yat - pageó -box (pageó building, building, building).

Active past participles formed from imperfective and perfective verbs by adding a suffix to the past tense stem -vsh-(after a vowel) or -sh-(after a consonant) plus generic endings of the adjective: wrote(nonsov.) - pisa-vsh-y, wrote-l(owl) - writing, carried(nonsov.) - brought it, brought it(owl) - brought it.

Passive participles

Passive participles denote a sign of a person or object undergoing some action: book, read comrade(a book that a friend read); house, built workers(the house that the workers built). Passive participles are formed only from transitive verbs.

Formation of passive participles

Passive present participles formed from imperfective verbs by adding a suffix to the present tense stem -eat-(for the first conjugation) or -them-(for the second conjugation) plus generic endings of the adjective:
read - read-e-th (readable, readable, readable),
vúd-im - vúd-im-y (visible, visible, visible).

Many imperfective transitive verbs do not form passive present participles (for example, from protect, beat, shave, bend, heat, hold, fry, measure, wash, crush, drink, heat, clean, sew and so on.).

Passive past participles are formed from transitive verbs of the imperfect and perfect forms by adding suffixes to the past tense stem -nn- , -enn- , -T- plus generic endings of the adjective: read-l - chúta-nn-y, brought - brought-y, closed-l - closed.

Suffix -nn- joins past tense stems ending in a vowel and I, Sometimes e:sow-l - sow-nn-y, uvúde-l - uvúde-nn-y.

Suffix -enn- (or -yonn- ) is added to stems ending in a consonant (see example above) or vowel And , which drops out (in this case, an alternation of the final consonants of the base occurs, similar to the alternations in the formation of the 1st line of the present or future simple tense): purchased - purchased(cf. I'll buy), asked - asked(cf. I'll ask).

Suffix -T- joins the stems of verbs ending in the indefinite form with -no, -no, -here , and to monosyllabic stems (the prefix is ​​not taken into account): took it out(from take out) - take it out,number(from prick) - colo-th, wiped(from wipe off) — wiped, bi-l(from beat) — bú-t-y(similar to: nailed down, broken).

The most common are the passive past participles of perfective verbs.

Declension of participles

Participles are inflected like full adjectives: real participles are inflected like adjectives with stems on sch, sh(For example, general, good), passive participles - modeled on adjectives with a base on a hard consonant (for example, new): reading, reading it... reading, reading it..., hú tann-y, hú Tann-oh etc.

Passive participles of the present and past tenses have a short form, which is formed similarly to the short form of adjectives: masculine - without ending, feminine - with ending -A , neuter - with ending -O , plural - with ending -s (for all genera): from darling - love, darling, darling, darlings; from brought - brought, brought. brought, brought.
In a sentence, short participles, like short adjectives, are used as a predicate (in combination with or without an auxiliary verb): Shop closed; Window was closed;
Books will be purchased .

• ← Communion →

Objective (associated with the adjective) features of a participle are the categories of gender, number and case, the possibility of forming short forms for passive participles, and the syntactic function of an agreed definition.

The participle is used in many Indo-European languages, Arabic, Hungarian, and also in many Eskimo languages ​​(for example, Sireniki).

In other languages, together with the gerund, it forms a special part of speech - English. Participle, German Partizip.

In russian language

The question of the status of the participle has been and is being resolved many times in Russian studies, but linguists agree that participles are formed from a verb. The formation of participles is closely related to the category of aspect and transitivity. For example, present and past participles can be formed from imperfect verbs, but only past participles can be formed from perfect verbs (although the meaning of future participles is making, writing- very transparent). In addition, passive participles can only be formed from transitive verbs.

Present participles are formed from the present tense stem. Active voice forms are formed using suffixes -ush- working) And -ash- holding). Forms of the present passive voice are formed using suffixes -om- , -eat- for verbs of the first conjugation ( slave) And -them- - for verbs of the second conjugation ( persecuted).

Past participles are formed from the stem of the infinitive. Active participles are formed using a suffix -vsh- for verbs whose stem ends in a vowel ( holding). Using a suffix -sh- such participles are formed from verbs with a stem on a consonant ( growing up).

Some verbs have specificity in the formation of participles; such verbs include verbs in -is , during the formation of which the original base is truncated ( sat down). From verbs with suffix -Well- It is possible to form two forms of participles, for example, extinguished - extinguished.

Passive past participles are formed using suffixes -nn- (from verbs to -at : read, Lost), -enn- (from verbs to -it And -whose : baked), -T- (from monosyllabic verbs: crumpled).

Passive participles usually have full ( verified) and short ( verified) forms. Short forms vary by gender and number.

However, not all present passive participles have a short form. Since passive present participles ( slave, readable) relate primarily to book speech; there are some stylistic restrictions on the formation of such forms.

Therefore, from colloquial and some neutral verbs (for example, beat, cover, feed and so on) often passive present participles are not formed.

Also, not all verbs form passive past participles in Russian.

Participles are divided into passive past and present tenses, active past and present tenses.

Passive present participles

Formed from imperfective verbs, transitive using the suffixes -em- and -im-:

• -im- is written if the participle is formed from a verb of the second conjugation.
• -eat- ; -om- is written if the participle is formed from a verb of the first conjugation.

Examples:driven, driven, driven

Passive past participles

Formed from perfective verbs, transitive using the suffixes -enn- (-yonn-); -nn-; -T-; -en- (-yon-); -n- .

Examples: offended, fed, rejected.

Active present participles

Formed from imperfect verbs, transitive and intransitive, using the suffixes -ush- (-yush-), and -ash- (-yash-).

• -ushch- (-yusch-) is written if the participle is formed from a verb of the first conjugation.
• -ashch- (-yash-) is written if the participle is formed from a verb of the second conjugation.

Examples: whistling, trembling.

Active past participles

Formed from perfective verbs using suffixes:

• -вш- is used in words whose stem ends in a vowel.
• -ш- is used in words whose stem ends in a consonant.

Examples:watched, withered

Adjectivation

Adjectivation The transition of various parts of speech into adjectives is called, but most often it is participles that are subject to adjectivation.

When adjectivated, participles lose their verbal categories and begin to denote a constant, static, unchanging feature, thus a rethinking of participles occurs.

Grammatical features

The participle changes according to the characteristics of the adjective. It changes by numbers, by cases, by gender in the singular.

The participle can be perfect and imperfect, past and present tense. These signs for the sacrament do not change.

Some scientists consider participles to be an independent part of speech, since they have a number of features that are not characteristic of the verb.

As verb forms, participles have some of their grammatical features. They are perfect type and imperfect; present time and past; returnable And irrevocable. The participle has no future tense form.

Participles are active and passive.

Denoting a characteristic of an object, participles, like adjectives, grammatically depend on nouns that agree with them, that is, they become in the same case, number and gender as the nouns to which they refer.

Participles change by case, by number, by gender (singular).

Case, number, gender of participles is determined by the case, number, gender of the noun to which the participle refers. Some participles, like adjectives, have a full and short form., formed by adding a particle to the active past participle. would, is debatable. However, similar forms are sometimes found in the works of N.V. Gogol, and in the form of a stable circulation would be an honor- from many other authors.

Participial

A participle with dependent words is called a participial phrase. In a sentence, the participial phrase and the participle are a separate or non-separate agreed upon definition.

In Russian, the participial phrase is often separated by commas. If the participial phrase comes after the word being defined, it is separated by commas on both sides. When the participial phrase stands before the word being defined, commas are not placed, except in cases where the word being defined is expressed by a personal pronoun or the participial phrase denotes the reason. If after the participle phrase there is the end of the sentence, then a comma is placed only before the participial phrase.

Examples:

• A program written in haste performed an illegal operation.
• A hastily written program performed an illegal operation.

Simple sentences can be overloaded with participial phrases:

• A woodpecker, pecking at a tree growing in a forest covered with snow falling from the branches, is very cold.

The situation is approximately the same as with the past participle, but in the future tense there are three forms of the participle. The first is similar in form to a definite future tense, the second is similar to an indefinite future, and the third is unique in its own way. It is formed by adding affixes -asy/-asse; -ysy/-ise to the stem of the verb. In order not to confuse it with a conditional verb, it is necessary to remember that the participle always modifies the noun and comes before it:

kilәchәk kon – future day; kilase ate - next year.

Future participles are often translated into Russian using participial phrases:

yazylachak novel - a novel that will be written; kiler kon – the day that will come; Barasy Hir – the place where we will go (we need to go).

K-NEG-

Tәрҗмә it:

Azat college student Kilgan. University student kilgan. Kitkan keshe, kire ( back) kaytyr. Eshlәgan eshegezne kүrsәtegez. Bashkargan eshne tiksherdek ( checked). Sin bargan bazaar yakhshymy? Marat Ukygan University әibәtme? Bik әybәt. Anda ukygan studentlar kanәgat ( happy).

Without sөylәshәbez. Kilgan Guzal kol bashlady ( started laughing). Without kibettә ( in the shop) ipi ( bread) aldyk. Algan ipi bez tiz ashadik ( ate quickly).

Participle

The participle (hal figyl) describes an additional action that occurs in addition to the main one, or gives additional information about the main action. In the Tatar language, gerunds are used much more often than in Russian: they serve to create numerous analytical forms of the verb.

There are four adverbial forms in the Tatar language:

1) the most common form is formed by adding the affix -yp/-ep/-p to the stem of the verb. It is this form that is involved in the formation of analytical verbs:

basyp tora – stands (is located, standing)

language beterә – finishes writing (finishes writing).

In combination with auxiliary verbs, for translation it is necessary to know the meanings of the auxiliary verbs (more on this in the next paragraph).

2) the second form of the gerund is formed by adding the affix -ganchy/-gәnche/-kanchy/-kәnche to the stem of the verb. This form of the gerund can have two meanings:

1. Anda barganchy, min concert baram.

Before going there, I'll go to a concert.

2. Anda barganchy, min concert baram.

Instead of going there, I'll go to the concert.

In the first case, the gerund denotes an action that preceded the main one. In the second case, the action that the subject intends to do instead of the main one. You can choose the correct translation only based on the context.

3) the third form of the gerund is formed by adding an affix to the stem of the verb -gach/-gәch/-kach/-kәch.

Anda bargach, min kino karym.

When I get there (after I get there), I will watch a movie.

Kilgach street, min kitәm.

When he comes, I'll leave.

4) fourth form - steam room: bara-bara (walking); soylәshә-sөylәshә (speaking, talking). The Russian reader quickly gets used to this form, but it must be remembered that the paired form of the gerund is used to express a repeated or prolonged action.

Kyzlar, sөylәshә-sөylәshә, suga kittelәr.

The girls, talking among themselves, went to get water.

K-NEG-LOR

Form four forms of gerunds from these verbs and translate:

Sample: kilү – kilep (coming); kilganche (before he comes; instead of coming); kilgәch (after he came); kilә-kilә (coming).

Yazu, baru, kitү, eshlәү, sanau, chigu, toru ( be, stand).

Auxiliary verb "ide". This verb does not have its exact meaning and can be combined with both names and different forms of the verb. This verb always indicates the past tense.

In combination with names, it coincides in meaning with the Russian verb “byl, bylo, were.”

Min ukytuchy we're going. – I was a teacher.

Alar 1987 nche elda studentlar ide. – They were students in 1987.

In combination with verb forms, it forms analytical tense forms:

1) verb in the form of the present tense + ide, taking personal endings of the second type:

Min yaza let's go. - I wrote.

Sin soili ideң. - You have said.

This is the form past unfinished tense denotes a continuous or repeated action in the past. Only this, of course, does not exhaust the meaning of this form: there always remains a connotation of duration and incompleteness of the action.

2) a verb in the form of the indefinite past tense + ide, taking personal endings of the second type:

Min yazgan let's go. – I (once) wrote.

Sin soylogan ideң. – You (once) spoke.

This prepast tense form denotes an action that occurred in the distant past or is repeated in the past.

3) verb in the present tense form + organ ide, also taking personal endings of the second type. This is how the shape is formed past multiple tense:

Min yaza torgan let's go. – I used to tell.

Sin soili torgan ideң . - You used to tell me.

This past tense form denotes an action that is systematically repeated in the past.

Of course, it is possible to memorize these analytical forms of tenses, but only through constant practice of oral and written speech can one work out their semantic nuances and correct application.

K-NEG-LOR

Put these verbs into analytical forms of the past tense and translate them:

Sample: kilү – kilә ide (came); kilgan ide (somehow (once) came); kilә torgan ide (used to come).

Yazu, baru, soylәү, eshluү, chigu, kitү.

Now remember the synthetic past tense forms of these verbs and compare them with the analytical forms:

Sample: kilү – kilde (came); kilgan (it turns out he came).

An auxiliary verb can also be attached to other forms of a semantic verb, thereby forming an analytical verb.

Knowledge of the Russian language will help you here: in the Russian language there is a particle “would”, which is, as it were, an unaccomplished “to be”. It is this particle that will help translate analytical forms from I'm going.

1) yazar ide – would write (denotes an action that, under a certain condition, would take place in the future):

Address: Belsam, Hat Yazar, let's go. – If I knew his address, I would write a letter (I want to write).

2) yazgan bulyr we go – would write (denotes an action that, under a certain condition, would have taken place in the past, but did not take place):

Address belgan bulsam, khat yazgan bulyr let's go. – If I knew his address, I would write a letter (I won’t write it anymore).

3) baryrga ide, yazasi ide – would go, write (expresses the desire to perform an action expressed by the main semantic verb):

Bugen kinoga baryrga ide. – I'd like to go to the cinema today.

Kichen hut yazasy ide. - I should write a letter in the evening.

4) yazmakchy ide - would like to write (intended to write). Verb construction of intention -makchy/-mәkche bula discussed in paragraph 8.

Min ana khat yazmakchy let's go. – I wanted to write him a letter (I intended to).

5) yazsyn ide - let him write (expresses the urge to perform an action expressed by the main semantic verb).

Niga ul khat yazmada son? Yazson go! – Why didn't he write a letter? Let him write!

6) In combination with a conditional verb yazsa ide The auxiliary verb is translated by the particle “would”. In this way, the conditional verb is placed in the past tense:

Street mina hat yazsa ide, min kilgan bulyr let's go. “If he had written me a letter, I would have come.”

K-NEG-

Translate, paying attention to analytical verbs:

Baryr let's go; kitәr let's go; uylarga ( think) go; yazasy ide; kitsen ide; Chyksyn ide; kilmakche ide; Leopard is coming.

Baryr let's go, esh yuk. Kilmakche let's go, yes bulmada. Sin mina yazsan, min qavap iterman ( I'll give you the answer). Mina kilsa street, min kitmәm. Min kitsәm, sin kөtep tor ( Wait). Ul Mina Khat Yazmada. Shuna kurә ( That's why) min kilmadem. Yazson go!

Kilsen is coming! Kilmade bit ( after all). Min anyn kayda ikәnen belsәm, let's go. Belmim shul!

Azat kaida, sin belesenme? Ul mina yazgan ide. Addresses bar. Birimma? Bir. Belmim, Marta Yazgan Ide St. Khazer September bit. Gynvar-February st. mina yaza ide, khazer yazmy.

Future participle in Russian.

Do we have future participles? Despite the prohibitions of academic and school grammar, they exist. “He who does, who can, who wishes, who sees, who reads...” Relation to the future is an important sign of the present. Future participles are organic to the Russian language, and only conservative linguistic morality prevents their use.

Looking into modern textbooks of the Russian language, we will find such firm formulations: “participles have forms of present and past tense, they do not have forms of future tense”; “unlike verbs, participles do not have a future tense”; "there is no future participle form."

In modern literary language, the forms of real participles are not used - -schy from verbs of the perfect form (with the meaning of the future tense), "he who decides to compose ", "trying to assure", "able to explain". (D. E. Rosenthal)

However, no convincing arguments are given against future participles. I will be grateful to grammarians who can explain why this cannot be said.

Perhaps this is the logic of the ban. The participle combines the properties of a verb and an adjective: the action performed by an object acts as a sign of this object. “Reader” is the person whose sign is the action “read”. You cannot define an object by what it does not do or has done, but only what it will do.

But this logic is extremely vulnerable, especially taking into account the fact that the Greek language, on the model of which the grammar of Old Slavic was largely created, has future participles. There are participles of the future tense in Sanskrit, and Latin, and in Esperanto, and in Ido, and in the language of the Avesta (beginning of the 1st millennium BC). Why can’t a future action serve as a sign of an object, since potential signs are just as important as actual ones? Culture, as a unity and interaction of times, cannot do without potential characteristics as determinants of the phenomena of the present. The very word "culture", Latin " culture" is the future participle of the verb colere, “cultivate”, “process”, “look after”, “take care”, “nurture”, “educate”.

We all carry the marks of our future, our possibilities. The fact that a student will read a book, even if only presumably, sets him apart from those who will not read it. The fact that a politician will fulfill his promises, even if only presumably, distinguishes him from those who will not fulfill them.

• Student, reader Vinogradov's entire textbook will easily pass the exam.
• Politician, performing what he promises will be able to count on the trust of the people in the next elections.
• Leader, again calling us into the bright future, will most likely turn out to be a new dictator.
• Soldier, first bringing news of the victory, he will be promoted to officer.
• Ecofascism is cruel but fair: to people breaking tree branch, your hand will be cut off.
• Brave man, capable defeat the dragon and receive a princess as a reward.
• Young woman, loving Such an experienced heartthrob is unlikely to be happy with him.

How to replace the future participle in these examples? They could only be replaced by qualifying subordinate clauses ("the brave man who can...", "the girl who will love..."), which add cumbersomeness to the speech. For that matter, then in general it is possible to remove subordinate clauses from use by replacing them with subordinate clauses. But if the language still needs subordinate clauses, then there is no reason to exclude future participles from them...

Comparison with Esperanto

Russian past participles can be of the perfect and imperfect form: “come” - “the one who came” and “coming” - “the one who came”, while future participles can only be of the perfect form: “coming” - "he who will come"; there is no participle corresponding to the form “he who will come.” In Esperanto, such participles are freely formed:

perfect view	imperfect species
past vr. veninta - who came	venadinta - who came
present vr. venanta - coming (now)	venadanta - coming (often)
bud.time venonta - coming (who will come)	venadonta - who will come)

Examples

• Blessed coming in the name of the Lord! (Psalms, 117:26) (also Mat.21:9; Mark.11:9; Luke 19:38) (in previous translations - “the one who is coming”).
• God gave me a wonderful house in such a beautiful place that many rich people would envy, those who wish have one for relaxation. (Elder Paisios)
• ...How pitiful is a man who cannot hold back the power of light that has already visited him capable! (Saint Philaret of Moscow)
• But in many places folklore is no longer preserved; unless he ended up in the non-moving departments of a museum and only by chance a musician or writer stumbles upon him, willing bring these parchments and scrolls to life. (Nikolai