A past participle can enter several constructions

Wilson distinguishes an indefinite past, formed with a past participle without an auxiliary, from a perfect using the present auxiliary and a pluperfect using the past auxiliary. His examples of sleeping keep the participle while changing the accompanying auxiliary to distinguish having slept from having slept before another past reference. His past-imperfect table works differently: it combines a present participle with a past auxiliary and translates the result as an action in progress in the past. A reader therefore needs to identify both the participle and its companion. The English word past does not name one unchanging Punjabi verb form.[2]

Agreement depends on the construction

The noun phrases matter too. In Wilson’s indefinite-past account, an intransitive verb agrees with its subject in gender and number. With a transitive verb, his agent-case construction allows an unmarked object to control agreement; an object accompanied by the dative postposition instead leaves the verb in its unchanging masculine form. The Lodiana grammar describes the subject of perfect past active constructions under its Instrumental case, then names exceptions and notes regional omission of the case sign. The different terminology should remain visible. Neither account supports a rule that every past verb simply agrees with the person performing the action.[1][2]

Compare the sending paradigm

The 1851 sending paradigm supplies a concrete comparison. Its “Present Past” translates as having sent, while its “Remote Past” translates as having sent earlier. The printed past participle shown below is part of those constructions, not a complete sentence by itself. A note permits an additional form of the verb to be before the auxiliary when the performed act remains in force. This helps separate a bare event, its continuing relevance and its relation to another time. When reading the table, keep its subject, participle and auxiliary together rather than borrowing only the English tense heading.[1]

Sources & notes

Source records include access dates and, where known, limits on what was examined. Checks used AI assistance; independent human or specialist review has not been completed.

  1. Lodiana American Presbyterian Mission Press; J. Newton attribution in the archive catalogue; Rev. J. Porter, press superintendent. A Grammar of the Panjabi Language; with Appendices ↗Historical descriptive and teaching grammar · Source date: 1851 · Locator: Printed pp.48–49,73 / PDF pp.61–62,86: sending paradigm, continuing-effect note and Instrumental syntax §§116–119. Accessed 2026-11-02.The actual selected original text was read. The Present Past/Remote Past page and its Gurmukhi participle were visually checked. Instrumental is the grammar’s own terminology, with its exceptions preserved.Return to Script form 1 ↑Return to Agreement depends on the construction, paragraph 1 ↑Return to Compare the sending paradigm, paragraph 1 ↑
  2. J. Wilson; acknowledged assistance of Munshi Mahbub Alam; Punjab Government Press. Grammar and Dictionary of Western Panjabi, as Spoken in the Shahpur District, with Proverbs, Sayings and Verses ↗Historical district grammar and dictionary · Source date: 1899 imprint; preface September 1898 · Locator: Printed pp.52–53 / PDF pp.70–71: past imperfect, indefinite past, object agreement, perfect and pluperfect. Accessed 2026-11-02.Both actual original pages were read and visually checked, including the continued object-marking rule at the top of p.53. The account is a dated Shahpur description.Return to A past participle can enter several constructions, paragraph 1 ↑Return to Agreement depends on the construction, paragraph 1 ↑
Help improve this entry. Suggest a correction with a source.
Record PH-LAN-0079 · English edition · human review not performed