Editing Suret language (section)

=== Tenses ===
Suret has lost the [[Perfect (grammar)|perfect]] and [[imperfect]] [[morphology (linguistics)|morphological]] tenses common in other Semitic languages. The [[present tense]] is usually marked with the [[subject (grammar)|subject]] [[pronoun]] followed by the [[participle]]; however, such pronouns are usually omitted in the case of the third person. This use of the participle to mark the present tense is the most common of a number of ''compound'' tenses that can be used to express varying senses of tense and aspect.<ref>Comrie, Bernard, ''Tense'', Cambridge Univ. Press, 1985.</ref>{{page needed|date=June 2021}} Suret's new system of inflection is claimed to resemble that of the Indo-European languages, namely the [[Iranian languages]]. This assertion is founded on
the utilisation of an [[active participle]] concerted with a [[copula (linguistics)|copula]] and a [[passive participle]] with a genitive/[[dative]] element which is present in [[Old Persian]] and in Neo-Aramaic.<ref>E. Kutscher, Two "Passive" Constructions in Aramaic in the Light of Persian, in: Proceedings of the International Conference on Semitic Studies held in Jerusalem, 19–23 July 1965, [[The Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities]] 1969, pp. 132–151</ref>

Both Modern Persian and Suret build the [[present perfect tense]] around the past/[[resultative]] participle in conjunct with the copula (though the placing and form of the copula unveil crucial differences). The more conservative Suret dialects lay the copula in its full shape before the verbal [[Constituent (linguistics)|constituent]]. In the Iraqi and Iranian dialects, the previous construction is addressable with different types of the copula (e.g. [[deictic]]) but with the elemental copula only the cliticised form is permitted. Among conservative Urmian speakers, only the construction with the enclitic ordered after the verbal constituent is allowed. Due to [[language contact]], the similarities between Kurdish and Modern Persian and the Urmian dialects become even more evident with their [[Negation (linguistics)|negated]] forms of present perfect, where they display close similarities.<ref>Cf. M. Tomal, Studies in Neo-Aramaic Tenses, Kraków 2008, pp. 108 and 120.</ref>

A recent feature of Suret is the usage of the [[infinitive]] instead of the present base for the expression of the [[present progressive]], which is also united with the copula. Although the language has some other varieties of the copula precedent to the verbal constituent, the common construction is with the infinitive and the basic copula cliticsed to it. In the [[Jewish Neo-Aramaic dialect of Urmia]], the symmetrical order of the constituents is with the present perfect tense. This structure of the NENA dialects is to be compared with the present progressive in Kurdish and [[Turkish language|Turkish]] as well, where the enclitic follows the infinitive. Such construction is present in Kurdish, where it is frequently combined with the [[locative]] element "in, with", which is akin to the preposition bi- preceding the infinitive in Suret (as in "bi-ktawen" meaning 'I'm writing'). The similarities of the constituents and their [[Morphosyntactic alignment|alignment]] in the present progressive construction in Suret is clearly attributed to influence from the neighbouring languages, such as the use of the infinitive for this construction and the employment of the enclitic copula after the verbal base in all verbal constructions, which is due to the impinging of the Kurdish and Turkish speech.<ref>E. McCarus, op. cit., p. 619, Kapeliuk gives further examples, see O. Kapeliuk, The gerund and gerundial participle in Eastern Neo-Aramaic, in: "Sprachtypologie und Universalienforschung" 1996, Vol. 51, p. 286.</ref>

The [[morphology (linguistics)|morphology]] and the valency of the verb, and the arrangement of the [[Grammatical relation|grammatical role]]s should be noticed when it comes to the similarities with [[Kurdish languages|Kurdish]]. Unlike [[Old Persian]], [[Modern Persian]] made no distinction between [[Transitive verb|transitive]] and [[intransitive verb]]s, where it unspecialised the [[absolutive]] type of inflection. Different handling of inflection with transitive and intransitive verbs is also nonexistent in the NENA dialects. In contrast with Persian though, it was the ergative type that was generalised in NENA.<ref>O. Kapeliuk, Is Modern Hebrew the Only "Indo-Europeanized" Semitic Language? And What About Neo-Aramaic?, "Israel Oriental Studies" 1996, Vol. 16, pp. 59–70</ref><ref>M. Chyet, Neo Aramaic and Kurdish. An Interdisciplinary Consideration of their Influence on Each Other, "Israel Oriental Studies" 1997, Vol. 15, pp. 219–252.</ref>

{| class="wikitable" align="center"
|+ Persian and Suret verb tense comparison
|-
! Language !! Transitive verb !! Intransitive verb
|-
| Modern Persian
| {{interlinear|košte-am|kill.PP-COP.1SG|'I killed'}}
| {{interlinear|āmade-am|arrive.PP-COP.1SG|'I arrived'}}
|-
| Suret{{clarify|which dialect|date=June 2021}}
| {{interlinear|qṭǝl-li|kill.PP-1SG.OBL|'I killed'}}
| {{interlinear|dmǝx-li|sleep.PP-1SG.OBL|'I went to sleep'}}
|}