Editing Umbrian language (section)

==== Moods ====
The Umbrian language inflects for three grammatical moods: [[Realis mood|indicative]], [[Subjunctive mood|subjunctive]], and [[Imperative mood|imperative]]. In the Umbrian language, [[Relative clause|relative clauses]] are exclusively attested as utilizing the indicative; although, evidence from the closely related Oscan language indicates that it may have been possible to employ the subjunctive in relative clauses that expressed characteristic.{{Sfn|Buck|1904|p=217}} Like Latin, the Umbrian subjunctive comprises the old functions of the original Proto-Italic [[Optative mood|optative]] and subjunctive, which fused together during the transition from Proto-Italic to Latin and Umbrian. Both the Latin and Umbrian languages exclusively preserved traces of the original optative in subjunctive inflections of verbs that derive from [[Thematic vowel|athematic]] Proto-Italic verbs:{{Sfn|Buck|1904|pp=231-232}} the athematic irregular Proto-Italic verb {{Lang|itc|*esom}}, with the optative 3rd person singular inflection {{Lang|itc|*siēd}}, evolved into Latin {{Lang|la|sit}} and the equivalent Umbrian form {{Lang|xum|si}}.{{Sfn|Buck|1895|p=134}} Umbrian and Latin are largely identical in their choice of derivation from either the Proto-Italic subjunctive or optative for their subjunctive forms respectively, although the Umbrian perfect subjunctive forms derive from the Proto-Italic subjunctive whereas in Latin they derive from the optative.{{Sfn|Buck|1895|p=135}} Umbrian and Latin both contain the vowel {{Lang|xum|-ā}} in the endings for the subjunctive forms of the second, third, and fourth conjugations (compare Latin {{Lang|la|terreat}} and Umbrian {{Lang|xum|terisandu}}), while first conjugation verbs shift the {{Lang|xum|-ā}} vowel in the stem to {{Lang|la|-ē}}.{{Sfn|Buck|1904|p=135}} One possible exception to this rule appears in the Umbrian verb {{Lang|xum|heriiei}}, which may constitute an {{Lang|la|-ē}} subjunctive of a third conjugation {{Lang|xum|-iō}} verb, although this form may be explained as a perfect indicative form based on the perfect stem of the verb.{{Sfn|Buck|1895|p=135}} The Umbrian present imperative is exclusively attested in two first conjugation forms: {{Lang|xum|aserio}} ("observe") and {{Lang|xum|stiplo}} ("bargain"), both substituting the final {{Lang|xum|-ā}} for {{Lang|xum|-ō}}. All other known Umbrian imperatives represent the future imperative.{{Sfn|Buck|1904|p=175}} 

The Subjunctive in Umbrian could also be used to express orders; the subjunctive of command is the most frequently appearing usage of the subjunctive in the Umbrian corpus. This jussive function of the subjunctive appears throughout the Iguvine tablets, which decree "{{Lang|xum|fust eikvasese Atiierier, ere ri esune '''kuraia''', '''prehabia''' pife uraku ri esuna}}," meaning "[the [[Flamen]]] '''shall have the care''' of the sacred affair; he '''shall furnish''' whatever is necessary."{{Sfn|Buck|1895|p=138}} [[Carl Darling Buck]], an American [[Philology|philologist]], argued that, in the attested Umbrian corpus, the jussive subjunctive and the imperative were used largely interchangeably.{{Sfn|Buck|1895|p=139}} However, the linguist D.M. Jones suggests that, while the imperative considered specific instructions, the jussive subjunctive was largely limited to descriptions of duties or punishments for officials.{{Sfn|Jones|1962|p=215}} Thus, the aforementioned sentences utilized the subjunctive as they were outlining ritual practices for Flamini, while statements such as "{{Lang|xum|'''di grabouie pihatu'''}}" (Jupiter Grabovius, purify!) utilize the imperative.{{Sfn|Jones|1962|p=214}} In negative commands, which call for something to not occur, Umbrian primarily utilizes the imperative, although the subjunctive form {{Lang|xum|'''neiřhabas'''}} appears in one inscription to mean "let them not use."{{Sfn|Buck|1904|p=215}} Furthermore, this term appears to violate the previously established distinction between the subjunctive and the imperative, as it used as an explicit instruction. The full sentence, reading "{{Lang|xum|huntak piři prupehast eřek ures punes '''neiřhabas'''}}," may translate to "When he has purified the jar, thereafter '''they shall not use''' any of that mead."{{Sfn|Jones|1962|p=218}} This interpretation proposes that the subjunctive form constitutes a special instruction outside of the original description of the ritual, thereby fitting the standard pattern of subjunctive use. However, Jones instead opts to resolve this anomaly with the translation "during the preliminary purification of the {{Lang|xum|huntak}} the aforesaid mead '''is not to''' '''be used'''." Jones argues that this interpretation is not just a more accurate translation but also ensures consistency with the standard rules of the Umbrian subjunctive as—in his version—the prohibitive command is distinct from the actual section of the description of the ritual that first mentions the mead, and thus, there is some level of discontinuity between the two pieces of the text.{{Sfn|Jones|1962|pp=218-219}} The Umbrian subjunctive and imperative also seemingly shared the capacity to express optative meanings, a function that—in Latin—is fulfilled by the subjunctive of wish. The Iguvine tablets contain the phrase "{{Lang|xum|fos sei, pacer sei}}," reading "may you be favorable, be propitious," which utilizes the subjunctive forms for optative meanings. However, it later contains a phrase of identical meaning which employs the imperative: "{{Lang|xum|futu fos pacer}}."{{Sfn|Buck|1895|p=140}}

Instances of a subjunctive of cause, in which the subjunctive is used in tandem with clauses of cause and result, are also attested in Umbrian. These clauses are typically introduced with the term {{Lang|xum|pusi}}, the Umbrian equivalent of Latin {{Lang|la|ut}}, meaning—in such clauses—"so that."{{Sfn|Buck|1895|p=141}} However, such clauses can also be introduced without the [[Conjunction (grammar)|conjunction]]: the phrase {{Lang|xum|stiplo aseriaia}}, reading "demand that I observe," expresses a meaning that can be translated into English utilizing the word "that," but lacks the equivalent Umbrian conjunction.{{Sfn|Buck|1904|p=216}} Another Umbrian conjunction, {{Lang|xum|sue}} or—alternatively—{{Lang|xum|sve}}, meaning "if" (compare Latin "{{Lang|la|si}}"), was involved in indirect questions: the Umbrian sentence "{{Lang|xum|Sve mestru karu fratru Atiief iu, pure ulu benurent, prusikurent kuratu rehte neip eru, enuk fratru ehvelklu feia fratreks ute kvestur, panta muta arferture si}}." reading "if the greater part of the Atiedii brothers announce it to not be properly cared for, then the magister or the quaestor should ask the brothers how many flamini there are."{{Sfn|Buck|1895|p=217}} The conjunctions {{Lang|xum|sue}} and {{Lang|xum|sve}} were also often used to introduce [[Latin conditional clauses|conditional]] clauses, which typically contained two components: a main verb in the imperative or subjunctive of command, followed by a secondary statement completed with a verb in the future or future perfect tense. However, scant evidence has been preserved indicating that the present or perfect subjunctive may have also fulfilled this function.{{Sfn|Buck|1904|p=220}} One example of a conditional clause without an introductory conjunction appears in the Iguvine tablets, which stipulates "{{Lang|xum|Heriiei façiu arfertur... kurçlasiu façia tiçit}}," meaning "if the flamen wishes to make the sacrifice, it is proper."{{Sfn|Buck|1904|p=221}} Jones suggests that the uses of the subjunctive may have extended to invocation, citing another passage from the Iguvine tablets which reads "{{Lang|la|'''di grabouie tio subocau'''}}." According to Jones, this statement utilizes a subjunctive form of "{{Lang|la|'''subocau'''}}" to mean "[[Jupiter (god)|Jupiter]] Grabovius, I invoke thee."{{Sfn|Jones|1962|p=214}}