Pashto verbs may seem confusing, unruly, and intimidating to the outside learner. But in reality, once we get to know them, we see that they all follow one beautiful, simple structure. If we can understand this [basic set of rules](#the-master-formula-for-pashto-verbs), all verbs will make perfect sense.
Over the course of this post we'll do three things:
1. Introduce the idea of [the two aspects in Pashto verbs](#two-aspects-in-pashto-verbs)
2. Give you the [simple master formula](#the-master-formula-for-pashto-verbs) for all verbs
3. [Prove](#how-this-actually-works-for-all-verbs) how this does work for *all* verbs
## Two Aspects in Pashto Verbs
The first thing to realize in that in Pashto, **every verb has two main roots**, based on two different [aspects](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grammatical_aspect).
In Pashto, all verbs are divided up into two different [aspects](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grammatical_aspect): imperfective and perfective. **We can think of the aspect as our *angle* or *perspective* on the action**. Do we see the action from inside, as something ongoing or recurring? That's the imperfective aspect. Do we see the action as a whole snapshot, completed and done? That's the perfective aspect.
It might help to think of these two aspects as *videos* and *photos* of some event. When you see a video <i className="fas fa-video" />, you can see the action happening over time. You can be immersed in it. You can see the inner workings of an action as it's ongoing or repeated. When you see a photo <i className="fas fa-camera" />, you see the action from the outside, as a whole. You just know that it happened, that's all.
With the <i className="fas fa-video" /> *imperfective aspect*, we can see that an action progresses over time, or is repeated.
import imperfInTime from "./imperfective-time.svg";
<img className="image-fluid" src={imperfInTime} alt="imperfective in time" />
With the <i className="fas fa-camera" /> *perfective aspect*, we only see that an action *happens*. We just see it as simple event. All we know is that the action occurs.
In English we often use these two different aspects with the past tense:
For an excellent explanation of these aspects from a different perspective, see [this video on how aspects are used in Maya](https://youtu.be/ttq0S4cuIHA?t=228).
In Pashto we also use these aspects not just for the past tense, but in all kinds of other ways as well. For example, in English we can only say "Eat palaaw!" but in Pashto you can have two very different kinds of commands, depending on the aspect that you use.
<td><em>You should make a habit of eating it, repeatedly or generally</em></td>
<td><em>I'm just telling you to do this one time.</em></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
If we set up a little graph of reality like this...
...then we can draw some rough diagrams of what all the different verb forms are used for:
import presentImg from "./present.svg";
import subjunctiveImg from "./subjunctive.svg";
import perfFutureImg from "./perfective-future.svg";
import imperfFutureImg from "./imperfective-future.svg";
import perfImperativeImg from "./perfective-imperative.svg";
import imperfImperativeImg from "./imperfective-imperative.svg";
import perfPast from "./perfective-past.svg";
import imperfPast from "./imperfective-past.svg";
import presentPerfect from "./present-perfect.svg";
<TensesChart>{[
[
{
notes: "Something that is happening, happens generally, or is definitely about to happen",
image: presentImg,
},
{
notes: "Used for hypothetical statements about the desire, necessity, purpose, or possibility of something happening. Or for saying something should or shouldn't happen",
image: subjunctiveImg,
},
],
[
{
notes: "Saying something will happen, repeatedly or as an ongoing action",
image: imperfFutureImg,
},
{
notes: "Saying something will happen as a one-time event - May also used when there is some doubt",
image: perfFutureImg,
},
],
[
{
notes: "Commanding someone/people to do something repeatedly, or in general",
image: imperfImperativeImg,
},
{
notes: "Commanding someone/people to do something one time",
image: perfImperativeImg,
},
],
[
{
notes: "Saying something was happening, or would happen",
image: imperfPast,
},
{
notes: "Saying something happened.",
image: perfPast,
},
],
[
{
notes: "Saying something happened and it affects the present",
image: presentPerfect,
}
]
]}</TensesChart>
That's nice, but when we speak Pashto, how do we actually make these different forms? What do we do to the verbs to make them fit into these different boxes?
Below is *one simple formula for every different form*. This is the **master chart** you came for. First have a look, and then we'll see how this actually works with different verbs.
## The Master Formula for Pashto Verbs
export const verbFormula = [
[
<>imperfective stem + present ending</>,
<>perfective stem + present ending</>,
],
[
<>به + present</>,
<>به + subjunctive</>,
],
[
<>imperfective stem + imperative ending</>,
<>perfective stem + imperative ending</>,
],
[
<>imperfective root + past ending</>,
<>perfective root + past ending</>,
],
[
<>past participle + equative verb</>
],
];
<TensesChart formula={verbFormula} />
Behold the simplicity. All verbs follow this chart exactly. Yes, all of them. Exactly.
- With transitive past tense verbs, the endings will agree with the object, not the subject.
- With negative imperative statements, only the imperfective form is used.
</div>
## How this actually works for all verbs
Now let's see how we can use this formula to make the forms of *any kind of verb we want*. Whatever verb we encounter, it will always follow these very simple rules. We just need to explain what these "stems" and "roots" that we mentioned are.
#### Regular Verbs
Here's how you make the ingredients mentioned with regular verbs:
Other verbs have a *special form in the present tense (imperfective stem)*. To make the perfective stem we just add a **"و - oo/w" prefix** on the front of this irregular stem form.
Here are a couple examples of verbs where the present / stem forms are irregular:
<p style={{ fontSize: "smaller" }}>Note: Many intransitive verbs can be said in a shorter form as well where the ېږ - eG is ommitted. For example "زه ګرځېږم" (I am walking around) or "زه ګرځم" (I am walking around - more common).</p>
#### Verbs that can't take the و - oo prefix
There are many words that begin with پرې - pre, کې - ke, بو - bo etc., and these words can't take an و - oo prefix in front in the perfective aspect.
There's a *very* small handful of verbs where multiple ingredients are irregular. But even these most unruly verbs dutifly and perfectly follow the formula.
**NOTE**: The لاړ in the perfective stem will inflect depending on the gender of the subject. For example, I woman will say, <span dir="rtl">"زه لاړه شم?"</span> while a man will say <span dir="rtl">"زه لاړ شم?"</span>. (subjunctive)
So far our formula is holding up well. it holds true for all kinds of different verbs. But will it work with compound verbs too? Yes, it will!
#### Special Auxillary Verbs
For compound verbs there's a very important set of auxillary verbs. These are extremely common in Pashto, and yes, they continue to follow our formula. They are also the only words we see that have irregular past participles.
info={getVerbInfo({"i":10247,"ts":1579015359582,"p":"کول","f":"kawul","e":"to make ____ ____ (as in \"He's making me angry.\")","c":"v. trans. irreg. stat. aux.","ssp":"کړ","ssf":"kR","prp":"کړل","prf":"kRul","pprtp":"کړی","pprtf":"kúRey","noOo":true})}
info={getVerbInfo({"i":10246,"ts":1527812752,"p":"کول","f":"kawul","e":"to do (an action or activity)","c":"v. trans. irreg. dyn. aux.","ssp":"وکړ","ssf":"óokR","prp":"وکړل","prf":"óokRul","pprtp":"کړی","pprtf":"kúRey","diacExcept":true})}
**NOTE:** When not used before an ل, the کړ - kR and وکړ - óokR in the perfective stem and perfective roots is often shortened to ک - k and وک - óok.
Some see these as only two verbs (کېدل and کول), and not four, probably because in some forms they are homonyms. But it really is helpful to think of them as four different verbs. They have completely different meanings, they're used differently in sentences, and they have diverging perfective roots and perfective stems.
Once we see these as four seperate verbs, so much confusion about when and why the و prefix is used completely dissapears. It is not random, and you don't have to memorize it!
Some have talked about these verbs having 'weak' (کول) and 'strong' (کړل) forms. But we will see that it's probably more accurate to think of these different roots and in the same categories as all other verbs: imperfective and perfective.
#### Transitive stative compounds with کول - to make
<details>
<summary>What are these??</summary>
There are a huge amount of compounds using کول (to make) in Pashto. These involve applying a complement to an object and somehow *changing the object*. These compounds come with a complement (an adjective, noun, or adverb) and take an outside object. Basically they follow this kind of pattern
I am making [object] _______ (complement).
These are made up of a **complement + کول**. Here's an example with پخول - pukhawul (to cook) whis is made up of پوخ (cooked) plus کول (to make).
زه آلوګان پخوم
zu aaloogaan pukhawum
I am cooking potatoes (I am making potatoes cooked)
When a complent ends in a consonant, we take off the ک in kawul and shove the two words together. پوخ + کول = پخول
If the complement is an adjective it will inflect to agree with the object if possible. (when it's not jammed together in the imperfective forms)
For example
ما الوګان پاخه کړل
maa aaloogaan paakhu kRul
I cooked potatoes (potatoes are masculine)
ما ورېژې پخې کړې
maa wrejze pakhe kRe
I cooked rice (rice is feminine plural)
You can also use nouns or adverbs in these compounds. If you are going to say "I'm sweeping the room" you say:
entry={{"i":5448,"ts":1577898915919,"p":"خفه کول","f":"khufa kawul","e":"to make sad, to grieve, to annoy; to choke, to make suffocate","l":1527812798,"c":"v. stat. comp. trans."}}
entry={{"i":13746,"ts":1589640176788,"p":"ورکول","f":"wrukawúl","e":"to lose/make lost, to misplace, to make dissapear, get rid off","l":1527814373,"c":"v. stat. comp. trans."}}
entry={{"i":5449,"ts":1577898920635,"p":"خفه کېدل","f":"khufa kedul","e":"to be sad, grieved, annoyed, upset; to be choked, to suffocate","l":1527812798,"c":"v. stat. comp. intrans."}}
e: "I've gotten lost. (ie. I am lost/dissapeared now)",
},
},
],
]}</TensesChart>
</VerbDemo>
#### Transitive dynamic compounds with کول - to do
<details>
<summary>What are these?</summary>
These kinds of compound verbs use کول - to do, or another helper verb like وهل - wahul etc.
They always involve *doing an action*, and the action itself is the object. This object is included *inside* the compound verb. And so in the past tense the verb will always agree with the object included in the compound.
When using کول - to do with these compounds:
- The ک is never dropped from کول as it is with the stative compounds. The 2 words in the compound are always seperate.
- There will *always* be a و prefix on کول in the perfective forms.
Notice how you will often hear people say, "دعا کوه!" (Pray for me!) This is an *imperfective* command meaning that they want you to pray for them, repeatedly, in general. If they just wanted you to make one prayer at one time, they would say "دعا وکړه!"
### There's more...
For the sake of simplicity, we've left out some verb forms. There are a number of other forms, but don't worry, they all follow simple formulas as well.
#### Habitual Past
import imperfectiveHabitualPast from "./imperfective-habitual-past.svg";
import perfectiveHabitualPast from "./perfective-habitual-past.svg";
long: { p: "ما به ډوډۍ پخوله", f: "maa ba DoDúy pakhawúla" },
short: { p: "ما به ډوډۍ پخوه", f: "maa ba DoDúy pakhawá" },
e: "I would cook food (each time I would be busy doing it as on ongoing event)",
},
},
{
ex: {
long: { p: "ما به ډوډۍ پخه کړله", f: "maa ba DoDúy pakha kRula" },
short: { p: "ما به ډوډۍ پخه کړه", f: "maa ba DoDúy pakha kRa" },
mini: { p: "ما به ډوډۍ پخه که", f: "maa ba DoDúy pakha ka" },
e: "I would cook food (each time seeing it as a single, whole event that was done)"
},
},
],
]}</TensesChart>
#### Other forms of Perfect
There are a number of different variations on the perfect form that can be made by adjusting the tense of the equative.
import pastPerfect from "./past-perfect.svg";
import futurePerfect from "./future-perfect.svg";
import affirmationalPerfect from "./affirmational-perfect.svg";
<TensesChart
custom={[
["Past Perfect"],
["Present Perfect"],
["Future/Possible Perfect"],
["Affirmational Perfect"],
]}
formula={[
["Past Participle + Past Equative"],
["Past Participle + Present Equative"],
["Past Participle + Future Equative"],
["به + Past Participle + Past Equative"],
]}
>{[
[
{
notes: "Talking about events that had happened in the past, or had affected a past situation",
image: pastPerfect,
ex: {
p: "هغې ډوډۍ خوړلې وه",
f: "haghé DoDúy khoRúle wa",
e: "She had eaten food",
},
},
],
[
{
notes: "Talking about that something happened in the past and it affects the present",
image: presentPerfect,
ex: {
p: "هغې ډوډۍ خوړلې ده",
f: "haghé DoDúy khoRúle da",
e: "She has eaten food",
},
},
],
[
{
notes: "Talking about something that will have happened in the future, or guessing that the event will have occured presently",
image: futurePerfect,
ex: {
p: "هغې به ډوډۍ خوړلې وي",
f: "haghé ba DoDúy khoRúle wee",
e: "She will have eaten food (future or uncertain)",
},
},
],
[
{
notes: "Affirming that an event will have taken place",
image: affirmationalPerfect,
ex: {
p: "هغې به ډوډۍ خوړلې وه",
f: "haghé ba DoDúy khoRúle wa",
e: "She'll have eaten food (affirmational)",
},
},
],
]}</TensesChart>
### Perfect Tenses and Equatives don't fit!
It's important to note that the [Perfect tense is not the same thing as the Perfective aspect](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfective_aspect#Perfective_vs._perfect)!
In fact, you will have noticed that the perfect forms don't quite fit into our division of <i className="fas fa-video" /> *imperfective* and <i className="fas fa-camera" /> *perfective* aspects. Perfect verbs can even be used with imperfective meaning.
Also, the equative verbs "I am, I was, I will be" (زه یم، زه وم، زه به یم) do not fit into this imperfective/perfective division. If you say someone *was* tired, you aren't specifying if they were tired at one point or if this was an ongoing thing.
Equatives are just like an `=` sign. They're just for saying something:
- was (past),
- is (present),
- or will be (future) something.
ie. He is hungry. He = hungry.
Equatives take the same endings as the other verbs, but **in Pashto they do not have an infinitive, and they don't have a perfective root**. In fact, maybe we could say that *they're not even verbs*. 🤔
<details>
<summary>A note on کېدل and the equative</summary>
But what about کېدل - kedul? Isn't that the infinitive for "to be?" I would propose that, کېدل is not quite the same as the equative in Pashto. It is only used for something "becoming" or changing into something, or for something "happening."
Using کېدل I can say that someone "became" tired: (<i className="fas fa-camera" /> *perfective*)
<Example left>{{
p: "هغه ستړی شو",
f: "haghá stúRey sho",
}}</Example>
And I can also say that he was "becoming" tired: (<i className="fas fa-video" /> *imperfective*)
<Example left>{{
p: "هغه ستړی کېدلو",
f: "haghá stúRey kedúlo",
}}</Example>
But with the equative I can only say that he "was" tired. (He `=` tired in the past)
<Example left>{{
p: "هغه ستړی و",
f: "haghá stúRey wo",
}}</Example>
This third form appears to be something completely seperate from کېدل. It doesn't fit into the same grid of categories that all other verbs fit into. It's used as **a connector for assigning meaning, but not as an event or action**.
It also appears that while there are there are the infinitives,
- کېدل (to become) ✔
- کېدل (to happen) ✔
...in Pashto there is no infinitive form of "to be."
- (to be) ❌
There are some cases and idioms where کېدل can be bent to almost fit an equative meaning. But usually, it carries more of a meaning of "becomming" or "happening/occuring".
For example, you can't say:
<Example left>{{
p: "زما پلار دلته کېدای شي",
f: "zmaa plaar dălta kedaay shee",
e: "My father could be here",
incorrect: true,
}}</Example>
but rather you have to say:
<Example left>{{
p: "کېدای شي چې زما پلار دلته وي",
f: "kedaay shee che zmaa plaar dălta wee",
e: "It could be/happen that my father is here",
}}</Example>
As mentioned, there are cases where people might be shortening these kinds of constructions or playing with the syntax a little and کېدل is used as something close to an equative.
*I could be wrong, and this does require further study*, but it appears that کېدل is not used as an infinitive meaning "to be" in Pashto setences. If someone is able to challenge this, please do so in the comments!
</details>
### Other forms not discussed:
In our master chart for Pashto verbs we have left out some forms for simplicity's sake:
- ability (I can..., I was able to...) etc.
- passive forms of transitive verbs (The book is being written, the book was written) etc.
- unreal / wish / prayer (If only you came! If only you were coming! etc.)
We haven't covered these forms, but don't worry, they also follow very simple, universal formulas.
Here's a final review of all the verb forms we have mentioned in this post, along with their formulas.
<TensesChart
bigFormula
custom={[
["Present", "Subjunctive"],
["Imperf. Future", "Perf. Future"],
["Imperf. Imperative", "Perf. Imperative"],
["Continuous Past", "Simple Past"],
["Imperf. Habitual Past", "Perf. Habitual Past"],
["Past Perfect"],
["Present Perfect"],
["Future/Possible Perfect"],
["Affirmational Perfect"],
]}
formula={[
...verbFormula.slice(0, 4),
["به + Continuous Past", "به + Simple Past"],
["Past Participle + Past Equative"],
["Past Participle + Present Equative"],
["Past Participle + Future Equative"],
["به + Past Participle + Past Equative"],
]}
>{[
[
{
notes: "Something that is happening, happens generally, or is definately about to happen",
image: presentImg,
},
{
notes: "Used for hypothetical statements about the desire, necessity, purpose, or possibility of something happening. Or for saying something should or shouldn't happen",
image: subjunctiveImg,
},
],
[
{
notes: "Saying something will happen, repeatedly or as an ongoing action",
image: imperfFutureImg,
},
{
notes: "Saying something will happen as a one-time event - May also used when there is some doubt",
image: perfFutureImg,
},
],
[
{
notes: "Commanding someone/people to do something repeatedly, or in general",
image: imperfImperativeImg,
},
{
notes: "Commanding someone/people to do something one time",
image: perfImperativeImg,
},
],
[
{
notes: "Saying something was happening, or would happen",
image: imperfPast,
},
{
notes: "Saying something happened.",
image: perfPast,
},
],
[
{
notes: "An action would happen over and over again, viewed as an ongoing event each time",
image: imperfectiveHabitualPast,
},
{
notes: "An action would happen over and over again, viewed as a whole event each time",
image: perfectiveHabitualPast,
},
],
[
{
notes: "Talking about events that had happened in the past, or had affected a past situation",
image: pastPerfect,
},
],
[
{
notes: "Talking about that something happened in the past and it affects the present",
image: presentPerfect,
},
],
[
{
notes: "Talking about something that will have happened in the future, or guessing that the event will have occured presently",
image: futurePerfect,
},
],
[
{
notes: "Affirming that an event will have taken place",
image: affirmationalPerfect,
},
],
]}</TensesChart>
Whatever the verb, you can easily conjugate it into all these different forms by following the formulas.
### A little more weirdness...
#### The idiosyncratic 3rd person masculine singular
One last important detail is that the **short forms of the masculine 3rd person past endings are often idiosyncratic**, and you will see some weirdness and variation with these forms. Nevertheless, there are often patterns and predictability with these idiosyncrasies.
Verbs ending in ـول - -awul will end with an ـاوهٔ
<Example left>{{
p: "هغه کار کاوهٔ",
f: "haghá kaar kaawú",
e: "He was working",
}}</Example>
With other verbs ending with a short a and then a consonant on the end, the short a will be lengthened to a long ا - aa. For instance, with the verb تړل - taRúl (to tie).
<Example left>{{
p: "ما هغه وتاړه",
f: "maa haghá óotaaRu",
e: "I tied him up",
}}</Example>
This is also why the third person masculine plural simple past form of کېدل is شو - sho, and in some dialects can even be شهٔ - shu.
