Analysis of M XT Clause Unpublished BA H

ANALYSIS OF m-xt-CLAUSE:
xt
CIRCUMSTANTIAL CLAUSE MARKED BY A PREPOSITION
VIRTUALLY FUNCTIONING AS A CONJUNCTION
by
Hiroshi Yoshino
School of Archaeology, Classics and Egyptology
University of Liverpool
Dissertation submitted in partial fulfilment

of the requirements for the degree of BA (Hons) in Egyptology
April 2010
Word Count: 9811

ALGY450 Analysis of the m-xt-clause Hiroshi Yoshino
200359777
I certify that (i) any material in this dissertation which is not my own
work is properly identified and acknowledged, (ii) the dissertation complies
fully with the University of Liverpool regulations on plagiarism and collusion,
(iii) no part of the dissertation has ever figured in material successfully
submitted for the award of any other degree.
Hiroshi Yoshino
18 April 2010
Page 2 of 62
200359777
Table of Contents
Table of Contents ............................................................................................................ 3
List of Figures .................................................................................................................. 4
Abbreviations .................................................................................................................. 4
0. Introduction ............................................................................................................. 5
0.1. Aim ...................................................................................................................... 5
0.2. Objectives ............................................................................................................ 5
0.3. Methodology ....................................................................................................... 5
1. Subordinate Clauses Headed by Prepositions ...................................................... 6
1.1. Theories concerning circumstantial forms ......................................................... 6
1.1.1. Polotsky’s theory .......................................................................................... 7
1.1.2. The ‘Standard Theory’ ................................................................................. 8
1.1.3. Current Egyptological approach ............................................................... 10
1.2. Verb-forms as a prepositional object ................................................................ 13
2. Preposition-Conjunction m-xt .............................................................................. 15
2.1. Lexical contents of m-xt .................................................................................... 17
2.2. With Noun Phrases ............................................................................................ 18
2.3. With Infinitives .................................................................................................. 20
2.4. With Suffix Conjugations .................................................................................. 23
2.4.1. sDm=f forms ................................................................................................ 23
2.4.2. sDm.n=f forms ............................................................................................. 28
2.4.3. Contingent forms........................................................................................ 29
2.5. With Participles and Relative Forms ................................................................ 30
2.6. With Stative ....................................................................................................... 31
2.7. With Complement Clauses ................................................................................ 35
3. Initial m-xt-clauses
xt ................................................................................................ 36
4. Difference from other forms ................................................................................ 42
4.1. Unmarked: the Circumstantial sDm.n=f form ................................................... 43
4.2. Marked: the Subordinating Particles ................................................................ 45
4.3. Marked: Prepositions Dr and r-sA plus sDm=f ................................................... 48
4.4. Aspects as the primary ‘temporal’ distinction .................................................. 52
5. Needs of Specific Temporal Expressions ............................................................. 54
6. Conclusion ............................................................................................................. 55
Bibliography ................................................................................................................... 61
Page 3 of 62
200359777
List of Figures
Figure 1: Syntactic models of sentences in Polotsky’s theory ....................................... 8
Figure 2: Syntax tree of sentences in Polotsky’s theory ................................................ 8
Figure 3: Syntactic models of adverbial sentences in ST .............................................. 9
Figure 4: Syntax trees of adverbial sentences in ST .................................................... 10
Figure 5: Structures of sentences in the current Egyptological approach .................. 12
Figure 6: Syntax trees of sentences under the current Egyptological approach ......... 12
Figure 7: Syntax tree of a model sentence with the m-xt-clause ................................. 13
Figure 8: Syntax tree of Example (37)......................................................................... 44
Figure 9: Syntax tree of Example (38)......................................................................... 46
Figure 10: Syntax tree of Example (40)....................................................................... 48
Figure 11: Three major patterns of verbal objects in the m-xt-clause ........................ 52
Figure 12: The bipartite system of the object verb-forms of m-xt ............................... 60
Abbreviations
2T Second Tense form
ACT Active voice POSS Possessive expression
AdvP Adverbial Phrase PRG Progressive
AUX Auxiliary PRS Present tense
CMPL Complementizer/ Complement PRS1 First Present
clause PRT Participle
CPL Copula PRTCL Particle
EXT Existential PSS Passive voice
IMPTV Imperative PST Past tense
INDPT Independent Pronoun REL Relative form
INF Infinitive S Sentence
NAR Narrative SBJ Subjunctive sDm=f form
NEG Negative SEQ Sequential
NOM Nominal sDm=f/sDm.n=f form SG Singular
NP Noun Phrase STV Stative
NRM Normative sDm.xr=f/xr=f sDm=f VP Verbal Phrase
Page 4 of 62
200359777
0. Introduction
0.1. Aim
Some prepositions are obviously employed as a marker of the subordinate clause
of circumstance already in the Classical Egyptian1. However, there frequently recur a
number of ambiguous and problematic cases. This dissertation is aimed at presenting an
analysis of a subordinate clause introduced by one of such prepositions m-xt.
0.2. Objectives
There are three goals to achieve in this dissertation: (1) the lexical and functional
meanings of m-xt, (2) the morphosyntactic and semantic difference of the m-xt-clause
from other subordinate clause constructions, and (3) the degree of grammaticalisation of
m-xt (from a preposition into a conjunction).
0.3. Methodology
The analysis is to be made through examples from actual texts and through
comparison with those of other constructions. Examples are extracted from various
spells, inscriptions, and literary works of the Classical and Later Egyptian languages.
1
This stage of Egyptian language (i.e. Old Egyptian and Middle Egyptian) encompasses the Old
Kingdom, the First Intermediate Period and the Middle Kingdom. This is a counterpart to the Later
Egyptian (i.e. Late Egyptian, Demotic, and Coptic) roughly covering the late New Kingdom to the
Coptic Christian era (circ. the Fourth century AD). However, Middle Egyptian is often called the
Classical Egyptian since this was continuously used for hieroglyphic inscriptions in later periods.
Page 5 of 62
200359777
1. Subordinate Clauses Headed by Prepositions
Subordinate clauses2 can be divided into two types: unmarked (i.e. sentences
function as subordinate clauses on their own) 3 , and marked (i.e. sentences are
converted by introductory markers). The former type is expressed by either the
Circumstantial sDm=f/sDm.n=f forms or the Subjunctive sDm=f form4. The latter is often
constructed by placing a preposition or a particle in front of a sentence, and this type is
what m-xt concerns.
1.1. Theories concerning circumstantial forms
Before analysing actual examples of m-xt-clauses, here are briefly summarised
the major theories concerning the unmarked type and their difference, and the typical
cases of the marked subordinate clause and usual analyses.
Definition and function of circumstantial forms are not unanimous. There are
currently three major streams: Polotsky’s theory, the ‘Standard Theory’, and current
Egyptological approach. Essentially, however, the idea and the function of the
2
A subordinate clause breaks down into three types: (a) Complement or Dependent Clause, (b)
Relative Clause, and (c) Adverbial Clause (Kroeger, 2005:219). These three function respectively as
noun, adjective and adverb. Circumstantial clauses belong to the Adverbial Clause as its
sub-category.
3
The Circumstantial sDm.n=f form is included in this type, as this has no morphological marker of
subordination, although it has a Past tense marker (the infix .n). The opposition here is made by the
existence or lack of a free morpheme which explicitly marks the conversion of the governed clause
into a subordinate clause to a main clause.
4
Since the Subjunctive sDm=f form has wish and command aspects, they express a purpose and/or a
result of the event of the main clause in subordinate clause. This is not conflicting with the
m-xt-clause here.
Page 6 of 62
200359777
Circumstantial sDm=f/sDm.n=f forms are unanimously agreed among all three
approaches.
1.1.1. Polotsky’s theory
Formerly, Egyptological studies of language were largely based on
morphological analyses (i.e. observations of the appearance) and semantic-pragmatic
contents (i.e. what texts speak about). Although there was already an idea of the
circumstantial clause (or equally called the adverbial clause), which subordinates to the
main clause, morphology couldn’t solve a riddle since sDm=f/sDm.n=f forms in initial
position and Circumstantial sDm=f/sDm.n=f forms in non-initial position share very
identical appearances (cf. Gardiner (1957:159))5.
Polotsky brought his ‘revolutionary’ idea that most sentences in ancient
Egyptian language consisted of the syntactic pattern Noun Phrase + Adverbial Phrase.
This assumption explained a lot of constructions, including the remarkable Second
Tense (henceforth, 2T) construction. Under this syntactic analysis, all these (a) iw=i m pr
“I am in a house”, (b) iw(=i) sDm=i nn “I hear this”, (c) irr=i nn sDm.n=i st “I do this after
I have heard it” have the same structure: SENTENCE = [NOUN PHRASE] [ADVERBIAL
PHRASE] (Figure 1 and Figure 2)6.
5
Thus, Gardiner employed a term ‘virtual adverb clause’ in his grammar.
6
As he notes (Polotsky, 1965:311), the Semitic imperfect form tends to come in non-initial position
Page 7 of 62
200359777
(a) S = [NP iw=i ] + [AdvP m pr ]

(b) S = [NP iw=i ] + [AdvP sDm=i nn ]
(c) S = [NP irr=i nn ] + [AdvP sDm.n=i st ]
Figure 1: Syntactic models of sentences in Polotsky’s theory
NP AdvP
(a) iw=i m pr
(b) iw(=i) sDm=i nn
(c) irr=i nn sDm.n=i st
Figure 2: Syntax tree of sentences in Polotsky’s theory
In short, non-initial bare sDm=f/sDm.n=f forms are to be treated as ‘adverbial
verb-forms’ (i.e. circumstantial forms). This syntactic analysis, especially concerning 2T,
is sound and now recognised by other Egyptologists. According to his theory, the
m-xt-clause would function like m pr in Figure 2(a); however, there is no case of *iw=f
m-xt sDm=f.
1.1.2. The ‘Standard Theory’
The so-called ‘Standard Theory’ (henceforth, ST) of Egyptological linguistic
and to function as a subordinate clause (i.e. circumstantial clause) but auxiliary plus imperfect form
functions as an independent clause.
Page 8 of 62
200359777
study is largely owing to Polotsky’s pioneer works. The ST is aimed at incorporating
traditional Egyptological studies and Polotsky’s new idea into a new and basic theory of
the Egyptian language study.
Concerning circumstantial forms, the ST reinterpreted and classified adverbial
sentences (i.e. NP + AdvP) into three patterns:
(d) Noun Phrase plus Adverbial Phrase;
(e) Introductory auxiliary/particle plus Noun + Adverbial Phrase; and,
(f) 2T form plus Adverbial Phrase (Depuydt, 1983:46).
These Adverbial Phrases include adverbs, prepositional phrases, and
Circumstantial sDm=f/sDm.n=f forms. Thus, this can be expanded into six patterns as
follows (Figure 3 and Figure 4):
(d) S1 = [NP Hm=f ] + [AdvP m pr ]

S2 = [NP Hm=f ] + [AdvP sDm=f nn ]
(e) S1 = [Aux+Noun mk -sw ] + [AdvP m pr ]
S2 = [Aux+Noun iw=f ] + [AdvP sDm=f nn ]
(f) S1 = [NP irr=f nn ] + [AdvP m pr ]
S2 = [NP irr=f nn ] + [AdvP sDm=f nn ]
Figure 3: Syntactic models of adverbial sentences in ST
Page 9 of 62
200359777
NP AdvP
(d) Hm=f m pr
Hm=f sDm=f nn
(f) irr=f nn m pr
irr=f nn sDm=f nn
Aux NP AdvP
(e) mk -sw m pr
iw =f sDm=f nn
Figure 4: Syntax trees of adverbial sentences in ST
1.1.3. Current Egyptological approach
Whereas the ST followers try to figure out the syntactical structure of the
Egyptian language, other Egyptologists began to seek its semantic structure (i.e. what a
sentence actually says and means) by analysing verb-forms as ‘verbal’ verb-forms
(Collier, 1990). It is not sound in the theory of Polotsky above that sDm=f/sDm.n=f forms
constitute a NP (Noun Phrase) or AdvP (Adverbial Phrase) according to the current
Page 10 of 62
200359777
linguistic theories,7 where a phrase containing a verb should constitute a VP (Verbal
Phrase). A particle mk is here considered as an extra clausal constituent8, which has no
grammatical governance on other parts of sentence (Collier, 1992:51) (Figure 5 and
Figure 6).
The greatest difference is that there is no fixed pattern (i.e. NP + AdvP) which
cannot fully explain why the subordinate clause marked by a preposition is not found in
a slot of the Adverbial Phrase apart from cases where the 2T concerns. This problem is
easily resolved by employing the idea of the constituent structure (Kroeger,
2005:227-230[§12.4]). Under the current approach, each word is a minimal constituent
and this enables the m-xt-clause fit in a sentence.
7
This approach is greatly influenced by the American Structuralist Linguistics, whereas Polotsky
employed that of Europe. The essential difference is that the European Structuralist Linguistics takes
a sentence as a minimal part, whereas a morpheme, and even a non-morphological property, is
deemed to be the minimal part in the American one.
8
That is to say, a particle mk and other introductory auxiliaries and particles have nothing to do with
the syntax of a following sentence.
Page 11 of 62
200359777
(g) S1 = [Aux iw ] [NP =f ] [AdvP m pr ]

S2 = [Aux iw ] [NP =f ] [VP/AdvP ii.w / Hr ii.t]
S3 = [Aux iw ] [NP =f / =ø] [VP mr=f -st]
(h) S1 = [Prtcl mk ] [NP -sw ] [AdvP m pr ]

S2 = [Prtcl mk ] [NP -sw ] [VP/AdvP ii.w / Hr ii.t]
S3 = [Prtcl mk ] [NP ø] [VP mr=f -st]
(i) S1 = [VP irr=f nn ] [AdvP m pr ]

S2 = [VP irr=f nn ] [AdvP mr=f -st ]
Figure 5: Structures of sentences in the current Egyptological approach
Aux/Prtcl S’
NP AdvP
(g) S1 iw =f m pr
(h) S1 mk -sw m pr
Aux/Prtcl S’
NP VP
(g) S3 iw =f mr=f -st

(h) S3 mk =ø mr=f -st
VP AdvP
(i) S1 irr=f nn m pr
S2 irr=f nn mr=f -st
Figure 6: Syntax trees of sentences under the current Egyptological approach
Page 12 of 62
200359777
Aux/Prtcl S’
VP AdvP
iw ir.n=f nn m-xt sDm=f -st
Figure 7: Syntax tree of a model sentence with the m-xt-clause
1.2. Verb-forms as a prepositional object
By definition (Matthews, 2007:315), a preposition takes a noun or its equivalent;
and this is also the case in earlier Egyptian. There are four types of candidates for a
prepositional object: (1) noun phrases, (2) complement clauses, (3) Infinitives, and (4)
substantive verb-forms (i.e. Nominal and Subjunctive forms) (Gardiner, 1957:118;
Depuydt, 1998:83-85). The first three have a feature of noun by nature; it is
straightforward to consider them as noun equivalents. It is supposed almost as a rule
that a verb-form following a preposition is (a) Infinitive, (b) Subjunctive sDm=f form, or
(c) Nominal sDm=f/sDm.n=f forms.
The suffix conjugational forms are problematic when spotting one out of many.
For example, Subjunctive sDm=f form is expected to appear after a conditional clause
marker ir (Allen, 2000:250-251), whereas both Subjunctive and Nominal sDm=f forms
Page 13 of 62
200359777
are often found to appear after a preposition r9. Their morphological difference is
occasionally observable: non-geminating (Subjunctive sDm=f) and geminating (Nominal
sDm=f). Nominal sDm=f form geminates in the Geminating and the Weak verbs.
Subjunctive sDm=f form doesn’t geminate but has -y ending in the Weak verbs and, often
used independently as both main and subordinate clauses. In any case, Subjunctive
sDm=f form tells what is not yet realised but not counterfactual at the moment of speech
(irrealis10). For this semantic feature, it produces a future sense (“he shall hear”) but
also a wish and command sense (“May he hear” and “he may hear”) in independent
clauses. In Late Egyptian, it is the Subjunctive sDm=f form that appears as a
prepositional object, whose combination forms a subordinate clause (Junge,
2005:139-141 [§3.4.1]; 223-226 [§5.4.1])11.
Apart from Subjunctive and Nominal forms, although it is unusual and rare, Past
(or Present Perfect) sDm.n=f and contingent forms also come as a prepositional object.
Gardiner analyses that the sDm.n=f form in both marked and unmarked subordinate
9
A preposition ir is a full form of a preposition r; thus, they are allomorphs of the same root word.
There is a crucial difference that r + Subjunctive sDm=f expresses the until-clause (“at that he may
hear” > “until the point that he may hear”) but r + Nominal sDm=f form forms the subordinate clause
of purpose (“in order that”).
10
This is a matter of modality; irrealis means a low degree of certainty.
11
Note that Junge uses a term ‘prospective’ in his grammar. Prospective and Subjunctive sDm=f
forms were confused and undistinguished already by the time of Middle Egyptian texts. In passive
voice, Subjunctive employs an affix .tw, whereas Prospective Passive form geminates in the last
radical in any types of verbs (i.e. a strong verb sDm does geminates like sDmm). For the use of
Subjunctive Passive form is significant in a slot of Subjunctive-Prospective Active sDm=f,
Prospective forms disappeared or merged into Subjunctive sDm=f form.
Page 14 of 62
200359777
clause gives the explicit relative past sense, so that its event precede that of the main
clause (Gardiner, 1957:119-120[§156]; 330[§414.2]). Each verb-form will be further
analysed in the next chapter, with actual examples where m-xt takes them.
2. Preposition-Conjunction m-xt
Simple prepositions have their origin in nouns (e.g. Hr ‘on, over’ < Hr ‘face’; r
‘at, toward’ < r ‘mouth’). This is due to a loss of the grammatical case system12 at some
earlier stage of the language (Loprieno, 1995:99-100 [§4.7]). A strict word order13 and
free morphemes 14 took over the roles of cases (Satzinger, 2004:182). Compound
prepositions are combinations of a simple preposition plus a noun. Thus, Egyptian has a
variety of prepositions.
On the contrary, conjunctions are quite small in number. There are two types of
conjunction: coordinating and subordinating conjunctions (henceforth, respectively,
coordinator and subordinator). Coordinators link words, phrases, clauses, or sentences
(e.g. “sons and daughters”, “I went shopping and bought a pair of shoes”, and so on). In
Egyptian, coordination is principally expressed simply by juxtaposing one to another
12
Here matters the locative case, which expresses spatial and temporal point and status of nouns.
Case system is deemed popular in Afro-asiatic languages; however, neither Egyptian nor Semitic
languages show this feature in surviving written records.
13
Principally, earlier Egyptian has the VSO-type word order, although the SVO-type one coexists
(i.e. Pseudo-verbal sentences, including Stative). In later Egyptian, its basic word order changed into
SVO by a heavy use of auxiliaries and by a shift from a synthetic to an analytic language.
14
They are words, not being bounded or part of inflection.
Page 15 of 62
200359777
(e.g. rpa HAty-a “prince and governor”). However, prepositions Hr and Hna pragmatically
function as coordinators (Gardiner, 1957:69)15, as well as i-r-m and m-mitt in Late
Egyptian (e.g. The Last Will of Lady Naunakhte, 5.3-616).
Initial and continuative clauses (i.e. main clauses) are nothing more than
independent sentences which are juxtaposed and coordinated in this way, while
subordinate clauses are dependent to these main clauses. On occasions, however, these
main clauses can be marked by auxiliaries/particles. For example, the most common
auxiliary iw introduces an initial clause in earlier Egyptian17; equally, a particle mk18 is
used widespread to indicate the beginning of a new section (= the initial clause); and ix
marks a main clause with a nuance of ‘then’ but this is almost exclusively used with
Subjunctive sDm=f form. Subordination can certainly be both unmarked (by employing
the circumstantial forms) and marked (headed by particles or prepositions). Particles are
expected to appear rather freely (usually in the initial or the second position of a clause),
whereas prepositions have to come before both a noun equivalent and a sentence.
15
Gardiner also mentions a disjunction, which is also expressed in the same way. A disjunctive
conjunction r-pw is rarely placed at the end of sentence. Use of nb “every, all” can donate to such a
nuance (e.g. Weni, 10-11: n(n) wnt tAyty sAb TAty nb sr nb im “There was no vizier or official there.”).
16
P. Ashmolean Museum 1945.97, Document 1. A compound adverb m-mitt “likewise, also” is
repetitively used before nouns, i.e. “Now as for my cauldron… also the spike… also the metal vase…
also the adze…” should mean “Now as for my cauldron…, the spike…, the metal vase…, and the
adze…” (cf. Černý, 1945:31)
17
From Late Egyptian onwards, iw became a marker of subordinate clause (= a circumstantial
clause marker; e- in Coptic).
18
A set of particles mk/mT/mt/mTn/mtn may be derived from a verb mi “to see” with personal
pronoun (Gardiner, 1957:178-179[§234]). Allen (2000:189 [§16.6.7]) notes this mi “was originally
followed by dependent pronouns, like an imperative, rather than the suffix forms.”
Page 16 of 62
200359777
2.1. Lexical contents of m-xt
Compound prepositions, including m-xt in question, are combinations of a
simple preposition plus a noun (e.g. n-mrwt ‘in order that’ < n plus mrwt ‘for the desire
(of)’). Meaning of prepositions should retain part of lexical contents of their etymology
(e.g. m-Xnw “within, inside” is literally “in the interior (of), in a residence (of)”).
In the case of m-xt, there are two steps: a verb xt(i) “to retire, to retreat” changed
into a simple preposition xt ‘through(out)’; then, xt was compounded with m “in” into
m-xt “accompanying, after, as a result of”. The verb xt(i) has a lot of etymological
parallels in Afro-asiatic languages (Takács, 1999:168). Lexical contents of these related
words and its determinative (legs-walking-backwards19) tell that the verb xt(i) basically
means “to move away (from sb/sth)”. However, it’s not the case with a preposition xt,
whose determinative appears as the legs walking both forwards and backwards20. It is
assumed here that the nuance of ‘going away’ was deduced to ‘moving (to any
direction)’. A preposition xt should mean “passing through something”21, which is
rendered by “through”. The preposition m-xt in question is a compound of m “in; from;
by means of” and xt; it would originally mean “by (means of) carrying out to pass
through something” > “by completion of something” > “following the completion of
19
It is D55 in Gardiner’s Sign List.
20
That is to say, a determinative of xt is either D54 or D55 in Gardiner’s Sign List.
21
A preposition xt is here assumed to have derived from a past active participle of xt(i).
Page 17 of 62
200359777
something” > “after something (which is completed)”. Other renderings “in
consequence of the fact that” and “as a result of” (Faulkner, 1962:198) are compatible
with this analysis. For this reason, m-xt is supposed to take an object with a sense of
activity or result of events.
2.2. With Noun Phrases
Since a preposition takes a noun, it is natural to look at examples of m-xt with
noun phrases. When used as a pure preposition, m-xt is conventionally rendered as
“after” or “accompanying, following”, and it does suffice for translations here. As noted
above, nouns appearing after m-xt are presumably ‘eventive’ nouns (i.e. nouns referring
to some event):
(1) CT 829, VII 30 i

ink ir nfry m-xt Xnw
INDPT-1sg PST-ACT-PRT-make calm after storm
“I am one who made calm after storm.”
(2) CT 820, VII 19 p

ab.n=i ø m-xt nspw
PST-join=I (it) after wounds
22
“I have healed after wounds.”
In example (1) above, Xnw is a noun referring to an event of ‘storm’ and a noun
22
The literal translation is ‘I have joined (it) after wounds’. Here the unwritten pronoun ‘it’ surely
refers to wounds, and so ‘join wounds’ is rendered into ‘heal’. This sentence means “I took care of
people when they were injured.
Page 18 of 62
200359777
derived from a verb Xn(i) “to row, to sail (of boat)”, which should mean “those coming
from the waters”23. As for example (2), it is uncertain if nspw “wounds” derives from
any verb; however, it is easily imagined that there involves some event where someone
is ‘wounding’ or ‘getting wounded’. Therefore, it is possible to gain a sense of
‘movement’ or ‘event’ from both grammatical (explicit) and lexical (implicit) sources.
However, apart from numerous examples of m-xt=f “after him”, which appears
very frequently in a nisbe24 form imy-xt=f “who is after him” or “who is following him”,
there are two most popular nouns used as a prepositional object of m-xt, namely, rnp(w)t
“year(s)” and mni “death”:
(3) Urk. IV 58, 2

Hs.tw=i Hr rx=i m-xt rnpwt
SBJ-PSS-praise=I about knowledge=my after years
“I shall be praised about my knowledge after years.”
(4) Urk. IV 64, 16

ab.t(w) XAt=i m-xt mni
SBJ-PSS-present corpse=my after death
m is=i n Xrt-nTr
in tomb=my of necropolis
“My corpse will be presented after death in my tomb of necropolis.”
Although rnpwt “years” do not refer to any specific event, it is easily understood
23
Thus, Xnw would originally be some active participle.
24
A nisbe is an adjectival form of a preposition, and if compound prepositions, the first preposition
becomes this form. This is often used as a noun in a series of titles in Egyptian autobiography, e.g.
Hry-tp ‘who is upon’ > ‘chief’ or ‘nomarch (chief of nome)’.
Page 19 of 62
200359777
as the duration that he acquired his knowledge and as a series of inconsecutive events of
his learning things. More clearly, like examples (1) and (2), mni “death”25 contains an
event that this person dies, which cannot precede the presentation of his corpse in his
tomb (i.e. his burial).
2.3. With Infinitives
The infinitive is treated as a nominal; analysis of this requires a similar
examination taken above for Xnw “storm” in example (1). The Xnw is analysed to be a
nominalised active participle of Xn “to row, to sail”; in other words, Xnw is a noun
expressing a resultant event of an activity Xn. In contrast, bHn “to cut (up)” is used here
as an infinitive, which means that bHn (infinitive) is taken as a noun representing the
action of bHn itself (“the cutting-up”):
(5) CT 922, VII 126 g-i

qd.t(w) ist m-xt bHn
SBJ-PSS-build Isis after INF-cut
sqd.t(w) ø ist m-xt bHn=f
SBJ-PSS-cause.to.build (it) Isis after INF-cut=his
“Isis will be rebuilt after cutting up; Isis will be caused to rebuild it after his cutting.”
While in the example (5) above both infinitives lack in specifying its subject and
object, in other words, its agent (who cuts) and patient (who is cut) are not explicitly
25
The noun mni is originally a verb mni “to moor” and this verb is used as a euphemistic way of
saying “to die” (i.e. “mooring to the shore” is “arriving at the West”; that is, “dead and buried in a
tomb”).
Page 20 of 62
200359777
explained. The infinitival form of verbs has no reference to tense, aspect, mood or
voice; yet, it doesn’t mean that infinitives have none. In fact, infinitives in the initial
position of a sentence are sometimes best translated by the past tense (i.e. “narrative
infinitive”) (Allen, 2000:168[§14.14.2]). In a similar way, an infinitive appearing after
m-xt is to be translated by the past tense here:
(6) Urk. IV 745, 11-12

iw wD.n Hm=i qAb Htp-nTr -pn
AUX PST-order majesty=my INF-double god’s.offering this
m t n xA
in bread of thousand
m-xt ii.t Hm=i Hr dr rTnw
after INF-come majesty=my PRG-destroy Retjenu
“My Majesty has ordered to double up this god’s offering in thousands of bread, after My
Majesty returned from destroying Retjenu.”
An example (6) below clarifies the agent by employing an intransitive verb of
motion (which takes no object (=patient)). From its morphological feature, ii.t must be
an infinitive, although its Subjunctive form has the -t ending26 but always iwt not iit.
Any passive form (including the non-past sDm.tw=f forms) is not available for
intransitive verbs. Usually an infinitive takes a suffix pronoun either as its subject or
object. However, it is known that an infinitive of a transitive verb can take both subject
(suffix pronoun) and object (dependent pronoun). Not many prepositions take a fully
26
This is a feature of the Prospective sDm=f form, which already merged into the Subjunctive form
by Middle Egyptian.
Page 21 of 62
200359777
conjugated infinitive (i.e. those taking both subject and object), but it is the case with a
preposition m-xt:
(7) Urk. IV 90, 1-3

wD Hm=f Sad mr -pn
NAR.INF-order majesty=his INF-dig canal this
m-xt gm.t=f -sw DbA(.w) m inr
after INF-find=he it STV-block in stone
“His Majesty ordered to dig this canal, after he had found it blocked in stone.”
In other words, a transitive infinitive does behave like ordinary finite verb-
forms. This causes an ambiguity when determining its form, because of both its
appearance and meaning, as seen in the example (8) below:
(8) Urk. IV 751, 1-2

m-xt gm.t Hm=i ir.tw xt im m snTr
after INF-find majesty=my SBJ-PSS-make things there as incense
“(Look, it is My Majesty who provides calendar festivals as annual requirements, and who
opens the sight there in the Residence of my father Amun from Karnak Temple,) after My
Majesty has found that things be made there as incense.”
This gm.t in example (8) is considered to be an infinitive; thus, it works as in the
example (7), although its subject here is a noun Hm=i and its object is a whole
subordinate clause led by ir.tw (subjunctive passive sDm.tw=f). Another possible option,
gm.t(w) (present/subjunctive passive sDm.tw=f), is not appropriate because ir.tw cannot
be its object, if Hm=i ‘my majesty’ acts as both the agent and the patient of ‘finding’.
Page 22 of 62
200359777
Then, in that case, ir.t(w) xt im m snTr would be: (a) another prepositional object of m-xt,
(b) subordinate clause of purpose or result, or (c) an independent sentence. Although
these three are all grammatically possible, none of them provides a reasonable meaning.
The verb gm(i) ‘to find’ is very often found in above two combinations: gm=f —sw +
stative27 (Example (7)); and gm=f + subjunctive sDm=f (Example (8)). Therefore, it is
more natural and straightforward to take this ir.tw as a subjunctive passive and to take it
as the latter combination with gm(i).
2.4. With Suffix Conjugations
A great ambiguity occurs when m-xt takes a sDm=f form. Since various suffix
conjugations share similar appearances, it is generally hard to tell a single correct form28
with a definite certainty. For convenience, it is assumed here that a Nominal sDm=f form
comes after m-xt, according to a general behaviour of prepositions.29
2.4.1. sDm=f forms
Examples (9) and (10) below have nonverbal sentences30 as their main clause.
27
This seems to be an exception to a general rule of statives. In a subject-first stative construction,
the subject is modified by the stative. A stative in an adverbial clause also modifies a subject but one
in a main clause. The stative DbA(.w) in gm.t=f —sw DbA(.w) m inr is supposed to modify the subject
“he” (=f) according to this general rule; however, it is clear from a meaning that “it” (-sw; referring to
mr ‘canal’) is modified here. Thus, this is a fused expression of *gm.t=f iw=f DbA m inr *“he found
that it is blocked in stone”.
28
There is also cases that ancient Egyptian scribes deliberately used ambiguous forms to express
double meanings and that they confused one form with another.
29
A preposition surely takes the Subjunctive form, but the Nominal forms are usually expected to
appear in the slot.
30
More precisely, they are nominal sentences, respectively, in the “A —pw B” pattern and in the
Page 23 of 62
200359777
In other words, both main clauses are temporally unmarked and neutral; therefore, they
are set in the present tense practically relative to preceding passages (i.e. determined by
its context). These two verbs spr and wab have respectively the action and the state
Aktionsart31; thus, it is now clear that m-xt takes an event and a situation as well:
(9) CT 1158, VII 504 g

m-xt spr=sn r nb=sn
after NOM?-arrive=they at owner=their
“(One who is benefitted and who dwells in it is Osiris who is in it), after they have arrived at
their owner.”
(10) CT 1060, VII 316 b

m-xt wab Hwt-Hr
after NOM?-be.pure Hathor
“(I am one whose face is hidden within the shrine, and who is in charge of the chapel of the god
at the proper time which I have reached,) after Hathor becomes32 pure.”
In a case like the examples (9) and (10) above, where immutable verbs spr ‘to
arrive’ and wab ‘to become pure’ are used, it became extremely hard and virtually
impossible to spot a single correct form among all possibilities. What is frustrating is
that the use of immutable verbs as a prepositional object of m-xt is very popular.
A reason to take them as the nominal sDm=f is that a subjunctive form is
participial statement.
31
The action and the state are opposing properties, which concern whether or not there is any
change in a situation with them: the action comes with changes, the state with no change. However,
there are cases where this criterion cannot be applied straightforward (Comrie, 1976:49).
32
Egyptian adjectives are inceptive verbs and have a nuance of “becoming” into a particular state
(Matthews, 2005:187); thus, wab is “to become pure” but also “to be pure” when a Resultant aspect
is required (e.g. Stative).
Page 24 of 62
200359777
inappropriate here because there involves neither a strong determination (the
subjunctive mood: ‘I shall…!’) nor a wish (the optative mood: ‘May he…!’)33. As for
the infinitive, there is still some uncertainty, as both verbs spr and wab belong to the
strong verbs, with three radicals, which means that their infinitival forms are
indistinguishable from sDm=f forms34.
Another rendering for m-xt ‘since’ seems to be valid in examples (9) and (10),
because the scenes of main clauses and m-xt-clauses are inconsecutive and distant. A
meaning of an English conjunction ‘since’ has developed from ‘from the time that’ into
‘from the reason that’ (Lehmann, 1995:66). If the same phenomenon has occurred with
this conjunctional preposition, m-xt-clause also has a further property as background
knowledge35 for its main clause.
(11) Urk. IV 978, 15

ii.t(=i) m Hwt-nTr
NAR.INF-come(=I) from temple
m-xt ir(=i) Hss.t imn
after SBJ?-make(=I) PRS-REL-praise Amun
“I came from a temple, after I have made what Amun praises.”
33
Both meanings (determination and wish) are related to its use in a circumstantial clause of
purpose or result, which may be translated with respectively ‘in order that’ and ‘so that’.
34
Weak verbs and anomalous verbs have a distinct marker for the infinitival form: -.t ending.
Geminating verbs geminate their last radical (e.g. mA > mAA) in the nominal form. Strong verbs only
deform and double in the passive prospective form.
35
This may not be a direct trigger but a setting which precedes a situation in the main clause, i.e.
providing explanations for the current situation(s) and reasoning the action taken there.
Page 25 of 62
200359777
(12) Siut I 308-309

m-xt pr=f Hr ir.t xt m Hwt-ntr ra nb
after SBJ?-go =he on INF-do things in temple day every
“(…and giving by a wab-priest, who is in the duty of a monthly festival, a flat bread and a jar of
beer to his statue which is in the lower tomb shaft of his tomb,) after he has gone out upon
doing things36 in the temple every day.”
However, these examples (11) and (12) show use of the non-geminating sDm=f
form, which cannot be a Nominal sDm=f form where mutable verbs always geminate.
These two sDm=f forms, ir(=i) and pr=f, are most likely to be the Subjunctive sDm=f form.
There is also a case where a verb rdi appears not in Subjunctive form (di) or in Nominal
form (dd) in the example (13):
(13) Siut I 298

m-xt rdi n=i wnwt Hwt-nTr pA t HD
after ?-give to=me hourly.temple.staff the bread white
“…after the hourly temple staff has given me the white bread.”
This spelling rdi here has three possible suffix conjugational forms:
Circumstantial Present sDm=f form, Prospective sDm=f form, and Passive sDm(w)=f form.
The circumstantial form is not certainly used as a prepositional object. The Passive
sDm(w)=f form isn’t sound both syntactically and semantically. The Prospective form is
possibly the best choice among these three, as it was confused and merged with the
Subjunctive form.
36
ir xt ‘do things’ is an Egyptian idiom, which refers to giving offerings, reciting spells, and
performing any other funerary necessities.
Page 26 of 62
200359777
Use of wnn ‘to exist’ as a converter of the adverbial pattern nonverbal sentence
is also observed after m-xt:
(14) Urk. II 8, 13-15

ir.n=f st wr.t m-mAw
2T-PST-make=he place great newly
m inr-HD nfr n rwD
from limestone good to sandstone
m-xt wnn=s Dr rk Hm
after NOM?-exist=it during lifetime majesty
“He made the great place newly, from good limestone to sandstone37, after it had existed
during the reign of the majesty (of Amenhotep III).”
The verb wnn does conjugate like other ordinary geminating verbs. wnn here is a
geminated form which signals Nominal sDm=f form. The fact that geminating forms are
often found in the slot may indicate that Nominal forms are the ‘correct’ and ‘expected’
suffix-conjugational forms as an object of m-xt, as in a case of other prepositions. There
are two points to consider: (a) this inscription was made a thousand years later from the
end of the eighteenth dynasty, in the Graeco-Roman Period under Alexander the Great
(c. 332-323 BC), and (b) the verb wnn ‘to exist’ was used widespread as a converter
which explicitly marks verbal features (e.g. tense, aspect, mood, voice) for nonverbal
sentences (cf. Late Egyptian and Coptic).
Even though hieroglyphic writings of inscriptions retained ‘Classical’ Egyptian

37
Good limestone was white and of quality and luxury, while sandstone was considered cheap and
less luxurious.
Page 27 of 62
200359777
style, misunderstandings and mistakes of grammar would be often made by scribes of
such later times. Even if they made no mistake, wnn and its allomorphs seem to function
as a set of auxiliary verbs. In this sense, wnn was grammaticalised into a
semi-auxiliary38 and might be less forced to follow a general rule of and concerning
verbs as if being a particle. Actually this feature of wnn is emphasised in later Egyptian,
where its past sDm(=f) form became an imperfect converter (wn in Late Egyptian and
ne-- in Coptic).
2.4.2. sDm.n=f forms
Now the focus turns to sDm.n=f which is the second most frequent suffix
conjugational form appearing as a prepositional object. In a main clause, sDm.n=f shows
a Past tense (“he heard”) but also often with a Perfect aspect (as a Present Perfect tense:
“he has heard”). As Gardiner (1957:119; 330) claims, sDm.n=f seems to convey an
explicit Relative Past tense in subordinate clause:
(15) Qurneh, III, 2, 2-3 (Petrie, 1909)

iw hAb n(=i) Hr wAH-anx …
AUX PRS-send to(=me) Horus Wahankh (Antef)
m-xt aHa.n(=i) Hna pr xty
after PST-stand(=I) with house Khety
“Horus Wahankh… (Antef)… sends (a message) to me, after I have fought with a house of
Khety.”
38
In fact, wnn as a converter is often best rendered by ‘be’-auxiliary verb in English. Moreover, a
complementizer wnt is a derivational form of wnn.
Page 28 of 62
200359777
The Past sDm=f form had disappeared by the twelfth dynasty and was replaced
by a distinct Past sDm.n=f form since then (Eyre, 1994:122). It should be noted that this
belongs to the First Intermediate Period where Egypt was virtually divided by two
‘kingships’ in the north (i.e. the Delta) and the south (i.e. Thebes). Writings of this
period tend to show a certain oddity39, most likely due to the rise of the middle-classes
who were literate but not trained well and due to a desire of breaking the past tradition.
2.4.3. Contingent forms
Apart from ordinary and common suffix conjugations, there are also instances
with other kinds of suffix conjugation, namely contingent suffix conjugations, which
express events not yet happening at the time of speech. There are three of them:
sDm.in=f, sDm.xr=f (xr=f sDm=f), and sDm.kA=f (kA=f sDm=f); each matches respectively to
the past, present, and future events in relation to context and/or speech. Therefore, by
this nature, contingent verb-forms have the Relative Future tense:
(16) P.Ebers 53, 16-17

ir m-xt nD.xr=k afA 1 xt 1
PRTCL after NRM-grind=you sweet.clover 1 khet 1
rdi ø r rhdt -tn
IMPTV-place (them) to vessel this
“Now, after you grind 1 portion of sweet clover and 1 portion of khet, place them to this
vessel; (after boiling and straining, and you must have it drunk for 4 days.)”
39
For example, there is an unusual writing of anx (combination of anx (S34) and ms (F31) signs).
Page 29 of 62
200359777
Here nD.xr=k is a present contingent sDm.xr=f form which especially expresses a
currently necessary action (i.e. normative action). It is by meaning clear that the process
follows (1) grind ingredients, (2) place them in a vessel, (3) boil it, (4) strain it, and (5)
drink the medicine for 4 days. The function of sDm.xr=f form here should be an
emphasis on ‘grinding ingredients’ before any other stage of the process, most probably
because it makes a crucial difference on its effect and thus it is the most important
procedure that anyone must follow.
The problem here is the cotext of this example: medical papyri. Texts of this
genre are more instructive than others and employ ‘special’ terms and phrases as well as
characteristic forms and constructions. The contingent present sDm.xr=f form is one of
such forms, and this suffix conjugation forms a dependent clause by the nature of
contingency and is not expected to appear in a circumstantial clause. Moreover, in
medical papyri, m-xt is quite often used as noun “posterity, future” as well as adverb
“afterwards”. Thus, it is possible that ir m-xt and nD.xr=k are separate and mean “as for
the posterity (i.e. afterwards), you must grind…”
2.5. With Participles and Relative Forms
Since relative forms and participles are analysed as adjectival forms of verbs,
they are nominalised when appearing as a prepositional object. Therefore, relative forms
Page 30 of 62
200359777
and participles can be treated as a nominal element, namely, a nominalised verb-form40.
Because they are treated as a nominal element, like Xnw in example (1), their syntactic
relation is the same as that of prepositions and nouns.
2.6. With Stative
This is not observed in any constructions with other prepositions, and thus it is
expected to have a different grammatical structure. The stative is a counterpart of
Middle Egyptian sDm.n=f form. The intransitive Verbs of Motion (henceforth VoM)
often take the stative form. However, in Old Egyptian where various tenses share the
sDm=f form, the past sDm=f corresponds to the stative. If m-xt sDm=f and m-xt + subject +
stative belong to some archaic Old Egyptian construction, then it reasonably meet
requirements: the past sDm=f form becomes the Relative Past in subordinate clauses; and
the stative construction may fit in the slot instead of the past sDm=f form when
employing verbs of motion. What is really remarkable is that m-xt takes a Subject-First
Construction (henceforth, SFC) of the stative without a complementizer (i.e. connector)
ntt or wnt:
40
The simplest explanation of nominalisation is “the transposition of a proposition into a concept”
(Lehmann, 1995:61). These forms would not completely drop their verbal features and actually
retain attributes of tense and voice. The participles have a present or past tense and an active or
passive voice, and there is a distinctive future active sDm.ty=fy form, which has a ‘prospective’ future
tense and appears only in an active voice, while the relative forms are always in active voice and
have a present tense form (sDm=f) and a past tense form (sDm.n=f).
Page 31 of 62
200359777
(17) Cairo 20001, 5-6

di.n(=i) Sma n iwni n HfAt
2T-PST-give(=I) barley to Yuni to Hefat
m-xt iw-m-itrw sanx.t(i)
41
after Iumiteru STV-feed
“I gave the Upper Egyptian barley to Yuni and to Hefat, but only after Iumiteru was fed.”
(18) BM 1671, 6-7

iw di.n(=i) mrHt n nxn
AUX PST-give(=I) oil to Nekhen
m-xt niwt(=i) Htp(.ti)
after town(=my) STV?-be.satisfied
“I gave oil to Nekhen after my town was satisfied.”
Whereas the example (17) is likely to be the 2T construction, the example (18) is
definitely an ordinary sentence headed by iw-auxiliary. Although Htp lacks an agreement
with its grammatical subject (i.e. stative ending is not spelt out), only niwt is reasonable
to be a subject in the m-xt-clause. However, it seems that there is no such instance with
a pronominal subject (*m-xt=s sanx.ti *“after it was fed”). This lack of various examples
makes a further difficulty in analysing the construction.
Statives and participles share a similar pattern of endings for third persons: -.w
(stative; but often unwritten) and -.ø (participle) for masculine; and -.t(i) (stative) and
-.t (participle) for feminine. Here is an example of a similar construction, found in the
Dialogue of a Man with His Ba:
41
Places are usually referred to as feminine nouns; thus, the Stative shows a feminine singular
ending (.ti).
Page 32 of 62
200359777
(19) Dialogue of a Man with His Ba, 139

42
mi s sxt im r xm.t.n=f
like man PRT-acquire there about REL-PST-ignore=he
“(Death is in my sight today, like the clearing of the sky,) like a man who discovers what he
has ignored.”
In this example (19), sxt is analysed as a participle and fit both in the grammar
and in the context. However, since s is a masculine singular noun, sxt could be taken as
sxt(.w): *mi s sxt(.w) “*like a man was acquired”.43 This alternative rendering does not
make a good sense. On the contrary, it is unlikely by meaning that sanx.t is a participle
(“*after Iumiteru which was fed”).
Moreover, Old Egyptian texts provide only a few examples of m-xt + verb-form,
while those of a pure adverbial phrase (m-xt plus a noun or pronoun) and a nisbe form
(imy-xt=f) are numerous. Therefore, existence of such an archaic construction is just
imaginary.
The VoM is not expected to appear in sDm=f form in a main clause other than the
2T form in a narrative. However, it surely appears in the Circumstantial sDm=f forms,
since Old Egyptian (Doret, 1986:33-35). Thus, there is a possibility that Egyptian
scribes of the later times misinterpreted this use of VoM in the Circumstantial sDm=f
42
sxt im r xm.t.n=f is literally “who acquires [knowledge] concerning what he doesn’t know”
43
Statives of transitive verbs almost always have the Passive voice, except for rx “to know”. rx is
more precisely “to be acquainted with”; thus, Egyptian took this as an intransitive verb.
Page 33 of 62
200359777
form, and sDm=f form and stative were confused or deemed substituting for each other.
Apart from above examples (17) and (18), m-xt plus SFC of stative often
appears in the eighteenth dynastic texts where iAw(t) “the old age” is concerned:
(20) Urk. IV 1084, 11

swD=Tn iAwt=Tn n msw=Tn
SBJ-assign=you offices=your to children=your
m-xt aHaw Aw
after lifetime STV-be.long
“You should assign your offices to your children, after the lifetime has been long.”44
(21) Urk. IV 1197, 16

m-xt iAw wAH
after old.age STV-set.down
“(You shall assign your offices to your children), after the old age is set down.”
(22) Urk. IV 113, 7-8

qrs.t(w)(=i) nfr.t m-xt iAw imAx iAwt ii.ti
SBJ-PSS-bury(=I) beautifully after old.age STV-be.honoured old.age STV-come
“I shall be buried beautifully, after the old age has been honoured, while the old age has
come.”
Examples (20) and (21) share an almost identical main clause (“You shall assign
your offices to your children” 45 ), and both m-xt-clauses contain a similar content
(“lifetime being long” and “old age being set down”). The example (22) has two sets of
‘Noun plus Stative’; however, a preposition seems not to take two or more objects at
44
iAw “old” and Aw “long” seem to make a pun. A phrase aHaw Aw frequently comes as an object of
m-xt.
45
In the former example, “you(r)” is a second-person plural (=Tn; ‘you (pl)’, ‘ye’), whereas those in
the latter is a second-person singular (=tn; ‘you (sg)’, ‘thou’).
Page 34 of 62
200359777
once. Therefore, the latter one should be analysed as a stative construction in a
subordinate clause, as shown here above.
2.7. With Complement Clauses
It seems that m-xt could be applied for almost all verb-forms and gives an
additional emphasis on the order of consecutive events. Such an extra sense could be
added by other prepositions (e.g. m-Dr). What are truly noteworthy concerning m-xt are
cases with nonverbal sentences.
This is well-known almost as a rule that prepositions take nonverbal clauses
when they are headed by complementizers (i.e. ntt, wnt, iwt46). Therefore, the case of
m-xt is odd and unique; a pattern ‘m-xt plus ntt’ is not yet found. Although there is no
explicit subordinator, ntt seems to be a true complementizer47 and to function exactly
like an English conjunction ‘that’. The following is an example of ntt:
(23) CT 775, VI 408o-p

Hw A Dd.n mwt=i -tw
PRTCL PRTCL pst-say mother=my this
ntt -wi snD.ki wr.t
CMPL DPT-1SG STV-fear greatly
“If only my mother said this that I fear greatly!”
46
These three can be used without modifying the tense but wnt would put an imperfect or past sense.
iwt introduces a negative version of ntt-clause. Nominal and Subjunctive forms of wnn ‘to exist’
were employed as an auxiliary verb to convert a nonverbal into a verbal sentence.
47
Complementizers introduce a dependent clause which is one of three major types of the
subordinate clause. See also the note 2 above.
Page 35 of 62
200359777
3. Initial m-xt-clauses
xt
The m-xt-clause usually appears, as expected, in the non-initial position in a
sentence. It is known that the m-xt-clause occasionally precedes the main clause,
especially when headed by xr and ir, as shown in examples (24) and (25):
(24) P.Westcar 7, 13-14

xr m-xt spr=f r Ddi
PRTCL after NOM?-arrive=he at Djedi
aHa.n wAH pA qniw
then PST-PSS-put.down the palanquin
“After he had arrived at Djedi, then the palanquin was put down.”
(25) Urk. IV 768, 11-13

ir m-xt Htp Hm n nTr -pn
PRTCL after NOM?-be.pleased majesty of god this
Sps m xt=f
STV-be.wealthy in things=his
kA=tw di=tw pr aHa n wdn(w)
FUT-cause=one SBJ-come heap of offerings
“Now after the majesty of this god has become pleased, being wealthy in his things, one
shall cause that a heap of offerings come, (equipped in everything, to the hourly temple
staff.)”
In a good Middle Egyptian, an adjunct clause is not expected to come before a
main clause. In both cases above, however, the clause order is inverted. For this
inversion, the m-xt-clause should serve a different function and meaning. A structure
similar to both examples (24) and (25) is a sentence with a conditional clause (i.e. a
clause headed by ir “if”) which always comes before the main clause. This particle ir
Page 36 of 62
200359777
expresses the anticipatory emphasis on a non-verbal member in a clause (Gardiner,
1957:116[§149.2]).
(26) Urk. IV 1021, 5-6

ir m-xt iAw n=k-imy
PRTCL after old.age POSS-you
iw ø m sA n sA iwa n iwa
AUX (it) as son to son heir to heir
48
“After you (come to) possess the old age, it is (as) ‘son to son; heir to heir’ .”
This example (26) has a condition that ‘you possess the old age’ is completed, so
that the main clause be valid. The possessive expression49 in Egyptian language(s)
employs the genitival preposition (n(y)/n(y)t: of), instead of a verb like English ‘have’.
Although the old age (a state of ‘being aged’) represents a completion of ‘growing old’,
m-xt doubly emphasises its completion.
This proclitic particle xr has an indication of what to come next in sequence50
48
This is an Egyptian idiom, which indicates how and whom rights and properties were transferred
to. Offices were also transferred as if a property, and this led to a custom of occupying a particular
title at a hereditary basis.
49
A dative n=f plus an adverb imy “there” forms a specific possessive expression. Another way is to
employ an adjectival preposition n(y) plus a noun (or dependent or independent pronoun) and
another noun (e.g. P.Ebers 1, 7-8: n(y) -wi ra “I belong to Re.”), while this construction is often
abbreviated: ny -wi > nw, ny -sw > nsw, and ny -sy > ns (Allen, 2000:69-70[§7.5]). However, a
sentence “I am an owner of the ship.” (iw=i m nb dpt) also indicates that the ship belongs to him. See
also Welmers (1973).
50
A proclitic particle always appears in the initial position of the clause, whereas an enclitic particle
in the non-initial position. This xr is usually translated ‘and’, ‘further’, ‘accordingly’, ‘so’, or ‘then’.
Allen (2000:191; 250; 269) explains that the particle xr has several usages: for examples, with the
Subjunctive sDm=f from, “the particle xr signals an inevitable consequence of some preceding action
or situation” in the future (ix plus the subjunctive describes the consequent future event as the
speaker’s desire); and the construction xr=f sDm=f expresses necessity, although this is an exception
from the general rule of particles to take a dependent pronoun when pronominal subject.
Page 37 of 62
200359777
(Gardiner, 1957:96[§119.5], 180-181[§239]). Etymologically it seems to have derived
from a verb xr(i) ‘to fall’, having become grammaticalised into a function word with
loss of its lexical indication of ‘falling’, along with a preposition xr ‘near (someone)’.
When it introduces m-xt-clause, anticipation of what is coming next is emphasised. In
this regard, the event of xr m-xt-clause is a reason or background of the main clause.
Thus, xr m-xt-clause should express a condition or circumstance for the event or
activity of the main clause. This semantic feature adds a nuance of the Perfective aspect,
along with the Relative Tenses, in translation:
(27) Urk. IV 1110, 2-4

xr ir m-xt mA=f -sw
PRTCL PRTCL after SBJ-see=he him
“After he had seen him, (he was absent from his place, sealed with the seal of the vizier).”
This example (27) is another example of non-geminating sDm=f form following
m-xt. Since sDm=f forms are non-past forms in Middle Egyptian, they should retain a
Relative Present tense in a subordinate clause. However, m-xt gives a sense of
‘completion’ or ‘background knowledge’ to the Relative Present tense; it turns out to be
a Relative Present Perfect tense, as shown in translation.
Page 38 of 62
200359777
(28) Cairo CG 20541, 10

ixr m-xt sAq.n=f tA -pn
PRTCL after PST-pull.together=he land this
rdi.n n=f ra Hqt
PST-give to=him Re rulership
“After he had pulled this land together, Re gave him a rulership.”
(29) Urk. IV 5, 4-5

xr m-xt smA.n Hm=f mnTw sTt
PRTCL after PST-destroy majesty=his Beduin West.Asia
wn.in=f Hr xnty.t r xnt-Hn-nfr
then=he PRS1-travel.upstream toward Nubia
“After His Majesty had destroyed Beduin of West Asia, then he travelled south to Nubia.”
The explicit past sDm.n=f form is also employed in the initial m-xt-clause. In this
example (28), Re gave him a rulership because he (presumably the king) had reunified
the land, which is natural especially in this inscription made in Year 2 under
Amenemhat II in the twelfth dynasty.51 Similarly in the example (29), the sequence of
events is clear that an event of m-xt-clause comes first and that of a main clause next.
m-xt + Noun + Stative appears in the initial clause as well:
(30) P. Westcar 7, 11
xr m-xt nA n aHaw mni(.w) r mryt
PRTCL after the of boats STV-moor to shore
SAs -pw ir.n=f m-Hrt
INF-travel CPL REL-PST-do=he above
“Now after the boats were moored to a shore, he travelled by land.”
51
Egypt had been decentralised and two ‘kingships’ had existed there during the First Intermediate
Period. It was the first eleventh dynastic king Montuhotep II who recovered the control over the
entire Egypt, or reunified the Two Lands. This inscription tells that a kingship belonged to a
saviour-like king who pacified the land.
Page 39 of 62
200359777
(31) P. Ramesseum I, A 11-12

xr m-xt kt pXryt swA.ti Hr nn
PRTCL after other circle STV-pass over this
pr n=f sDAw
PST-go.out to=him seal.bearer
“Now after another period had passed upon this, a seal-bearer came to him.”
Cases of m-xt-clause in the initial position in the New Kingdom literature are
interesting. As far as appearing in Doomed Prince, Two Brothers, and Contendings of
Horus and Seth, it bears a fixed construction xr ir m-xt plus First Present and this is
frequently followed by (a) the Sequential52, (b) wn.in plus First Present, or (c) Infinitive
plus —pw ir.n=f. The examples (32)-(34) below also show a variety of ‘prepositional’
objects of m-xt:
(32) Two Brothers 13.9-14.1

xr ir m-xt grH xpr.w
PRTCL PRTCL after night STV-happen
iw HAty=f am nA mw
CIRC heart=his PRS1-swallow the water
“When the night had come, his heart swallowed the water.”
52
The Sequential is a rather fixed combination of the circumstantial marker iw + NP + the First
Present. This construction expresses the sequence of events as its name tells. This is actually
identical with the Circumstantial First Present, and thus the Sequential expresses the Relative Present
tense.
Page 40 of 62
200359777
(33) Doomed Prince 7.5

xr ir m-xt swA Hr nn
PRTCL PRTCL after INF-pass over these
wn.in pA Sri Hr Dd n tAy=f Hmt
then the boy PRS1-say to his wife
“Now after passing by this, then the boy said to his wife.”
(34) Doomed Prince 8.14

xr ir m-xt tA-HD.n hrw xpr.w
PRTCL PRTCL after PST-dawn day PRT-happen
iy.t -pw ir.n […] …
INF-come CPL REL-PST-do [demon] …
53
“Now after the next day had dawned, [the demon] returned….”
An interesting example (35) below has an adverbial sentence in the m-xt-clause.
The example (36) demonstrates that this set of heading particles xr ir introduces the
initial subordinate clause and that an adverbial phrase alone can be transposed by it. In
the case of example (35), m-xt adds a relative past sense or a nuance of completion prior
to the main event. An anaphoric impersonal pronoun is here inserted, because it is
grammatically required if m-xt is to take a noun clause:
(35) Two Brothers 18.2-3

xr ir m-xt ø Hr At nhy.t
PRTCL PRTCL after (it) on moment short
wn.in Hm=f a.w.s. Hr di.t Sm.t(w) Hmw.w rxy
then majesty=his l.p.h. PRS1-cause SBJ-go craftsmen skilled
“After it had been a short while, then His Majesty l.p.h. sent skilled craftsmen.”
53
hrw xpr.w is literally “the day which is coming into existence”.
Page 41 of 62
200359777
(36) Horus and Seth 11.3

xr ir m grH
PRTCL PRTCL in night
iw stx (Hr) di.t nxt Hnw=f
SEQ Seth PRS1-cause SBJ-be.strong possessions=his
“At night, Seth let his possession become stiff.”
The main clause in example (36) is also the Sequential. This implies xr ir
precedes an adverbial element and converts it into an initial clause. Since the
m-xt-clause constitutes an adverbial clause, m grH and m-xt sDm=f are paradigmatically
interchangeable.
4. Difference from other forms
Examples above prove that the content of m-xt-clause tends to contain an event
completed prior to that of a main clause, to which the m-xt-clause is dependent.
However, it is not clear from the translation that how it differs from other constructions
similar to m-xt-clause in both their construction (i.e. morphosyntactic structure).
The adverbial clauses (i.e. subordinate clauses) are either marked (preposition
followed by the ntt-clause or geminating sDm=f form) or unmarked (the Circumstantial
sDm=f/sDm.n=f forms). While unmarked adjuncts are variable in meaning, marked
adjuncts are further divided into two categories: realis (i.e. actually happening or
certainly going to happen) and irrealis (i.e. possibly or imaginably happening)54.
54
This opposition is different from counterfactual where an event did not happen in reality but the
Page 42 of 62
200359777
There is a certain tendency that a different construction is favoured in a different
genre. In general, a construction Preposition + sDm=f or Preposition + ntt-clause is
preferred for non-literary works (e.g. official records), while the Circumstantial
sDm=f/sDm.n=f forms on the contrary tend to appear in literatures. This concerns a
modality of these forms and constructions (Uljas, 2007:257). In other words, it is a
matter of the accuracy of possibilities or facts.
4.1. Unmarked: the Circumstantial sDm.n=f form
It is true in any case that two different expressions may share the core sense but
differ in their precise meaning. The unmarked sDm.n=f form in the circumstantial use is
considered to have a Relative Past tense (i.e. its event happened earlier than that of main
clause) (Figure 8):
(37) Canal Inscription of Thutmose III = Egyptian Readingbook (de Buck, 1963) 46, 3-4
xd.n=f Hr=f ib=f Aw
2T-PST-go.north=he for=it heart=his STV-be.wide
smA.n=f xftyw=f
PST-kill=he enemies=his
“He proceeded northwards for it, with his heart wide55, after he had killed his enemies.”
speaker imagines if it happened. Irrealis means that an event is not yet occurring but still there is a
possibility; thus, it is neither true nor false but it is a matter of a degree of certainty.
55
It means that he is generous.
Page 43 of 62
200359777
S’
VP AdvP AdvP
xd.n=f Hr=f ib=f Aw smA.n=f xftyw=f
Figure 8: Syntax tree of Example (37)
In the example (37) above, where a main clause has a Past Tense, the
Circumstantial sDm.n=f form expresses a Past Perfect (i.e. Pluperfect) tense and
naturally requires a conjunction ‘after’.
An internal time location is, however, not specified by the circumstantial
sDm.n=f form, and it allows the form to be translated with ‘when’, ‘after’, ‘since’, and so
forth, depending on the context. A construction m-xt sDm=f, however, seems to specify
such remoteness, as m-xt is reasonable to be translated as ‘after’ (but also often an
alternative rendering ‘when’ is available).
As Depuydt (1995:21-22) points out, there was no distinct marker of
sDm=f/sDm.n=f forms in main and subordinate clauses in the earlier Egyptian. They were
most likely distinguished by the presence and absence of an empirical marker (e.g.
pause, intonation, stress; those concerning the phonology whose study is still
unsatisfactory as for earlier Egyptian) when spoken. Thus, two are almost
Page 44 of 62
200359777
indistinguishable in writing but ancient Egyptians could have identified them by
intonation, stress, and context. A significant difference is that circumstantial forms have
their passive and negative counterparts (Doret, 1986:92-96; 171), whereas
sDm=f/sDm.n=f forms in a subordinate clause introduced by particles or prepositions are
expected to show the active voice in an affirmative sentence56.
The Circumstantial sDm.n=f form is also always non-geminating and unmarked
(other than the infix .n past marker). The unmarked forms are deemed neutral and have
no additional emphasis on any part of the clause or a whole clause. Therefore, the
Circumstantial sDm.n=f form simply contains a situation prior to that of a main clause.
4.2. Marked: the Subordinating Particles
There are a few particles which introduce a subordinate clause: is, sk, and other
variants. While admitting that a particle sk explicitly introduces a circumstantial clause,
Doret (1986:25, n.25) doesn’t treat the sk-clause as an initial clause in a sentence but
always as a non-initial clause. The particles sk is considered to be an Old Egyptian
variant of isT/sT and ist/st. Thus, they seem to have derived from a verb-form i-s=k,
where the Injunctive mood would be retained and the subject pronoun =k (2nd person
56
Pseudo-verbal constructions seem not affected by this ‘rule’, since Stative has a resultant aspect
which can be translated with either a Relative Present Perfect tense or the Passive voice.
Page 45 of 62
200359777
masculine singular) was also replaced by =T/=t (2nd person feminine singular). 57
However, the use of sT as a marker of an initial subordinate clause in Weni’s
autobiography is plausible:
(38) Weni, 8 = Urk. I 100, 6-7

sT -wi m sAb (i)r(y)-nxn
58
PRTCL DPT-I as judge
rdi -wi Hm=f
NAR.INF-appoint me majesty=his
m smr wat(y) imy-r xnt-S pr-aA
as sole.companion overseer bodyguard palace
“While I was a judge, His Majesty appointed me as a sole companion and an overseer of
royal bodyguard.”
AdvP
Prtcl S’ S’
sT -wi m sAb (i)r(y)-nxn rdi -wi Hm=f …
57
This change of grammatical gender may show to whom the sentence was written, e.g. (i)s=k was
used where the reader or the hearer was expected to be male, whereas (i)sT where they would be
female. However, this raises another question whether a great number of women were literate and
concerned with texts, so that one would like to address to them. Rather, it may be just a matter of the
scribe’s style.
58
When a pronominal subject comes after a proclitic particle (e.g. sk, mk), the pronoun always takes
a dependent form. It is considered that these particles have their origin in some transitive verbs and
carry the syntactic structure. Thus, these non-enclitic particles are followed by dependent pronouns,
whose primary usage is an object of a verb (Gardiner, 1957:177-179[§230-231, 234]). However, the
dependent pronouns after these particles function as a subject.
Page 46 of 62
200359777
An example (39) below also contains an initial sk-clause, however, it is now
headed by another particle ixr which is a variant of xr marking an initial subordinate
clause as mentioned in the Chapter Three above:
(39) Urk. I 41, 12-13

ixr sk Hm=f Hs=f -sw Hr=s
PRTCL PRTCL majesty=his PRS-praise=he him for=it
mA -sw Hm=f i-sn=f tA
PST-see him majesty=his PRS-kiss=he ground
“While His Majesty was praising him for it, His Majesty saw him as he was kissing the
ground.”
Although these sk-clauses seem to describe a setting or background knowledge
to the event in a main clause, they do not express any temporal property or distribution
to the main clause, other than the Relative Present tense or “concomitance”.
An enclitic particle (i.e. non-initial particle) -is is also employed to convert a
sentence into a noun clause. Since -is is an enclitic particle, this appears inside the
clause, and its usage is limited to an object of a verb (Allen, 2000:137[§12.13.1];
193[§16.7.3]). However, this particle actually introduces a dependent clause to a main
one, like other particles such as isT, isk, sk.
Page 47 of 62
200359777
(40) Urk. IV 164, 5-8

rx.n(=i) -is nHH -pw wAst
PST-know=I PRTCL eternity CPL Thebes
Dt -pw imn
forever CPL Amun
nb ipt-s(w)t (-pw) ra
lord Karnak.temple (CPL) Re
iwnw-Smaw (-pw) irt=f Ax.t imyt tA -pn
S.Heliopolis (CPL) eye=his profitable NSB-in land this
“I know that Thebes is eternal, (that) Amun is forever, (that) Re is the Lord of Karnak
temple, (and that) his profitable eye is Southern Heliopolis (i.e. Thebes), which is in this
land.”
VP CMPL
rx.n(=i) Prtcl S’
-is nHH -pw wAst

Dt -pw imn …
In this example (40), a particle -is marks a complementation (Gardiner,
1957:184[§247.1]) but it is not clear whether the particle governs all four Nominal
Sentences or the latter three are subordinated to the first Nominal Sentence as
circumstantial clauses or juxtaposed as continuative clauses.
4.3. Marked: Prepositions Dr and r-sA plus sDm=f
There are many examples of prepositions marking subordination to a main
clause. Prepositions Dr and r-sA are comparable with m-xt as all these three prepositions
Page 48 of 62
200359777
take sDm=f and introduce a temporal clause. Prepositions Dr and r-sA should also follow
the general behaviour that prepositions take Nominal sDm=f form.
According to Allen (2000:311-312; 398; 399, n.3), Dr is expected to be followed
by the Infinitive or the non-geminating sDm=f forms (‘temporal clause’) or the
geminating sDm=f form, ‘sDmt=f’ form, or ntt-clause (‘causal clause’):
(41) Urk. IV 1198, 16

Hsy Dr pr.t m Xt
PRT-praise before INF-go.out from womb
“…the praised one since emerging from the womb”
(42) Urk. IV 157, 6-7

nn grg nn iwms m-m
NEG-EXT falsehood NEG-EXT misstatement therein
Dr wn Hm(=i) m inp
since SBJ-exist majesty(=my) as royal.child
“There was no falsehood and there was no misstatement therein, since My Majesty was a
child.”
(43) CT 1103, VII 429c-d

wiA sd(.w) Dr iw=k
barque STV-break? before SBJ-come=you
“The barque has broken, since you come…”
(44) CT 1109, VII 438d

Dr tm=f rx r n swA hr=f
since SBJ-not.do=he NEG.CMPL-know spell of INF-pass over=it
“…since he does not know the spell of passing over it.”
Page 49 of 62
200359777
(45) CT420, V 257b-c (B1L)

hAy=i ia(=i) -wi m S n Hsmn
SBJ-go.down=I SBJ-wash(=I) me in lake of natron
Dr aqt=i r iwnyt
before ?-go.inside=I into columned.hall
“I shall go down and wash myself in the Lake of Natron, before I enter the columned hall.”
(Zonhoven, 1997:12)
The example (45) has a rare sDmt=f form, which appears only in idiomatic
construction with a preposition r (r-sDmt=f “until he has heard”), a negative marker n
(n-sDmt=f “he has not heard yet”) and this preposition Dr (Dr-sDmt=f “before he has
heard”). Although the function of sDmt=f form 59 may require a further study,
Zonhoven’s view in studies on Dr is sound. He explains that Dr has a goal which comes
after the situation in the main clause (i.e. a sense of a Relative Future) (Zonhoven,
1997:18-19; Depuydt, 1998:83-84). Thus, according to him, Dr should primarily mean
“before” and secondarily “since”.
This combination Dr sDm=f was replaced by m-Dr sDm=f and m-Dr ir=f sDm in
Late Egyptian, and later by nterefswtm in Coptic. It is an interesting fact that m-Dr
sDm=f in Late Egyptian is a preposition m-Dr plus a Subjunctive60 sDm=f form (Junge,
2005:139-140). Thus, ir=f in m-Dr ir=f sDm is presumably a Subjunctive form. Junge also
analyses that m-xt sDm=f in Late Egyptian employs a Subjunctive sDm=f form.
59
It seems to have a Relative Future tense with a Perfective aspect.
60
See the footnote 11 above.
Page 50 of 62
200359777
A preposition r-sA also takes a Nominal sDm=f form as well as a Subjunctive one:
(46) Dialogue of a Man with His Ba, 153

xny=i r-sA wrd=k
SBJ-alight=I after NOM?-be.weary=you
“(And desire that you reach the West, when your body goes to earth,) so that I alight after you
become weary.”
(47) CT 340, IV 342d

Dd=s r -pn
NOM-say=she spell this
aq=f r-sA prr=f m imntt
SBJ-enter=he after NOM-go.out=he from west
“She recites this spell, so that he enter after he goes out from the West.”
(48) Siut I 298

Aw=f -s(y) n Hm.wy-kA
SBJ-extend=he it for pair.of.Ka.priests
r-sA ir=f ir.t=f im=s m Hwt-nTr
after SBJ-do=he REL-PRS-do=he through=it in temple
“He shall extend it for a pair of Ka-priests, after he does what he should do by means of it
in the temple.”
Again, it is not clear if a preposition really takes a Nominal (i.e. geminating)
form, not a Subjunctive (i.e. non-geminating) form, as a rule. Although both m-xt and
r-sA are often translated as ‘after’, r-sA seems to mark an event prior to that of a main
clause without an internal reference to aspect. This compound preposition r-sA is
literally “at the back (of)”, which implies a spatial relationship with an event in a main
clause. An event of a main clause may begin anytime, but an event of r-sA-clause will
Page 51 of 62
200359777
always be ahead of it.
4.4. Aspects as the primary ‘temporal’ distinction
The m-xt-clause functions as a subordinate clause, and has the Relative Present
and Past tenses to its main clause. It is not expected m-xt-clause has the Relative Future
tense,61 since this tense expresses a purpose or result of the main clause. A main clause
of a sentence containing the m-xt-clause can have all the present, past and future tenses.
However, the time location of an event in m-xt-clause is bound by that of a main clause.
In other words, the m-xt-clause has, like other subordinate clauses, the relative tense.
The m-xt-clauses are roughly categorised into three major patterns (Figure 11):
sDm=f ! Relative Present tense

sDm.n=f ! Relative Past tense
m-xt
! Relative Present tense
Noun + Stative
+ Resultant aspect and/or Passive voice
Figure 11: Three major patterns of verbal objects in the m-xt-clause
If the sDm=f form and the sDm.n=f form constitute a paradigm, Subjunctive sDm=f
does not fit it, while Nominal sDm=f and sDm.n=f forms do. Both Subjunctive and
Nominal forms definitely have passive forms (with the infix .tw). However, the passive
voice is expressed only through employing a Stative (with the Resultant aspect) in
61
The Relative Future tense is expressed normally by a preposition r plus infinitive, Subjunctive
sDm=f form in a subordinate clause, or a preposition r plus Nominal sDm=f form.
Page 52 of 62
200359777
m-xt-clause.
Although Old Egyptian had the three identical sDm=f forms for the present, past,
and future tenses, Middle Egyptian distinguished these three tenses by distinct forms. In
short, the present tense is marked by a geminating form (mrr=f) or iw + non-geminating
form (iw mr=f)62; the past by sDm.n=f form (mr.n=f); and the future by a non-geminating
form (mry=f). Since the geminating form is “used only when it was stressed that action
was in the process of going on” (Eyre, 1990:59), the reduplication of the radical here
clearly shows its marked status. Eyre argues that Egyptian language originally had the
aspectual system, and that the explicit Past sDm.n=f form, the Third Future (iw=f r sDm),
and other pseudo-verbal constructions were ‘later’ developments with some
intermediate state between tense and aspect (Eyre, 1990:63; Junge, 1989:31-32;39). It is
sound since the time reference system through aspects without tenses is observed in a
number of West African languages (Comrie, 1976:82-84).
The Relative Tense system is closely related to the aspectual opposition of
Perfective and Imperfective (Comrie, 1976:25;42). If the Egyptian verb-forms
possessed such aspects as their very basic properties, it explains a lot why the bare
sDm=f/sDm.n=f forms and Statives carry the relative tenses in the subordinate clause of
62
In Polotsky’s theory and the ‘Standard Theory’, this is to be analysed as [S [NP iw=ø] [AdvP mr=f]].
Page 53 of 62
200359777
circumstance. As for these forms in a main clause, their aspectual values imply, and are
rendered in Indo-European languages by, the absolute tenses63 (i.e. Perfective aspect >
Past tense; Imperfective aspect > Present tense).
5. Needs of Specific Temporal Expressions
As mentioned in the last chapter, earlier Egyptian keeps a feature of a tenseless
language with a great dependency on aspect.64 Thus, it should be reminded that ancient
Egyptian might have a different conception of ‘time’. It is well-known that there are two
terms for ‘eternity’ in Egyptian: Dt and nHH. There is a clear distinction between them
that Dt is to ‘remain forever’, and nHH is to ‘come unendingly’ (Assmann, 2001:76;
Iversen, 1995:69). This seems to be reflected in a development of forms, which often
shows a relationship of past vs. non-past65. It is reasonable to say that the past should
remain forever as being completed, whereas the present and the future continue to come
and to vary in many ways. This is exactly the same as seen in aspectual opposition:
Perfective vs. Imperfective (Comrie, 1976:18-21; 24-25).66 Such carefulness in time
location reflects the emphasis on a sequence of events. A time location is easily
63
However, this doesn’t mean that these aspects were grammaticalised into tenses in the original
language.
64
This is a characteristic of African languages (cf. Welmers, 1973).
65
For example, sDm.n=f (Past) vs. sDm=f (Present or Future) in Middle Egyptian, and Stative
(Past/Perfective) vs. Preposition plus Infinitive (Present or Future/Imperfective).
66
Perfective reduces a situation to a single ‘object’ with clear limits (i.e. the beginning, endpoint,
and sphere of an event) but without any reference to internal structures. Imperfective has no natural
endpoint or sphere but internal reference to the temporal structure.
Page 54 of 62
200359777
illustrated like a spatial location. In fact, Egyptian employs Hr ‘on’ as part of a Present
Progressive form (Collier, 1994:60-67).
The degree of remoteness from a reference time is easily expressed with lexical
items, such as an adverb yesterday and an adverbial phrases in this moment. However, a
number of languages have no grammaticalised items to gain such accuracy. Aspectual
oppositions (Perfective vs. Imperfective, Punctual vs. Durative, and Telic vs. Atelic)
would specify the time location (Comrie, 1976:25; 42; Comrie, 1985:83-84) Loprieno
(1995:77-81 [§4.6.3.1]) also makes it clear that Egyptian verb-forms have a mixture of
tense and aspect and that the opposition is between the past (marked) and the non-past
or neutral ( unmarked).
6. Conclusion
Objective 1
The m-xt etymologically has a sense of ‘happening ahead in the past’ and ‘being
behind at the present moment’ (i.e. the Past tense). Thus m-xt has been correctly
rendered by ‘after’. However, m-xt also has a nuance of ‘completion of action’.
Therefore, a phrase or clause following m-xt contains a completed event, remote past
event, or resultant situation. These are all best rendered by the Relative Past tense (i.e.
occurring earlier) with the Perfect aspect (i.e. being already completed by the moment).
Page 55 of 62
200359777
As a functional word, m-xt is classified as a preposition but surely behaves like a
conjunction. Although several prepositions are employed as if a subordinator, their
syntactical structure remains the same as that of a prepositional phrase. The ‘preposition’
m-xt, however, takes a noun equivalent and even a whole clause or sentence. Thus, m-xt
functions exactly like an English word “after” which can be both a preposition and a
conjunction.67
Objective 2
It is clear that m-xt-clause indicates a more explicit Relative Past tense than the
Circumstantial sDm.n=f form by form, and that it further specifies the completed state of
an event prior to that of a main clause more than Dr-clause or r-sA-clause by meaning.
Therefore, the m-xt-clause is morphologically and semantically well marked. This
means that it has a narrower usage than others and that it appears in a particular genre
(e.g. medical papyri) or otherwise infrequently in other genres. Frequent cases of m-xt
plus Noun + Stative prove that m-xt behaves just like a subordinator which can take a
whole sentence as its object. Thus, its syntactic structure is different from other ordinary
prepositions which always take noun equivalents.
Objective 3
67
They are polysemous (Matthews, 2007:308).
Page 56 of 62
200359777
A reasonable explanation for ‘m-xt + bare SFC of stative’ is that a preposition
m-xt was more grammaticalised into a conjunction than other prepositions. Although
many prepositions are used as if a conjunction, they normally behave in accordance
with a general rule of a preposition: taking a nominal element as its object. Therefore,
the object verb needs to be nominalised, either as a nominalised participle or relative
form or as a nominal sDm=f/sDm.n=f form. A ‘true’ conjunction takes a clause; that is to
say, a whole sentence can be taken as its object, whether it is a verbal or nonverbal
construction, without changing a form or construction (e.g. nominalisation, use of
Nominal forms, and complementizer ntt/wnt/iwt).
Since ancient Egyptian apprentice scribes had used existing texts and model
letters for their practice at school, such a distinct but rare expression would not
repeatedly appear in schoolbooks or not accurately remembered by many scribes. It is
expected that they had no grammar book to consult but existing texts. Even though there
is a certain but unwritten rule (e.g. “a preposition takes a Nominal sDm=f form”), scribes
could interpret or misunderstand them differently (e.g. “a preposition takes any
verb-form or construction”). Together with Dr, r-sA, and other conjunction-like
prepositions (e.g. mi, xft), the preposition m-xt became less restricted in usage and
grammaticalised into a true subordinator (i.e. subordinating conjunction) as in the
Page 57 of 62
200359777
modern linguistic terminology.
This preposition-conjunction m-xt seems to have developed due to a necessity of
a specific temporal clause. It certainly appears as a conjunction since around the Middle
Kingdom and survived through the New Kingdom. The disappearance of a conjunction
m-xt from Coptic makes a good comparison with the case of (m-)Dr. In fact, m-Dr
(‘when’) took over and replaced m-xt (‘after’) in Coptic. While indistinguishable forms
and constructions disappeared and was replaced (e.g. Past sDm=f form in Old Egyptian),
distinct ones died out as well (e.g. Middle Egyptian sDm.n=f > Past sDm=f in Late
Egyptian; but since the twentieth dynasty, ir=f sDm).68
A remaining problem is that there are a number of examples where a preposition
takes both geminating and non-geminating sDm=f forms, although it is said that basically
a Nominal sDm=f (i.e. geminating) form dominantly appears as a prepositional object. If
not mistakes and misunderstandings of ancient scribes, then they must differ in meaning.
It is concluded here that there is a bipartite system of the prepositional object
68
In Old Egyptian, all three basic tenses (Past, Present, and Future) were expressed by sDm=f forms.
Although they were distinguished in speech by different vowel patterns (and possibly intonation),
writing was not sufficient to tell one from another. By Middle Egyptian, use of sDm.n=f as an explicit
Past tense verb-form was established, replacing the Old Egyptian Past sDm=f form. In Late Egyptian,
however, Present and Future tense and the Second Tense construction were explicitly marked by
respectively tw=i (Hr) sDm, iw=i (r) sDm, and irr=i sDm (> i-ir=i sDm). Due to this change, the
paradigmatic suffix conjugations collapsed and the only survived sDm=f form was the Subjunctive
form, which is not a counterpart of sDm.n=f. Thus, the ordinary Past tense form came to be described
by the archaic Past sDm=f form. However, this Past sDm=f form was also replaced by a periphrastic
ir=f sDm form.
Page 58 of 62
200359777
verb-forms, which is based on modality opposition: realis vs. irrealis (Figure 12).
The realis group consists of the geminating sDm=f form, the past/perfect sDm.n=f
form, the old past sDm=f form, and pseudo-verbal constructions. These forms and
constructions have a reference to an event or situation which is observed in reality or
observable at the moment of speech. The irrealis group seems to have the Subjunctive
sDm=f form alone, and this has a reference to an event or situation which is not observed
and observable yet at the moment.
This analysis illustrates that (1) the preposition m-xt retained a core meaning of
the root word; (2) its prepositional object tends to contain an event or a situation
resulted from an event; (3) m-xt came to function as a subordinator since around the
Middle Kingdom; (4) m-xt is more significantly grammaticalised into a subordinating
conjunction than other prepositions; and (5) thus m-xt is a polysemy and can take both a
Noun Phrase (as a preposition) and a Clause or Sentence (as a conjunction), just like
English preposition/conjunctions (e.g. ‘after’, ‘since’, ‘for’).
Page 59 of 62
200359777
Internal structure of an event is

Imperfective specified: Repetitive vs. Habitual,
Nominal sDm=f form (irr=f)
aspect Punctual vs. Durative, Telic vs.
Event
Atelic, etc.
REALIS O.Eg. Past sDm=f form (ir=f) / Perfective An entire event is taken as a single
Past sDm.n=f form (ir.n=f) aspect unit with limits or sphere.
iw=f Hr ir.t / Progressive

pseudo-verbal Ongoing situation of an event.
Situation iw=f r ir.t aspect
constructions
iw=f ir.w Stative aspect Resultant situation of an event.
Ref. to a possibility that an event

Subjunctive
IRREALIS Subjunctive sDm=f (iry=f) form occurs or would have occurred.
mood
Uncertainty is often expressed.
Figure 12: The bipartite system of the object verb-forms of m-xt
Page 60 of 62
200359777
Bibliography
− Allen, J.P. (2000), Middle Egyptian: An Introduction to the Language and Culture of
Hieroglyphs, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
− Assmann, J. (2001), The Search for God in Ancient Egypt, Ithaca and London:
Cornell University Press.
− Collier, M.A. (1990), “The Circumstantial sDm(.f)/sDm.n(.f) as Verbal Verb-Forms in
Middle Egyptian”, JEA 76, 73-85
− Collier, M.A. (1992), “Predication and the Circumstantial sDm(=f)/sDm.n(=f)”,
LingAeg 2, 17-65.
− Collier, M.A. (1994), “Grounding, Cognition and Metaphor in the Grammar of
Middle Egyptian”, LingAeg 4, 57-87
− Comrie, B. (1976), Aspect, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
− Comrie, B. (1985), Tense, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
− Černý, J. (1945), “The Will of Naunakhte and the Related Documents”, JEA 31,
29-53.
− De Buck, A. (1963), Egyptian Readingbook: Exercises and Middle Egyptian Texts,
second edition, Leiden: Nederlands Instituut voor het Nabije Oosten.
− Depuydt, L. (1983), “The Standard Theory of the ‘Emphatic’ Forms in Classical
(Middle) Egyptian: A Historical Survey”, Orientalia Lovaniensia Periodica 14,
13-54.
− Depuydt, L. (1995), “On the Empirical Distinctness of Certain Adverbial Clauses in
Old and Middle Egyptian”, Chronique d’Égypte 70, 18-33.
− Depuydt, L. (1998), “Events Engaged in the Grammatical Tango of Contiguity: The
Case of the Preposition Dr”, JARCE 35, 73-88.
− Doret, E. (1986), The Narrative Verbal System of Old and Middle Egyptian, Geneve:
Cramer.
− Eyre, C.J. (1990), “Tense or Aspect in Middle Egyptian?”, Akten des vierten
Internationalen Ägyptologen-Kongresses, München 1985, vol. 3, Hamburg: Buske,
51-65.
− Eyre, C.J. (1994), “Word Order Hierarchies and Word Order Change”, LingAeg 4,
117-38.
Page 61 of 62
200359777
− Faulkner, R.O. (1962), A Concise Dictionary of Middle Egyptian, Oxford: Griffith

Institute.
− Gardiner, A.H. (1957), Egyptian Grammar, third edition, Oxford: Griffith Institute.
− Iversen, E. (1995), “sDm.f and sDmn.f and the Egyptian conception of time”, DE 31,
69-79
− Junge, F. (1989), “Emphasis” and Sentential Meaning in Middle Egyptian,
Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz.
− Junge, F. (2005), Late Egyptian Grammar: An Introduction, second edition, Oxford:
Griffith Institute.
− Lehmann, C. (1995), Thoughts on Grammaticalization, München: Lincom Europa.
− Loprieno, A. (1995), Ancient Egyptian: A linguistic introduction, Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
− Matthews, P.H. (2007), Oxford Concise Dictionary of Linguistics, second edition,
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
− Petrie, W.M.F. (1909), Qurneh, London: School of Archaeology in Egypt.
− Polotsky, H.J. (1965), “Egyptian Tenses”, The Israel Academy of Sciences and
Humanities, Vol. II, No. 5., Jerusalem, 286-311.
− Satzinger, H. (2004), “ Some Remarks on the Afroasiatic Case System”, Wiener
Zeitschrift für die Kunde des Morgenlandes 94, 177–183.
− Takács, G. (1999), Etymological Dictionary of Egyptian, Boston: Brill.
− Uljas, S.P. (2007), The Modal System of Earlier Egyptian Complement Clauses: A
Study in Pragmatics in a Dead Language, Leiden: Brill.
− Welmers, Wm.E. (1973), African Language Structures, Berkeley, Los Angeles, and
London: University of California Press.
− Zonhoven, L.M.J. (1997), Studies on the sDm.t=f Verb Form in Classical Egyptian,
Ph.D. thesis, Groningen: Rijksuniversiteit Groningen [Accessed on 20-March-2010:
http://irs.ub.rug.nl/ppn/161787622 ].
Page 62 of 62

Analysis of M XT Clause Unpublished BA H

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Analysis of M XT Clause Unpublished BA H

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Analysis of M XT Clause Unpublished BA H

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ANALYSIS OF m-xt-CLAUSE:

Dissertation submitted in partial fulfilment

Word Count: 9811

work is properly identified and acknowledged, (ii) the dissertation complies

fully with the University of Liverpool regulations on plagiarism and collusion,

(iii) no part of the dissertation has ever figured in material successfully

submitted for the award of any other degree.

Some prepositions are obviously employed as a marker of the subordinate clause

of circumstance already in the Classical Egyptian1. However, there frequently recur a

number of ambiguous and problematic cases. This dissertation is aimed at presenting an

analysis of a subordinate clause introduced by one of such prepositions m-xt.

m-xt (from a preposition into a conjunction).

1. Subordinate Clauses Headed by Prepositions

converted by introductory markers). The former type is expressed by either the

constructed by placing a preposition or a particle in front of a sentence, and this type is

what m-xt concerns.

1.1. Theories concerning circumstantial forms

Before analysing actual examples of m-xt-clauses, here are briefly summarised

cases of the marked subordinate clause and usual analyses.

Circumstantial sDm=f/sDm.n=f forms are unanimously agreed among all three

1.1.1. Polotsky’s theory

Formerly, Egyptological studies of language were largely based on

morphological analyses (i.e. observations of the appearance) and semantic-pragmatic

position and Circumstantial sDm=f/sDm.n=f forms in non-initial position share very

identical appearances (cf. Gardiner (1957:159))5.

Polotsky brought his ‘revolutionary’ idea that most sentences in ancient

This assumption explained a lot of constructions, including the remarkable Second

PHRASE] (Figure 1 and Figure 2)6.

(a) S = [NP iw=i ] + [AdvP m pr ]

Figure 1: Syntactic models of sentences in Polotsky’s theory

(b) iw(=i) sDm=i nn

(c) irr=i nn sDm.n=i st

Figure 2: Syntax tree of sentences in Polotsky’s theory

In short, non-initial bare sDm=f/sDm.n=f forms are to be treated as ‘adverbial

1.1.2. The ‘Standard Theory’

The so-called ‘Standard Theory’ (henceforth, ST) of Egyptological linguistic

study is largely owing to Polotsky’s pioneer works. The ST is aimed at incorporating

the Egyptian language study.

Concerning circumstantial forms, the ST reinterpreted and classified adverbial

sentences (i.e. NP + AdvP) into three patterns:

(d) Noun Phrase plus Adverbial Phrase;

(e) Introductory auxiliary/particle plus Noun + Adverbial Phrase; and,

(f) 2T form plus Adverbial Phrase (Depuydt, 1983:46).

These Adverbial Phrases include adverbs, prepositional phrases, and

follows (Figure 3 and Figure 4):

(d) S1 = [NP Hm=f ] + [AdvP m pr ]

Figure 4: Syntax trees of adverbial sentences in ST

1.1.3. Current Egyptological approach

sentence actually says and means) by analysing verb-forms as ‘verbal’ verb-forms

constitute a NP (Noun Phrase) or AdvP (Adverbial Phrase) according to the current

linguistic theories,7 where a phrase containing a verb should constitute a VP (Verbal

Phrase). A particle mk is here considered as an extra clausal constituent8, which has no

grammatical governance on other parts of sentence (Collier, 1992:51) (Figure 5 and

easily resolved by employing the idea of the constituent structure (Kroeger,

2005:227-230[§12.4]). Under the current approach, each word is a minimal constituent

and this enables the m-xt-clause fit in a sentence.

(g) S1 = [Aux iw ] [NP =f ] [AdvP m pr ]

(h) S1 = [Prtcl mk ] [NP -sw ] [AdvP m pr ]