Egypt Exploration Society

The Form mtwf r sm in Later Egyptian

Author(s): J. D. Ray
Source: The Journal of Egyptian Archaeology, Vol. 59 (Aug., 1973), pp. 156-158
Published by: Egypt Exploration Society
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3856106
Accessed: 10-10-2016 23:57 UTC
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted
digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about
JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
http://about.jstor.org/terms

Egypt Exploration Society is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The
Journal of Egyptian Archaeology

This content downloaded from 193.227.1.43 on Mon, 10 Oct 2016 23:57:07 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

(156)

THE FORM MTWF R SDM IN LATER EGYPTIAN

By J. D. RAY

ONE of the most interesting characteristics of the later stages of Egyptia

to form complex tenses from an accumulation of particles: forms suc

wn-nf) r sdm 'he was about to hear' or wn-ni hrf sdm (nuyqcTrii) 'h
used to hear', are quite well attested, at least in demotic texts.' These t

to the usual pattern, a particle or prefix accompanied by a personal suffix

by either the Infinitive or Qualitative of the verb. The infinitive may in
preceded by a preposition, hr (or in very rare cases m) for present time, r
to the future, but in demotic the former are never written and it is extre

that they were pronounced. The preposition r, on the other hand, see
have been present in speech, and its occasional omission from the scri
to be explained phonetically, since it had by this period become a vowe

sometimes found written as iw (e, a) a clear indication of its vocalic natur

Particularly interesting is the development of the Late-Egyptian C

Gardiner, as early as 1928, had postulated the origin of this rather portm
in the earlier hn ntf sdm.3 This construction, in which the infinitive is
dently, qualified only by a possessive pronoun ('together with hearing
clearly does not conform to the type mentioned above: the infinitive,

cannot be replaced by the Qualitative. The Conjunctive Tense, in oth

not originate from the 'Pseudo-Verbal construction' of Middle Egyp

writings, in which hr precedes the infinitive (mtw.f hr sdm), were expla

as being purely graphic, and arising from a scribal desire, conscious or un
assimilate the Conjunctive to other narrative tenses.5 Cerny invokes the
tion for the writing mtwf r sdm, of which only some half dozen exampl
and his argument is strengthened by the fact that two at least of his exa
the pronominal infinitive irt, and are therefore explicable as phonetic wr
later Coptic &^a. However, the fact that the element r seems always to ha

nounced, should warn us against taking its appearance in the script a

more so as the other examples quoted by Cerny do not precede irt and ca
explained phonetically.7 Demotic, furthermore, shows clear writings of m
and demotic has a tendency to omit the unnecessary (sometimes even,
necessary) rather than insert the unpronounced.
I Rather scantily treated, however, in the Grammars, cf. Spiegelberg, Gr. 172 f.

2 Ibid. 4 et passim. 3 YEA 14 (I928), 86-96. 4 Gardiner, Egn. Gr. 319-34.

5 7EA 35 (I949), 26 ff.

6 Ibid. 27 n. I and z. Another possible example may be added from the Doomed Prince (6, 15: Late-Egn.
Stories, p. 5, line 1 5), where the princess of Naharin exclaims, 'As Prec endures, mtw-tw r sm;-f if they are going

to kill him, when the sun sets, I shall be dead.' But the text is not certain. 7 Ibid. 27 n. i.

This content downloaded from 193.227.1.43 on Mon, 10 Oct 2016 23:57:07 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

THE FORM MTW-F R SDM IN LATER EGYPTIAN I57

It is in dream-books and omen-texts that the clearest examples of mtwf r sdm are
found; this is not surprising, since it is the very quality of prediction which this new

tense denotes. In Papyrus Carlsberg XIV. e. 9, in a passage discussing the dreams of

women, we are told that a woman will suffer a consequence, doubtless bad, as a result
of a certain dream, mtws r mwt n try rnpt 'and she shall die within this year'.' A more

complete example occurs in Column d, 4-5, where, if a man eats a certain kind of
refuse in his dream, [iwf r] nht n mcr nb mtwf r sm r rmwtl[ 'he will live in every place

and shall proceed to (his) death (?) . . .'2 Here the form is used, in true conjunctive
style, to continue a preceding future tense. A similar and clearly written example
occurs in an omen-text, Papyrus Carlsberg 94, line 3 (unpublished), where a man is
destined to undergo an experience mtw-f r ir th 'and will grow bitter'. This last, however, should be treated with some caution in iview of Cern s strictures about phonetic
writings before ir; although the infinitive is here in the nominal, not the pronominal,
state.

All these examples hail from Tebtunis, and can be dated roughly to the end of the
second century A.D.3 That the construction of mtwf r sdm is not simply a by-product of

the Roman Fayum, however, is shown by a fragment of a dream-book discovered in

1966 by the Egypt Exploration Society at North Saqqara.4 The date of the papyri from
this site, which are as yet unpublished, remains uncertain, but it would seem difficult
at present t to place them later than the Second Persian Period. The dream-book
fragment, again dealing with the dreams o women (line x6), gives as the ene prognosis,
jply.s sr mtw's r mwt riHr.hrl pry s sr

'.. her son, and she shall die before her son'.

The parallel with the later Carlserg text is clear, but the present example antedates
it by at least five centuries. A further occurrence from the same group (also unpublished), gives in a broken context [m]tww r ir-w 'and they shall make them', but this
fails the 'Cern4 test' (it could be a writing of *ivroy ^&y) and should not be counted

independently.5 Other examples of this phrase may also reveal themselves in time;
but one should also mention, if only to eliminate, the clause found in Papyrus Berlin
3 I08 5/6: pr nkt mtwf r hws n-im4w 'the thing among them which will be missing (?)'.
Here it would seem best to regard mtwf as a writing of nty iwf, and the tense corre-

spondingly as Third Future in a relative clause.6

These few passages may show that there existed, as early as the fourth century B.C.
I A. Volten, Demotische Traumdeutung (Copenhagen, I942), 98, and pl. 6 (rather faint).
2 Ibid. 96 and pi. 5.
3 Cf. ibid. 3: the identification of Pap. Carlsberg 94 rests on general similarity of hand, and unpublished
manuscript notes, also by Volten, in the Egyptological Institute, Copenhagen. For this and much other
information, I am indebted to Professor J. R. Harris.
4 Preliminary Report in YEA 53 (I967), I44. The dream-book bears the excavator's number S. H6. D. 485
(Verso). Permission to study this document has been granted by Professor H. S. Smith, and for this I am very
grateful: right of publication is vested in the Society.

5 S. H5-122, Recto (1720), line (x+ I).

6 Spiegelberg, Demotische Papyrus aus den Koniglichen Museen zu Berlin (1902), 17 and pi. 33. The papyrus
is a contract of 98 B.C.

This content downloaded from 193.227.1.43 on Mon, 10 Oct 2016 23:57:07 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

I58

J. D. RAY

in demotic, a form of the Conjunctive with inserted r: this tense persisted until well
into the Roman Period, and indeed may well have been present in the language of the

Late New Kingdom. Its meaning is, naturally, future: since, however, the Conjunctive itself by necessity refers to a following event, this meaning probably differs little

from that of the parent tense. Perhaps the very timelessness of the Conjunctive
prompted the creation of a specific future. It is also possible to see in many of the
examples the nuance 'and he is bound to hear', but whether this is an intrinsic
property of mtwf r sdm, or whether it is one imposed by the context, is difficult to

decide. The latter is perhaps a sounder conclusion.

The final question must be whether the existence of mtw-f r sdm will lead us to revise

our theories of the origin of the Conjunctive. There is perhaps little need for this: it is
clear that in such Late-Egyptian texts as Papyrus d'Orbiney, which habitually writes

mtwf [hr] sdm, the Conjunctive was thought to be no different from other tenses
which had their origins in the Pseudo-Verbal construction.' Once this had happened,
there is no reason why it should not form a future with r, as did iw.f sdm and wn.f sdm.

The obvious name for this hybrid is thus the Future Conjunctive, although regrettably
this term is sometimes used in Coptic for an entirely different formation, and it may be
that it will be left to pursue its career under its native appellation mtw-f r sdm.2
Additional note

As explained above, the evidence of a form mtw-f r sdm in demotic texts need not
greatly affect our theories of the origin of the Conjunctive. Alternative theories, such

as the attempt by Mattha (BIFAO I947) to derive the form from an earlier *ntt iw.f
hr sdm, would gain little support from the existence of the new form with r, and must
stand or fall by their own inherent plausibility. This is particularly true of the attempt

by A. Volten in Studies in Egyptology and Linguistics in Honour of H. J. Polotsky

(Jerusalem, 1964, although the article in question was concluded in I955), pp. 55-80,
where the evidence of an apparently similar form, svr-(m)tw-f sdm (^(n)TeqcT3), is
reviewed: this ts tense is traced back to r rtf sdm, which employs the sdmtf form of
iri as an auxiliary. This seems very plausible, particularly now in view of the remarks
by H. Satzinger in the I97 I issue of this Journal, where the essentially final nature of the
sdmtf ('he eventually hears') is convincingly demonstrated. However, there seems little
compelling reason to postulate the same origin for the Late-Egyptian Conjunctive: dialect
forms in Coptic (such as the 'Nitrian' Teqec&Tii quoted by Volten) are capable of other

interpretations, and the very fact that s'r-(m)twf sdm is written so often, both in
Late Egyptian and demotic, as s'r-twf sdm without the nasal element,3 should warn
us against thinking of it as a twin of the Conjunctive. Whatever the truth of the matter,
the form mtw.f r sdm is perhaps best to be explained as a secondary formation from
a Conjunctive no longer felt to be different in its origin from other narrative tenses.
I Except, presumably, that it was never followed by the Qualitative (Cern9, JEA 35 [1949], 27). Such an
observation, however, might not readily have occurred to the scribe, or may not have been thought significant.

2 The tense did not apparently survive into Coptic, but in this it is not unique. Its negative counterpart
may perhaps have been *mtw-f r tm sdm, but I know of no examples of this.
3 Could this be caused by the near presence of rayin ? Cf. the Greek renderings of Rr in XE9p'nv, MVKeplvos, etc.

This content downloaded from 193.227.1.43 on Mon, 10 Oct 2016 23:57:07 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms