Converb

The term was coined for Khalkha Mongolian by Ramstedt (1902) and until recently, it was used mostly by specialists of Mongolic and Turkic languages to describe non-finite verbs that could be used for both coordination and subordination. Nedjalkov & Nedjalkov (1987) first adopted the term for general typological use, followed by Haspelmath & König (1995).

A converb depends syntactically on another verb form, but is not its argument. It can be an adjunct, an adverbial, but it cannot be the only predicate of a simple sentence or clausal argument. It cannot depend on predicates such as 'order' (Nedjalkov 1995: 97).

The converb -megc denotes that as soon as the first action has been begun/completed, the second action begins. Thus, the subordinate sentence can be understood as a temporal adverbial. There is no context in which the argument structure of another verb or construction would require -megc to appear, and there is no way (possibly except for afterthought) in which a -megc-clause could come sentence-final. Thus, -megc qualifies as a converb in the general linguistic sense.

However, from the viewpoint of Mongolian philology (and quite in agreement with Nedjalkov 1995 and Johanson 1995), there is a second converb in this sentence: -ž. At its first occurrence, it is modified by the coverb ehel- ‘to begin’ and this coverb determines that the modified verb has to take the suffix. Yet, the same verbal suffix is used after the verb ‘to beat’ which ends an independent non-finite clause that temporally precedes the following clause but without modifying it in any way that would be fit for an adverbial. It would be possible for -ž to mark an adverbial:

Such "polyfunctionality" is common. Japanese and Korean could provide similar examples, and the definition of subordination poses further problems. There are linguists who suggest that a reduction of the domain of the term converb to adverbials does not fit language reality (e.g. Slater 2003: 229).

Mostly, Uzbek converbs can be translated into English as gerunds, but the context is important as the translation has to be changed as per the former. For example, below are the two sentences including the converb turib from the verb stem tur- “stand”:

Alternatively, turib may denote the meaning of “then” i.e. consequitiveness, so the sentence in this case can be translated as “If you stood up (and) then wrote it”. But in the second example below the same converb turib can in no way be translated either with gerunditive or consecutive meaning: