Split Tense Projection in Urdu: An Illusion


  • Asad Ali Department of Languages, The University of Chenab, Gujrat, Pakistan
  • Nazir Ahmed Malik Department of Languages, The University of Chenab, Gujrat, Pakistan
  • Zain Department of Languages, The University of Chenab, Gujrat, Pakistan


Projection, Inflection, Aspect, Tense, Derivation, unvalued


This study explores the cartography of Tense Projection (TP) in the Urdu/Hindi language within the framework of feature sharing proposed by Pesetsky and Torrego (2007). To examine feature sharing, the study employs Head Movement Constraints (HMC) as proposed by Travis (1984) to analyze the role of intervening elements in Urdu/Hindi T-Projection. Additionally, it demonstrates how HMC restricts T to V or V to T movement in Urdu, contrasting with English where such movement is permitted in the absence of an intervening head (Ho). This study explores the inflection of V in Urdu concerning aspect and tense marking through the lens of feature sharing. Drawing on evidence from Urdu/Hindi, it strongly asserts that V in Urdu does not inflect to mark tense but solely for aspectual distinctions: habitual (ta), imperfective (iya), perfective (chuka), and progressive (raha), while tense marking (present (hai) and past (tha)) is achieved through other means. Furthermore, these findings endorse the Feature Sharing Theory by affirming the significance of valuing unvalued features for the interpretability of uninterpretable features during derivation, emphasizing the necessity for all features to be valued and interpreted before spell-out to avoid derivation crashes.


Ali, A., Jabbar, Q., & Kiani, H. (2021). Clausal-Internal Scrambling in Urdu Language: A Derivation by Phases. REiLA: Journal of Research and Innovation in Language, 3(1), 52-60.

Ansari, N. A., & Mangrio, R. (2019). Morphology of Urdu Verbs: A word and paradigm approach. Pakistan Journal of Language Studies, 3(1), 31-42.

Arregi, K., & Pietraszko, A. (2021). The ups and downs of head displacement. Linguistic Inquiry, 52(2), 241-290.

Baker, M. C. (1988). Incorporation: A theory of grammatical function changing.

Bhatt, R. (2011). Urdu/hindi modals.

Bjorkman, B. M. (2018). Ergative as perfective oblique. Syntax, 21(4), 321-361.

Butt, M., & Geuder, W. (2003). Light verbs in Urdu and grammaticalization. Words in time: Diachronic semantics from different points of view, 295-350.

Butt, M., & Ramchand, G. (2001). Complex aspectual structure in Hindi/Urdu. M. Liakata, B. Jensen, & D. Maillat, Eds, 1-30.

Butt, M., & Sadler, L. (2003). Verbal morphology and agreement in Urdu. Syntactic structures and morphological information. Mouton, 57-100.

Chomsky, N. (1957). Syntactic Structures, Mouton and Co., The Hague. (1965) Aspects of the Theory of Syntax.

Chomsky, N. (1980). Lectures on Government and Binding, Foris, Dordrecht. Chomsky Lectures on Government and Binding.

Chomsky, N. (1986). Knowledge of language: its nature, origin and use. New York: Praeger.

Chomsky, N. (1995). The minimalist program. MIT press.

Chomsky, N. (2001). Derivation by phase. MIT Press

Chomsky, N. (2005). Three factors in language design. Linguistic inquiry, 36(1), 1-22.

Chomsky, N. (2013). Problems of projection. lingua, 130, 33-49.

Chomsky, N. (2014). The minimalist program. MIT press.

Chomsky, N. (2021). Linguistics then and now: Some personal reflections. Annual Review of Linguistics, 7, 1-11.

Chomsky, N. (2023). Genuine explanation and the strong minimalist thesis. Cognitive Semantics, 8(3), 347-365.

Chomsky, N., & Kenstowicz, M. (1999). Derivation by phase. An Annotated Syntax Reader, 482.

Cinque, G. (2001). “Restructuring” and the order of aspectual and root modal heads. In Current studies in Italian syntax (pp. 137-155). Brill.

David, A., Maxwell, M., Browne, E., & Lynn, N. (2009). Urdu Morphology. Maryland: Centre for Advanced Study of Language, University of Maryland.

Donati, C. (2006). On wh-head movement. Current Studies in Linguistics Series, 42, 21.

Embick, D. (2000). Features, syntax, and categories in the Latin perfect. Linguistic inquiry, 31(2), 185-230.

Harris, A. C. (1997). Ergativity.

Haegeman, L., & Guéron, J. (1994). English grammar: A generative perspective. Blackwell Publishing.

Harizanov, B., & Gribanova, V. (2019). Whither head movement?. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 37, 461-522.

Hashmi, A. (2013). Urdu. Ilmi Kutb Khana.

Khurshid, M. A., Azad, H., Ahmed, S. R., & Usman, T. (2021). Oblique Agreement Feature and Oblique Adjunct Phrase. Jahan-e-Tahqeeq, 4(3), 412-421.

Kidwai, A. (2000). XP-adjunction in Universal Grammar: Scrambling and binding in Hindi-Urdu. Oxford University Press, USA.

Koul, O. N. (2008). Modern Hindi Grammar. Springfield, USA: Dunwoody Press.

Li, C., & Thompson, S. (1994). On ‘middle voice’s verbs in Mandarin. Voice: Form and function, 27, 231.

Mahajan, A. K. (1990). The A/A-bar distinction and movement theory. Doctoral dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Matushansky, O. (2006). Head movement in linguistic theory. Linguistic inquiry, 37(1), 69-109.

Naseer, A. (2010). Tense and Aspect in the Context of Urdu. International Journal of Electrical & Computer Sciences, 10(5).

Pesetsky, D., & Torrego, E. (2001). T-to-C movement: Causes and consequences. Current Studies in Linguistics Series, 36, 355-426.

Pesetsky, D., & Torrego, E. (2007). The syntax of valuation and the interpretability of features. Phrasal and clausal architecture: Syntactic derivation and interpretation, 262-294.

Rai, I. P. (2017). Aspect in English and Mugali Rai: A contrastive study. Pakistan Journal of Language Studies, 1(1), 1-11.

Roberts, I. G. (2010). Agreement and head movement: Clitics, incorporation, and defective goals, 59. MIT Press.

Sharif, A. N. (2020). Causative alternation licensing in Urdu: An event structure account (Doctoral dissertation, University of Otago).

Travis, L. D. (1984). Parameters and Effects of Word Order Variation: Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements of the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. MIT.

Rizzi, L., & Cinque, G. (2016). Functional categories and syntactic theory. Annual Review of Linguistics, 2, 139-163.

Zyman, E., & Kalivoda, N. (2020). XP-and X0-movement in the Latin verb: Evidence from mirroring and anti-mirroring. Glossa: a journal of general linguistics, 5(1).



How to Cite

Ali, A., Malik, N. A., & Zain. (2023). Split Tense Projection in Urdu: An Illusion. Pakistan Journal of Language Studies, 7(1), 16-31. Retrieved from //pjls.gcuf.edu.pk/index.php/pjls/article/view/222