Re-evaluating the Status of rah- within the Aspectual System of Hindi

From Auxiliary to Progressive Affix

Abstract

This paper re-evaluates the status of rah- within the aspectual system of Hindi. While previous studies have often classified rah- as an auxiliary verb, I argue that it has grammaticalized further into a bound progressive morpheme. The analysis is based on four diagnostics: incompatibility with the habitual marker -t-, restrictions on negation, absence in negative imperatives, and morphological opposition with habitual -t-. These distributional patterns demonstrate that rah- diverges from the profile of canonical auxiliaries and vector verbs, which inflect independently, modify event structure, and participate in monoclausal [V1+V2] constructions. A central contribution of this study is to refute the long-standing “perfective rahā” hypothesis. Because the progressive form rahā is formally homonymous with the perfective participial ending -ā, earlier accounts have analyzed progressive constructions as containing a perfective morpheme. This yields the paradoxical conclusion that the progressive encodes perfective aspect—an untenable analysis, since progressive and perfective are incompatible. By distinguishing the true perfective marker -(y)ā from agreement suffixes -ā/-ī/-e, and by recognizing rah- as the sole progressive exponent, the analysis resolves this inconsistency. The findings are situated within complex predicate theory and the grammaticalization literature. The trajectory of rah- aligns with Lehmann’s grammaticalization cline (lexical verb → auxiliary → TAM affix) and illustrates Hopper & Traugott’s principles of decategorialization and persistence. Typologically, the Hindi evidence contributes to the well-documented tendency for posture or existence verbs (‘stay, remain, sit, stand’) to develop into progressive markers. This study clarifies the synchronic role of rah- as an affixal progressive morpheme and revises our understanding of Hindi TAM morphology. It also raises broader implications for the analysis of Indo-Aryan aspect systems, for the theory of complex predicates, and for typological models of grammaticalization.