Mordvinic/Multipersonal

The Mordvinic languages sport a system of multipersonal verbal agreement, operating separate from the common Uralic subject agreement conjugation.

Of the two forms listed per slot, the upper is the present, the lower the preterite.

Erzya

Subject → Object ↓	1PS	1PP	2PS	2PP	3PS	3PP
1PS	N/A		-samak -imik	-samiź -imiź	-samam -imim	-samiź -imiź
1PP			-samiź -miź		-samiź -maź
2PS	-tan -iťiń	-tadiź -iďiź	N/A		-tanzat -ińźiť
2PP	-tadiź -iďiź				-tadiź -iďiź
3PS	-sa -ija	-sińek -ińek	-sak -ik	-sink -ink	-si/-sazo -iźe	-siź -iź
3PP	-siń -iń		-siť -iť		-sinze -inze

Mokša

Subject → Object ↓	1PS	1PP	2PS	2PP	3PS	3PP
1PS	N/A		-samak -majť	-samaśť -maśť	-samań -mań	-samaź -maź
1PP			-samaśť -maśť		-samaź -?	-samaź -?
2PS	-ťä -çťəń	-ťäďäź -ďäź	N/A		-tanza(t) -nźä
2PP	-ťäďäź -ďäź				-ťäďäź -ďäź
3PS	-sa(n) -jńä, -jä	-saśk -śk, -ńək	-sak -jť, -jk	-saśť, -sajəńť, -sańk -śť, -jəńť, -ńk	-si -źä	-saź -ź
3PP	-sajńä -zəń		-sajť -zəń		-sińä -zəń

Reconstructions

It is uncertain when this paradigm formed; but most scholars consider it a Mordvinic innovation. While it is theoretically possible that it is of Proto-Uralic vintage, and Seefloth's Paradigm constitutes a version of it which has lost the category of object person, the absence of any trace of that category in the definite conjugations of other Uralic languages renders this unlikely.

Klemm's reconstruction

Antal Klemm reconstructed the Proto-Mordvinic paradigm as follows in 1926:

Subject → Object ↓	1PS	1PP	2PS	2PP	3PS	3PP
1PS	N/A		-sV-mV-t -j-mV-t	?	-sV-mV(-z.) -j-mV-(j)-m	-sV-mV-z. -j-mV-z.
1PP			?	?	?	-sV-mV-j-z. -j-mC-j-z.
2PS	-tV-n -j-tV-n	? ?	N/A		-tV-z. -j-nz.(k)	-tV-z. -j-tV-z.
2PP	? ?	? ?			? ?	-tV-j-z. -j-tV-j-z.
3PS	-sV-m -j(V)-m	-sV-j-n-m.k -j-n-m.k	-sV-t -j-t	-sV-j-n-d.k -j-n-d.k	-sV-z. ~ -sV-j -j-z.	-sV-z. -j-z.
3PP	-sV-j-n -j(V)-n	-sV-j-n-m.k -j-n-m.k	-sV-j-t -j-t	-sV-j-n-d.k -j-n-d.k	-sV-j-nz. -j-nz.	-sV-j-z. -j-z.

(Keresztes 1999:56)

Keresztes's reconstruction

Laszlo Keresztes assumes that the Mordvinic multipersonal paradigm was built up from a much simpler paradigm in stages, At the beginning of the differentiation of indefinite and definite forms was a simple paradigm:

Subject	Indefinite	Definite (3rd person object)
1SG	-m -j-m
2SG	-t -j-t
3SG	-0 ~ -j -j ~ -ś	-zV -j-źV(-n)
PL	-j-t -ś-t	-ź -ź

The imperative forms were indefinite -k and definite 1st person -ma-k (Keresztes 1999:108).

Sources

• László Keresztes (1999): Development of Mordvin Definite Conjugation (Mémoires de la Société Finno-Ougrienne #233)