The interaction of verbal aspect and passive voice in the Molise Slavic micro-language

The dominating Romance varieties have strongly influenced the functions of the two aspect categories of the Molise Slavic micro-language, i. e. the morphosyntactic opposition of imperfect vs perfect and the opposition of perfectivity (totality) of the derivative Slavic type of perfective vs. imperfective. In Molise Slavic there are three passive constructions, two of them being traditional Slavic grammemes: the esse passive (auxiliary verb bit ‘to be’ + passive perfect participle) and the reflexive passive. As a result of the Italian influence, an additional venitive passive has developed, formed by the aspectually paired auxiliary dokj/grem ‘to come’. As in Italian, the venitive passive is an eventive (dynamic) passive, just like the reflexive passive, whereas the esse passive may also express states.The two Molise Slavic traditional passives are formed from the stems of both aspects, with a typical specialization of the imperfective participles in the eventive passive, except for secondary (suffixed) imperfective verbs, completely lacking passive participles. As for the reflexive passive, it is interesting that adding an agent is excluded, just like in Italian. The use of the imperfect and the perfect corresponds in all three types of the passive to Italian. The opposition of perfectivity, in contrast, allows for differentiating delimitative (imperfective) from total states of affairs (perfective) in the perfect and of processes (imperfective) from repeated (perfective) states of affairs in the imperfect. This means that the perfect of imperfective verbs includes in the passive voice, just like in the active, the same functions as delimitative perfective verbs with the prefix po- in Russian. In contrast, it cannot express processes.The venitive passive is compatible with an overt agent. In spite of many other characteristics of the venitive passive coinciding in the two languages in contact (for example its exclusion from the perfect), there is, however, also an important difference, namely the possibility of unambiguously expressing repeated total events with the help of the perfective imperfect in Molise Slavic, absent in Italian.publishe