4. SR in Subordinate Clauses

In the following sentence, the entire clause 'that I was burning with desire for you' is the subject. The predicate is ünen 'true'. Čamajg is in the Accusative case, but this is a true Accusative, not the product of differential subject marking.

ᠴᠢᠮᠠᠢ᠋ᠶ

чамайг

ᠦᠨᠡᠨ

үнэн

ᠴᠢᠮᠠᠢ᠋ᠶ ᠬᠦᠰᠡᠭᠰᠡᠨ
ᠰᠡᠳᠬᠢᠯ ᠳᠦ ᠪᠡᠨ
ᠰᠢᠲᠠᠵᠤ ᠶᠠᠪᠤᠭᠰᠠᠨ
ᠮᠢᠨᠢ ᠦᠨᠡᠨ᠃

Чамайг хүссэн сэтгэлдээ шатаж явсан минь үнэн.

The possessive particle n' may similarly be used to refer to the third person subject of the matrix clause, or even to a third person not made explicit. It commonly has a topicalising function:

ᠶᠠᠪᠤᠭᠰᠠᠨ ᠨᠢ ᠳᠡᠭᠡᠷ᠎ᠡ᠃

Явсан (нь) дээр

This sentence acts as a general recommendation ('better to go') and can be used for first or second-person, i.e., 'It's better that you go' or 'It's better that I go'. The нь can be omitted.

A common everyday construction is the following. The subject of the main clause is the same as that of the subordinate clause, hence the reflexive. The Accusative ending is omitted but understood.

ᠪᠢ ᠠᠪᠤᠬᠤ ᠪᠠᠨ ᠮᠠᠷᠲᠠᠭᠰᠠᠨ᠃

Би авахаа мартсан.

In the following sentence, the subject of the subordinate clause differs from that of the main clause. There is also differential subject marking (Genitive marking on the subject of the subordinate clause), to be discussed below.

ᠲᠠᠨ ᠦ ᠢᠷᠡᠭᠰᠡᠨ ᠢ
ᠪᠢᠳᠡ ᠮᠡᠳᠡᠭᠰᠡᠨ ᠦᠭᠡᠢ᠃

Таны ирсэнийг бид мэдсэнгүй.

In the following sentence the subject of the subordinate clause (a man who took books from many libraries and failed to return them) is omitted. Under differential subject marking, whereby the subject of the subordinate clause is put in the Accusative, the subject of the clause could theoretically be '896 books', but the obvious interpretation here is that the books were taken by a human agent.

ᠣᠳᠣ ᠪᠠᠷ ᠠᠯᠪᠠᠨ ᠦ ᠬᠢᠨ
896 ᠰᠢᠷᠬᠡᠭ ᠨᠣᠮ ᠢ
ᠠᠯᠢ ᠨᠣᠮ ᠦᠨ ᠰᠠᠩ ᠡᠴᠡ
ᠠᠪᠣᠭᠰᠠᠨ ᠢ ᠨᠢ
ᠲᠣᠭᠲᠠᠭᠠᠭᠠᠳ ᠪᠠᠢᠭ᠎ᠠ᠃

Одоогоор албаныхан 896 ширхэг номыг аль номын сангаас авсныг нь тогтоогоод байгаа.

In the following example, the subject of the main clause is či 'you'. A second embedded clause, containing the content of the message, takes as its subject ter 'he', the person to whom the message is to be given.

ᠴᠢ ᠲᠡᠭᠦᠨ ᠲᠡᠢ ᠠᠭᠤᠯᠵᠠᠪᠠᠯ
ᠲᠡᠭᠦᠨ ᠳᠦ ᠲᠠᠪᠤᠨ ᠴᠠᠭ ᠲᠤ
ᠢᠷᠡᠬᠦ ᠵᠢ ᠨᠢ ᠬᠡᠯᠡᠭᠡᠷᠡᠢ᠃

Чи түүнтэй уулзвал түүнд таван цагт ирэхийг нь хэлээрэй.

The verb itge-x 'to believe' requires the Dative-locative. In the following sentence, gegeen is gapped from the relative clause.

ᠳᠠᠷᠤᠩᠭᠤᠶᠢᠯᠠᠭᠴᠢ ᠵᠢᠨ ᠦᠢᠯᠡ ᠶᠢᠨ
ᠦᠷ᠎ᠡ ᠪᠣᠯᠪᠠᠰᠤᠷᠠᠬᠤ ᠴᠠᠭ
ᠢᠷᠡᠭᠰᠡᠨ ᠳᠦ ᠢᠲᠡᠭᠡᠭᠰᠡᠨ
ᠭᠡᠭᠡᠨ ...

Дарангуйлагчийн үйлийн үр боловсрох цаг ирсэнд итгэсэн гэгээн ...

ᠰᠨᠣᠤᠳᠧᠨ ᠲᠥᠷᠦ ᠵᠢᠨ ᠮᠥᠷᠳᠡᠯᠭᠡ
ᠲᠠᠩᠨᠠᠭᠤᠯ ᠦᠨ ᠲᠤᠬᠠᠢ ᠢᠯᠡᠴᠢᠯᠡᠵᠦ᠂
ᠪᠤᠷᠤᠭᠤ ᠬᠡᠷᠡᠭ ᠬᠢᠭᠰᠡᠨ ᠳᠦ ᠪᠠᠨ ᠲᠡᠢᠮ ᠴᠤ
ᠶᠡᠬᠡ ᠰᠠᠨᠠᠭ᠎ᠠ ᠵᠣᠪᠠᠬᠤ ᠦᠭᠡᠢ ᠪᠠᠢᠭ᠎ᠠ᠃

Сноуден төрийн мөрдлөг тагнуулын тухай илчилж, буруу хэрэг хийсэндээ тийм ч их санаа зовохгүй байгаа.

Amlasand xürex is a set expression meaning 'keep one's word'. Xürex 'stand by' requires the Dative-locative. This sentence features an embedding within an embedding. The unexpressed subject of the deepest subordinate clause (amlasan 'promised') is an undefined 'person'. This is identical with the (again) unexpressed subject of the immediately higher clause (xürexgüj 'not stand by') and thus requires the reflexive. The subject of the highest clause (uur xürex 'become angry) is also unexpressed. However, it is not the same as the subject of the two subordinate clauses since bajxlaar, carrying the subordinating converb suffix -xlaar, does not have the reflexive suffix. Here the subject of the main clause can probably be interpreted as 'I'.

ᠠᠮᠠᠯᠠᠭᠰᠠᠨ ᠳ᠋ᠦ ᠪᠠᠨ
ᠬᠦᠷᠬᠦ ᠦᠭᠡᠢ
ᠪᠠᠢᠬᠤᠯᠠᠷ ᠠᠭᠤᠷ
ᠬᠦᠷᠳᠡᠭ᠃

Амласандаа хүрэхгүй байхлаар уур хүрдэг.

ᠠᠮᠠᠯᠠᠭᠰᠠᠨ ᠳ᠋ᠦ ᠬᠦᠷᠬᠦ

амласанд хүрэх

ᠬᠦᠷᠬᠦ

хүрэх

ᠠᠮᠠᠯᠠᠭᠰᠠᠨ

амласан

ᠬᠦᠷᠬᠦ ᠦᠭᠡᠢ

хүрэхгүй

ᠠᠭᠤᠷ ᠬᠦᠷᠬᠦ

уур хүрэх

ᠪᠠᠢᠬᠤᠯᠠᠷ

байхлаар

᠊ᠬᠤᠯᠠᠷ

-хлаар

The verb xaramsax 'regret, deplore' requires the Dative-locative.

The following example makes a statement about 'following the path of truth', which is thus the subject of the whole.

ᠦᠨᠡᠨ ᠦ ᠵᠠᠮ ᠢᠶᠠᠷ ᠶᠠᠪᠤᠬᠤ ᠭᠡᠳᠡᠭ ᠨᠢ
ᠦᠨᠡᠨ ᠢ ᠠᠮᠢᠳᠤᠷᠠᠯ ᠤᠨ ᠵᠢᠠᠨ ᠭᠣᠣᠯ ᠵᠦᠢᠯ ᠪᠣᠯᠭᠠᠵᠤ᠂
ᠲᠡᠷᠡ ᠳᠠᠭᠠᠭᠤ ᠠᠮᠢᠳᠤᠷᠠᠨ᠎ᠠ ᠭᠡᠭᠰᠡᠨ ᠦᠭᠡ᠃

Үнэний замаар явах гэдэг нь үнэнийг амьдралынхаа гол зүйл болгож, тэр дагуу амьдарна гэсэн үг.

The following is a straightforward example where the subordinate clause is the object of medex 'to know'. The subject of the main clause differs from that of the subordinate clause; hence no reflexive suffix. The subject of the subordinate clause features differential subject marking (Accusative case).

ᠲᠠᠨ ᠢ ᠵᠢᠷᠤᠭᠠᠴᠢ ᠭᠡᠳᠡᠭ ᠢ
ᠪᠢ ᠮᠡᠳᠡᠭᠡ ᠦᠭᠡᠢ᠃

Таныг зураач гэдгийг би мэдээгүй.

In the following example, the subject of the subordinate clause is the same as that of the main clause.

ᠲᠠ ᠵᠢᠷᠤᠭᠠᠴᠢ ᠭᠡᠡᠳᠡᠭ ᠵᠢᠠᠨ
ᠨᠠᠳᠠ ᠳᠦ ᠬᠡᠯᠡᠭᠡ ᠦᠭᠡᠢ᠃

Та зураач гэдгээ надад хэлээгүй.

The verb itgex 'to believe' requires the Dative-locative. In this example, the subject of the main clause is bi 'I', that of the subordinate clause is ta 'you'. The subordinate clause in this example includes two Accusatives: one is a result of differential subject marking (Nominative > Accusative); the other is a true Accusative.

ᠲᠠᠨ ᠢ ᠡᠨᠡ ᠵᠢ ᠬᠢᠵᠦ ᠴᠢᠳᠠᠨ᠎ᠠ
ᠭᠡᠳᠡᠭ ᠲᠤ ᠢᠲᠡᠭᠡᠵᠦ ᠪᠠᠢᠨ᠎ᠠ᠃

Таныг энийг хийж чадна гэдэгт би итгэж байна.

In the following sentence, the verb ergelzex 'to doubt' mandates the Dative-locative. The reflexive indicates that the subject of the main clause and that of the subordinate clause are the same. The subject is not spelt out and could be first, second, or third person, although first person would seem to be most likely. The Accusative in the subordinate clause is a true Accusative; it is not the result of differential subject marking.

ᠡᠨᠡ ᠵᠢ ᠬᠢᠵᠦ ᠴᠢᠳᠠᠨ᠎ᠠ ᠭᠡᠳᠡᠭ ᠲᠤ ᠪᠠᠨ
ᠡᠷᠡᠭᠡᠯᠵᠡᠵᠦ ᠪᠠᠢᠨ᠎ᠠ᠃

Би энийг хийж чадна гэдэгтээ эргэлзэж байна.