Второе будущее (предбудущее) в древненовгородском диалекте: время или наклонение?
The article examines the grammatical semantics of the so-called ‘second compound future’ tense in the Old Novgorod dialect. Two interpretations of the grammatical semanticsofthisconstructionarecomparedinthearticle: whileZaliznjakconsidersittobe a‘suppositionalmood’, according toAndersenitisatypical relative futuretensesimilarto the English future perfect. In various languages the future perfect tense can describe both foregroundandbackgroundtaxis. ItistheforegroundtaxisthatisacharacteristicofthefutureperfectinEnglish. InPortuguesetheforegroundtaxisisexpressedbythefutureperfect indicative, while the background taxis is designated by the future perfect subjunctive. The periphrastic construction ‘budu+l-participle’ in the Old Novgoroddialect was used to express the background taxis,and this is similar to the future perfect subjunctive in Portuguese. The periphrasis in the Novgorod dialect lost its main taxis function and was drifting towards a suppositional mood before its total decline. In numerous cases, the periphrastic construction ‘budu +l-form’ can be explained only with a broader context and its pragmatic features. The periphrasis can be used as a marker of topic; the 1 st person sg. form of the construction can introduce implicit negation.