Editing Umbrian language (section)

===== Future perfect formation =====
Uniquely, Sabellic future perfects are marked with the ending {{Lang|xum|-us-}} and, in some cases, {{Lang|xum|-ur-}}. The "{{Lang|xum|-ur-}}" form appeared as, in Umbrian, intervocalic -{{Lang|xum|s}}- became {{Lang|xum|-r-}}.{{Sfn|Zair|2014|p=368}} Both forms are of disputed etymology: it is possible that it relates to the Proto-Italic form {{Lang|itc|fuiō}}, from the Proto-Indo-European form {{Lang|pie|bʰuH-}}. These verbs, both meaning "to be," evolved into the Umbrian form {{Lang|la|'''fust'''}}, which possibly predicated the development of the similar future perfect endings. However, the linguist Nicholas Zair suggests that, given the dual meaning of {{Lang|xum|'''fust'''}} as both a future and future perfect term,{{Sfn|Beeler|1980|p=3}} it is unlikely that it would evolve into an exclusively future perfect suffix. Furthermore, Zair considers it unlikely that the term would be reanalyzed into a unique suffix as it already consists of {{Lang|xum|*-fu-}} combined with the future marker {{Lang|xum|*-s}}.{{Sfn|Zair|2014|p=373}} One proposal to rectify these concerns suggests that the suffix may originate from a reduplicated future perfect stem {{Lang|xum|*fefus-}} , which, although formed from {{Lang|xum|*fe-fu-s}}, came to be reanalyzed as {{Lang|xum|*fe-f-us}}.{{Sfn|Zair|2014|p=373}} Alternatively, it may have emerged due to the generalization of the [[Zero grade|zero-grade]] [[Proto-Indo-European language|Proto-Indo-European]] perfect active participle root {{Lang|pie|*-us-}} or the lengthened grade {{Lang|pie|*-uōs-}} , itself possibly from {{Lang|pie|*-uūs-}}. In either scenario, the forms would yield to {{Lang|xum|-us-}} in Umbrian due to inevitable loss of initial {{Lang|pie|*-u-}} after most consonants and the loss of long {{Lang|pie|*-ū-}} in Oscan-Umbrian in non-initial syllables.{{Sfn|Zair|2014|p=369}} However, the linguist [[Madison Beeler]] critiqued this theory, arguing that there is insufficient evidence for the existence of a perfect active participle in any Italic language related to the Proto-Indo-European perfect active participle, and consequently no evidence for the existence of such a form of Proto-Italic.{{Sfn|Beeler|1980|p=4}} 

Another possibility is that this form is related the u-perfect in Latin, as seen in verbs such as {{Lang|la|habui}} or {{Lang|la|tenui}}.{{Sfn|Piwowarczyk|2011|p=115}} This theory holds that the original Sabellic future marker, {{Lang|xum|*-s-}}, likely combined with a perfect marker in {{Lang|xum|*-u-}} to form the Umbrian future perfect form {{Lang|xum|-us-}}.{{Sfn|Zair|2014|p=370}} Zair suggests that, although the Umbrian future perfect form was based on an original Sabellic perfect ending, it is entirely unrelated to the Latin {{Lang|la|-u}} perfect.{{Sfn|Zair|2014|p=370}} Instead, Zair argues that it was likely related to the possible [[South Picene language|South Picene]] {{Lang|xum|-ō-}} perfect formation, which is represented orthographically by {{Lang|spx|-ú-}} and may appear in terms such as {{Lang|spx|adstaíúh}} (meaning, "they set up").{{Sfn|Zair|2014|p=378}} According to Zair, the original Proto-Indo-European language formulated perfect terms through the reduplication of the initial consonant and the shift of the root into the o-grade, leading the creation of a perfect stem {{Lang|pie|*-ō-}} that was transformed into a future perfect stem in Proto-Sabellic through the addition of the morpheme {{Lang|xum|*-s-}}. Zair continues, proposing that the Proto-Sabellic language likely utilized the {{Lang|pie|*-ō-}} morpheme in its perfect and aorist tenses, although these were largely lost during the generalization of the perfect stems following the loss of the aorist tense, leaving the future perfect form as the only remnant of the original {{Lang|pie|*-ō-}} stem as there were no aorist parallels.{{Sfn|Zair|2014|pp=380-381}}