translations in English but are not interchangeable in Hindi-Urdu. Now, these copula verbs (besides होना honā) can themselves be converted into their participle forms and put into one of the three different aspects of Hindi-Urdu, which are habitual, progressive, and perfective aspects, hence generating sub-aspectual infinitive forms. This way a verb form combining two grammatical aspects is constructed. The table below shows the combined aspectual forms: Note: The perfective subaspect of the habitual main aspect (habitual) also is imperfective (habitual). Also, these sub-aspects are even more nuanced that it is not possible to translate each of them into English in a unique way. Some translations don't even make sense in English. Slavic languages Verbs in Slavic languages have a perfective and/or an imperfective form. Generally, any of various prefixes can turn imperfectives into perfectives;<ref> {{cite book | last1 = Bybee | first1 = Joan | author-link1 = Joan Bybee | last2 = Perkins | first2 = Revere | last3 = Pagliuca | first3 = William | chapter = 1: Theoretical Background | title = The Evolution of Grammar: Tense, Aspect, and Modality in the Languages of the World | chapter-url = https://books.google.com/books?id=aOvU6m-f1IwC | location = Chicago | publisher = University of Chicago Press | date = 1994 | page = 17 | isbn = 9780226086651 | access-date = 2016-08-04 | quote = The Slavic perfective prefixes originally signaled locative notions which made the verb telic (just as go out', go through, and eat up are telic in English). }} </ref> suffixes can turn perfectives into imperfectives. The non-past imperfective form is used for the present, while its perfective counterpart is used for the future. There is also a periphrastic imperfective future construction. Other languages The imperfective aspect may be fused with the past tense, for a form traditionally called the imperfect. In some cases, such as Spanish and Portuguese, this is because the imperfective aspect occurs only in the past tense; others, such as Georgian and Bulgarian, have both general imperfectives and imperfects. Other languages with distinct past imperfectives include Latin and Persian. Perfective The opposite aspect is the perfective (in Ancient Greek, generally called the aorist), which views a situation as a simple whole, without interior composition. (This is not the same as the perfect.) Unlike most other tense–aspect category oppositions, it is typical for a language not to choose either perfective or imperfective as being generally marked and