Re: [tied] Re: PIE conjugations

----- Original Message -----

From: Miguel Carrasquer Vidal

To: cybalist@egroups.com

Sent: Friday, January 12, 2001 2:55 AM

Subject: Re: [tied] Re: PIE conjugations

>Don't tell me you accept my explanation of <esi>, <audiam>/<audie:s> etcetera! :-)

I'm not that rash, but I certainly like your ingenuity.

>But *-wan(i)/*-wen(i) are themselves undoubtedly connected to non-Anatolian *-men (and both in turn, one would expect, connected to singular *-m(i)/*-w(i)).  The correspondences are irregular, but to me that suggests that we're dealing with an unstable proto-phoneme **mw.

... or -weni dissimilated to -meni after -u- (similarly to -war/-mar). But Hittite has only -mi in the 1sg. "Undoubtedly" is not the right word here, as many linguists connect 1pl. -we- with the non-Anatolian dual ending. Not my favourite theory, but let's leave a little room for doubt ;).

>There is awimi "I come".

I know. There are several "explanations" of this particular -mi, cited by Szemerényi, for example. The problem with Luwian is that the attestation of anything is so often scarce and encumbered by philological problems.

>What are Hittite verbs like iiami, iasi "to do" or zinnami, zinnisi "to stop" if not thematic verbs?

What I mean is that there's no inflectional contrast between vocalic and consonantal stems. This can be interpreted in various ways -- the usual "retention or innovation?" dilemma.

 

Piotr