Re: [tied] Re: word without root

Thanks Sergei

At 08:23 AM 1/16/01 +0000, you wrote:

>However, Russian -nu- (<*-no,-) is not a common verbal
>suffix (and is not reduced to -n- in future forms), this suffix marks
>in Common Slavic, eg, inchoative verbs (the verbs denoting the
>beginning of an action, state, or occurrence), the future form in
>Russian is formally the same as the present one, other markers make
>the difference (usually the verb's stem is changed).

When writing "common", I meant "not unusual" since suffix -nu- is used in
very large number of verbs. Infinitive of such verbs has full suffix -nu-,
future/present - only -n-.

>Considering a normal developement we should have in modern Russian
>the following (taking into account acute's generazation on vy-):
>
>1 sg.(f.<p.) vyn'mu<*vy(n)Imo,
>2 sg.f. vyn'meSH<*vy(n)Imes^i
>3 sg.f. vyn'met<*vy(n)ImetI.
>
>The forms we really have might be explained as simplification of
>consonantal cluster -n'm->-n- influenced by analogy, as you noted.

I still have doubts about this - all other verbs with identical structure
(prefix on vowel + im + ti) do not have -n- in present/future forms:
pon'at' - pojmu, zan'ati - zajmu, and infinitive shows expected -'a-.
Can the stress be of importance here?

Andrei