>Latin does
> however preserve a trace of the old subjunctive in the future tense of
> the verb "to be"
Both the -a: and -e: subjunctives of Latin can be traced back to the PIE
subjunctive, in part. The -e: form in the first conjugation appears to be a
mixture:
Thematic first conjugation:
dona -ye/o -e/o - (short vowel subjunctive) with generalisation of the -e:
But Athematic first conjugation requires the optative endings:
nevah2 -yeh1 -
Meiser suggests the -a: subjunctive is based on subjunctives on roots
in -h2, for example:
tlneh2-e-s (short vowel subjunctive) > tlnah-as > tolna:s > tolla:s
Indicative tlneh-ti > (eventually) tolnat, tollat.
He says that as long as the original stem vowel -a survived, the pattern
Indicative -a, Subjunctive -a: would be parallel to the inherited PIE one on
thematic verbs (indicative -e/o, subjunctive -e:/o:), but when the sound
changes etc reduced the indicative tolnat to tollit, this relationship was
disturbed, and the -a: could spread to other verbs.
Any reactions to this idea?
Peter