On Wed, 17 Jul 2002 14:40:51 +0200 (MET DST), Jens Elmegaard Rasmussen
<
jer@...> wrote:
>The ablaut of Narten presents, reduplicated structures and subjunctives is
>highly recessive.
I'd like to know more about the ablaut of subjunctives. My impression
is that all or at least the vast majority of subjunctives have full
grade throughout (following the bhávati-type rather than the
tudáti-type). Am I overlooking something?
>All the evidence we
>have (which is little) indicate that the 1./2. pl. had final accent,
>irrespective of the presence of reduplication; the 3pl perfect even has
>final accent on a zero-grade morpheme which must be an innovation, even if
>the form has been established before the breakup of PIE.
At least for the reduplicated presents, I find it hard to conceive
that final accentuation (not counting -i) in the dual/plural was *not*
the original state (*bhi-bhr-méni (-més), *bhi-bhr-téni (-té(s)),
**bhi-bhr-énti), as it is for unreduplicated presents. The only thing
that sets apart the 3pl. ending is that it starts with a vowel, but I
must confess I have no idea why this would have triggered an accent
shift from **bhV-bhr-énti to *bhé-bhr-n.ti (Skt. bíbhrati).
=======================
Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
mcv@...