[tied] Romanian verbal paradigm (Re: Late Proto Albanian...)

From: Richard Wordingham
Message: 30820
Date: 2004-02-07

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "altamix" <alxmoeller@...> wrote:
> Hmmm.. if I do not confound then we have as follow:
>
> Latin conj. IV, scire, to know, perfect tense.
> scivi, scivisti, scivit, scivimus, scivistis, sciverunt
>
> Rom. conj. IV "Sti", to know, simple perfect
> Stiui, StiuSi, Stiuse, Stiusem, StiuseTi, Stiuse

(**)

> the root in both languages should be "sci-", "Sti-"
> Latin paradigms for making the perfect here are:
>
> sci -vi, -visti, -ivit, -ivimus, -iverunt
> Sti -ui, -uSi , -u , -urãm , -urãti, -urã

The past participle has been reformed - Latin _sci:tus_, Romanian
_$tiut_, not *$tit. I suspect the perfect stem has been similarly
reformed. The 3s of perfects in -v- was variously contracted, and -
vi- and -ve:- in the perfect could be dropped even in Classical
Latin. For example, for the -a- stems, French shows -avit > -at,
but spaish and Italian show -avit > -aut. Starting from sci:vi:,
and then changing the stem, I get:

Perfect singular:

sci:vi: > $tii > $tiui
sci:visti > sci:sti > $ti$ti > *$tiu$ti
sci:vit > *sci:t > $ti > $tiu

Latin perfect plural:
sci:vimus > sci:mus > $tim > *$tium
sci:vistis > sci:stis > $ti:ste > *$tiuste
sci:verunt > sci:runt > $tiru > $tiuru > *$tiur

Latin pluperfect plural > Romanian perfect plural

sci:vera:mus > sci:ra:mus > $tiram > *$tiuram
sci:vera:tis > sci:ra:tis > $tirate > *$tiurate
sci:verant > sci:rant > $tirã > $tiurã

As can be seen, the perfect of Romanian plural derives from the
pluperfect! But then, you did the same when you first conjugated
$tiu! (See ** above.) There have been a few other changes:

sci:vi: > $tiui
sci:visti > *$tiu$ti - (A) actually $tiu$i
sci:vit > $tiu
sci:vera:mus > *$tiuram - (B) actually $tiurãm
sci:vera:tis > *$tiurate = (B,C) actually $tiurãTi
sci:verant > $tiurã

A. The second singular ending has simplified from -$ti to -$i. This
form has now been extended to the pluperfect!

B. The stress of the 1pl and 2pl was retracted onto the perfect stem
(yielding columnar accent) before unstressed a > ã, so we get, for
example, $tiurãm instead of *$tiuram.

C. As in the rest of the paradigm, the 2pl ends in -Ti rather than
predicted -te.

As you can see, apart from the stem, the development, though not
regular, is explicable.

As to the change from Latin _sci:vi:_, _sci:tus_ to Romanian
_$tiui_, _$tiut_ is a bit more complicated. The past participles
in -u:tum (orignally for 3rd conjugation verbs in -vo:) did become
very popular in Proto-Romance, and replaced the regular participle
of the second conjugation, which ended in -itum in Classical Latin.

I hope this answers your question as to whether it fits.

Richard.