From: Miguel Carrasquer
Message: 33708
Date: 2004-08-06
>--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Miguel Carrasquer <mcv@...> wrote:In the case of *e/o being a kind of relativizer:
>> On Thu, 05 Aug 2004 18:46:31 +0200, Miguel Carrasquer
>> <mcv@...> wrote:
>>
>> >> I also fail to see the principle whereby the thematic vowel
>could be
>> >>used to mark the object. Otherwise it expresses belonging. That
>> >>incidentally makes some sense: If the bare endings were passive
>> >>("was killed"), the extension by a morpheme of belonging would
>be
>> >>possessive ("has killed"), which comes quite close.
>> >
>> >Yes, that would be another possibility, but it would have to
>> >be explained better, because I don't quite get the mechanism
>> >you're proposing.
>>
>> Perhaps a parallel can be found in Basque, where the
>> morpheme -(e)n marks the subjunctive, the past tense, and
>> the verb of a relative phrase (as far as it isn't already
>> past/subjunctive).
>>
>> This is of course not quite the same picture as PIE (verbal)
>> *-e/o-, but who knows whether the Basque preterite
>> originated in a perfect of sorts.
>>
>> Basque also offers a kind of parallel for what I was
>> proposing: the ergative subject is usually expressed as a
>> set of suffixes on the verb (optionally followed by -(e)n),
>> and the absolutive object/subject as a set of prefixes.
>> Except in the transitive past tense with 3rd. person object:
>> there the ergative is expressed by prefixes similar to the
>> ones marking the absolutive.
>
>I can't follow this. What in Basque is parallel with what in IE
>here?