From: Miguel Carrasquer
Message: 34229
Date: 2004-09-20
>If we take audi:bam as original, could one consider a syncopated formInteresting suggestion. It would ruin the link with the
>of the familiar infinitive in *-se, i.e. *ama:s(e)+ba:m > ama:bam.
>This has the advantage of being phonologically regular if the syncope
>is granted. It would automatically give a long e: in the 3rd
>conjugation, as *regesb- would > rege:b- regularly. The classical
>audie:bam would have to be explained by influence from the second and
>third conjugations, or perhaps just from capie:bam if this was from
>*kapyes(e)+ba:m.