[tied] Re: sum

> >In that case the argument hinges on whether the Latin present
> >endings continue the primary or the secondary endings.
>
> They are primary endings, secondarily reduced to look like
> secondary endings. The 1sg. -o: is clearly primary. So is
> the 3sg. -it (< *-eti), because *-et gives OLat. -ed.
> According to Sihler, the 3pl. also points to *-Vnti, because
> *-nt would have given (and in Oscan gives) -ns.
>

So, for the sake of (my) argument, I'd have to claim *sóm-i, *es-s-i,
*es-t-i, *sómV-, *estV-, *sónt-i. Which is not quite impossible.


Torsten