From: Patrick Ryan
Message: 38588
Date: 2005-06-13
----- Original Message -----From: tgpedersenSent: Monday, June 13, 2005 9:13 AMSubject: [tied] Re: But where does *-mi come from?--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "tgpedersen" <tgpedersen@......> wrote:
>
> Some nominal and verbal suffixes are identical, as Alscher has
noted,
> e.g.
>
> locative *-i and primary *-i
> dative *-ei and middle *-oi
> 'locative' *-r and middle *-r
> [endingless locative and secondary?]
>
> Latin has a "double ablative", a dependent construction where a
> subject and a past pasticiple (*-tó-) of its verb are given ablative
> endings. Similar constructions exist in OCS (with dative) and
Sanskrit
> (several cases). Perhaps such a dependent construction is the origin
> of the mi-conjugation?
>
BTW the deictic character of the endings (*-mnw "at me", *-s "at him",
*-t "at it", *-r "somewhere") would explain why 1st and 2nd pl.
survived (not 'were taken over') from the hi-conjugation (but how -r
ended up in the hi-conjugation, I don't know).
Another thing: with a few exceptions the hi-survivors in Germanic are
modal verbs. That means they are constructed with an infinitive.
Placing the whole thing in a "double ablative" vel. sim. construction
would make the whole too complicated to understand; which I suppose is
why they never made the cross-over to the mi-conjugation.
Torsten
***Patrick:Excuse me, but this is pure fantasy.***
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
What would our lives be like without music, dance, and theater?
Donate or volunteer in the arts today at Network for Good!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/TzSHvD/SOnJAA/79vVAA/GP4qlB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
cybalist-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/