From: tgpedersen
Message: 46694
Date: 2006-12-16
> > > Could somebody tell me if the Greek k-perfect is an internalSince the form chosen for preterite was uninflected for person and
> > > Greek construction or is originated from PIE times?
> > > What the inner k-particle could mean if from PIE?
> > > And the lead-in vowel -a that characterized the set of its
> > > endings?
> > > Also : is the reduplication of the root always mandatory ?
> > > Thanks a lot,
> > > Marius
> > >
> >
> > Meanwhile I could find that :
> >
> > a) Tocharian /ta:ka:/ 'I was' (that seems to have lost a sibilant
> > /(s)ta:ka:/ , based on his imperatve form /pa:sta:k/ could be
> > cognate with the Old Greek esta:ka: 'I stand' (it's true that
> > there is no reduplication in the Tocharian form, so at least I
> > ould answer to:
> >
> > > : is the reduplication of the root always mandatory ?
> > Answer: (based on Tocharian the answer is ) No, in case of a 'a
> > Common PIE k-tense')
> >
> > b) another Tocharian k-verbal-form is /käl-k/ 'he went' (see Skt.
> > carati)
> >
> > So this k-verbal-particle seems to appear in Tocharian too, not
> > only in the Greek k-Perfect.
> >
> > So, I need to ask you again:
> >
> > > What the inner k-particle could mean?
> >
> > Thanks for your help,
>
>
> Some think (Miguel is one) there was an alternation *-k-/*-x#
> (*-h2), ie *k becomes *h2 in auslaut.
> That would relate the Greek k-perfect to the Lithuanian preterite
> 3sg -o (<- *-ax) and Latin imperfect era- and -ba- (<- *-bhw-ax-)
> (with a later addition of personal endings). The -ax- suffix is
> known also as a factitive suffix (stems in -a:).
> Personally I think this preterite started as an uninflected
> participle in *-ak, with the subject in either dative or
> instrumental, and that as it began to be construed with subjects
> in nominative, personal endings were added. I also think this
> suffix is identical to the f.sg., n.pl., diminutive *-ak (-> *-ax),
> so therefore: "To/by X there is a lot of / a mass of V" ie
> "X V'ed".