From: cafaristeir
Message: 67944
Date: 2011-08-01
>My question is not about "mH1no-" or "meno-", but as to whether this suffix was used for PIE perfect medio-passive participles.
>
>
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "cafaristeir" <cafaristeir@> wrote:
> >
> > I know that the IE active participle of present and aorist is in -nt, while the perfect has -wos/-us.
> > Likewise, the passive participle of present and aorist is in -mH1no-
>
>
> There's no ev. for -H1- or any other H here.
>
>Why not, but was this the ending for perfect medio-passive participles ? In most classical IE languages, it seems to be a general passive participle, not linked to a particular tense. Some languages still show remnants of its old adjective verbal function; ex: Latin "potus" = "who has drunk, inebriated", much like modern English "drunk(en)". The "-to" suffix shows a possessive value, like Latin "alatus" (who has "alas" = "wings") or simply English "winged".
> > In my opinion, the prefix -to/-no was used in PIE not for a passive participle, but for a verbal adjective, as in Old Greek.
> > Ex: *bheid = "to split; *bhidstos = "fissile"
> > "weid" = "to know, learn"; *widstos = "knowledgeable"
> >
> > What is your opinion about ?
>
>
> It's probably a Greek innovation. It's unlikely so many other branches besides Greek would have the same meaning as a shared innovation, rather than a shared retention.
>