>[...] the affixed -s of the aorist and future was held to be a >redlex of
>PIE *es "be". Here again the proponents pay little >attention to meaning.
>[...] Lehman would appear to equate the *-dh >of the Germanic weak
>preterite with other derivational verbal >suffixes such as *-yo/-eyo,
>*-sk-,*-s-, as well as the Greek perfect >in -k- and the Latin perfect in
>-w-.
Yes, *-s- cannot be from *es- "to be". Some of these modal affixes have
connections outside of IE and appear to be extremely old. It appears that
the use of these modal affixes go back to Nostratic itself.
Whether one cares to believe this or not, the k-perfect is also found in
Etruscan /-c(h)e/ and Uralic *-ka. I have been also promoting the idea that
the aorist *-s was once a transitive *-(i)t (Uralic *-ta), whose
phonological development was affected by an ancient *t to *s change that
affected not only this suffix but the IE 2nd person *-s (< *-t) and the
plural suffix *-es (< *-it) too... but no one will believe me {whimper,
sob}.
Salute
- gLeN
______________________________________________________