--- In
cybalist@egroups.com, Andrei Markine <andrey@...> wrote:
> Could cybalist members help me in resolving a puzzle?
>
> It is a Russian verb " vynut' " ("to take out").
> vy- is prefix, -t' is infinitive ending. If we look at the verb's
conjugation:
> 1sg: vynu
> 2sg: vynesh'
> 3sg: vynet
> -nu- looks like common verbal suffix (reduced in future forms to -n-
).
> That leaves no space for the root.
>
> I could guess that original structure was vy-n-im-ti (with -n-
inserted by
> analogy with prefixes vUn-, sUn-), then by analogy with large group
of verb
> on -nu, -nim- was replaced with suffix -nu and thus the verb
eventually
> lost its root. Is it correct? If it is, are there other examples of
> "rootless" words?
>
> Regards,
> Andrei
Your conjecture is correct, a Common Slavic form was *vy-(j)Im-ti
(<*u:- 'out'+ im- 'take'), 1 sg. pres. *vy-(j)Im-o, (here I for jer',
o, for nazalized o, j is a prothesis, analogically replaced by -n- in
East Slavic). However, Russian -nu- (<*-no,-) is not a common verbal
suffix (and is not reduced to -n- in future forms), this suffix marks
in Common Slavic, eg, inchoative verbs (the verbs denoting the
beginning of an action, state, or occurrence), the future form in
Russian is formally the same as the present one, other markers make
the difference (usually the verb's stem is changed).
Considering a normal developement we should have in modern Russian
the following (taking into account acute's generazation on vy-):
1 sg.(f.<p.) vyn'mu<*vy(n)Imo,
2 sg.f. vyn'meSH<*vy(n)Imes^i
3 sg.f. vyn'met<*vy(n)ImetI.
The forms we really have might be explained as simplification of
consonantal cluster -n'm->-n- influenced by analogy, as you noted.
Sergei