Re: [tied] Latin -mini 2pl passive

From: Piotr Gasiorowski
Message: 7303
Date: 2001-05-10

You are right. This is a very nice precedent which does away with one part of my counterargument, though of course the replacement of <pepragatai> by <pepragmenoi eisi> had nothing to do with pronounceability. The Greeks perhaps found the nasal-less ending of <pepragatai> confusible with the <-tai> of the 3rd peson singular and therefore tended to avoid that form.
However, in Greek this use of the participle in <-meno-> was part of a more general phenomenon. The third person plural is treated in the same way in the pluperfect (<pepragmenoi e:san>) and the conjunctive and optative forms of the perfect mediopassive are periphrastic across the board, even for vocalic stems: <pepaideumenos o:, pepaideumenos e:is, ...>, <pepaideumenos eie:n, pepaideumenos eie:s>, etc.). Also, <pepragmenos> is a productively formed participle which occurs freely in other constructions as well. For Latin, you'd have to assume a completely isolated survival of a purely hypothetical periphrastic stage, since *<porta:mini: estis> is not attested; nor is *<porta:minus>.
----- Original Message -----
From: MCLSSAA2@...
Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2001 5:26 PM
Subject: Re: [tied] Latin -mini 2pl passive; high-order characters in titles

--- In cybalist@......, "Piotr Gasiorowski" <gpiotr@......> wrote:
> ... anything as unheard-of as having normally inflected passives for
> five persons and a periphrastic construction for the sixth.

It happens in Attic Greek with perfect passives if the stem ends in a
     luo:     pra:sso:
1s lelumai   pepragmai
2s lelusai   pepraxai
3s lelutai   pepraktai
1p lelumetha   pepragmetha
2p lelusthe   peprakhthe
3p leluntai  --pepragmenoi eisi(n)--
  whereas the etymological form should be *pepragatai, which is found
in Ionic and Homeric Greek.