Re: [tied] On do/tun

Germanic *e: in the *dHeh1- root is guaranteed by the deverbal noun *de:di- < *dHeh1-tí- (English deed < OE dæ:d, ON dáð, Goth. ge-de:þs, Dutch daad, Ger. Tat, etc.), which is actually more widespread than the verb itself (the latter survives well only in West Germanic). This is what I imagine happened to *de:- : in the 1sg. *de:mi and other forms where a nasal followed (also perhaps in some contracted forms like the inf. *de:n- < *de:-an-) *e: became Proto-West-Germanic *o: (e.g. 1sg. *do:m, later reduced, cf. OHG tuom > tuon > tuo), providing a new base for the whole present-tense paradigm (note that in OE o: extends to the pp. ge-do:n vs. OHG ge-ta:n, Dutch ge-daan, etc.) . The preterite is even more puzzling. We have OE dyde, pl. dydon (synchronically an irregular weak preterite), which resembles nothing outside the British Isles. The primitive forms seem to have been like those in Old Saxon deda, da:dun or OHG teta, ta:tum < *ded-, de:d-. The first form is thought to reflect an old reduplicated preterite (extra-Germanic perfect) *dHe-dHoh1- (like Skt. dadHa:-), and if that's correct, the length in the plural can only be analogical (modelled on Germanic "second preterites" with a lengthened root vowel in an open syllable).

Piotr

----- Original Message -----
From: Miguel Carrasquer Vidal

To: cybalist@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2002 3:26 AM

Subject: Re: [tied] On do/tun

On Mon, 21 Jan 2002 20:26:10 -0000, "P&G" <petegray@...> wrote: >> Can anyone help me out in finding about the remote origins of the >> english/german verbs do/tun?. > >It's a very wide-spread Indo-European root, *dheh1. It appears with >reduplication in Sanskrit (dadha:mi) and Greek (tithe:mi) and in both >languages also in forms without the reduplication. In Latin the initial >#dh- appears by a regular sound change as an f-, so the root is hidden in >the word facio (no firm explanation for the -c-) and it also appears in >compounds as -do, as in credo, abdo, condo, perdo, but there could well be >contamination from the "give" root *deh3. > >It is also attested in Armenian, Phrygian, Messapic, OCS, Hittite, >Tocharian and Lycian > >It is very productive, with various noun and adjective forms. > >Hope that gives you enough information. That explains most of it, except the vocalism in Germanic (why *-o: or *-a: instead of *e:?). Unfortunately, I don't know. Shame on me. So why?