Re: [tied] Latin pqpf conjunctive (Re: Late Proto-Albanian...)

m_iacomi wrote:
Of course, this has nothing to do with prior

> simple
> evolution of Romanian pqpf. indicative from Latin pqpf. conjunctive
> hinted
> in the same message: probably he retained only that at some point
> there
> was some extra -se- inserted with no etymological motivation, so a
> good
> "reason" to challenge any Latin paradigm involving -sse-. :-)
>
> Regards,
> Marius Iacomi

Actually, Wolfgang Rothe discusse more in detail that problem.
Yes, I meant there the problem of plusq.pf.:
fusesem, fuseseSi, fusese, fusesem , fuseseTi , fusese

the same for "to have" and a lot more other verbs:

avusesem, avusesei, avusese, avusesem, avuseseTi, avusese

The same about the Part. Perf. "fost" (am fost).

To be honestly, to me are too many topics for treating them with the
needed obiectivity and I would prefer to let them by side for now.

Alex