[tied] Romanian verbal paradigm (Re: Late Proto Albanian...)

From: altamix
Message: 30874
Date: 2004-02-09

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [tied] Romanian verbal paradigm (Re: Late Proto
Albanian...) (09-Feb-2004 6:46)
From: alxmoeller@...
To: moeller@...

> Richard Wordingham wrote:



> The line for the imperfect is inconsistent about the vowel.

You got me to think about with this sentence. It appears the relation
between tenses is made otherways.We have in fact the imperfect which
is *very* consistent with the infinitive since this is made from the
infinitive form + the paradigms with tho exceptions:

I a purta: purta-am, purta-i, purta-a, purta-am, purta-atzi, purta
II a vedea: vedea-am, vedea-i, vedea-a, vedea-am, vedea-atzi, vedea
III a merge: merge-am, merge-ai,merge-a, merge-am, merge-atzi, mergea
IV a dormi: dormi-am, dormi-ai,dormi-a, dormi-am, dormi-atzi, dormia

Note: ia > ea: I cannot verify now if Latin "dormire" has a short "i"
but I expect it has since it seems Rom. points to a short "i". If I
am right in my assumption, then the verb "a dormi" changed the
conjugation and there should be "a doarme" but not " a dormi".

The alternance in vowel in Simple Perfect and Plusque Perfect made me
a bit head aches until I found out these two tenses are not related
to Imperfect but to ... participium. Here too, there is no exception
from the rule all of them being conjugated with no exceptions. First,
a bit introduction in participium:

Conj I: a-stem, participium always in "-at"
Conj II: ea-stem, participium always in "-ut"
Conj III: e-stem, participium in "-s" and "-ut"
Conj IV: i-stem, participium always in "-it"

Now, the participium is to be analysed whas is made that way, but
from the forms of participium we have very regulated the Simple
Perfect and the Plusque Perfect. It ought to observe the final
consonant of participium is droped in Simple Perfect and Plusque
Perfect before paradigms of these two tenses.The (C) noted consonant
is the dropped one. The "ã" was becoming mute after "u and e" in
the
group "uã", "iã" and "eã" and I note it with "*".I have
further a
problem with the Conj. III where there appears an "e" which
I cannot explain unless this is of epentetic nature for making
posible the pronounciation of the root and the plural paradigms.

Simple Perfect
--------------
I: a purta- purta(t)i, purta(t)shi, purta(t)ã, purta(t)rãm,
purta(t)rãtzi, purta(t)rã
II: a vedea- vãzu(t)i, vãzu(t)shi, vãzu(t)*,
vãzu(t)rãm, vãzu(t)rãtzi, vãzu(t)rã
III: a merge- mers e i mers e shi, mers e *, mers e rãm,
mers e rãtzi, mers e rã
IV: a dormi- dormi(t)i, dormi(t)shi, dormi(t)* dormi(t)rãm,
dormi(t)rãTzi, dormi(t)rã

It worth to mention that there is stil dialectal speach which use the
unshorted forms with an "ã" between usualy droped consonant of
participium and paradigm of Simpl. Prf. specialy in plural forms:
purtatãrãtzi, vãzutãrãtzi, dormitãrãm, etc.

As rule, it appears clear. Simple perfect is made by participium of
the root + paradigms
The same is for Plusque Perfect:

Simpl. Perf= root & -i, - shi, - a, - rãm, - rãtzi, -

Plsqp. Perf= root & -sem, -seshi, -se, -serãm, -serãtzi,
-serã


About your other questions here, I will try to answer in the evening.
I don't know how this Participium & Plusque Perfect & Simple Perfect
fits etymologicaly with Latin in this case since I have had not time
to verify the Latin counterparts.

> > Richard.


Alex