Re: [tied] Re: Eggs from birds and swift horses

On Mon, 16 Feb 2004 20:23:07 +0000, P&G <petegray@...> wrote:

>>Latin has
>> traces [of the augment] like /e:st/ of course, but it evidently
>> wasn't such a vital prefix in IE.
>
>Happy to concede it wasn't a vital prefix, if you're conceding it was a
>prefix.
>But enough of that trail - Latin /e:st/ interests me. Are you suggesting
>there was a Latin past form /e:st/ meaning "was"? You may well be right,
>but it's new to me. The only /e:st/ I know is the present tense of the verb
>esse = "to eat" (< *ed-t).

As far as I know, the only otherwise augment-less language that has e:s- in
a past tense of "to be" is Slavic, in the imperfect:

be^(a)xU, be^(as^e), be^(as^e)
be^(a)xomU, be^ste/be^as^ete, be^s^eN/be^axoN
be^(a)xove^, be^sta/be^as^eta, be^ste/be^as^ete

The idea is that the paradigm derives from *e^s(^)- < *e:s-, with b- added
later (as in in German pres. bin < *im < *esmi or Old Irish subj. beo < *eo
< *eso:).


=======================
Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
mcv@...