From: Exu Yangi
Message: 31421
Date: 2004-03-12
>From: enlil@...Many years ago, I was in a class with a fellow from the Bronx. The teacher
>
>
> > As for the status of the *-i, it is of importance that the primary
> > marker is used in both positive and negative statements of the
> > present, and it is not used in any statements of the past, be they
> > positive or negative. This is a point in which all IE languages that
> > can show the difference concur.
>
>Yes, I yield. It was a major goofup I must recover from. And
>my crabby, stubborn, stressed-out self couldn't process being
>wrong. So I resisted... but resistence is futile. After going
>on a mini-vacation out of the city, I feel refreshed and less
>bitter towards humanity than I normally am :) Mea culpa.
>
>Still, it has no bearing on the analysis of *-i as deriving from a
>demonstrative that was originally meant to put focus on the time
>of the action, regardless of tense. I guess I was deceived partly
>because of how I associate this ending with English "over here" in
>a slangy, New York style accent. For example, "I'm dyin' over here".
>Again, like *-i, it puts focus on the action and can only
>normally be used in the present. A phrase *"I was dyin' over here"
>sounds odd. However, I coincidentally never see it in the negative
>afaik. I never hear a phrase like *"I _AIN'T_ dyin' over here".
>
>Regardless of the negative-present issue, I think English "over
>here" is a good analogy to the ending in IE. I'll get to the
>whole syncope issue later. I've had a few days to think about
>how to explain it, and hopefully prove it as best as possible,
>step-by-step.