[tied] Re: English 2s. -t (was: Slavic *-os (*-om))

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Brian M. Scott" <BMScott@...>
wrote:

> At 6:10:40 AM on Friday, July 9, 2004, tgpedersen wrote:
>
> > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Richard Wordingham"
> > <richard.wordingham@...> wrote:
>
> >> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "tgpedersen"
> >> <tgpedersen@...> wrote:
>
> >>> ... and the '-t' of Englsh 2nd sg. 'art', 'wast',
> >>> 'wert', which are supposed to be documented late in the
> >>> history of that language (thus coming from 'below'?).
>
> >> 'Late' = when? All the preterite-presents in my Old
> >> English grammar have -t or -st for the 2s.
>
> > Unfortunately I forgot again where I read that (Skeat?).
> > BTW 'art', 'wast', 'wert' are not preterite-presents, and
> > 'art' were never even a preterite.
>
> But <art> goes back to OE <eart>; that <-t> is ancient.
> It's only <wast> and <wert> that are ME (or later)
> innovations. Mossé says that <wast> is East Midlands ME; it
> appears to be modelled on the preterite-presents. <Wert> is
> later, I believe.
>

You're right. I checked; it _was_ Skeat, and he says as you do.
But to go back to my original thought: 2nd sg. -t in 'art' (and
ON 'ert' and 18th century Danish 'est') is strange in a present
inflection.

Torsten