Re: Balto-Slavic -RHj-?

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "willemvermeer" <wrvermeer@...>
wrote:

>
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "whetex_lewx" <whetex_lewx@...>
> wrote:
> >
> > Gir-s aorist is impossible in Lith. There is only gir-io'- (o

with

> > right stress).
>
>
> It is unlikely that Kortlandt is so dumb as not to be aware of

that.

> He happens to be reconstructing earlier stages and given the fact
> that Slavic has retained the s-aorist it is not overly adventurous

to

> assume they existed in earlier phases of Baltic. Quite the

contrary,

> Kortlandt is actually forced to assume that they existed because

he

> operates with a Balto-Slavic period, so that ideally the loss of

the

> s-aorist should actually be part of the reconstruction of the
> prehistory of Baltic.
>
> That is not to say that Kortlandt's reconstruction is correct or

even

> defensible (I've said earlier that I don't understand it and am

not

> in a position to evaluate it), but surely it can't be dismissed

just

> by stating that modern Lithuanian has no s-aorists.
>
>
> Willem

Who said that Lith. doesn't have these? What's about skir-ti (to
cut, to separate, to segment) and skir-s-t-y-ti (to do the same acts
but in shorter time and do full action), also dre:b-ti and drab-s-t-
y-ti (plonk away, flop)
Sre:b-ti, Sreb-s-c^-io-ti

ver-ti, var-s-t-y-ti

and etc...

There is a huge system of such aorists. I don't have deep absorption
in it, but i think that accent paradigms and structures of verb
stems have big influence for all these -y; -s; -o and other aorists.