Just had a few afterthoughts about what I wrote to you in my last communication. I realized that the idea of "Tom has a good time at parties" evolving into "Tom has enjoyed parties" is not untenable -- one could see that a statement that applies to any time could have as a basis for its assertion events that happened in the past or were true in the past (and are expected to continue to happen at any time), and this emphasis could become dominant, evolving into a perfect tense. Something that happens at any time could come to be seen as something that has happened in the past, whether it continues to happen or not. But I still think it seems less likely, especially since the perfect as used in English tends to emphasize the fact that the action or event no longer happens or is happening. A tenseless stative does not have this emphasis, and I wonder why it would evolve. (Of course, this is ignoring that in the majority of
instances in Sanskrit, the perfect/stative forms are used to indicate simple past tense, such as in narration. I don't see how a tenseless stative form used to indicate any time would evolve into a form used specifically to indicate events that occurred in a former time, other than the idea that what one knows to be true at any time, one only knows is true at any time because it happened previously (as opposed to events whose truth is limited to the ongoing present, as it happens) - and this past truth could somehow come to be emphasized rather than the universal truth of tenseless stative statements. But I still find that that would be a bit of a stretch, quite a change in referent.
I don't know if I've made myself clear. Thanks once again for your thoughtful answer.
Regards,
Andrew Jarrette