From: Andrew Jarrette
Message: 36499
Date: 2005-02-26
>
>Thanks for your answer.
>Regarding Hittite, I believe that a lot of the characteristics of Hittite
>(endings, paradigms, etc.) are not shared by other Indo-European languages,
>and therefore one might be obliged to consider Hittite as being outside the
>original Indo-European system -- related, but independent in many respects.
> Thus I would not consider the Hittite evidence as being a strong
>indication that the "perfect" should not be regarded as a (past) tense. Of
>course, I'm no expert, I'm more of a dilettante, but this is the impression
>I have of Hittite.
Hittite, while very early, still shares a large part of IE, both in grammar
and vocabulary. Most of the grammar is clearly IE. Most of the vocabulary is
clearly IE. Yes, there are changes, but you expect that.
Hittitle, like Tocharian and Luwian, is solidly within the IE "umbrella".
_____________________OK, I stand corrected. I reexamined some of the Hittite vocabulary and grammar and now see that you are correct. There are only a relatively small number of noun and verb endings that seem unrelated to those of other IE languages, but for some reason I magnified these in my recollection of Hittite.