Re: [tied] Stative Verbs, or Perfect Tense

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Miguel Carrasquer <mcv@...> wrote:

>[]
> Reduplication is practically unknown in Slavic (I can only
> think of dad- "give" and (Im-)e-om- > jIma~m- "have"), which
> I suppose can be interpreted as a sign that reduplication
> was simply eliminated across the board. In Hittite,
> however, Jasanoff has me convinced (pqpf. wewakk-) that this
> canot be the whole story there.

Sure, reduplication was not lost where it has been retained. You
just said the same for Slavic. The story of Hitt. wewakk- is exactly
like that of German beben which corresponds to the pluperfect
structure of Ved. ábibhet 'feared', old preterite made ot go with
the perfect bibhá:ya. It would be an unwarranted stretch of the
probative force of the evidence to take beben as proof that
preterites like kam, nahm, war etc. have never been reduplicated, or
even as proof that they do not reflect the IE perfect.

> Incidentally, I find your 3pl. *mél-mlH-nti (and Jasanoff's
> *mélH-nti, I suppose) incongruent with both of yours
> derivation of the present forms of BS ê/i-verbs (ultimately
> based on 3pl. -inti). The o-grade verbs in Slavic have
> either -e- (bo``doN, bodetI', bodoNtI', a.p. c) or -je-
> (borjoN', bo'rjetI, bo'rjoNtI, a.p. b), but never -i-.

Many athematic verbs have become e- or je- verbs in Slavic, why not
this one?

Jens