Re: sum

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "elmeras2000" <jer@...> wrote:

> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "tgpedersen" <tgpedersen@...>
> wrote:
>
> > I believe the compound of them in Hittite is -i-s^k-. Where's the
> > -e? If so, -sk^é- and -yé- are post-PIH, PIE. That's late PIE (and
> > BTW by 'late' I always mean 'late PIE').
>
> Again, I don't quite understand. What does "them" refer to? Your
> question "Where's the -e?" is strange. The -e- follows after -sk-,
> so does the *-o-: Oettinger gives the Hittite endings of sk-verbs
> like this: -skami, -skesi, -skezzi, -skaweni, -skette/ani, -skanzi.
> That fits the other branches exactly.
>

This is how I think it is: There are athematic and semithematic and
thematic paradigms in the various IE languages (but not all paradigm,s
in all IE languages, obviously). Therefore they might also have
coexisted in PIE. What I'm saying is I think that historically, in pre-
PIE and in pre-pre-PIE, as you want it to be, two of those paradigms,
namely the athematic and the thematic were formed (invented, arose) on
the basis of the third, the semi-thematic. So -sk^e/o- and -ye/o-
would exist in PIE, but they had been formed in pre-PIE, at such a
time as the thematic patradigm had been invented (arisen bla-bla).


Torsten