Re: [tied] -hi, -mi

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "P&G" <G&P@...> wrote:

> > The hi-conjugation was once in use in both present and aorist,
> > Jasanoff shows.
>
> I'm interested that you've read Jasanoff's book, and apparently been
> convinced by it. I asked on this group a while ago if anyone knew

it, but

> no one else seems to. What else does he suggest?
>

Basically he suggests that the hi-conjugation was much more
widespread, and that is the point of the book. He does it on a verb-by-
verb (or verb group by verb group) basis, so it's a question of being
convinced in each case. Part of the reason I like his idea is that if
the mi-conjugation arose as a dependent "absolute ablative"-type
clause, I need another conjugation for the finite verb to be in
existence at that time.


Torsten