Re: [tied] -hi, -mi

----- Original Message -----

From: Patrick Ryan

To: cybalist@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Monday, June 13, 2005 9:40 AM

Subject: Re: [tied] -hi, -mi

>   So "stative" served for durative and punctual? No language known
to me is incapable of making this distinction by one device or another.
>

The hi-conjugation was once in use in both present and aorist,
Jasanoff shows. As to what other derived tenses etc there might have
been, we can't tell. They're gone.


***

Patrick:

 

The normal plural in Englidh ends in - (e)s.

 

If we see the word "justifies", should we assume it represents "justify" with a plural subject?

 

The <h> in Hittite -hi represents at least two, possibly three or even four kinds of *H from PIE. Identity of form within Hittite would not necessarily indicate identity of origin - and sigmificance.

 

If -hi is truly used in both present (durative) and aorist (punctual), then either the origin of each -hi is different in each aspect - or - -hi does not signify anything and durative and punctual  are being marked in some other way.

 

Actually, I think we need to go over the basics: there are two types of _action_, durative, which perists over a remarkable period of time; and punctual, which persists over such a small period of time that, for all purposes, it can be said not to perist, and is a one-time event.

 

Stative, on the other hand, characterizes the _result of an action_ NOT an action itself. When we say "is red", we indicate a persistence of a state rather than an action.

 

The perfect originally represented the stative in PIE.

 

To oppose aorist and present is technically incorrect; present is a tense, aorist is an aspect. Aorist is opposed by progressive; present is opposed by past and future.

 

A stative can be past (was red), present (is red), or future (will be red).

 

A progressive can be past (was reading), present (is reading), or future (will be reading).

 

A "aorist" (punctual) can be past (struck), present (strikes), or future (will strike).

 

Now, Hittite does have two major manifestations of the "hi" conjugation: -hi and -hu(n). We can characterize the first as present tense (because of -i) and the second as past tense (preterite) with -Ø; continued in the second person singular as -ti (ta + i) and -ta.

 

Now, I repeat to you again, how did Jasanoff "show" that -hi was used in both present (presumably progressive) and aorist (presumably punctual)? And what does either one of them have to do with "stative".

 

Either you are mightily confused or Jasanoff is.

 

 

 

Patrick