1sg. -o: [was Re: IE Thematic Vowel Rule]

From: squilluncus
Message: 39584
Date: 2005-08-11

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Piotr Gasiorowski <gpiotr@...>
wrote:
I think there's another possibility worth considering: the
conflation of
> the thematic indicative with the thematic subjunctive in *-o:,
which
> could derive from *-o:m < *-e/o-o-m, with early dropping of the
final
> nasal after a long vowel. Phonetically, this is much more
plausible than
> any other solution I've seen so far. The replacement of indicative
forms
> by corresponding subjunctives is not unprecedented in the
historically
> known languages, cf. OE (dial.) 1sg.pres. -u --> -e (cf. also the
> innovated 2sg. of the preterite, e.g. OE bude as opposed to Goth.
baust
> < *(bHe-)bHoudH-th2a). In the southern dialects of Polish one
finds 1sg.
> pret. -ech for -em on the analogy of <bych> (an original aorist
> converted into a subjunctive in Old Polish).
>
> Piotr


For the 1sg subjunctive there are parellels used in a future
paradigms :
Latin reg-a-m (but: reg-e-s reg-e-t)
(British) English (at least normative in grammars a century ago):
I shall (but: you/he/she/it will).

There seems to be a weakening of the subjunctive modus (i.e. when
the uttering is filtered through the speaker's consideration of what
is happening) when the speaker uses the form on himself. The result
of which is that mere tense is focussed and the "filtering" is
fading.

?

Lars