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

--- 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