Piotr:
> And it should be remembered that in most of the
> early thematic presents the thematic vowel was
> _accented_.
On what basis do you assert that the *earliest*
thematic presents have an accented thematic vowel?
I'd say that the earliest thematic presents were
affected by a widespread Acrostatic Regularization.
That then would make verbs like *h2wés-e-ti most
ancient while the fewer presents having accented
thematic vowel would be the product of analogy with
thematic aorists.
> This is in particular true of the ordinary *-jé-
> and *-sk^é- presents,
... Which are by analogy with thematic aorists which
also have accent on the thematic vowel. Their
original function would be to form verbs referring
to a state of action. Indeed, in IE itself, they
can describe a state of repetition.
Oftentimes, *-ye- and *-ske- created denominal verb
stems but they could also extend other pre-existing
verb stems.
We can etymologize *-ye- as being from relative
pronoun *yo- and *-ske- would be from aorist *-s-
plus emphatic particle *ge. These etymologies further
suggest the denominal (and thus stative) character of
these suffixes. That would make for a stronger
connection at one time with the aorist, not the
durative. That then explains the accent.
> Originally, the thematic vowel in verbs might have
> carried obligatory accent, later retracted if there
> was a full vowel to the left of it.
In order to explain paradigmatic vowel alternation in
thematic vowels, whether they be in nouns or in verbs,
the accent must be *off* of the thematic vowel at
the time of Schwa Diffusion. Schwa Diffusion occurs
after Acrostatic Regularization, thereby explaining
how we have *bHer-e-si and yet also *bHer-o-mes with
the least amount of further hypothesizing.
= gLeN
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com