--- In
cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Piotr Gasiorowski <gpiotr@...> wrote:
> Rob wrote:
>
> > Could not *gWrxW-é- and *tud-é- simply be subjunctives of root
> > duratives?
>
> Anyway, of root verbs with an underlying short vowel.
That was going to be my next point. :) The so-called tudáti-type is
then, in origin, nothing more than the subjunctive of a root durative.
However, there is again no formal distinction between root duratives
and root aorists, so their subjunctives should also be formed
identically.
> > *bher- is a root durative, is it not?
>
> The comparative evidence indicates a thematic present (*bHér-e-ti)
> beside a _reduplicated_ athematic present (*bHi-bHér-ti) and traces
> of an athematic aorist.
The only way *bher- can be both a root durative and a root aorist is if
there were earlier two separate roots which came to be conflated.
On the other hand, the reduplicated durative *bhibhérti is obviously a
derived stem. If I understand correctly, these reduplicated forms
carry a meaning of intensity or habituality.
What are the traces of an athematic aorist with *bher-?
- Rob