[tied] Re: IE thematic presents and the origin of their thematic vo

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Piotr Gasiorowski <gpiotr@...>
wrote:

> tgpedersen wrote:
>
> > Tokh B (Krause)
> > pres.
> >
> > unattested
> > unattested
> > paräm.
> >
> > unattested
> > parcer
> > parem.
> >
> > partc.
> > act.
> > preñca
> > pass.
> > premane
> >
> >
> > Now that pres.part.act. looks more like something that was

dreamt up

> > by Schmalstieg to me.
>
> All these forms are regularly derived from Proto-Toch. *p&r'&-

/*p&rë- <

> *bHér-e-/*bHér-o-. The generalisation of a dispalatalised *p-

across the

> paradigm is Proto-Tocharian (and not unusual there).

That's not the issue.

>The positional loss
> of reduced vowels is a dialectal affair within Tocharian, cf. the
> different treatment of parallel forms in Toch.A and B:
>
> *bHér-o-m&1no- > PToch. *p&rëmanë > Toch.A pärma:M, Toch.B premane
>

Erh, explain how you just proved that Tokh. A hasn't regularised the
pres. pass. part.?


Torsten