Re: [tied] Re: Lithuanian nom.pl. participles

On Fri, 30 Dec 2005 10:23:20 +0000, tgpedersen
<tgpedersen@...> wrote:

>--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Miguel Carrasquer <mcv@...> wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, 29 Dec 2005 10:00:28 +0000, tgpedersen
>> <tgpedersen@...> wrote:
>>
>It's striking how similar the Uralic 1st 2nd endings are to those of
>IE, eg Estonian
>
>-n -me
>-d -te
>
>but the 3rd pers endings are not:
>
>-b -vad
>
>Jens (I think it was) told me that those endings are originally
>participial. It's therefore tempting to seek a similar explanation
>for IE.

The participial element in the Uralic forms above is b/v (-d
is the plural morpheme). Since it is a present participle,
it is absent from the preterite forms.

If PIE were parallel to Uralic here, one would have to find
an element which occurs in both 3sg. and 3pl., and not in
the preterite. There is no such element: 3sg. *-t(i) and
3pl. *-nt(i) have /t(i)/ in common, but the /t/ also occurs
in the preterite.



=======================
Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
mcv@...