Re: [tied] I'm back with a few questions

Only <molo:> seems to reflect an original *o recurring also in

> a number of extra-Latin cognates. Such o-presents have been analysed

as

> a whole separate PIE conjugation (with *-h2a-type endings and *o/*e
> ablaut) by Jasanoff (2003). Our list-member Jens Rasmussen believes

that

> Jasanoff's theory of o-presents is a monumental mistake and that the
> o-type goes back to de-reduplicated intensive stems of the type
> *m(e)lh2-molh2-. The debate will surely continue for a long time.
>

Let's assume (for other reasons) that the verbal stem is a verbal
noun. Then

1 simple CeC- means "V-ing"
2 reduplicated CéC&C- (later CéCC-) means "V-ing several times" (cf.
*mems- "severally cut, ie cut up (meat)")
3 de-reduplicated CóC- means "V-ing only once"

2 is used in iterative presents and in the plural of the perfect
3 is used in "de-iterative" presents and originally in the singular of
the perfect (later analogically reduplicated CéCoC-)


Torsten